any wiccans here

[Hapsburg]

are there any wiccans here because i'm thinking about converting to wicca and i would like some advice on how to find a coven from a wiccan

While not myself a Wiccan, I am greatly familiar with their philosophy and general views, and I find myself agreeing with many of them; and I am very knowledgeable on the Wiccan religion's history.
I know a few Wiccans, and they seem to be far kinder, and more balanced people than most Christians that I know.
I may be able to help. I can ask my Wiccan friends if they know of any websites that can help you find one near you.

Although, you don't necessarily need to be in a coven, nor do you need to be ordained by a Wiccan cleric to be considered a Wiccan. Most Wiccans in today's world, actually, are lone practitioners, and the Eclectic Wiccan movement, which is aiming to move away from the secretive traditionalism of Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wicca, is growing within the Wiccan religion.

Pagan religion is a flawed term, esentially meaning non-christian-religion.

Not really. It's quite an accurate term.
"Pagan" literally means "rustic" or "country", so Pagan religions can be taken to be a broad term for any religion which seeks to find a more fluid, nature-based system of ethics, aesthetics, and belief than the strict, organised and doctrinal religions in other parts (i.e, Abrahamism).

Paganism is divided into three main things:
Palaeopaganism, which are the oldest polytheistic and animistic religions of the world, their date of origin ranging from before 200,000 BCE to around 200 CE. Various African native religions, Hinduism, Shinto, and the various European bronze- and iron-age polytheisms can be grouped into here.

Mesopaganism are pagan religions who originate from around 200 CE to about 1920 CE. These often integrated monotheistic or henotheistic ideals into their polytheisms, and usually had a more structured or organised system of belief than palaeopagan systems. Some Hellenic Mysteries can be considered part of this; Norse polytheism, although heavily based from Germanic palaeopaganism, is considered mesopagan. A few neodruid and Celtic reconstructionist faiths, and some Germanic reconstructionist paths, can be grouped into there as well.

Neopaganism is any pagan or nature-based religions originating from 1920 onwards. These often attempt to reconcile palaeopagan ideas and beliefs with modern, and later New-Age, values and societal ideals and with modern scientific study and information. These include, among others, Wicca, most Germanic reconstructionist religions, such as Asatru, and most of the varuiys Celtic reconstructionist groups, as well as most neodruid groups. Also included is Kemetic Orthodoxy, which is Egyptian reconstructionist, as well as the modern Eclectic Movement, which seeks to make a more "general" or "multi-purpose" Paganism.

Imo wicca is a new religion which has taken some themes from the old "pagan" cults, some from christianity , some from eco movement, and some from hippies, and also a few fairy tales. Put it all together and voila! It's a recreation of an old idea, but it's not the same thing, not at all.

Not necessarily. Wicca takes many ideals and beliefs from Proto-Indo-European religion, and could, like most other Neopagan religions, be considered a religion which seeks to reconcile an ancient belief system with modern social values.

While palaeopagan and mesopagan ideas have a considerable influence, Wicca is firmly in the realm of neopaganism, being an integration of old ideas with modern ideals.

 

[pjdude1219]

Easy, just dress like some hippy throw back and act like you're on drugs. The wiccans will find you.

did i forget to mention i want to succede

 

[pjdude1219]

While not myself a Wiccan, I am greatly familiar with their philosophy and general views, and I find myself agreeing with many of them; and I am very knowledgeable on the Wiccan religion's history.
I know a few Wiccans, and they seem to be far kinder, and more balanced people than most Christians that I know.
I may be able to help. I can ask my Wiccan friends if they know of any websites that can help you find one near you.

Although, you don't necessarily need to be in a coven, nor do you need to be ordained by a Wiccan cleric to be considered a Wiccan. Most Wiccans in today's world, actually, are lone practitioners, and the Eclectic Wiccan movement, which is aiming to move away from the secretive traditionalism of Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wicca, is growing within the Wiccan religion.


Not really. It's quite an accurate term.
"Pagan" literally means "rustic" or "country", so Pagan religions can be taken to be a broad term for any religion which seeks to find a more fluid, nature-based system of ethics, aesthetics, and belief than the strict, organised and doctrinal religions in other parts (i.e, Abrahamism).

Paganism is divided into three main things:
Palaeopaganism, which are the oldest polytheistic and animistic religions of the world, their date of origin ranging from before 200,000 BCE to around 200 CE. Various African native religions, Hinduism, Shinto, and the various European bronze- and iron-age polytheisms can be grouped into here.

Mesopaganism are pagan religions who originate from around 200 CE to about 1920 CE. These often integrated monotheistic or henotheistic ideals into their polytheisms, and usually had a more structured or organised system of belief than palaeopagan systems. Some Hellenic Mysteries can be considered part of this; Norse polytheism, although heavily based from Germanic palaeopaganism, is considered mesopagan. A few neodruid and Celtic reconstructionist faiths, and some Germanic reconstructionist paths, can be grouped into there as well.

Neopaganism is any pagan or nature-based religions originating from 1920 onwards. These often attempt to reconcile palaeopagan ideas and beliefs with modern, and later New-Age, values and societal ideals and with modern scientific study and information. These include, among others, Wicca, most Germanic reconstructionist religions, such as Asatru, and most of the varuiys Celtic reconstructionist groups, as well as most neodruid groups. Also included is Kemetic Orthodoxy, which is Egyptian reconstructionist, as well as the modern Eclectic Movement, which seeks to make a more "general" or "multi-purpose" Paganism.


Not necessarily. Wicca takes many ideals and beliefs from Proto-Indo-European religion, and could, like most other Neopagan religions, be considered a religion which seeks to reconcile an ancient belief system with modern social values.

While palaeopagan and mesopagan ideas have a considerable influence, Wicca is firmly in the realm of neopaganism, being an integration of old ideas with modern ideals.

thank you for that i've tried finding some websites on my own to help find a coven but i haven't had any luck

 

[phlogistician]

In what sense are you moderate?

In what way am I a moderate? When I see hippies, I don't beat them up.

 

[phlogistician]

Converting is bollox, you either know what you are, or you do not.

I agree, this implies a romantic attraction to the idea, rather than a rational choice based on knowledge of the practices.

 

[Grantywanty]

In what way am I a moderate? When I see hippies, I don't beat them up.

So most people are moderate including hippies?

 

[Grantywanty]

I agree, this implies a romantic attraction to the idea, rather than a rational choice based on knowledge of the practices.

So if you decide to follow a romantic attraction you are not choosing?
We can only make rational decisions and choices?
No one has chosen to join a religion based on knowledge of the practices?
No one has for example, seen Buddhists sitting in meditation, asked what they were doing, heard the answer, been skeptical and decided to try it anyway because it sound attractive adn they were curious, and found that they were more relaxed afterwords and so on and one day they ACCURATELY called themselves a buddhist? (before they were a Jew. Can we not call this both a choice and a conversion?)

 

[Carcano]

Anyone interested in Wicca and Paganism should go and rent a great film 'The Wicker Man'...the original made in the 70s.

One of the first films to explore the emerging pagan mythos, as well as genetic engineering.

 

[SkinWalker]

What is the evidence that the fictional film, "The Wicker Man," is representative enough of an entire religious cult to reveal insight into their superstitions and beliefs?

 

[Carcano]

What is the evidence that the fictional film, "The Wicker Man," is representative enough of an entire religious cult to reveal insight into their superstitions and beliefs?

The evidence is to be found in the philosophy, which forms an equal measure of the film along with its riveting drama.

To say that its 'representative' however wouldnt quite fit, because when the film was made in the early seventies there was no Wicca or Paganism in any significant way.

Nowadays when you walk into a big bookstore like Chapters the Wicca/Paganism section is actually bigger than the Christianity section, but this has only happened in the past decade.

The central difference between Paganism and most world religions is that of location, location, location.

Where is divinity?

For the Christian, divinity is not here. A small spark may dwell within us in the world, but it is not 'of' the world. It belongs with God in heaven. And so the purpose of life is to return home by abstaining from attaching oneself to the pleasures of worldly embodiment. To sit on one's hands and wait for the magic bus to paradise.

To the Pagan, divinity is to be realized here and now, within a world of eternal recurrence. It is to be found in rocks and streams, mountains and rivers. It celebrates divinity in life and matter, and suffers none of the gloomy self mortification of pale mournful ascetics.

"Verily, rather would I see even the shameless than the contorted eyes of their shame and devotion. Who created for themselves such caves and stairways of repentance? Was it not such as wanted to hide themselves and were ashamed before the pure sky?

And only when the pure sky again looks through broken ceilings, and down upon grass and red poppies near broken walls, will I again turn my heart to the abode of this God.

They have called God what was contrary to them and gave them pain, and verily, there was much of the heroic in their adoration. And they did not know how to love their God except by crucifying man." -Nietzsche.

 

[pjdude1219]

i'm suprised the ccr on this site like sandy aren't hopping on this thread to attack me for want to convert to a non christian religion

 

[Avatar]

there was no Wicca or Paganism in any significant way.

What do you mean by paganism here? Because if you think nature religions, then they were all over the place, just go East of Moscow or South of Mexico.

The central difference between Paganism and most world religions is that of location, location, location.

Actually that's just about three, and three plus a few doesn't make it most.

 

[Carcano]

Actually that's just about three, and three plus a few doesn't make it most.

Perhaps, but the others are insignificant in number of adherents, relative to the grand total.

 

[phlogistician]

So if you decide to follow a romantic attraction you are not choosing?

No, you are making an irrational choice.

We can only make rational decisions and choices?

No, I didn't say, nor imply that.

No one has chosen to join a religion based on knowledge of the practices?

No, I didn't say, nor imply that. I implied, in this instance, that the attraction seemed to be romantic, rather than rational, actually implying it is better to make a rational choice. Comprehension not your forté, eh?

No one has for example, seen Buddhists sitting in meditation, asked what they were doing, heard the answer, been skeptical and decided to try it anyway because it sound attractive adn they were curious, and found that they were more relaxed afterwords and so on and one day they ACCURATELY called themselves a buddhist? (before they were a Jew. Can we not call this both a choice and a conversion?)

Meditating for a day does not make you a buddhist. Other religions meditate. So no, your scenario would not mean someone could ACCURATELY deem themselves to be buddhist!


But herein you highlight the difference, even though your analogy is flawed and inaccurate. Your observer sees the religion in practice, and makes enquiries. Our OP is too shy to approach a hippie and ask them about their new age BS religion. The reasons for being interested in the first place are not stated.

Thankyou, it's been fun playing with you. If you wish to take another blade, open your eyes next time.

 

[GeoffP]

What is the evidence that the fictional film, "The Wicker Man," is representative enough of an entire religious cult to reveal insight into their superstitions and beliefs?

Well they did build a seventy-foot wicker man, you know. Honestly. Just look up.

 

[Grantywanty]

No, you are making an irrational choice.

A choice. Which would mean one is choosing.

No, I didn't say, nor imply that.

Avatar was saying you cannot convert, you are either one thing or another. You agreed. In that context it seems pretty clear you are saying you cannot make this choice. Now you are saying it is an irrational choice. So be it. This does not fit with Avatar's assertion which you claimed to be agreeing with.

No, I didn't say, nor imply that. I implied, in this instance, that the attraction seemed to be romantic, rather than rational, actually implying it is better to make a rational choice. Comprehension not your forté, eh?

I can only assume you did not read Avatar's post, the one you were agreeing with, where he makes it clear you cannot convert. You cannot make this choice. You are saying you can make this choice but it is irrational. You do not agree with him. Keep your snideness to yourself. At the very least you can see how in the context of your support for his position, you points are not clear.

Meditating for a day does not make you a buddhist. Other religions meditate. So no, your scenario would not mean someone could ACCURATELY deem themselves to be buddhist!

I said ' and so on and one day'. I did not say 'on that day' or within 24 four hours.

But herein you highlight the difference, even though your analogy is flawed and inaccurate. Your observer sees the religion in practice, and makes enquiries. Our OP is too shy to approach a hippie and ask them about their new age BS religion. The reasons for being interested in the first place are not stated.

Thankyou, it's been fun playing with you. If you wish to take another blade, open your eyes next time.

Oh, Jesus, another Jedi or samurai wanna be. I can only hope you are physically still in puberty for your sake. I will not read your response. Have your errors and misplaced smugness.

 

[phlogistician]

A choice. Which would mean one is choosing.

There are different types of choices. Whether it is a choice or not was not the debate, you are drawing it off topic. If this kid doesn't know anything about Wicca, the decision to attempt to become one is an irrational choice. One has to question his motives.

Avatar was saying you cannot convert, you are either one thing or another. You agreed. In that context it seems pretty clear you are saying you cannot make this choice.

Like I said, comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong point. You miss the point entirely, and that the OP hasn't explained their attraction to, or knowledge of Wicca. It sounds like they know squat at this point.

I can only assume you did not read Avatar's post, the one you were agreeing with, where he makes it clear you cannot convert.

Convert is an interesting word. It implies a membership of an existing religion, then schooling in another, and then conversion to that new religion. Usually due to marriage, and it usually involves some ceremony.

I think Avatar was saying that with Wicca, with it's loose structure, that once you know enough about the religion, you can call yourself a Wiccan. You don't need to convert.

You cannot make this choice. You are saying you can make this choice but it is irrational.

Which angle are you battering now? The kid has made an irrational choice to get involved with Wicca. It's that simple. There is a simple answer to his needs too, BUY A BOOK ABOUT WICCA.

I said ' and so on and one day'. I did not say 'on that day' or within 24 four hours.

So being vague makes you correct does it? All you mentioned was meditation. There's more to buddhism than that. If you were implying investigation and schooling, well that would be a different matter. The loci of your vague and fractured analogy would then be making a rational choice based on their experiences, unlike our OP.

Oh, Jesus, another Jedi or samurai wanna be.

It was a fencing term, actually.

I can only hope you are physically still in puberty for your sake. I will not read your response. Have your errors and misplaced smugness.

With your lack of comprehension and predeliction for stuffing straw men, this retreat doesn't surprise me.

 

[Grantywanty]

There are different types of choices. Whether it is a choice or not was not the debate, you are drawing it off topic. If this kid doesn't know anything about Wicca, the decision to attempt to become one is an irrational choice. One has to question his motives.

Avatar did not say: 'your conversion sounds problematic.' He spoke about conversion IN GENERAL. You agreed. Fine, you meant only in relation to this case. But you want to keep insulting me (below), when in context my point was quite reasonable. Avatar was make a categorical denial of the possibility of choosing a religion. I would not have reacted to your post if he had been specific about his doubts here.

Like I said, comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong point. You miss the point entirely, and that the OP hasn't explained their attraction to, or knowledge of Wicca. It sounds like they know squat at this point.

See above. Also, your point seems to be that I am off topic because I am talking about choice and conversion IN GENERAL. If you read Avatar's post you will see he did precisely this. You seemed to be in agreement with his post. I did not open the door to a general discussion of conversion and if it is a choice. I joined it. It seemed like you joined it earlier also by agreeing with his post.

Convert is an interesting word. It implies a membership of an existing religion, then schooling in another, and then conversion to that new religion. Usually due to marriage, and it usually involves some ceremony.

But of course includes conversions not related to marriage. And history is replete with a variety of reasons for conversions including personal choice - without the threat of torture for example.

I think Avatar was saying that with Wicca, with it's loose structure, that once you know enough about the religion, you can call yourself a Wiccan. You don't need to convert.

REally. Do you really believe that? Read his second paragraph and just by yourself ask yourself if you believe that.

If he meant this he communicated poorly since his post DENIES THE POSSIBILITY of conversion. You keep implying I can't comprehend what I read. I keep going back to his post and the portion YOU QUOTED and it seems to me I read his post and that quote quite well while you are interpreting it rather strangely.

And the way you word it here makes it sound like he was somehow neutral about Wicca or saying 'Oh, you can just join' when in fact he says

Any way, what's wicca? I read the wiki article on it and didn't get it.
It says that wicca comes from old European witchcraft religion, but there was no such thing,
so it seems that it was invented in 1920s to accommodate for the newly emerging eco movement.

which strongly suggests he thinks it is a bunch of bullshit and is not about to say something like 'hey, it's no big deal you can just join.'

Which angle are you battering now? The kid has made an irrational choice to get involved with Wicca.

same issue. I thought you read and understood Avatar's post. I was speaking about conversion and choice in general as Avatar was and thought you understood this when you agreed with him.

So being vague makes you correct does it? All you mentioned was meditation. There's more to buddhism than that. If you were implying investigation and schooling, well that would be a different matter. The loci of your vague and fractured analogy would then be making a rational choice based on their experiences, unlike our OP.

You misread it. It was clear it was not about 24 hours. 'and so on' in English can include any number of steps. 'and one day' tends to imply a long time, in English. I was not equating this with the OP. Avatar, who you agreed with, was saying you could not convert. I was showing how in fact one can take steps from curiosity to conversion. 'and so on' in English can include any number of steps. 'and one day' tends to imply a long time, in English. Since it turns out that you in fact do not agree with Avatar, I can see how this post was confusing for you. Since you said you did agree I began an argument to show conversion was possible and that his 'either you are or you aren't' did not match reality.

It was a fencing term, actually.

Same adolescent vibe in context.

With your lack of comprehension and predeliction for stuffing straw men, this retreat doesn't surprise me.

If your reading of Avatar's post was that he was only talking about the OP's experiences and not generalizing that choice in such a case is not possible and are continuing to maintain this position despite your misreading being pointed out, I really don't care what surprises you.

Can't you have the integrity to admit that you agreed with Avatar's post when in fact you don't. Keep on insulting me if you need to, but in the privacy of your own head you might as well be honest. There is no crowd. No buzzer when your hallucinated point hits me. No awards.

Pardon my lack of optimism about your character when I don't come back to read whatever interpretational gymnastics you go through to avoid seeing your part in our earlier miscommunication.

 

[phlogistician]

I will not read your response.

Ah, but you are snared by your own ego, and felt compelled to do so.

Everything posted on this thread is about the OP, unless stated otherwise. So your excuse discussing things in general does not hold. It's simple, replies not quoting subsequent replies to the OP, are to the OP, not general comments.

Your excuses and defence of your flawed buddhist analogy do you no good. Abandon it.

It doesn't matter if Avatar thinks that new age bullshit is bullshit. The point was, and that I agree, is that if this kid knew enough about Wicca, he could call himself a Wiccan. You can call yourself a Christian without following a major schizm, and there is less structure and hierarchy to the Wiccan faith, no induction ceremony required, no 'conversion' required, and like I said, 'conversion' implies ditching one religion for another, you seem to be avoiding this thorny issue, that the OP has not stated what, if any religion they already are! Their own use of the word 'conversion' displays rather a lack of the undertanding of the relevant terminology. This is a forum, words are important.

btw, you are putting words into Avatars mouth. He said 'conversion is bollocks', you are arguing from a point of view he hasn't personally expressed! You are still stuffing that straw man trying to make your point, and that is intellectualy dishonesty.

Anyway, please make good on this promise;

when I don't come back to read whatever interpretational gymnastics ...

because you really are embarrassing yourself.


If you are going to carry on flailing though, don't nit pick line by line, answer some questions.

What religion is the OP 'converting' from? Is the OP converting, or adopting?

Is there a Wiccan equivalent of baptism, that is required before one can call themselves a Wiccan; ie, does the OP actually need to meet a Wiccan?

Toodle pip!

 

[pjdude1219]

Ah, but you are snared by your own ego, and felt compelled to do so.

Everything posted on this thread is about the OP, unless stated otherwise. So your excuse discussing things in general does not hold. It's simple, replies not quoting subsequent replies to the OP, are to the OP, not general comments.

Your excuses and defence of your flawed buddhist analogy do you no good. Abandon it.

It doesn't matter if Avatar thinks that new age bullshit is bullshit. The point was, and that I agree, is that if this kid knew enough about Wicca, he could call himself a Wiccan. You can call yourself a Christian without following a major schizm, and there is less structure and hierarchy to the Wiccan faith, no induction ceremony required, no 'conversion' required, and like I said, 'conversion' implies ditching one religion for another, you seem to be avoiding this thorny issue, that the OP has not stated what, if any religion they already are! Their own use of the word 'conversion' displays rather a lack of the undertanding of the relevant terminology. This is a forum, words are important.

btw, you are putting words into Avatars mouth. He said 'conversion is bollocks', you are arguing from a point of view he hasn't personally expressed! You are still stuffing that straw man trying to make your point, and that is intellectualy dishonesty.

Anyway, please make good on this promise;



because you really are embarrassing yourself.


If you are going to carry on flailing though, don't nit pick line by line, answer some questions.

What religion is the OP 'converting' from? Is the OP converting, or adopting?

Is there a Wiccan equivalent of baptism, that is required before one can call themselves a Wiccan; ie, does the OP actually need to meet a Wiccan?

Toodle pip!

no i could be a solitary practishner but i would feel more comfertable worshipping in a group and i would be converting from roman cathilicism