If you have even a vague definition of Wicca, then you acknowledge at least something that distinguishes Wicca--some sort of border which, if crossed, means that one is or is not practicing Wicca.
Sure, "Christian" has a broad meaning. Christianity, though, in all its forms, through history has had one thing in common--one thing that said you are or are not a Christian: that Jesus was exceptionally holy and the Messiah. The dividing line has become even more clean-cut since the Enlightenment: that Jesus is the son of God and the Messiah.
As covered in my Vox article, Wicca cannot claim such uniformity of belief. Rightfully so. We are a religion of Priests and Priestesses: we have our own links to the Divine and our own interpretation of Them, the rituals, magic, and the world around us. Ritual--and the eight characteristics outlined in the article--are the vehicle by which we discover the Gods. A different vehicle will take us down a different path. This is fine...just don't call a Hyundai a Honda.
As for "Witch" and "Wicca" being the same word, philologically speaking, that is a stickier point. In the spirit of evolving language, the two words have grown apart in meaning. So much so, that Wicca has come to mean anything Gardnerian derived and Witchcraft covering not only Gardnerian-derived Wicca, but the practices which are not Gardnerian derived (ie Cochran-based, Anderson Feri tradition, etc). What do I mean by Gardnerian derived? Not specifically with lineage back to Gardner, but stylistically derived from Gardnerian Witchcraft.
Is it evolution for "Wicca" to become this undefined catch-all? Or is it simply the result of someone not being taught correctly by teachers without a backbone? Consider this imaginary conversation:
Student: I want to become a Wiccan.
Teacher: Okay, well, first let's learn how to cast a circle.
Student: You know, I really prefer squares.
Teacher: Well, I guess. I don't have a right to say what you're doing isn't Wicca. Okay. Well, Since there are four corners to a square, we can still talk about calling the guardians to guard the...er, square.
Student: Yeah, I read a little about these guardians in a book. I don't know. I just don't think I need to call any guardians. Besides, it seems kind of rude to demand they show up to my square just because I ask them to.
Teacher: Huh. Okay. Well, scratch that. Let's talk about the God and Goddess.
Student: The All.
Teacher: Huh?
Student: Well, since I don't think the God and Goddess are physical, and therefore they neither have chromosomes or genitalia to establish their sex or gender...I just prefer to call It...whatever It is, the All.
Teacher: Well...I'm polytheistic, personally...but I do know a number of henotheists in Wicca...and pantheists. So, I guess that's no problem. What about magic?
Student: I just don't want to risk harming someone, so instead of taking some sort of moral stance, I'm just gonna sit out on that game all-together.
Teacher: So, you prefer to cast a square without magic and without any sort of protections to worship an ambiguous, undefined Deity.
Student: Right.
Teacher: But you want to be a Wiccan?
Student: Right.
Teacher: So, what is it you think Wicca is?
Student: I dunno. You tell me, you're the teacher.
No comments:
Post a Comment