Ok - that was funny. And probably sad that I got it right off the bat.

Onyx - honey I am so sorry. That totally sucks.

And all of you - thank you. What I basically have been following all my life and haven't been able to put into words has been clarified in this post and helped me to research my path. I just want to thank you for reinforcing in my mind that I am not a wacko.

Chalk up another "I think I've always been a Witch and didn't know it until now" to the 'Net savvy Pagans of the world!

I guess. It was just really odd reading this post and the other one. It was like a light bulb going off. (Being as I was raised a swedish baptist) So now - I have research and reading to do LOL. Any suggestions elspode? (and others that I can't think of)

      Hi there Dani, nice to see you venture out of the IOTD area. Enjoy the rest of the Cellar.
      Nah, I was hedging my bets with that reference. If you scroll down to the 'Silliness' thread from awhile back you'll see there are a lot of Monty Python fans around here.

      Hey, OC. Tell Steve he has my deepest condolenses on the loss of his Yngwie singed quitar. I have muscian friends that would give up testicles for such an item. Sorry for you own losses as well.

Dani:

I agree with OC that Cunningham is a good starting point. Although controversial, Silver Ravenwolf is a good Wicca 101 level writer as well. "To Ride a Silver Broomstick" is as good a place as any to begin. The Farrars' "Witches Bible" is an excellent second step.

Be aware that, when you read different authors, you are going to get varying points of view about what one would think was the same topic. The Farrars', for instance, are steeped in the genuine, first-level after Gardner and Alexander type of Wicca, and the modern (particularly American) practice of the Craft has really begun to deviate in many substantial ways from the origins of Wicca as a religion.

Also - and this is really, really important - *ask questions* of people who practice. It is good if you can determine that they are not radical flakes first, though. There are just as many loonie Wiccans as they are crazy christians, bonkers buddhists and slap-happy satanists, so watch out for them. If you decide to find a group to work and study with, try and become familiar with the Bonewits evaluatory scale, found at http://www.celticcrow.com/bonew.html .

It is a no-nonsense, logical and practical way of evaluating groups to see if they are reasonably down to earth (hey, all of Pagan types are a little flaky and weird) or outright cultists. It is a scary world out there, and scary people who think they are Pagan can be the scariest of them all. Just ask OC, I think she knows better than most of us.

Finding a reputable and generous teacher can be the best thing for someone interested in starting down the Wiccan path, but it isn't precisely necessary. There's tons of stuff in print and online, but like everything else, *not all of it is necessarily right, or even reasonable*, so again, ask questions, use evaluative thought processes...and always, always be safe.

Keep us posted! For a very good online general resource regarding Wiccan and other Pagan paths, I recommend www.witchvox.com .

Although I despise her radical left politics, I really liked Starhawk's The Spiral Dance. It's more intermediate than introductory level, but very good.

I also appreciated Cunningham's books, Wicca and Living Wicca provide very good introductions for solitary practitioners, and much of his information is adaptable for coveners. His guides (to herbs, crystals, and pretty much everything else) are indispensible magickal resouce works.

Be wary of much else of what Llewellyn publishes though ... in most fields, as Sturgeon's Law tells us, 99% of everything is crap. For Llewellen Publishing that goes up to about 99.7% ... (okay, maybe it's not really THAT bad, but they tend to have a lot of light and fluffy "whitelighter" books.)

Llewellyn is a victim of its own success, but I do think it is somewhat true that they tend to exclude a less "fluffy" sort of writer. That being said, I have just finished engaging three of their more interesting authors to speak at our 2004 Pagan Fest. Donald Michael Kraig, Russell Buddy Helm and Ann Moura.

It is difficult to make a blanket indictment of a single publisher, but Llewellyn has brought a lot more information to the public than was ever available before, but not all of that information is good or even useful. I'm not a huge Llewellyn fan, but I do have to say that, from a festival production standpoint, they have been *extremely* cooperative, solicitous, helpful and generous (we get free books and stuff from them to review for our organizational newsletter now, too, BTW, so that's a nice bonus).

      Hey, I was just railing im the X-mas thread and when Ep posted I wondered what you Wiccan's do for x-mass? I suspect, much like some jewish friends I've had, you celebrate it as a cultural event and leave out the religion.

We have Yule, which is all the joyous fellowship, the gift giving, the green and red, the holly, the mistletoe, the evergreen tree, the lights, the yule log, the feasting, the ... well pretty much all of the secular stuff is actually pagan.

:)

Oh, and the bunnies and the chickies and the chocolate at Easter ... and the name Easter ... that's all pagan too. :D

      Well that's just darn convienient. No one knows what you're really celebrating... Kind of like when I start laughing and no one is sure what caused it. Wait... Maybe that's a bad example...

Yule (Winter Solstice) celebrates the rebirth of the Sun King, who dies at Mabon (Autumnal Equinox) , enters the Underworld at Samhain (Halloween), and then is reborn at the Winter Solstice.

He's also his own son...pretty cool trick, huh? :D

      Eh, being his own son is also done by the Jesus with the whole trinity thing. Big deal, I know of a family in Oklahoma that makes that seem mundane...

      Interesting though, that's the traditional literary description of the "hero's journey." Of course that type of thing is common in many religions. Even Jesus went to hell for a few days.

      Of course, if the sun king is connected to things warming up, I like him more.

      I was just thinking, this is clearly a case of a christian holiday being transposed. Due to biblical description most people who study the bible don't think Dec. 25 was the date of Jesus' birth it must have just been convenient to change the name of the celebration due to the Pagan holiday.
      Damn guys, is Halloween the only holiday celebrated by pagans and non-pagans alike that hasn't been converted to a 'Christian' holiday?

Well, if you think of it, Halloween is sometimes called "All Hallow'ds Eve" which comes before All Saint's Day on 11/1. So, even there it's somewhat been absorbed by the Christian belief system.

Dagney
(and I didn't forget the promise to dig out my notes on Samhain and other holidays for you Whit, I've just spent too much time at the Hospital lately)

There is very little in Christianity that wasn't around in one form or another before they commandeered it and tailored the mythology to suit their particular needs.

And, yeah, All Saint's Day was placed where it is to counter the night "when the veil between the worlds is thinnest, and the spirits of our anscestors are near". Thus, Samhain became "All Hallow's Eve" (since it was the night before All Saint's Day), which we now colloquially call "Halloween".

There is much interesting history behind the relationship between the beliefs and practices of the ancient peoples of Europe and the influx of Christianity. Killing off witches and Pagans was once thought to be a good idea, you know. And, if Ashcroft has his way, perhaps it will be thought to be a good idea again some day...

i have a hard time with any sort of organized religion, but its hard not to see some sort of meaning or practical design to existance, but i cant tell if thats a function of our species or our culture or both. and does that even matter? i think i have time left to contemplate on it.

as for god, i think i am elligible for forgiveness if i dont figure it out before i die, but i can try. and if you dont believe in god...dont worry, he doesnt believe in you either. lol j/k. to lable the divine as a being is a limitation of that being.

i do believe that all sides should be represented and i like what this man is trying to do:
brights

all beliefe systems should be looked at in a possitive light.

      Why? It makes more sense to me to look at all belief systems in a plain, ordinary light. If I choose to view a particular belief system then I don't want just the positive. That would lead to misunderstandings and problems. Such as the problem many self-described christians have with the christian church.
      Give them a fair view, certainly, but don't give them the advantage from the start. This can only hinder clarity.

I think that's a good and sensible notion, Whit. Give everything a neutral position to begin with, view and evaluate it all, then assigne the labels of good, bad, indifferent.

I've given everything an even shake at the beginning, but I gotta say that there are some whacked out ideas out there calling themselves religion.

I'm sure someone says that about my path as well, but I don't handle snakes or speak in tongues...

Giving everything a neutral position before you evaluate it.... that's obviously best. But sometimes it's pretty hard to do.

The thing I don't like about "Brights" is it lumps nonreligious, secular, atheist, and agnostics together when they might not want to be lumped. On the other hand it would give these people a catchy word to throw out when they don't want to explain their beliefs.:)

The very reason I like the Brights (I joined up this week, as soon as I discovered them) is because it . As far as I understand it (which is of course limited), you're not a Brights unless you join up. You can be an atheist and not be a Brights. (Not sure about the use of grammar with the plural yet either...) And it has some basic ground rules that I like too.

Until now, as an agnostic/non-religious person I haven't had a lobby group to push my interests when it comes to, e.g. goverment policy decisions on issues such as teaching creationism in biology classes, gay rights, etc etc. At the same time, it seems to me that many religious groups are becoming much better organised in mobilising their troups and marketing their causes.

Of course I can always push my own point as an individual, and I do, but I would be happier if a group such as Brights eventually had the numbers to be a lobby group worth reckoning with. Knowing there is a substantial percentage of the population that is non-religious and considers human rights to be more important than religious texts (again, in issues such as gay rights) would be a good thing, rather than it depending on opinion polls (which can be so skewed, depending on who runs it).

We just had a Census in Australia, and - as with last time - I put my religion as FSM. I did it last time out of a fear that Australia may start teaching creationism in science classes. "Atheist" can carry... I don't know... prejudices, due to the variety, just as Islam can. But Brights have basic ground rules that are clearly stated and which I can agree with.