Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
Let's keep this thread about Wicca specifically. Also, @Angelkesfarl it would be cool if you translated and shared one of those 4000 secret books instead of quoting snippets from them as replies to old threads.
"Indeed, I have translated for you from verified personal practices (or successful field experiments), not from a book, two sections detailing the Spirits by their correct, potent names, yet nothing has happened to anyone. I am writing entirely from my own mind and am not copying from any other source."
I used to be Wiccan for quite a while, but eventually left because the Epicurean paradox kept following me, but that's a whole other can of worms. I agree with the others here that it's a good point of contact between "normies" and the occult, given that it takes up the most space relatively speaking in the public consciousness of the western world.
I would caution against saying a path is BS. There’s a whole spectrum of practice out there, and even the fluffy, more New-Age-adjacent stuff often has a clear purpose: supporting the practitioner’s health and wellbeing. Basic energy work, meditation, and small rituals that mostly boost serotonin and dopamine can still be genuinely helpful. Is that the same thing as full-on spirit work? No, not even close. But in terms of personal change, the results can be just as meaningful.
Now, if the conversation shifts to influencing others or the external, material world, that’s where the difference becomes obvious. Whether we call those gentler methods “magic” depends on how tightly we define the word, but they do fall under the broad idea of shaping one’s life through subtle means. And honestly, if a practice helps someone improve their life and feel more whole, I’m not inclined to take that away from them.
I'm not Wiccan and never have been, and I have plenty of critiques of Wicca, neopaganism and modern pagan reconstructionism for trying to absorb all magic into itself, crap history , retconning of misinformation to claim original ownership in some fantasy idealized verson of history where "actually" they originally came up with other people's magical tech. It's was just more Anglo-Saxon Neo-colonialism, in my more Latino view.
But for the best glimpse, in my opinion, at a very sincere , honest, and grounded attempt to travel the modern pagan 'witchcraft' path, I highly recommend Diana Helmuth's The Witching Year. You might end up cheering for her as I did.
A few chapters in I could tell with her deep sincerity it would all eventually click for her , as she re-writes her dysfunctional subconsious self, and it might just activate a mystic luminosity that would transform her.
On the level of magical and mystical technology Wicca and paganism = New Thought + Romantic nature mysticism + academic speculation, but who cares? New Thought is totally legit , works, and does not matter if that person needs pagan gods and hippie pagan poetry to make it click for them.
And who knows, maybe something Eternal speaks behind the Wiccan and neopagan names and forms? That is up to them to discover, not me or anyone , to say what it 'really' is.
Amazon Description: Diana Helmuth, thirty-three, is skeptical of organized religion. She is also skeptical of disorganized religion. But, more than anything, she is tired of God being dead. So, she decides to try on the fastest growing, self-directed faith in America: Witchcraft. The result is...
Wicca is a religion that honors a Goddess and a God (mainly one Goddess and God archetype). Individual practitioners may however have more than one God or Goddess in their pantheon. Magic is a practice that is connected but can be separate from the veneration and worship of those deities. It has a rich history depending on the lineage and has its roots in Freemasonry and the HOGD and adjoining systems.
Post automatically merged:
Just to follow-up. Don't start/stop at Margaret Murray. There's a lot of issues with her scholarship/methods. I recommend the following books to give anyone a historical picture of Wicca, specifically the Gardnerian line. Note: none of the books below presents a perfect picture of Wicca's history, but together they do illuminate the history behind the movement and religion.
Adler, M. (2017). Drawing down the moon. In Religion Today: A Reader (pp. 250-252). Routledge.
Heselton, P. (2000). Wiccan Roots: Gerald Gardner and the Modern Witchcraft Revival. Capall Bann Publishing.
Hutton, R. (2019). The triumph of the moon: A history of modern pagan witchcraft. Oxford University Press.
Gen-X magician here, so I was there for the 1980's and 1990's explosion of Wicca. The now discredited Murryite Hypothesis - that witchcraft was a matrilineal pagan survival - was where Wicca at the time did start and stop. I thought it was true too, we all did, but I had not formulated my mythic universe around it.
I had read Prof Hutton's Triumph of the Moon when it came out, and it was a gut punch to the neopagans. Many people had their hearts broken. Many have wandered away, or are still wandering in the wilderness. I also like some of the neopaganisms and Witchcrafts v2.0 that have sprung up in it's wake, others not so much.
Signal boosting the excellent Prof. Ronald Hutton. I think he feels a little bad for nuking Wicca from space, and is trying to help out a bit
Just a quick correction to your list. Ronald Hutton's The Triumph of the Moon was published in 1999, not 2019. That was when Wicca fell apart and began searching for a new founding myth.
Aidan A. Kelly's book, Crafting the Art of Magic, was published in 199 . I read it in 1995 and it was the first time I had gotten the sense the story of pre-Christian religion and belief that Anglophone academia has been spreading since the 1800's was not totally accurate. Hutton's book in 1999 was the killing blow.
Gen-X magician here, so I was there for the 1980's and 1990's explosion of Wicca. The now discredited Murryite Hypothesis - that witchcraft was a matrilineal pagan survival - was where Wicca at the time did start and stop. I thought it was true too, we all did, but I had not formulated my mythic universe around it.
I had read Prof Hutton's Triumph of the Moon when it came out, and it was a gut punch to the neopagans. Many people had their hearts broken. Many have wandered away, or are still wandering in the wilderness. I also like some of the neopaganisms and Witchcrafts v2.0 that have sprung up in it's wake, others not so much.
Signal boosting the excellent Prof. Ronald Hutton. I think he feels a little bad for nuking Wicca from space, and is trying to help out a bit
Just a quick correction to your list. Ronald Hutton's The Triumph of the Moon was published in 1999, not 2019. That was when Wicca fell apart and began searching for a new founding myth.
Aidan A. Kelly's book, Crafting the Art of Magic, was published in 199 . I read it in 1995 and it was the first time I had gotten the sense the story of pre-Christian religion and belief that Anglophone academia has been spreading since the 1800's was not totally accurate. Hutton's book in 1999 was the killing blow.
Are things only legitimate if they are unbroken lines and old? The better question to ask is "Are the God and Goddess real entities?" My experience has shown they are. If they are real entities they've appeared to people and guided them in the past, but likely in different forms. Another important question is "Does this work?" Again, my experience is that it works really well.
Personally, I believe the idea of charging rocks with the full moon and making little spell jars is childish and silly. However, I don't know too much about the subject so I'll let everyone decide for themselves
Wicca is a modern new occult religion. Refer wikipedia. And every school of thought has its own knowledge. If it sounds silly at first. Investigate further or clarify. Thank you.
yeah, i think we have to be more specific and say the history Wicca likes to spread about itself is pretty much 90% BS, but Wicca itself it not BS, per se.
We all have BS to contend with. There is TONS of historical BS in my fave tradition, the Grimoire Tradition. Part of the fun is figuring out how the BS can be made actionable and useful, so it stops being BS.
As 'ex' OTO I have seen copies of Gerald Gardner's OTO lodge charter, so can vouch for this info:
The Secret History of Modern Witchcraft
WICCA AS AN OTO ENCAMPMENT
It was a revelation for me in the mid1990's when I came across it. See also Mitch Horowitz work tracking down the famed and probably-apocryphal "New Forest Coven"actually was self-myth making by tricksy Ol' Gardner.
The actual was an group started as an offshoot of a Theosophy, and was spun-up by Mabel Scott-Besant. See:
yeah, i think we have to be more specific and say the history Wicca likes to spread about itself is pretty much 90% BS, but Wicca itself it not BS, per se.
We all have BS to contend with. There is TONS of historical BS in my fave tradition, the Grimoire Tradition. Part of the fun is figuring out how the BS can be made actionable and useful, so it stops being BS.
As 'ex' OTO I have seen copies of Gerald Gardner's OTO lodge charter, so can vouch for this info:
You saw it ? Good ! Is it a LODGE charter or a CAMP charter ? My impression was he wasn't much more than a Minerval and was able to start a Camp ( not a Lodge ) ? Still, back in those days it seems a little mixed up .
Here ^ we have ' encampment ' .... not even an Oasis . The end of that article seems to state Crowley may have anticipated a lodge . That means he might have thought it could occur or he wanted it to occur in the future . The ideas about Gardiner having higher degrees seem linked to this anticipation . I know, that even in more recent times , people can get 'rushed through' if it helps establish an 'official body' , particularly a national one ; ''Listen , we will make you a ( PI or 7th ) .. so you can ...... '
Also the term 'charter ' seems flexible ; sometimes it seems like an initiation certificate and sometimes it seems like an operational charter to be head of a country ? ( I mean , back then , in reading the history ) . The same confusions are around Spenser Lewis and the formation of AMORC ( well, before it became AMORC mail order ....... you see what I did there ? )
It was a revelation for me in the mid1990's when I came across it. See also Mitch Horowitz work tracking down the famed and probably-apocryphal "New Forest Coven"actually was self-myth making by tricksy Ol' Gardner.
The actual was an group started as an offshoot of a Theosophy, and was spun-up by Mabel Scott-Besant. See:
I cant remember the source but I am sure I read Crowley somewhere talking about the need for a different expression of Thelema , for the more 'common people' in a type of folk tradition . I am pretty sure Gardiner was at least a MInerval , and may have had a Camp Charter - maybe there were plans to expand that ... but maybe it was considered that he was in a better position to put forward this new 'folk expression'
But now it gets tricky , because , as you probably realize , there are some elements in Wicca clearly borrowed from OTO initiations 1 - 3 ..... yet the Great Right and other things are clearly drawn from the Gnostic Mass ( well, the original version was until it got changed by Doreen Valiente ) to 'de-Crowleyize' it . This seems more than a 'camp' , it seems like Wicca was more like an 'Oasis that can perform the Mass / Rite ' .
The process may even still be forming . A few years back when we were active , we had a few Wiccans in our group ( and I actually took initiation into a coven , but not the local one , ) although I would do some things with them and visa versa . Their HP also took Minerval . We often talked about this subject and 'degree comparisons ' , but , of course , it was somewhat restricted .
Then one time she tells me she is about to go off and things with a 'really advanced couple ' (in Wicca ) that have offered her a higher initiation ( she was 3rd deg Wicca and HP of a Coven ... what's higher than that ? - Except for 'Witch Queen' .. and she was not going for that. )
Anyway she came back all abuzz and excited and could not keep it in and had to tell me about the amazing higher level Wicca initiation she did , and spilled the beans somewhat , describing this 'amazing bonding ritual ' , which afterwards I considered was an extension of the 5 fold blessing , along with another source of a similar 'bonding' ritual , that was familiar to me ( but not to her ) . I asked her if it was based on Wicca only or 'borrowed ' . She stated it was original , but could not give the source .
It seems some are still out there ( or were until recently ) still playing 'mix and match ' ? .... meaning ; 'We will find some of the OTO ritual stuff , snaffle it, rewrite and mask it and then later present it as some deeper inner version of Wicca ' ... a sort of, reversal of the original aim and process .
Post automatically merged:
Here it is ;
'Camp' of the OTO , yet Gardner being PI .... curious . I suppose back then, things were not as 'cut and dried' as they became later ?
Post automatically merged:
One idea might be , he got his PI as ( I think ) he was already a Master Mason ( early on it was considered one could transfer over to OTO degree if one had the relevant Masonic degree but the associated OTO body would have to go through the OTO progression starting at Camp ? ( although there seem cases of that too being flexible )
Post automatically merged:
I have to consider some concoctions between Crowley and Gardner ; if Gardiner had wanted to set up Wicca alone - he could have used the claims of authority that he did use , and he didnt use any claim of authority from OTO .... so why bother with the link and getting the charter to operate in the first place . Some say he got them but then decided to implement Wicca instead . Nah ... to much other evidence of things to not suggest some type of implemented plan that the OTO or Crowley was behind .
- Sometimes I would tease wiccans , if they got to 'feminist' and claimed all sorts of fantasy things about Wicca ; ' Do you realise your female based , woman in charge , Goddess worshipping religion was developed by a man ? And not any man , but the wicked Crowley and the old perv Gardiner .... now you have two types of Wicca ; Gardinerian ; that one , and 'Alexandrian ' another man ... that reinserted Crowley back into it .'
However I never let all this interfere with the actual Wiccan celebrations themselves ; that was a great time and fun socially .
Oh, nice data digging there, Firetree! 'Camp' makes a lot more sense, now that I think about it. (93, btw!)
I heard then, back in the 1990's, that Gardner made it to 4th degree. I have read since then it was up to 7th, but probably you know how fast and loose degree advancement gets sometimes, past KEW.
Post automatically merged:
Heh. Agreed.
Wiccans got together to throw a stink-bomb at Crowley so people wouldn't peer too closely at where Wicca came from. What’s more, becasuse of their sheer numbers, and their tighly scripted control of the messaging, it worked for a long fucking time.
But I get it. The Crowley is a hard sell. And then Wicca as a BDSM cult made by a white British aristocrat is already hard enough.
And to be fair, I like Gardner, just not the historical fabrications that came afterwards. Saturn-heavy here, so history is just one of my things. I came away from reading Philip Heselton's massive, exhaustive biography of Gerald Gardner liking him a fair amount, much to my surprise. He was not perfect, but who is?
Now the cat is out of the bag and Wiccans like Thorn Mooney are joining the Order and calling it a sister tradition. All good.,I remember when a bunch of Wiccans joined in the 1990s, and they were like, 'Well, OBVIOUSLY Gardner taught Crowley.' Then the historical documents were pulled out to set the record straight.
Not that I mind. I think people need to 'make things their own.' Just don't pollute the intellectual commons, or the historical record, with fabricated BS in the rush to make a super-special paganism decoder ring only you have. We already lived through the 1980s and 1990s 'Well, my grandmother initiated me' era. When then everyone's grandmother initiated them into especially-looking 'witchcraft' stuff that looked exactly like what Llewellyn Press was publishing.
I don't know if you've talked to many modern practitioners(particularly witches), but everyone shits on Crowley these days(although he probably liked being shit on) it ranges from moderate distaste to full on virtue signaling levels of trying to scrub Crowley from their practice. I think that he was important insofar as he brought magick into a more public space, the spike in interest in spirituality during the 20th century is likely wouldn't have been as big without him so I think him for that. Also without Crowley we wouldn't have yoga pants and that's a dark timeline.
Also random side-note: my great grandfather was a mystic and I guess he was very into Crowley throughout his life although said he regretted following some of his teachings when he was close to the end of his life.
I would caution against saying a path is BS. There’s a whole spectrum of practice out there, and even the fluffy, more New-Age-adjacent stuff often has a clear purpose: supporting the practitioner’s health and wellbeing. Basic energy work, meditation, and small rituals that mostly boost serotonin and dopamine can still be genuinely helpful. Is that the same thing as full-on spirit work? No, not even close. But in terms of personal change, the results can be just as meaningful.
wizardforums.com
)
