|
Post by maximus on Feb 14, 2010 10:10:38 GMT
I am. I have been for 35 years. What do you feel is strange about it?
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Feb 14, 2010 16:38:36 GMT
Ok strange is perhaps the wrong word, but I guess the problem I have with understanding why anyone would be interested in it is its way tenuous beginning, being that its essentially a bunch of stuff made up post 1921 by Margaret Murray..then Gerald Gardner plaigerising a bunch of Crowley stuff..then some feminist Doreen Valiente weighed changing the god to goddess..kind of seems like a fun thing, not to be taken seriously. So I get real puzzled with why people take it so serious. And the role of threefold has its ancient origin in..1968. Your ignorance is profound. And just as inaccurately. Gerald Gardner, to whom you are referring, was an amateur historian who, in his service to the Crown, had opportunity to gather information on indigenous practice of magic. He started the Witchcraft Museum which houses many fascinating articles from around the world. He also happened to be initiated into the New Forest coven, after a long friendship with Dorothy Clutterbuck. The New Forest coven long pre-existed Mr. Gardner. In fact, a published author, which disproves your claims of "wannabe," which means someone who claims to be so, but has published nothing. It is your opinion that he "made stuff up." He presented thinks in the light of the understanding of the times. This is really too vague to even respond to. To what, precisely, do you refer? This is a personal opinion, and an extremely uninformed one at that. In fact, it is recognized by the US government, and the US Military as being legitimate. It is only not so in the eyes of certain fundamentalist Christian and Muslim sects. I see you edited your original post to remove a reference to Doreen Valiente. You suggested that she "made up" the Charge of the Goddess. In fact, the Charge was originally published by Charles G. Leland in the late 1800s, from materials he gathered in rural Italy, during the mid-1800s, regarding the Stregahra Witchcraft tradition there. Valiente simply made it a bit more poetic. You also removed the reference to Aleister Crowley and Gardner having added elements of Ceremonialism, particularly Thelemic, elements into Wicca. This is true. Gardner did not possess all the inner teachings of the New Forest tradition, as he was a 1° initiate only, so he filled in the gaps in his knowledge using other disciplines to present a cogent, working Craft. There are also elements of Freemasonry in Wicca, such as the three degree structure. I suggest you do some research on something more than a Fundamentalist Wicca-bashing internet site.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Feb 14, 2010 17:00:45 GMT
I am a proponent of freedom of religion and the right for each person to choose their own as long as it does not interfere with the liberties of others. I may choose to disagree with it and examine its merits or lack thereof in discussion, yet I still believe the right needs to be sacrosanct.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Feb 14, 2010 19:44:00 GMT
Wicca: An O.E. masc. noun meaning "male witch, wizard, soothsayer, sorcerer, magician;" see witch. Use of the word in modern contexts traces to English folklorist Gerald Gardner (1884-1964), who is said to have joined circa 1939 an occult group in New Forest, Hampshire, England, for which he claimed an unbroken tradition to medieval times. Gardner seems to have first used it in print in 1954, in his book "Witchcraft Today" (e.g.: "Witches were the Wica or wise people, with herbal knowledge and a working occult teaching usually used for good ...."). In published and unpublished material, he apparently only ever used the word as a mass noun referring to adherents of the practice and not as the name of the practice itself. Some of his followers continue to use it in this sense. According to Gardner's book "The Meaning of Witchcraft" (1959), the word, as used in the initiation ceremony, played a key role in his experience: I realised that I had stumbled upon something interesting; but I was half-initiated before the word, 'Wica' which they used hit me like a thunderbolt, and I knew where I was, and that the Old Religion still existed. And so I found myself in the Circle, and there took the usual oath of secrecy, which bound me not to reveal certain things. In the late 1960s the term came into use as the title of a modern pagan movement associated with witchcraft. The first printed reference in this usage seems to be 1969, in "The Truth About Witchcraft" by freelance author Hans Holzer: If the practice of the Old Religion, which is also called Wicca (Craft of the Wise), and thence, witchcraft, is a reputable and useful cult, then it is worthy of public interest. And, quoting witch Alex Sanders: "No, a witch wedding still needs a civil ceremony to make it legal. Wicca itself as a religion is not registered yet. But it is about time somebody registered it, I think. I've done all I can to call attention to our religion." Sanders was a highly visible representative of neo-pagan Witchcraft in the late 1960s and early 1970s. During this time he appears to have popularized use of the term in this sense. Later books c.1989 teaching modernized witchcraft using the same term account for its rise and popularity, especially in U.S. wicked Look up wicked at Dictionary.com c.1275, earlier wick (12c.), apparently an adj. use of O.E. wicca "wizard" (see wicca). For evolution, cf. wretched from wretch. Slang ironic sense of "wonderful" first attested 1920, in F. Scott Fitzgerald. wile Look up wile at Dictionary.com 1154, wil "wile, trick," perhaps from O.N.Fr. *wile (O.Fr. guile), or directly from a Scand. source (cf. O.N. vel "trick, craft, fraud," vela "defraud"). Perhaps ultimately related to O.E. wicca "wizard" (see Wicca). Lighter sense of "amorous or playful trick" is from 1600. Wily is attested from c.1300. witch Look up witch at Dictionary.com O.E. wicce "female magician, sorceress," in later use esp. "a woman supposed to have dealings with the devil or evil spirits and to be able by their cooperation to perform supernatural acts," fem. of O.E. wicca "sorcerer, wizard, man who practices witchcraft or magic," from verb wiccian "to practice witchcraft" (cf. Low Ger. wikken, wicken "to use witchcraft," wikker, wicker "soothsayer"). OED says of uncertain origin. Klein suggests connection with O.E. wigle "divination," and wig, wih "idol." Watkins says the nouns represent a P.Gmc. *wikkjaz "necromancer" (one who wakes the dead), from PIE *weg-yo-, from *weg- "to be strong, be lively." That wicce once had a more specific sense than the later general one of "female magician, sorceress" perhaps is suggested by the presence of other words in O.E. describing more specific kinds of magical craft. In the Laws of Ælfred (c.890), witchcraft was specifically singled out as a woman's craft, whose practitioners were not to be suffered to live among the W. Saxons: "Ða fæmnan þe gewuniað onfon gealdorcræftigan & scinlæcan & wiccan, ne læt þu ða libban." The other two words combined with it here are gealdricge, a woman who practices "incantations," and scinlæce "female wizard, woman magician," from a root meaning "phantom, evil spirit." Another word that appears in the Anglo-Saxon laws is lyblæca "wizard, sorcerer," but with suggestions of skill in the use of drugs, since the root of the word is lybb "drug, poison, charm." Lybbestre was a fem. word meaning "sorceress," and lybcorn was the name of a certain medicinal seed (perhaps wild saffron). Weekly notes possible connection to Gothic weihs "holy" and Ger. weihan "consecrate," and writes, "the priests of a suppressed religion naturally become magicians to its successors or opponents." In Anglo-Saxon glossaries, wicca renders L. augur (c.1100), and wicce stands for "pythoness, divinatricem." In the "Three Kings of Cologne" (c.1400) wicca translates Magi: "Þe paynyms ... cleped þe iij kyngis Magos, þat is to seye wicchis." The glossary translates L. necromantia ("demonum invocatio") with galdre, wiccecræft. The Anglo-Saxon poem called "Men's Crafts" has wiccræft, which appears to be the same word, and by its context means "skill with horses." In a c.1250 translation of "Exodus," witches is used of the Egyptian midwives who save the newborn sons of the Hebrews: "Ðe wicches hidden hem for-ðan, Biforen pharaun nolden he ben." Witch in ref. to a man survived in dialect into 20c., but the fem. form was so dominant by 1601 that men-witches or he-witch began to be used. Extended sense of "young woman or girl of bewitching aspect or manners" is first recorded 1740. Witch doctor is from 1718; applied to African magicians from 1836. "At this day it is indifferent to say in the English tongue, 'she is a witch,' or 'she is a wise woman.' " [Reginald Scot, "The Discoverie of Witchcraft," 1584] www.etymonline.com/
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Feb 19, 2010 17:54:13 GMT
Your ignorance is profound.
His ignorance is profound. So let your own wisdom match his ignorance what for depth, and teach him what he does not know.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Feb 20, 2010 6:55:06 GMT
Your ignorance is profound.His ignorance is profound. So let your own wisdom match his ignorance what for depth, and teach him what he does not know. When/if he returns with a cogent question, I will attempt to answer it, excepting, of course, oath-bound material.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Feb 20, 2010 8:21:53 GMT
Your ignorance is profound.His ignorance is profound. So let your own wisdom match his ignorance what for depth, and teach him what he does not know. When/if he returns with a cogent question, I will attempt to answer it, excepting, of course, oath-bound material. I think he was just a troll trying to cause division. The bonds of brotherhood are stronger than all that. Who cares if we agree or disagree on matters of religion? Our uniqueness is what drives progress. The questions are far larger than any one of us. If we search fervently with an honest and self-critical heart, we cannot go wrong. In my opinion (imo).
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Feb 20, 2010 8:40:18 GMT
I have never met Bro Ruff Ashlar but he is very knowledgeable about Freemasonry and also fluent in many languages and about religion and associated matters.
He does have a robust way of putting things, but he is not alone amongst the posters here in that attribute.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Feb 20, 2010 8:43:45 GMT
Hi Lauderdale, I did not mean to aim that at Ruff Ashlar, but rather the originator of this thread. I agree with your assessment of Ashlar and his comments here. I don't know if there was confusion, and if so, I hope this sets it straight. I have never met Bro Ruff Ashlar but he is very knowledgeable about Freemasonry and also fluent in many languages and about religion and associated matters. He does have a robust way of putting things, but he is not alone amongst the posters here in that attribute.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Feb 20, 2010 8:53:37 GMT
Ignorance, like beauty. is in the eye of the beholder.
Do you know that some people think I don't know what I am talking about, can you believe that.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Feb 20, 2010 17:24:37 GMT
Thanks Bro Knosis, that clarifies matters.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Feb 20, 2010 20:59:49 GMT
And here was I thinking that you Bill were the Omniscient one in HRA. With my size and the number of Fora to which I post I claim Omnipresent, and I would award Omnipotent to Bro Middlepillar given the number of "Chairs" and equivalent he has been installed into in the various Degrees to which he belongs.
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Feb 20, 2010 22:03:29 GMT
I have a masonic Bro, a PM, and and HRA Soj, an excellent ritualist and thoughtful Freemason - by the way he is a practicing Wiccan - In fact talking to him I can see how Masonic ritual fits so well into his Wiccan/Pagan beliefs
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Feb 20, 2010 22:47:44 GMT
I do not see that it would be difficult. One of the brethren and PM of a different lodge in my town I think follows Asutru, though I've never discussed it fully with him. I rarely get or create the opportunity to discuss personal beliefs with the brethren, though we recently had the opportunity to examine a gentleman who follows Native American beliefs for our lodge. He's volunteered thoughts were quite impressive and refreshing, and it will be a pleasure to raise him.
|
|
|
Post by theplumbtruth on Feb 21, 2010 3:47:26 GMT
I am curious how others blend their different beliefs and practices with their Masonry, in light of the fact that so much of our ritual is Christian influenced. I know there are many that believe freemasonry is and only ever was Christian based and I'm not asking to define or explore that controversy.
In my lodge within LDH we have a mix of Christian, Native American, Wiccan, Liberal Catholic Church and members anywhere in between, along with Theosophists, Rosicrucians and probably other crafts and practices I'm not aware of. When someone makes an application to our lodge we ask if they have a belief in diety, whatever that may mean to them.
Perhaps I'm singing to the choir here since most members of MfoL appear to be liberal in their approach to diety, but I'm still wondering how you blend in your beliefs and if it's become easier to accept in our lodges than it did say a generation ago.
Though I grew up attending a Lutheran church I never remained active and just went along my way developing my personal spiritual beliefs. When I was initiated into masonry 22 years ago I was pregnant with my son - and that's a story unto itself! My son's father (who is also still an active member) and I also had our son baptised in lodge. It meant more to us to declare TGAOTU as his guide and protector than any other form of religious declaration.
Perhaps this should be a new thread but my thoughts came to mind from all the above.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Feb 21, 2010 4:25:35 GMT
Do you know that some people think I don't know what I am talking about, can you believe that. Surely not! I see the OP was removed. So, does anyone have any questions about Wicca or Witchcraft? I have no problem reconciling my beliefs with Freemasonry, because the ultimate source, the GAOTU, is the same for all of us. Religion is simply man's way of making sense of that which is unknowable, due to our limited understanding as humans. The Judaic symbolism in Masonry bothers me not one bit, just another way of approaching the search for ultimate wisdom.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Feb 21, 2010 8:08:52 GMT
As folllower of the Perennial Philosophy, which is essentially what Brother Maximus describes (apologies Brother Maximus if I misrepresent you here), I see all honest paths as an expression of the search for truth and a relationship with the GAOTU. I do not see there is a battle or even a necessary difference between any path. Everyone is at some level a searcher unless they've given up altogether. The individual is on his word with whatever oath he agrees to, and it's impossible to make a liar honest if they do not wish to be. The lesson of the interview process for a candidate is a first step and a lesson for both the interviewer and the interviewee. We as examiners must discern if the individual upright and forthright.
In my area, if not exactly my lodge, we have a mix quite like yours. All these paths you mention are represented. I do have to admit ignorance to the beliefs of many of the brethren-I simply do not think it is my business to pry. If they offer their views, I will listen. I am constantly intrigued by views not my own, and sometimes I incorporate lessons from them. There is much I find of use in Asutru, Wicca, Native American religions &c. I do not often offer my own views to many unless compelled.
Individually people may be dead wrong, or I may be dead wrong, in the specifics; I doubt that any personal God will let an earnest seeker stray. Languages are woefully inadequate in describing completely even many mundane items. How much more describing the GAOTU? It's definitely nothing to kill each other over.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Feb 21, 2010 14:51:01 GMT
I am not a member of any Wiccan body but have no problem with it. I am a Christian but of the High Anglican (Episcopalian)/Anglo Catholic type and an not an exclusivist. I find that Freemasonry, especially the Christian Degrees such as Rose Croix, Red Cross of Constantine, KTs and Royal Order of Scotland, enhance my religous beliefs.
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Feb 26, 2010 17:55:25 GMT
It's alright KNOs1s, I realised there'd been a misunderstanding I have never met Bro Ruff Ashlar but he is very knowledgeable about Freemasonry and also fluent in many languages and about religion and associated matters. Thanks, lauderdale. I'm well chuffed He does have a robust way of putting things, but he is not alone amongst the posters here in that attribute. True also. Lauderdale and I have broken a lance or two, a good few years ago now. What he means is, I tend to put my view across a bit stridently, which can be a bit shocking if it's concerning matters that you consider sacred. Just as we need to be careful how we post in case it causes mischievous offence, I think we also have to stand guard against feeling the sting of offence, as it's so likely to be unintended.
|
|
|
Post by barryw on Oct 27, 2011 23:15:26 GMT
Whatever you think about modern 'Wicca'; can I recommend you read Professor Ronald Huttons' book on the subject 'The Triumph of the Moon' which is a great historic introduction to its rise.
I suppose I would say that just because something is a relatively new interpretation of old beliefs does not in itself make it without worth as a spiritual tradition. What would be strange to some people is its realtive lack of dogma, structure and the relainace in the individual to formulate their own moral code. Here lies its strength and weakness in my view. Modern wicca has been described as the only religion ever invented by the British which I think is an interesting thought.
|
|