If a large part of Wicca is secretive and initiatory....?

Question

wouldn't that make solitary practice from "Wicca 101" type book/books be a bit misguided or going against the oath?

Including books on spells/rites/ceremonies...etc..etc..

Answer 1

.
Of course reading "Wicca ~ A Guide for the Solitary Practioner" first.

***I really suggest you read the chapters in Scott Cuninghams book "Living Wicca"~ A Furthur guide for the solitary practioner"**

It does a really good job of explaining the secretive parts of wicca~ Not that they are that secretive~ Just not flaunted, in most cases.
Blessed Be
Ariel
)O(

Answer 2

Not exactly no. First of all, I would not say a large part of it is initiatory, but there are certain mysteries, some are particular to the tradition and there are some things that are part of the religion as a whole. This does not mean a regular solitary practicioner cannot follow the religion, and have a very rich spirituality from it. Initiation I believe is optional, and is not for everyone. It is a different form of spiritual growth and advancement that is hard to explain, but it opens you to different currents. Above first degree, through the second and third degrees of the system are really best suited for those who really wish to train for the Wiccan Priesthood. The basics of the religion are not anything that are oathbound, and they are something anyone can enjoy the spirituality of without the necessity of initiation.

Now, as far as initiation, if it is possible to find a reputable group with real background, and if you want to experience, being part of a group and going through the process of initiation is definately worth it. The group energy, and the system of initiation are definately worth the experience even if you go back to being solitary later. Just make sure it is a good group, with coven trained leaders who can prove their background, and without internal politics. It should be a spiritual group not who is better than who.

I know this is getting long, but finally for the mysteries. The mysteries are there, they are out in the open, if one puts in the study and practice to understand them. The study is not just in material about Wicca, but also in the materials that Wicca takes it basis from. The Gardnerian Book of Shadows (even the online version), Aradia, and anything on the basics of Hermeticism is a start on this. Ignore the rede, its is not part of the inner mysteries to Wicca. Some authors to check out in this regard are Dion Fortune, Gerald Gardner, the Farrars, Aleister Crowley (Magick in Theory and Practice especially), John Dee, Charles Leland, and Isreal Regarde are a start.

Answer 3

No oath is made unless one actually takes it.

While most all Wicca is initiatory, that doesn't mean that it is all secretive. Too, there has to have been a "first" of any religion, and obviously, this person couldn't have been initiated or taught the secrets from another.

You should be suspicious of what you read though. I've seen many poorly written books on Wicca, from some authors that presume to be intellectuals. From the fluff by Ravenwolf, to the mis-use of words by Christopher Penczak, you can find poorly written books.

Too, there are many well-written ones. I love the works of Starhawk, the Farrars, and a new self-published book by Pino Longchild. You really need to separate the wheat from the chaff.

To address the Christian ninny, What about the astrologers who foretold Christ's coming, and who greeted him with gifts?

If you're going to place all of your trust in a book, you really need to spend some time with it. At least go so far as to get a copy of Strongs Concordance and learn what was originally said, rather than what the translators an preachers pump into what might otherwise pass for a brain. There is much to be said for thinking for yourself. Even your Christ said "Search the scriptures", not "Believe what preachers tell you about scripture". Given a brain, pleas use it.

Answer 4

My take on this, your mileage will vary.
(Eclectic Wicca is a misnomer, Eclectic Wicca would be Wicca from several Wiccan sources, sort of like an Eclectic Art or Car collection is a collection made of various types of Art or Cars. This of course would mean that the Eclectic Wiccan would have had to study various versions of Wicca, not just various forms of Paganism. Without having an initiation any information gotten would be sketchy at best.)

Eclectic Wicca, came about from people who did not like various things about Wicca as it was laid down by Gerald and Doreen, and thus would not become initiates, as such it should have been called something else.

Wicca as it was founded was set up to be initiatory and oath-bound, just like any other priesthood, which is what it was set up to be.

As far as I am concerned any oath-bound Wicca writing a book on Wiccan practices that is sent into the mass market is indeed violating their oaths, the same as if a Catholic priest or Rabbi started writing books on the inner workings of their priesthood.

Some things are only meant to be known if you are willing to be a part of it.

Answer 5

Good question! And something hotly debated.

First, READING a 101 book violates no oaths, because you never made any oaths. Also, the oaths involve not disclosing information, not not learning information.

Does writing a book violate oaths? Some authors have never taken oaths. With Wicca being around 60 years now, there are people who have learned from books who are now writing books. Again, no oaths were harmed in this. ;)

But what about those first people who wrote books? Some Traditionalists DO call at least some of those people oathbreakers. But exactly who is and isn't an oathbreaker appears to depend on who you ask.

Authors generally have one of two defences. First, the information they give is not shielded by oaths (according to them. I will make it clear that I am not oathbound so I don't know the specifics of what can and can't be talked about). For example, Traditionalists-turned-authors generally don't give names for their gods, for example. They give some general descriptions (such as triple moon goddess) but leave out the name and possibly other information about them. Also, they tended to talk a lot about what people used to do in ancient time without specifically addressing what they do today. They may also simply talk about how people can form eclectic practices based on some general Wiccan principles without going into the details of traditional practice. (Scott Cunningham and Raymond Buckland both do this quite a bit) The second defence I've heard is that they are discussing information that has already escaped the confines of secrecy. Doreen Valiente is the one I have specifically in mind for this one. She was very angry that information that had escaped the covens was being misrepresented and sought to clarify certain things.

What does that mean for us readers? A lot. Your question on misguidance is important. Some Traditionalists claim that a lot of information was altered before publication to protect oaths and send cowans in the wrong direction. Whether that is true or is itself a blind I don't know - I've had Traditionalists take both sides of that argument.

What I personally thinkis more problematic is that we eclectics have to remember that information that we get is often only half of the story. We get the Cliff Notes version, so to speak, without the backstory or full context available within a coven. Eclectics sometimes desparately try to act like traditionalists, but they just don't have the info. For example, some eclectics feel compelled to worship the triple moon goddess, but since they don't know a lot about her, and certainly not her name, they grab some other goddess and squash her into the triple moon goddess role, even if it doesn't make a lot of sense.

We need to be discerning in how we use information, forming practices that make sense to us and have meaning to us, even if it means we look a little less like a Traditional Wiccan. (Although, honestly, I live by this principle and I've been confused for a Traditionalist several times.)

In reference to spells/rites/ceremonies...

I've seen references that Gardner did not intend for rituals to be unchanging. Rituals are passed down because they are generally useful, but if something is more useful it can be changed. Ergo, it's not terribly important whether your ritual looks like a traditional ritual so long as it accomplishes the same thing.

Answer 6

Wicca has evolved in the sixty or so years since it was founded. What can be reliably said is that the earliest Traditions of Wicca -- and some of the more modern ones -- are initiatory and oathbound in nature. Other Traditions are not, and that includes solitary practice.

No offense, but the questions you're asking strike me as being of the "Protestant versus Catholic" kind... :-) Both are forms of Christianity, but they differ on several key points. Similarly, there are wide varieties of belief in Wiccan practice. My advice to you is to research some Traditions and find one that speaks to you, since you seem to want that kind of guidance. The book "Which Witch is Which?" by Patricia Telesco might be useful to you.

EDITED TO ADD: Amazon.com link:

http://www.amazon.com/Which-Witch-Concise-Neo-pagan-Traditions/dp/1564147541/ref=sr_1_3/002-8575618-8031215?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1185672121&sr=1-3

Answer 7

I agree with Gwen B. Wicca if it is to survive will have to be an inclusionary, with the same respect to those who are solitary and self initiated, instead of an exclusionary religion. Like all religions it will have to go through some growing pains - it is only 50 or so years old and still in its infancy.

Answer 8

I've never believed that Wicca is, or at least ought be, secretive and initatory. I think that a lot of people like that idea because it seems more mystical and shrouded in mystery and that appeals to our ideas of witchcraft and magic. And I know a lot of people wish there weren't those Wicca 101 books because it means anyone can practice the craft, meaning all sorts of interpretations and people acting like experts when they really don't know what they're talking about.

But for me, I'll always be a big advocate for openness and free information about Wicca, even if it demystifies it and takes away some of the awe. Everyone should be allowed to seek out the information and practice how they wish, whether that be alone or with others, whether they be experienced initators or also people new to the path.

That's my stance, at least.

Answer 9

By the same standards...

Confirmation classes in the Christian faith might also be considered to be secretive and initiatory. After all... these are teachings carried on behind closed doors, right?
.

Answer 10

I am not a Wicca but the information that is offered in Wicca 101 only informs you of what they want you to know not what you should