Witchcraft...terminology and what it is?

[Toby Stimpson]

Hello,

I just wanted to create a spae for people to perhaps talk about the terminology used in modern witchcraft...such as witchcraft. Can it be a religion unto it's self....is it right to call witchcraft it's self a single religion...what is the difference between Wicca and other forms of witchcraft around the world...and can these other traditions be even connected into modern Neopaganism? At what point is it appropriate to merge traditions...or call it 'this wicca' 'that wicca'...etc,. Just some thoughts...I have some ideas on these questions but by all means go ahead and debate...I know we have a similar thread however Flaire just closed it. So what do you modern Mysticwickers think?

Namaste

Tobias

[coeur]

My main concern for witchcraft and its use goes mainly for the distinction between 'witchcraft' and 'magick.' I believe that there is a difference between witchcraft and magick, and this can be seen in the people who want to be called a magician and those who want to be called witches. I can promise you that if you go up to any ceremonial magician and call them a witch, they'd go off at you in an instant. The same is probably true for most chaos magicians. A magician and a witch are simply two different things.

So then what is witchcraft? Witchcraft is a lot more...let's say...predictable than what some people might claim. When someone says: "I practise magick," well that's just like saying "I've got two legs." You don't know what sort of magick, what they believe in, what their ethics are, etc. But when someone says, "I'm a witch," the connotation is much more specific.

You can GUESS that a witch might have a particular affinity towards nature. You can GUESS that a witch practises some form of 'low magick.' You can GUESS that a witch believes in multiple gods. Anything more than that and it tends to get a little blurry. For instance: SOME witches don't believe in harming anything, SOME witches might be Wiccan, SOME witches might have familiars, etc.

Does respecting nature, practising magick, and believing in multiple gods (sometimes) constitute a religion? Well that depends on how you define religion. Through the number of religion/anthroplogy courses I've gone through, I've landed on one definition that seems to fit all religions, but it's a VERY broad one:

A religion identifies something that is sacred.

But what is sacred can be many things. It could be a particular custom, a form of action, a mode of dress, the arrangement of furniture in your house. The Berawen believe that their ancestors are sacred. The Atoni believe that the way that a house faces is sacred. More commonly it is thought of to be gods and goddesses, however, many of the minor religions in the world don't even have gods and goddesses (I could write paper upon paper about these religions, but I'm not going to).

So then, is there one thing that all witches believe is sacred? If so what is it? Is it nature? Well, this is hard to say. Do all witches love and view nature as sacred? Is it magick? Is magick considered sacred or everyday? Is there one 'right' way to approach it and respect it? Again hard to say.

Regardless the point is that witchcraft CAN be a religion. However, in order to say: witchcraft is a religion, one must at least pinpoint one thing that all witches believe is sacred or do because they believe it is sacred.

[Philosophia]

Regardless the point is that witchcraft CAN be a religion. However, in order to say: witchcraft is a religion, one must at least pinpoint one thing that all witches believe is sacred or do because they believe it is sacred.

But thats like asking how does one define witchcraft. If I state that witchcraft is this and this, others may disagree. A person who "worships" or "works with Gods and Goddesses" may believe that an atheist witch cannot exist. Another debate circles around how much nature really influences ones path and can you be a witch who doesn't connect with the outside world.
Its not as easy as simply pinpointing one belief that all witches have in common for it to be considered a religion. I don't believe witchcraft can be easily simplified and put into a neat little box.

[coeur]

Precisely, which is why I'm not going to say: witchcraft is a religion. I don't know enough witches to say that there is a common thread. I don't have the time or resources to go out and survey even 10% or 20% of people who identify themselves as neopagan witches. In fact, no one probably does.

It's next to impossible to classify witchcraft as a religion. Yet, it's hard to say that it isn't at the same time as well.

[Philosophia]

Precisely, which is why I'm not going to say: witchcraft is a religion. I don't know enough witches to say that there is a common thread. I don't have the time or resources to go out and survey even 10% or 20% of people who identify themselves as neopagan witches. In fact, no one probably does.
It's next to impossible to classify witchcraft as a religion. Yet, it's hard to say that it isn't at the same time as well.

I agree, except that I believe its not a religion.
I don't know if you've answered this but how do you define a magician? What "areas" and magickal paths (i.e. Enchonian) does it encompass? I'm seriously curious about this.
I hope you don't see this as any attack _inabox_ I'm very curious about it.

[coeur]

It's not so much as a definition as a trend, I suppose. When someone says 'I am a magician,' most people understand that they are something different than say a 'witch.' It's a difference in connotation much like the difference in using 'yelling' and 'hollering.' Why does someone choose to use 'yelling' instead of 'hollering?' Similarly, those who choose to call themselves 'magicians' have a particular image that they want to project, though, like 'witch' it's impossible to say if every 'magician' wants to project the same image.

As far as personal reasons, I call myself a 'magician' because I don't want to be associated with the ethics that many people sometimes mistakenly associate with 'witchcraft' (courtesy of Wicca, thanks very much Silver Ravenwolf and co.) I am pretty amoral in general and my magick is frequently a vehicle of experimentation in which I will bend moral rules.

In addition to this very simple reason, I also don't share the affinity for nature like many witches do. Nature in this sense meaning 'the great outdoors,' trees, mountains, streams, etc. I'm not an outdoorswoman and I don't practise magick commonly in association with nature. I frequently practise magick in relation to computers, technology, etc.

I have also found that the attitude of a magician is much more self-centred (not a negative way necessarily). For instance I have encountered witches who absolutely refuted the belief that a person's Will has any impact in the tide of Universal energies whatsoever and thus all magick was the 'riding of a cosmic wave.' Many magicians would believe more in the idea that the Will can reshape the Universe (to an extent). Of course this sort of arrogance sometimes leads many magicians into trouble (I am guilty of this. Frequently).

A magician is also more LIKELY to study areas like ceremonialism, Enochiana, the Goetia, etc, though this is not to say that all magicians use these systems. I have not met very many witches who seriously use the Goetia or the Enochian system, while it seems almost inevitable for most magicians to stumble over them and at least glance over it in the course of their studies. This might stem from the heavy emphasis on the Golden Dawn (whose members absolutely did not call themselves witches).

As far as I have observed, magicians tend to travel down the Golden Dawn path at least once in their studies (even chaos magicians who are naturally somewhat resistent to the confinement of the ceremonial system), thus leading them to practises like Enochiana, Goetia, and studies like Kabbalah. They are also more likely to be all over the map than a witch. A witch, so it seems to me, tends to study the more eath-based low magick systems and tends to stay on that path. The emphasis is to find one combination and then to stay with this system. On the other hand, a magician's attitude might be more along the lines of "try everything at least once."

Anothing thing I have found is that people who classify themselves as magicians tend to also take more risks (how many times have I ever heard the phrase "And then we summoned Cthulhu"?), working with entities that are traditionally known to devour everything in sight. Other things I have found is that magicians are more likely to adopt an 'anything goes' attitude than witches. When was the last time you heard of a witch evoking Invader Zim or Frosty the Snowman...or themselves as a god (this is much more common for chaos magicians, btw...some magicians also frown on these sorts of practises)?

The conclusion? Magicians are crazy mofos.

The other conclusion? The term magician is even more loose than witch.

[Ben Gruagach]

I think this is a wonderful thread and I'm glad to see the things that are being discussed. We need more people discussing these things as it's and excellent way to learn and grow.

Witchcraft to me is definitely within the larger classification of magick, but personally I tend to think of witches as being between the shamanic and the ceremonial magickian varieties of magick. It's all a continuum though and as individuals I think we tend to shift around depending on what we're doing at the moment. Sometimes a witch might do something that is more in line with ceremonial magick, and other times might be more spontaneous and attuning-with-nature like a shaman. We rarely ever limit ourselves to just one practice.

Some people have tried to argue that witchcraft should be limited to apply only to practitioners who are native English-speakers, and often to those who are basing their work on the culture and mythology of the UK. This argument doesn't sit too well with me because as far as I'm concerned something is essentially the same thing regardless what language we are using to describe it. An apple is still an apple even if it's called une pomme. A witch is still a witch even if they're called sorcière, Hexe, strega, bruja, or whatever.

And as it's been pointed out there is such a huge diversity regarding what witches do and believe throughout history and around the world I find it really hard to accept the claim that witchcraft is a single even loosely uniform religion. Witches are found in pretty much every religion and even among atheists. So to me that's the proof that witchcraft itself is a practice and not a religion.

Of course witchcraft can be a very important part of a religion as it is with Wicca. I think a huge amount of the confusion about whether witchcraft itself is a religion is due to the fact that for many years (at least since Gerald Gardner) the terms Wicca and witchcraft have been used interchangeably. Gardner's books weren't called "Wicca Today" and "The Meaning of Wicca" after all. He presented his specific religion as though it represented all witchcraft. Other witches after him continued the pattern. It doesn't mean it was correct!

Another part of the problem in my opinion is the One True Way concept which keeps popping up. I question whether it makes sense to validate the idea of One True Way at least among those of us who are purportedly polytheists. One True Way thinking, such as the claim that there is just one true form of witchcraft (and all others are not really witchcraft or are fakers or something) seems to be in direct conflict with the basic premise that there could be more than one God or Goddess. One True Way thinking makes perfect sense in a monotheistic faith, especially one that teaches variation from authorized dogma is heresy. In a world view that believes there is a Goddess and God, or perhaps a multitude of deities, it does not make sense that there is such a thing as a One True Way in the first place.

What do others think? Are some of the conflicts within Wicca and the modern Pagan community in general related to baggage carried in from monotheistic thinking? Is there such a thing as a valid One True Way argument for a polytheistic worldview?

[coeur]

What do others think? Are some of the conflicts within Wicca and the modern Pagan community in general related to baggage carried in from monotheistic thinking? Is there such a thing as a valid One True Way argument for a polytheistic worldview?

In my experience, most people who believe in one thing being the One True Way are either 1) not very well-read or 2) not very pagan or haven't been very pagan for very long. Usually the thing that I'm bombarded with the most by pagan One True Wayers is karma. However, I'd have to say that about 80% of these people have been in the Wiccan business for 3 months or less and 99.9% of these people have never read a single book or site on non-Wiccan forms of magick.

The biggest problem with this is that there aren't a lot of sites out there that are accessible to newbies on, say, Stregheria or Asatru or Chaos magick or Ceremonial magick etc. Looking at googleFight.com, sites with the term 'Wicca' outnumber sites with the term 'magick' by quite a fair amount (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=magick&word2=wicca). So the first problem is underexposure to other belief systems that use magick. Many newbies are not even aware of a system of magick outside of the Wiccan system and think that if they want to practise magick, they need to be Wiccan.

The second reason is because Wicca is a very convenient transition for Christianity because it focuses so intensely on positivity. No Christian wants to leave Christianity only to start breaking bones magickally and sacrificing babies to netherworld deities. Wicca looks like the 'good guy' magickal counterpart of Christianity, in fact. Certainly the same line of ethics: don't hurt things, love everything, etc etc etc. Just with the inclusion of magick. So another reason for the One True Way ideas also comes from the reluctance to let go of established ethical traditions.

Both of these traits die down with time and learning. Obviously you can't be kept in the dark forever about other religions/systems of magick and certainly you're going to start becoming less Christian and more pagan sooner or later. Hence why the more experienced pagans and Wiccans are less likely to criticize over differences in beliefs.

[David19]

It's not so much as a definition as a trend, I suppose. When someone says 'I am a magician,' most people understand that they are something different than say a 'witch.' It's a difference in connotation much like the difference in using 'yelling' and 'hollering.' Why does someone choose to use 'yelling' instead of 'hollering?' Similarly, those who choose to call themselves 'magicians' have a particular image that they want to project, though, like 'witch' it's impossible to say if every 'magician' wants to project the same image.

As far as personal reasons, I call myself a 'magician' because I don't want to be associated with the ethics that many people sometimes mistakenly associate with 'witchcraft' (courtesy of Wicca, thanks very much Silver Ravenwolf and co.) I am pretty amoral in general and my magick is frequently a vehicle of experimentation in which I will bend moral rules.

In addition to this very simple reason, I also don't share the affinity for nature like many witches do. Nature in this sense meaning 'the great outdoors,' trees, mountains, streams, etc. I'm not an outdoorswoman and I don't practise magick commonly in association with nature. I frequently practise magick in relation to computers, technology, etc.

I have also found that the attitude of a magician is much more self-centred (not a negative way necessarily). For instance I have encountered witches who absolutely refuted the belief that a person's Will has any impact in the tide of Universal energies whatsoever and thus all magick was the 'riding of a cosmic wave.' Many magicians would believe more in the idea that the Will can reshape the Universe (to an extent). Of course this sort of arrogance sometimes leads many magicians into trouble (I am guilty of this. Frequently).

A magician is also more LIKELY to study areas like ceremonialism, Enochiana, the Goetia, etc, though this is not to say that all magicians use these systems. I have not met very many witches who seriously use the Goetia or the Enochian system, while it seems almost inevitable for most magicians to stumble over them and at least glance over it in the course of their studies. This might stem from the heavy emphasis on the Golden Dawn (whose members absolutely did not call themselves witches).

As far as I have observed, magicians tend to travel down the Golden Dawn path at least once in their studies (even chaos magicians who are naturally somewhat resistent to the confinement of the ceremonial system), thus leading them to practises like Enochiana, Goetia, and studies like Kabbalah. They are also more likely to be all over the map than a witch. A witch, so it seems to me, tends to study the more eath-based low magick systems and tends to stay on that path. The emphasis is to find one combination and then to stay with this system. On the other hand, a magician's attitude might be more along the lines of "try everything at least once."

Anothing thing I have found is that people who classify themselves as magicians tend to also take more risks (how many times have I ever heard the phrase "And then we summoned Cthulhu"?), working with entities that are traditionally known to devour everything in sight. Other things I have found is that magicians are more likely to adopt an 'anything goes' attitude than witches. When was the last time you heard of a witch evoking Invader Zim or Frosty the Snowman...or themselves as a god (this is much more common for chaos magicians, btw...some magicians also frown on these sorts of practises)?

The conclusion? Magicians are crazy mofos.

The other conclusion? The term magician is even more loose than witch.

I agree with a lot of your beliefs, and some of them seem to be like mine (i think i'm a bit 'anything goes', although i haven't had much (if any) experience with magic, i want to explore more 'darker' things like the Goetia, Chulthu (i know people say that it's made up, and while i'm partly skeptical about things, i'd still like to look into it).

Personally, i'd like to explore things like Enochian magic, and also see what angels and demons are really like (i've read some sites that say angels aren't always good and demons aren't always bad).

I'm not sure what i'd call myself, whether it's witch, magician, sorcerer, mage, whatever, etc. I think i'll just wait till i get a bit more experience in magic before deciding what to call myself.

[coeur]

I agree with a lot of your beliefs, and some of them seem to be like mine (i think i'm a bit 'anything goes', although i haven't had much (if any) experience with magic, i want to explore more 'darker' things like the Goetia, Chulthu (i know people say that it's made up, and while i'm partly skeptical about things, i'd still like to look into it).

Personally, i'd like to explore things like Enochian magic, and also see what angels and demons are really like (i've read some sites that say angels aren't always good and demons aren't always bad).

I'm not sure what i'd call myself, whether it's witch, magician, sorcerer, mage, whatever, etc. I think i'll just wait till i get a bit more experience in magic before deciding what to call myself.

I tend to view deities as storehouses of certain types of energy both archetypal and otherwise. Venus, for example, stores lots of sexual energy which is why it's more useful to invoke Venus for reasons pertaining sex than for reasons pertaining chemistry homework. Various other things have energies too. For instance you can evoke a cartoon character because cartoon characters have their own (small) stores of energy. What feeds energy to these storehouses? I tend to view it along the lines of human belief fueling divine existence.

Of course it's probably not this simple. In fact, I view deities in many different ways, and I think that they exist on many different levels and in many different ways. However, how they come to exist is more or less all the same: people believe they exist.

For this reason I think that calling forth Cthulhu would be sorta dangerous, because people see him as a bad guy...or a creature who just wants to devour the entire world and us. This feeds into his storehouse of energy and that gives Cthulhu a decidedly negative vibe. The entity known as Cthulhu has energy in its existence...just like Santa...or Harry Potter (I want to evoke him one day)...or the Easter Bunny. Basically they are creatures who are 'not real,' and yet, they still exist! Does Harry Potter exist? Only in the books he does...and in our imaginations. Does Zeus exist...or rather, did he ever have a human body on planet Earth that we can touch? Probably not.

As for Goetic demons and Enochian angels...they're badass, that I'll attest to (and not necessarily in the good way).