Yeah, but they're not loaded.

I think there is a lot of truth to the idea non-dogmatic religions have nothing to discuss. This is mainly due to the fact that there is no absolute dogma to argue over.

In the dogmatic religions the discussion are always centered on "What the hell is this confusing doctrine trying to say?"

I mean, that's even true on Christian sites, where everyone is hoping to come away with a positive interpretation.

In fact, one thing that many Christians themselves stuggle with (including the Christian clergy) is that much of what is in their dogma is hard to interpret in a positive way even by the most well-meaning people.

In fact, this has always been my concern.

What good is a docrtine that supposedly teaches 'morals' if the most highly moral mortals have difficulting twisting the dogma into a morally meaningful idea?

This amounts to nothing more than highly moral mortal men trying to help their "God's word" become more moral.

That's pretty sad when the book they turn to for their morals requires the morality of the reader to be pushed back onto the doctrine to make the doctrine seem moral.

What a circus that becomes!

You mean its not moral to stone harlots? What about to get stoned with harlots? I think that misinterpretation works just fine.

You know, all it takes is a minor mistranslation to screw things up for everyone!

I thought I would post this if anyone is interested. It is Wicca specific however.

Wiccan morality is largely based on the Wiccan Rede: 'An it harm none, do what ye will'. While this could be interpreted to mean "do no harm at all," it is usually interpreted as a declaration of the freedom to act, along with the necessity of taking responsibility for what follows from one's actions.

Another element of Wiccan Morality comes from the Law of Threefold Return, which is understood to mean that whatever one does to another person or thing (benevolent or otherwise) returns with triple force.

Many Wiccans also seek to cultivate a set of eight virtues mentioned in Doreen Valiente's Charge of the Goddess, these being mirth, reverence, honour, humility, strength, beauty, power and compassion. In Valiente's poem they are ordered in pairs of complementary opposites, reflecting a dualism that is common throughout Wiccan philosophy.

* Wiccan Rede

Wiccan morality is summarised in a brief statement found within a text called the Wiccan Rede: "An it harm none, do what you will." ("An" is an archaic word meaning "if".) The Rede differs from some other well-known moral codes (such as Christian or Islamic notion of sin) in that, while it does contain a prohibition, it is largely an encouragement to act freely. It is normally considered that the prohibition against harm also covers self-harm. It is also worth noting that "Rede" means advice, as such it is not so much a law that must be followed as advice that it is recommended one follows - not following it would be considered folly more than rule-breaking, though for a group that calls itself "Wise" it follows that such folly would be strongly avoided.

A common belief amongst Wiccans is that no magic, even of a beneficent nature, should be performed on any other person without that person's direct informed consent. This stems from the understanding that it would interfere with that person's free will and thus constitute "harm" in violation of the Rede. So-called 'love spells' are very much frowned upon by the greater Wiccan community for precisely this reason.

The origin of the Rede is unknown, its earliest mention being by Doreen Valiente at a meeting held by the witchcraft magazine "Pentagram". Gerald Gardner compared the moral code of witches with the legendary ethic of the fabled King Pausol which was "Do what you like so long as you harm no one". Nevertheless, the similarity of the phrasing of the Rede (and explicit and verbatim phrasing of other texts) suggests that this statement is partly based on the Law of Thelema as stated by occultist Aleister Crowley, itself deriving from Rabelais' phrase "fay çe que vouldras" ("Do what thou wilt"). While the wording may have been influenced by the Law of Thelema, Thelema has no caveat concerning harmful actions and a definition of "True Will" that leads to different interpretations of "do what you will" to that of the Rede.

Alternatively the Rede has been interpreted as purely advising people not to obey moral codes that prohibit non-harmful activity, arguing that it advises what to do "An it harm none" but has nothing to say "An it harm". Wiccans who interpret the Rede in this way will still avoid causing harm; the Rede does after all still mention this as a case to consider separately even in this interpretation. This reading of the Rede also tends to be taken more often by more traditional Wiccans who pay more attention to the Laws, which includes and explicit "Harm None" (though which an emphasis on practical rather than ethical concerns). In practice the combination of such a reading of the Rede along with the Laws comes to much the same moral code as the more restrictive interpretation of the Rede.

Rule of Three

Many Wiccans also promote the Law of Threefold Return, a belief that anything that one does will be returned to them threefold. In other words, good deeds are magnified in like form back to the doer, and so are ill deeds.

American author Gerina Dunwich disagrees with the concept of threefold return on the grounds that it is inconsistent with more than one law of physics. Pointing out that the origin of the Law of Threefold Return is traceable to Raymond Buckland in the 20th century, Dunwich is of the opinion that, "There is little backing to support it as anything other than a psychological law." Dunwich offers an alternative interpretation, that whatever we do on a physical, mental, or spiritual level will sooner or later affect us, in either a positive or a negative way, on all three levels of being.

A possible prototype to the Rule of Three may be found in the prescribed ritual practice of the newly initiated second degree Wiccan scourging "her" initiator with three times as many blows at the end of the ceremony as "she" has received from "him" at the beginning. Gardner maintained that his 1949 novel High Magic's Aid contained elements of Wiccan belief presented in the form of fiction, and he wrote of this scourging: "For this is the joke of Witchcraft, the Witch knows though the initiate does not, that she will get three times what she gave, so she does not strike hard."

American High Priestess Phyllis Curott posits that the "Rule" of Three is inadequate as a model for Wiccan morality, since it is based on expediency (self-serving interests). Rather, she describes that Witches do not harm because they experience all of nature (included in this definition is all sentient beings, including other humans) as the physical expression of the Divine. To harm another then, would be to dishonor the sacred that dwells within all things.

Wiccan 'Laws'

Many lineaged Wiccans also follow, or at least consider, a set of 161 laws, commonly called the Ardanes. A common criticism of these rules is that they represent outdated concepts and/or produce counterproductive results in Wiccan contexts. Modern authors, specifically Doreen Valiente, have also noted that these rules were most likely invented by Gardner himself in mock-archaic language as the byproduct of inner conflict within Gerald Gardner's original coven over the issue of press relations, to justify Gardner's own authority over that of his High Priestess.

Wow! I did not know this. But, I am not surprised. If you're ever interested in reading about the problems in Wicca with it becoming a patriarchal religion (not sure if that is the right term) you should check out this website:

www.hecatescauldron.org

This woman was a Wiccan High Priestess and now operates outside of Wicca.

Cool. I will check that out. I honestly am not as interested in Wicca though I think certain elements of it are quite agreeable. I shy away from the idea that it is the 5th largest organized religion in the US to date. Its also growing in leaps and bounds and thats very likely to cause problems and conflicts amongst its adherents. I assume at some point in time we will begin to see distinct "denominations" of Wicca

Here the link for the "Covenant of the Goddess" homepage.

http://www.cog.org/

Are you kidding me?

They already have that now.

Most people who check those checkboxes called "Wicca" do not follow the outlines of Gerald Gardner (or whatever his name is).

I've read Gardner's Book of Shadows for Wicca. If you have to follow that Book of Shadows to be a 'true Wiccan' then I want no part of it at all.

On the other hand look at what's happening in "reality".

Scott Cunningham's Book Wicca: A Guide for the Solitary Practicioner had been cited on most "wicca" web sites that I've been to as their most highly recommended book.

Yet, Scott Cunningham's approach to Wicca is far differnt from Gerald Gardner's.

It's a fairly good guess that most "Wiccans" that show up on religious surveys and polls, are not following Gerald Gardner's lead, nor would they agree with his Book of Shadows or many covens that follow his creed closely.

I think Gardner may have gone a bit "overboard" in his description of Wicca. His reason would be obvious. If he is trying to get it to be a recognized religion by the USA he probably felt that it had to make some specific statement.

I'm not sure if the way that Scott Cunningham presents it in his book that it could even qualify as a single "religion". Scott's approach is quite abstract and vauge.

Christopher Penczak took an entirely different approach altogether. An approach I actually like.

First off, his books don't claim to be about "Wicca". His books are clearly titled as "Witchcraft". He doesn't care whether you view it as a religion or not. He's just sharing a tradition of humanity. He also reaches across cultural boundaries to explore ideas from various pagan and earth-related spiritualities.

To be perfectly honest about it I'd rather see humanity just do away with the idea of "organized religion" altogether. Just not recognize the concept of "religion" politically at all.

Instead, just allow for freedom of personal spirituality. No need to even report it, mark checkboxes or anything. You can still write books on it if you like though.

And people could surely be free to gather together and share their spirituality just like they can gather together to do anything else.

Spirituality would just be viewed like any other human endeavor.

If they want to give tax exemptions they could still do that, but not in the name of religion!

Just do it in the name of humanitarian organizations. In order to be tax exempt you need to be offering community service that actually helps someone, and be a non-profit organization.

In fact, tax exemptions for non-profit organizations is already in place so that part is already covered.

There's no need to give tax exempt status for institutions that spread religions. That was a mistake in the first place.

The Yule Circle

I've already invited about 15 spirits to come to my Yule Circle I guess I better keep it as scheduled huh?

Yep. Thats rude to invite a bunch of guests to a party and then call it off at the last second.

I had to remove this post because I referenced something that I had misread.

I also promised champagne but I forgot to buy it!

Just joined and saw this chat. So glad to know that it is here for me! I read alot of the recent posts. Thanks for all the info. I did like S. Cunningham's , Solitary practitioner.. It seems more realistic to me. Gardiner is to stuffy for my lifestyle.

Just joined and saw this chat. So glad to know that it is here for me! I read alot of the recent posts. Thanks for all the info. I did like S. Cunningham's , Solitary practitioner.. It seems more realistic to me. Gardiner is to stuffy for my lifestyle.

Nice to meet you Rustie. Im not a Wiccan myself but Pagan friendly. Welcome.

Welcome to the forums Rustie.

If you liked Cunningham's books, you'll probably like Penczaks books too. He also is very abstract and not stuffy at all.

Well, I went out and bought some Ginger Ale.

Hey, it's not Champagne but at least I tried.

I wanted something other than water for the Great Rite. Not sure why, it's just an intuitive thing.

Do you think they'll notice the lack of 'spirits'?

Do you not drink alcohol at all Abra? You could have gotten them Martinelli's sparkling cider. Im sure that would have fooled them. It comes in champagne like bottles.

She is not Wiccan anymore. She left and goes into quite a bit of detail as to why.

Gardner took rituals and added a lot of ceremonial magick to them to make Wicca (okay, that's an oversimplification, but it's true). I don't like them either.

Welcome to the thread.