Talk:Wiccan church
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Religion. This project provides a central approach to Religion-related subjects on wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
Hi. I'm very confused about what the subject of this article is supposed to be. It uses the term "Wiccan Church", which I would suggest is a term avoided by a majority of Wiccans, and yet the content of the article seems to be describing the entire Wiccan religion back to Gardner.
This is very misleading. I'm rather uneasy with the idea of "churches" of Wicca, which are a modern innovation that breaks with the traditional coven/covenstead structure. I presume one of the main reasons for forming churches is to appear more like Christian churches and so gain greater public trust as well as legal standing. However others would say Craft is as Craft does, and while a "church" structure may (or may not) be great, many Wiccans are not going to recognise it as having anything to do with traditional Wicca. This article needs to express that pretty clearly.
As I said, I can't tell what this article is actually about. If it's about Wiccan Churches, such as have been formed in some places in North America, it needs to express that this is a structure different from covens (which are the norm), and say when and where this concept originated, giving examples of some prominent churches. In that case details of Craft history (such as scepticism regarding Gardner's claims) are inappropriate here, and belong in Wicca (and these details have already been covered there).
Please note that I don't intend this as a criticism of Wiccan Churches, I just wanted to clarify that while this article sounds like it's representing Wicca in general, it is in fact representing a minority within the tradition. Thanks, Fuzzypeg☻ 03:45, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
- The article is not very helpful. Much of it is a fork of Wicca. There is probably something to be said about organisations such as the ATC, COG, WCC, etc. that could go into an article about Wiccan churches as a particular type of organisation, but this article isn't currently doing that. Jkelly 04:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Fuzzy Peg. I do agree with your intention of making this article better aimed to describe the actual Wiccan Churches. I am displeased that you seem to dismiss Wiccan Church, simply because they are not the norm. The fact is that there are some Wiccan Churches that use that title, but most do not, which is stated in the article, that these terms,, such as coven, covenstead, or church may or may not be used. As far as Gardner is concerned, I wanted to keep mention of him as brief as possible. You are correct that the mention of him, is not necessarily needed in this article. However, if he had not been the so called "founder" of the relatively modern Wiccan movement, the development of Wiccan Churches under that title would have been non-existant. If I find information about the actual first Wiccan Church to legally use that title, I may replace the Gardner section with that, unless you have such time that you can do this instead. I will not be offended if Gardner is out of the article.
I do agree that it is not very helpful, but that is only because it needs work. When I cane to it, it was only a paragraph long.
-- I have taken into consideration your request... The page does still need some work, but it's getting better!
69.245.175.43 21:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry if I come across as dismissive. I am not used to the structure of a Wiccan Church, and it seems very different to what I do, however I realise I'm a long way away and things are different in North America I don't really know how it works over there, but I'm perfectly willing to believe you have good, skilled priesthood, and although the structure is different, I would guess there are more similarities between us than differences. I was just rather uneasy about the way the article seemed to be representing Wicca in general, rather than a particular movement within Wicca. I'm glad to hear this isn't your intention. BB Fuzzypeg☻ 11:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I've made some edits to get the page looking a bit better. I've removed the entire section about beliefs, which is more fully covered in Wicca (the appropriate place). I have some questions: what is a "hive coven"? In my understanding a priest and priestess of 3rd degree can "hive off" to form their own coven — so is a "hive coven" a coven that has hived off from some other coven? (in which case it would be better to say "a coven hived off from blah-blah") Also, what's it mean about fixing the covenstead? A coven has a fixed covenstead, so how is a church different?
- I still find this very difficult to get my head round. The concept of having a Wiccan "clergy" and "congregation" in particular makes my head spin! That's one thing I actually can't see as having anything to do with traditional Craft, I'm sorry. Wicca as I know it is about the development of a personal connection with divinity, not about reliance on a middle-man. The mysteries I have been taught through Wicca (at least the ones worth knowing) cannot be preached from a pulpit; they are realised by the individual as revelations, which are achieved through the process of taking initiation and/or offering oneself to the gods as a priest/ess. I've always considered this one of the key benefits that Wicca has over the mainstream religions, the fact that this connection is personal. As priest(esse)s we maintain links with the community and do work for them sometimes, give advice if asked — and even occasionally officiate at public events. Some groups also allow "neophytes" or "dedicants" who come to some meetings on a trial basis. More than that I can't really comprehend...
- But that's OK. You're doing your thing, I'm doing mine, and if we're both doing good things in the world then it's OK. And if it's good you should keep doing whatever you're doing, the best way you know how. Fuzzypeg☻ 12:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Heya, Fuzzypeg My understanding of "clergy" in this context is not that of a middleman between us and deities, but rather someone who has acquired skills which may be of use to others, including ways to contact those deities. These skills may be shared and taught. Similarly, those who have experienced certain of the mysteries are able to guide others to or through them (depending on the mystery).
- Such people may also have a greater level of experience and understanding of a given Tradition, and be able to teach others about it.
- Similarly, people who are not interested in gaining or sharing those skills (which do imply a certain level of responsibility) or undergoing some experiences, are the equivalent of a "congregation" or "laity:" people who don't want to be responsible for anything but themselves. Such people still have communion with deity, of course, but won't undergo certain initiatory experiences.
- *Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 20:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
