Print

[Carysta]

WICCA IS WICCA.  Anything else isn't.

Would that I could have 1% of the fluff become REAL Wiccans!  We'd be a strong, vibrant, living faith.  Too many loonies making a fashion statement have rendered us impotent....erm....and barren. 

I DO. however, applaud your tenacity.

Thanks C_A.  I've held on this because I'm struggling to wrap my head around it; I don't like to go "oh, I'm wrong" and then blithely move on if something isn't adding up for me.  That isn't learning it's just...  drifting.  IMO, anyway. 

As I said before...think "Maestro" instead of "MASTER/SLAVE"

I particularly like his last post.  Think for instance of a person who may be the world's greatest (perhaps female) violinist.  There is nobody on earth who can even come close to the beauty of her music as she plays.  Now, consider her playing with an orchestra.  She is the centerpiece.  In the context of the current performance, she is the whole reason for their existence.  BUT there is also no way on earth that she could do what she's doing without the Conductor -- the Concert Master -- conducting the performance. 

Is he just there to conduct the rest of the gang because they don't know what they're doing?  No.  He is the "master" of the entire performance -- both them and her.


Is it he or is it she who is "more important" or "more powerful" in the performance of the music?  The answer is: No.

Something went 'click' when I read this.  It didn't the first time through C_A although it was there in the back of my mind...  Theosohpia's example is one I can definitely relate to.  (Having volunteered for our local orchestra in a stage-crew capacity and having played an instrument for many years I will ignore the fact of what happens when a bad conductor is up there... )  It all comes back to balance and the parts being important to the whole. 

Don't try to remake it to suit the feminist ideal. I was there when the women's movement started and have been a strong supporter of the rights of women all along. None the less ... the women's movement is a failed social experiment. The generation of young women coming up these days are returning to traditional roles. The reason women's lib failed so miserably is because it blithely ignored certain key elements of female human nature.

 

If I've come across as feminist ...  wow.  That has not been my intent at all.  I object strongly to the idea of 'control' (and to what on the surface came across that way to me) of one person by another - in this case of a man over a woman - but had the situation been reversed I would have objected just as stronly to it if the line was about a woman mastering a man.  Thanks to the excellent guidance I've received I'm past that idea now, and while I'll still be reading and learning I can move on past it being about 'control'.  As for the feminist movement - in the beginning, it was good, and it worked towards getting more rights for women.  Somewhere along the line the focus shifted and a lot of today's 'feminists' are women who are looking to be given MORE rights than men and who spend all their time tearing down men and demeaning men (not all feminists, I'm generalizing here based on what I've encountered myself).  I personally think most of the early feminists would be appalled at what feminism has become these days.

It would have been better if you had discovered the truth of Wicca in a formal degree setting. It's too much to take in all at once. You can't go from a first degree to a third degree understanding in a single day. It takes years to understand and appreciate. Don't dismiss it simply because it doesn't fit with your idea of how things are supposed to be.

If I were going to dismiss it I'd have given up arguing ages ago   I am not looking to have sudden perfect understanding of Wicca - I want to learn what I can about it, the formal instruction by someone else is simply not going to happen in my case, so here I am with my questions and my preconceptions - we'll have to work on tearing down and building up, but I'm not ready to give up and start painting unicorns and rainbows on everything so I can have some random form of McWicca.  I may never become Wiccan, if it turns out the traditions are not for me, but if I fit somewhere in the neopagan spectrum I also would not go around calling myself Wiccan just because it was a convenient label.  That would be like me saying I'm Christian because my father is/was Baptist - I have no idea what a Baptist believes so to call myself that would be equally presumptuous.

[theosophia]

Something went 'click' when I read this.  It didn't the first time through C_A although it was there in the back of my mind...  Theosohpia's example is one I can definitely relate to.

Well, thank you.  I'm glad I could help.  I've been hoping I was somewhere close to the right track as far as the Old Crow is concerned.  But I am just an un-trained Mystic wanna-be who really knows very little about Wicca or its "secrets."  I'm just using a bit of intuition and relating this Wicca stuff to my background in other things.

(Having volunteered for our local orchestra in a stage-crew capacity and having played an instrument for many years I will ignore the fact of what happens when a bad conductor is up there... )

Well, I wouldn't completely ignore what happens if the person in the position of "master" fails at his part.  It helps to show the importance of the right kind of mastery.  And at a certain level, the one who fails could have all the intellectual "book-learning" that there is on the subject.  But real "mastery" is something more than that.  It is something that one becomes at a much deeper level than merely "understanding."  If he does not have that, then the music (or magic ... or sex ... or whatever the subject is) just doesn't come out quite good enough.

(Having volunteered for our local orchestra in a stage-crew capacity and having played an instrument for many years I will ignore the fact of what happens when a bad conductor is up there... )  It all comes back to balance and the parts being important to the whole.

Yup.


And if you have time, take Blue up on his suggestion, too.  He knows what he's talking about and is generally spot-on about 97.3% of the time.  Personally, if I were gonna pick one, I'd recommend Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead.  The first page or so will give you an insight into her concept of an "ideal" man who has complete self-confidence and "mastery."

[Carysta]

Well, thank you.  I'm glad I could help.  I've been hoping I was somewhere close to the right track as far as the Old Crow is concerned.  But I am just an un-trained Mystic wanna-be who really knows very little about Wicca or its "secrets."  I'm just using a bit of intuition and relating this Wicca stuff to my background in other things.

Coming from not-much background in not-many spiritual paths, getting insight and interpretations from everyone is very helpful to me

Well, I wouldn't completely ignore what happens if the person in the position of "master" fails at his part.  It helps to show the importance of the right kind of mastery.  And at a certain level, the one who fails could have all the intellectual "book-learning" that there is on the subject.  But real "mastery" is something more than that.  It is something that one becomes at a much deeper level than merely "understanding."  If he does not have that, then the music (or magic ... or sex ... or whatever the subject is) just doesn't come out quite good enough.

Oh, agreed.  However for simplicity's sake since I finally grasped what everyone's been trying to show me (yes, I can be, erm, stubborn when I have an idea in my head lol) I didn't want to get into a discussion of 'bad maestros' because we're talking about balance which is the good and the bad together and I'm pretty sure we could go into a whole other thread about Deity as the good conductor versus the bad conductor.  I'm not there yet...  I hope to be someday

And if you have time, take Blue up on his suggestion, too.  He knows what he's talking about and is generally spot-on about 97.3% of the time.  Personally, if I were gonna pick one, I'd recommend Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead.  The first page or so will give you an insight into her concept of an "ideal" man who has complete self-confidence and "mastery."

I plan on it.  I tend to take book suggestions very seriously - it doesn't mean I'm going to agree with what I read once I read it (had to work today, hoping my local library will have Rand's work, but didn't have time to go) but I will read it and learn from it.

[FireWillow]

No.  We are not sharing oathbound or coven-related issues.

That would be a violation.

I don't see what six has to do with it, other than the fact that they used the sumptive "g-ds", not spelling out "g-ds and g-ddesses".

It's not spin.  As I said before...think "Maestro" instead of "MASTER/SLAVE", or even "understanding".

A MAESTRO is responsible for an orchestra sounding like an orchestra, not a bunch of people sawing on violins, blowing into tubas, and banging on drums.  A MAESTRO arranges, instructs, orchestrates, leads, conducts, and coordinates all of the cacophony into a more pleasant sound.  Melodies.  Harmonies.  Staccatos.  Crescendos.  Adagios.  The G-DS do this for us.  Men do this for women, and vice-versa.  In different ways, at different times, and for different reasons / causes / effects / seasons / directions, on and on, ad infinitum. 

You're dragging the word "semantics" through a forest of semantics for a reason....I do not know what that reason is.  It has NOTHING to do with "superiority" or "subservience" in that respect, though there are moments when it does.  There are, (and we start leaning HARD on number six here...), DUTIES for each in the coven and in ritual.  It all works out.  The HPs is "in charge", but she draws strength from the HP.  The HP GIVES this strength, freely, willingly.  It ALL comes out to balance.  Men teach girls.  Women teach boys.  Does that have an air of "servitude" or "MASTER" to it?  If you break your oath, the G-ddess damns you.  It didn't SAY that the G-d does as well....does that mean he doesn't?  Why?  Doesn't He care?  Is he BUSY being a slavedriver?  A pimp? An abusive husband?

If the G-ds (okay, AND G-desses...), leave you this much doubt, fine.  These Ardanes have suited me and many like me for many, many years.  We don't "preach" it.  We don't "tell" it.  We LIVE it.  As we have, and as we will.

My only hope is that the light of it turns on...for you, as well as anyone else reading this.  If it does, I am happy.  If it doesn't, well...I'm STILL happy, but a bit dismayed that this SINGLE POINT can actually be the RATIONALE for a lot of the schism in Wicca today.  A schism that causes more harm, not ONLY to Wicca itself, but to the greater neo-pagan movement at-large.  Indeed, it tears at the fabric of religious freedom....there's a reason why people take neo-pagans as a bunch of "loonies-going-through-a-phase"....it has a LOT to do with McWicca(c)...

"I don't like the phrase "mastered", so I'm going to change it to what I want, and STILL call myself Wiccan".

"I don't like the image of the Horned G-d, so I'm gonna worship a Silvery-Winged Pink Unicorn and STILL call it Wicca".

"I don't LIKE 'DARK MAGICKQE", so I'm gonna build a website with ALL kinds of RAINBOWS instead and call it REAL WICCA".

I am not accusing YOU of any of these infractions, but it helps make the point.

WICCA IS WICCA.  Anything else isn't.

Would that I could have 1% of the fluff become REAL Wiccans!  We'd be a strong, vibrant, living faith.  Too many loonies making a fashion statement have rendered us impotent....erm....and barren. 

I DO. however, applaud your tenacity.

I couldn't have said it any better myself.

There should be a 'standing ovation' emoticon, for I can think of nothing to add.

Bravo Maestro!

[C_A]

 

If there was a "blush" emoticon it wouldn't begin to cover it.  After all....you guys were the more adept at the point.

Now....shall we move on?

[C_A]

Six through ten.  Thoughts?

[theosophia]

Six through ten.  Thoughts?

Just one for a start:

Divinity (God or Gods ... or Goddess & God) can only do FOR a person that which Divinity does THROUGH the person.

[Carysta]

10.  For in this way only may men have communion with the gods, for the gods cannot help man without the help of man.

I love the part in italics.  It's similar to the oft-repeated but little-followed 'God helps those who help themselves'.  We have to give of ourselves and put in the effort, not just make the gestures.  For example, I could read a book, follow the steps, and put together a ritual, and say to myself 'hey, look at me, I did a ritual, so now I should get something back'... but if I don't understand why I've done the ritual, what the purpose of the ritual is, and if I don't properly prepare myself (see Old Laws 6-9), if I'm just following steps, I'll get back exactly what I put in, which is not a heck of a lot.  Going back to the music example (because I think it's one a lot of people can relate to and it's certainly one that's working for me)...  You can have a player who is technically proficient.  That player can hit every note, do the music exactly as written in the score, and put on a 'flawless' performance.  But... the performance would still not be complete.  You could have another player, who is not 'technically perfect', maybe hits a note off by a little or misses a beat or two... but still be a much more complete experience because they are playing with emotion and energy and they are giving of themselves to the music.  Of course, someone who is technically just awful, misses more than half the notes and is off key, well, they can put in all the emotion they want, if they do not understand the purpose and the form of the music, their performance will also be incomplete.  I feel that what the Ardanes are telling us here is that you must be able to prepare properly as far as the steps of a ritual go - AND also put the emotion/energy/power into it.  Otherwise it's just mechanical. 

Of course what I 'feel' is quite likely in need of refinement - so, am I at least in the ballpark? 

P.S.  I don't think if I put all the energy in the world into a well-thought-out ritual to bring myself money that I'm suddenly going to win the lottery; I would imagine that Deity is a lot more subtle than that   I think it would mean I'd find a way to save myself some money; or maybe that creative idea would go from nebulous thought to an opportunity I hadn't considered. 
 

[FireWillow]

I love the part in italics.  It's similar to the oft-repeated but little-followed 'God helps those who help themselves'.  We have to give of ourselves and put in the effort, not just make the gestures.  For example, I could read a book, follow the steps, and put together a ritual, and say to myself 'hey, look at me, I did a ritual, so now I should get something back'... but if I don't understand why I've done the ritual, what the purpose of the ritual is, and if I don't properly prepare myself (see Old Laws 6-9), if I'm just following steps, I'll get back exactly what I put in, which is not a heck of a lot.  Going back to the music example (because I think it's one a lot of people can relate to and it's certainly one that's working for me)...  You can have a player who is technically proficient.  That player can hit every note, do the music exactly as written in the score, and put on a 'flawless' performance.  But... the performance would still not be complete.  You could have another player, who is not 'technically perfect', maybe hits a note off by a little or misses a beat or two... but still be a much more complete experience because they are playing with emotion and energy and they are giving of themselves to the music.  Of course, someone who is technically just awful, misses more than half the notes and is off key, well, they can put in all the emotion they want, if they do not understand the purpose and the form of the music, their performance will also be incomplete.  I feel that what the Ardanes are telling us here is that you must be able to prepare properly as far as the steps of a ritual go - AND also put the emotion/energy/power into it.  Otherwise it's just mechanical. 

Of course what I 'feel' is quite likely in need of refinement - so, am I at least in the ballpark? 

P.S.  I don't think if I put all the energy in the world into a well-thought-out ritual to bring myself money that I'm suddenly going to win the lottery; I would imagine that Deity is a lot more subtle than that   I think it would mean I'd find a way to save myself some money; or maybe that creative idea would go from nebulous thought to an opportunity I hadn't considered. 
 

You're 'trying' to tread water in the shallow end of the pool...

...swim over to the deep end.


(If you need a "nudge," reference something you said here: http://wicca.com/forums/index.php?topic=1088.msg31415#msg31415)...

...or google "The Charge of The Goddess."  There is a hint there as well...

[Carysta]

You're 'trying' to tread water in the shallow end of the pool...

I'm not 'trying'...  I will learn to swim dang it; it just will take time and effort.  Maybe a lifesaver or two, or getting bashed over the head with the oar of information...  Please to show where I said 'try' in my post.  I have in fact been avoiding the word 'try' because of you FW.  LOL. 

And thou who thinkest to seek for me, know thy seeking and yearning shall avail thee not, unless thou know this mystery: that if that which thou seekest thou findest not within thee, thou wilt never find it without thee.

For behold, I have been with thee from the beginning; and I am that which is attained at the end of desire.

Is this the hint you were heading me towards?  That if we do not realize and understand that Deity is within us and it's from within us that comes the power to effect any change, we will not find the Goddess for all of our searching?

I pulled my Charge of the Goddess quote from:  http://doreenvaliente.com/doreen-valientes-poems/poem-the-charge-of-the-goddess

[FireWillow]

I'm not 'trying'...  I will learn to swim dang it; it just will take time and effort.  Maybe a lifesaver or two, or getting bashed over the head with the oar of information...  Please to show where I said 'try' in my post.  I have in fact been avoiding the word 'try' because of you FW.  LOL.

You didn't.  I added it for drama (and my own amusement).

And thou who thinkest to seek for me, know thy seeking and yearning shall avail thee not, unless thou know this mystery: that if that which thou seekest thou findest not within thee, thou wilt never find it without thee.

For behold, I have been with thee from the beginning; and I am that which is attained at the end of desire.

Is this the hint you were heading me towards?  That if we do not realize and understand that Deity is within us and it's from within us that comes the power to effect any change, we will not find the Goddess for all of our searching?

I pulled my Charge of the Goddess quote from:  http://doreenvaliente.com/doreen-valientes-poems/poem-the-charge-of-the-goddess

BINGO!!  But not only Goddess, but God as well (as well as Their aspects).

You're a quick study!

...or I (and the others) are just good teachers.

[Carysta]

You didn't.  I added it for drama (and my own amusement).

BINGO!!  But not only Goddess, but God as well (as well as Their aspects).

You're a quick study!

...or I (and the others) are just good teachers.

And you didn't even have to get out the oar of information to thump me one that time.  Yay!  In all seriousness finding these boards has been wonderful -  everyone has been most helpful and informative.  As a quick aside (sorry C_A it's a quick detour I promise!)... In my googling, I found a whole bunch of 'versions' of The Charge of the Goddess.  I remembered that Doreen Valiente rewrote the original Leviter Veslis (by Gardner, a prose version) so I quoted from hers; there were all kinds of others that were more-or-less the same but with some changes.  I found a site comparing some of the versions here:  http://www.ceisiwrserith.com/wicca/charge.htm that gave a little history as well.  For example I found a version by Starhawk that takes out references to "man", and one by Silver Ravenwolf that bears nearly no resemblance at all to the original charge (the line we just discussed for example is entirely absent in any form).  Anyway my question now is simply, s the Valiente version the one most commonly cited, or does it vary by tradition? 

[FireWillow]

*pretends he didn't see a reference to SRW ITT*

Yes, Valiente's is the most commonly cited.

[Carysta]

*pretends he didn't see a reference to SRW ITT*

Yes, Valiente's is the most commonly cited.

Even to my brand-new eyes SRW seems... erm, not so deep.  FW you might want to avert your eyes at the following quote:

And under my watchful eye,
my children shall be taught the mysteries of Earth
and Nature, of the ways of all Magick!
That which is unknown shall be known,
and that which is hidden shall be revealed,
even the secluded soul shall be pierced with my Light.
From my cauldron shall be drunk all knowledge and immortality!

Now forgive me if I'm off, but isn't this kind of the opposite of what's in Valiente's Charge?  It's implying that by showing up you will learn everything - no deeper understanding needed.  Or is it just me?

Edited to fix that pesky unquote

[FireWillow]

*withholds comment to let that one simmer for a while (not only necessarily for Cary but for the SRW fans everywhere)*