Silly Question?...must i do magic to be Wiccan?

[Lunaa]

I've been doing a lot of research in terms of Wicca, and I've found that I've learned a lot so far, and I do hope to learn more in the future.

Anyway, one day I was just searching around online and I came across this article that was talking about the use of magic. It had said something along the lines of you don't need to perform magic to be Wiccan. I was just wondering what some of your thoughts were on this?

I'm not against magic in anyway, its more just for my curiosity.

[Miss Pixie]

I've been doing a lot of research in terms of Wicca, and I've found that I've learned a lot so far, and I do hope to learn more in the future.

Anyway, one day I was just searching around online and I came across this article that was talking about the use of magic. It had said something along the lines of you don't need to perform magic to be Wiccan. I was just wondering what some of your thoughts were on this?

I'm not against magic in anyway, its more just for my curiosity.

Not all witches are Wiccans, but all Wiccans, to my knowledge, are witches. The word 'Wicca' means 'male witch'. The religion itself was brought about by the categorization of modern witchcraft.

I would politely and respectfully disagree with the poster of that article.

Blessed Be. )0(

[roseonfire]

Wicca is a witchcraft religion, as is Stregheria. Wicca has its origins in British Traditional Witchcraft (not to be confused with British Traditional Wicca) and the Order of the Golden Dawn. The Order was an occult group that pretty much gave form to and defined modern occultism and magick. A famous name from the Order who was an early writer on these topics, preceding Wicca, is Author Edward Waite, best known for his Tarot deck but also having written many books on many topics from spirituality to ceremonial magic.

So you see, one doesn't have to be Wiccan to be a witch.

[Tasariel]

Wicca is a religious belief system, as much as anything else, really. Many Wiccans perform magick, but you don't have to perform magick to believe in what Wiccans believe in. It's not required to do anything, and if you believe that magick should only be done in the direst of circumstances, and they never come up, then you've never cast a spell in your life. It's all about how you view your own personal beliefs, and how you read into the general religion.

I know that I followed Wicca spiritually for about 5 years before I even attempted any kind of ritual or spell. I didn't NEED all of that, I needed the spirituality, and the beliefs that it helped me understand. I just wanted what the beliefs were, not all of the glitz and glam and special additives that come with it. Those are GREAT, don't get me wrong, but it's not necessary to believe in harm none, or to celebrate Sabbats, or to worship a god and goddess.

Spellwork is NOT necessary to be a Wiccan.
Again, Wicca is a form of spirituality, and no magick is necessary to believe in anything that Wicca stands for religiously.

[roseonfire]

Wicca is a religious belief system, as much as anything else, really. Many Wiccans perform magick, but you don't have to perform magick to believe in what Wiccans believe in. It's not required to do anything, and if you believe that magick should only be done in the direst of circumstances, and they never come up, then you've never cast a spell in your life. It's all about how you view your own personal beliefs, and how you read into the general religion.

I know that I followed Wicca spiritually for about 5 years before I even attempted any kind of ritual or spell. I didn't NEED all of that, I needed the spirituality, and the beliefs that it helped me understand. I just wanted what the beliefs were, not all of the glitz and glam and special additives that come with it. Those are GREAT, don't get me wrong, but it's not necessary to believe in harm none, or to celebrate Sabbats, or to worship a god and goddess.

Spellwork is NOT necessary to be a Wiccan.
Again, Wicca is a form of spirituality, and no magick is necessary to believe in anything that Wicca stands for religiously.

You're a little off. Wicca is a religion, not a spirituality. There is a difference. You do need magick to be Wiccan. Even the act of erecting the temple involves magick. This is why Wicca is a witchcraft religion.

[Tasariel]

You're a little off. Wicca is a religion, not a spirituality. There is a difference. You do need magick to be Wiccan. Even the act of erecting the temple involves magick. This is why Wicca is a witchcraft religion.

I stated that Wicca is a religious belief. I was trying not to be repetitive haha, so I was using a bunch of different words for it. They all essentially mean the same thing to me.

My point is that to believe in Wicca, you don't have to cast a circle or erect the temple, though I'm not familiar with that term I think it's essentially casting a type of circle from what I can find online. Wicca is a witchcraft religion and witchcraft is an important part of it, I agree. I'm not saying that witchcraft isn't a big part of it.

What I'm saying is that to believe in Wicca, you don't have to do any magick whatsoever. You can believe in the God and Goddess and celebrate and pray in many ways that don't require magick. The definition of magick is up for grabs here though because you could consider the intent of spending a day baking for the God and Goddess magick in a simpler way, but in reality, you aren't doing it with the intent to cast a spell. So you could consider it simply a form of worship.
You don't ever actually have to cast a circle to be a Wiccan. You don't have to do anything of that nature. All you have to do is believe in the God and Goddess and everything they stand for, and follow the parts of the Wiccan Rede that apply, such as Harm none, and remember to observe the Sabbats in whatever way you choose.

There's nothing that ever says you HAVE to cast a circle EVER. Part of what's so great about Wicca is that it's very personalized and you can do a lot of what feels good to you. You can go along indefinitely and never need magick, even if it is a part of the religion, it's a part that's not REQUIRED.

Are you saying that people who are new to Wicca can't call themselves Wiccan until they've cast a spell? Are you saying that I can't call myself a Wiccan for never having needed to? Not trying to be overly argumentative, I just don't think that there are any kinds of requirements for magick in Wicca, and I'm trying to find out where you draw the line as far as who's Wiccan and who's not.

[A new found power]

You're a little off. Wicca is a religion, not a spirituality. There is a difference. You do need magick to be Wiccan. Even the act of erecting the temple involves magick. This is why Wicca is a witchcraft religion.

It's entirely debatable actually. If Wicca IS a Religion, then it is purely open to observations and interpretations, like all Religions. The same applies if it is a spirituality. I'd technically consider witchcraft to be more of a spirituality than Wicca, and Wicca more of a Religion then a spirituality, but that is merely my opinion on the matter, due to my definitions.

You don't NEED magick to be a Wiccan, nor a believer in Wicca. One may perform prayers/rituals that are considered "magick" in a normal Wiccans life, but remember that even "magick" is a personalised definition and not subject to a strict set of rules and regulations. And these prayers/rituals aren't *NEEDED* to be a Wiccan. If you so choose to be a Wiccan who does not use magick, that is your choice. And it would not devalue you as a Wiccan either.

Wicca took it's roots from modern witchcraft, which takes its roots from the Golden Dawn primarily, which took it's roots from animatism and bronze/iron age beliefs systems. Of course, most consider what the ancestors practised to be Paganism, which as an umbrella term they arguably did practise, but it was a form of Animatism and also Animism which did have tendancies to have magick in them, but magick was not necessarily the be all and end all of it.

Therefore to suggest that magick is necessary to be a Wiccan is quite off. Although it's fair to suggest that Wiccans do have a tendancy to be opened up to magick in their Religious practises. It's still not necessary though, so the author is right in that if you do not believe you need magick to be a Wiccan, then you don't. I wouldn't get hung up on it too much though, as magick in Wicca can be seen as a side-priority by some and not crucial.

[roseonfire]

You're a little off. Wicca is a religion, not a spirituality. There is a difference. You do need magick to be Wiccan. Even the act of erecting the temple involves magick. This is why Wicca is a witchcraft religion.

It's entirely debatable actually. If Wicca IS a Religion, then it is purely open to observations and interpretations, like all Religions. The same applies if it is a spirituality. I'd technically consider witchcraft to be more of a spirituality than Wicca, and Wicca more of a Religion then a spirituality, but that is merely my opinion on the matter, due to my definitions.

You don't NEED magick to be a Wiccan, nor a believer in Wicca. One may perform prayers/rituals that are considered "magick" in a normal Wiccans life, but remember that even "magick" is a personalised definition and not subject to a strict set of rules and regulations. And these prayers/rituals aren't *NEEDED* to be a Wiccan. If you so choose to be a Wiccan who does not use magick, that is your choice. And it would not devalue you as a Wiccan either.

Wicca took it's roots from modern witchcraft, which takes its roots from the Golden Dawn primarily, which took it's roots from animatism and bronze/iron age beliefs systems. Of course, most consider what the ancestors practised to be Paganism, which as an umbrella term they arguably did practise, but it was a form of Animatism and also Animism which did have tendancies to have magick in them, but magick was not necessarily the be all and end all of it.

Therefore to suggest that magick is necessary to be a Wiccan is quite off. Although it's fair to suggest that Wiccans do have a tendancy to be opened up to magick in their Religious practises. It's still not necessary though, so the author is right in that if you do not believe you need magick to be a Wiccan, then you don't. I wouldn't get hung up on it too much though, as magick in Wicca can be seen as a side-priority by some and not crucial.

You are entirely correct on these origins. This is the point that can be argued with you statement though: you don't need to practice magick to be Pagan, but Wicca is Orthopraxic, not Orthodoxic. Therefore, Wicca is a religion centered around practice, not belief. Of course, there is a belief system to Wicca, don't get me wrong. But to be truly labeled as a Wiccan deals with correct action. Once again, Wicca is a witchcraft religion. You can't be Wiccan without being a witch. You could, however, follow the spiritual aspect of Wicca without magick. But that in and of itself doesn't make one Wiccan. You need the practice as well, and the practice involves magick.

[A new found power]

Likewise there is a debate on whether or not Wicca actually is Othopraxic. In essence it doesn't really matter. As we can't dictate an entire religion, nor how you should follow it, only the original deity/ies of a religion has such a right. And as far as we know, there never was a deity/ies, and even if we knew such a thing, one cannot say HOW they wanted you to practise the Religion, as even through direct verbal passings and stories things change and become rumours and myth.

Gardner may have *officially* kick-started Wicca, but that does not mean he can, nor ever could, dictate what it was nor meant. The ancient neolithic celtics were the believed original founders, and as far as I know not all of them actively practised magick, nor felt a need to. It's simply seen as a modern necessity, that was never actually required by the olden, original Wicca of which Gardner took inspiration from. It's merely his opinion on what Wicca should be, and therefore does not dictate what Wicca HAS to be.

[roseonfire]

Likewise there is a debate on whether or not Wicca actually is Othopraxic. In essence it doesn't really matter. As we can't dictate an entire religion, nor how you should follow it, only the original deity/ies of a religion has such a right. And as far as we know, there never was a deity/ies, and even if we knew such a thing, one cannot say HOW they wanted you to practise the Religion, as even through direct verbal passings and stories things change and become rumours and myth.

Gardner may have *officially* kick-started Wicca, but that does not mean he can, nor ever could, dictate what it was nor meant. The ancient neolithic celtics were the believed original founders, and as far as I know not all of them actively practised magick, nor felt a need to. It's simply seen as a modern necessity, that was never actually required by the olden, original Wicca of which Gardner took inspiration from. It's merely his opinion on what Wicca should be, and therefore does not dictate what Wicca HAS to be.

This is where I point out that Gardner took inspiration from the British Traditional Witches (not Wiccans) as you are right that Wicca is Gardner's spin on that. The traditional witches were the ones that came from the (or were at least inspired by) the Celtics. And you are right that not all (and in fact most) of the Celtics did not see it necessary to practice magick. But Wicca isn't Celtic. It came from the witchcraft of the nine covens of the New Forest area and the ritual structure comes from the Golden Dawn, which was a magickal society that wasn't religion specific.

What you are arguing is that because Wicca's religious origins don't require magick to practice, you don't need magick to practice the religion of Wicca. But just because it has these origins doesn't make it these origins. If you take out the ritual structure, then you would have something closer to the traditional Celtic belief, although even then it wouldn't be precisely the same because of the modification over time. What distinguishes Wicca from the Celtic practice is this ritual structure. So without the ritual, it isn't Wicca.

[Starwitch]

It might be good to point out that many people use the term Wiccan in a broader sense to refer to people who have earth-centered beliefs and usually worship The Goddess, but who also believe in "harm none" and the three-fold law (or at least some form of karmic consequences for your actions). Some witches and pagans do NOT believe in karma and they feel that it's acceptable to harm others. I don't want to be grouped with those people, which is why I began referring to myself as Wiccan after several years of following a pagan/magical belief system.

There's a more strict definition of Wicca that refers to a specific religious tradition in which you study for a year and a day (presumably under the guidance of a coven) before finally being initiated into the coven and allowed to perform magic. These are usually the Gardnerian Wiccans. They have long lists of Wiccan Laws that they supposedly follow.

I used to say on my website that "you don't have to be Wiccan to be a witch", because back then I thought of Wicca in the strict sense, and I figured most of us didn't leave Christianity for Wicca only to be bombarded with a whole new set of rules from the Wiccan religion. But after knowing a lot of witches who made it a point to tell people they weren't Wiccan, and realizing that most of those witches were bad people who enjoyed hurting others, I knew I didn't want to be grouped with them. I'd prefer to be grouped with the "harm none" people, regardless of how "fluffy" that might seem to some. (What's truly "fluffy" are the people who have no spiritual beliefs and are only involved in witchcraft for the power they believe it will provide them and for the dark, evil reputation it gives them if they look a certain way.)

I used to do more magic when I was younger, when my life was more chaotic. Now that my life is more settled, there's rarely a need for magic spells unless someone close to me is sick or hurting. Sometimes people request that I do magic for them, so I'll light a candle and pray for them, but those are really more prayers in my view since I'm not casting a circle and everything.

I think it's kind of like when you start out being a Christian, you might feel all gung-ho about it. You may join a missionary group and go on trips where you seek new converts and walk up to strangers to tell them about Jesus. But after many years of being a Christian, you settle into more of easy way of being with God and you don't have that initial enthusiasm anymore. You lose that desire to prove how "Christian" you are. The same thing can happen with Wiccans. They still hold the same beliefs that they did when they were younger and did more magic. They still consider themselves Wiccan. But they no longer feel the need to perform rituals and spells. Going to the mountains and singing a song to the trees and the creek is ritual enough for some of us as we get older and more comfortable with our beliefs. Some will choose to meditate on bringing peacefulness and love into their lives instead of casting magic spells to get what they think they need or want.

You basically just start to understand that everything can't be solved with magic, that you're here on Earth to learn through your trials and to gain new experiences. So to try manipulate everything to your own liking (through magic) defeats the purpose we came here for.

[roseonfire]

Very good point, Starwitch. But not everyone that isn't Wiccan but is a witch is like that. I'm actually Irish Traditional. I still believe in the Law of Threefold return, though. The concept is based on the Law of Attraction, which is a fundamental of magick. Yet that doesn't make me Wiccan.

I also know some BTWs that make the point that Wicca doesn't forbid you from causing harm, which is unrealistic anyways as if one person gains, another generally looses, which is harm. They believe that you should be aware of the harm you are causing and to work your magick with that knowledge and accepting the responsibility for it. I've known many witches that don't have any religious association that feel the same way. So the argument could be made for either side. I feel something such as that is more up to the individual person and what they choose to do with magick.

[aillilek]

I thought I would bump this - and add ....

Witch: A practitioner of Witchcraft. This usually means an individual who practices ritualized magic of some sort. They may or may not be a Wiccan.

Wiccan: A follower of the Wicca religion. There are many different paths within what is now called Wicca. Not all paths will practice ritualized magic of some sort, so not all Wiccans are Witches, although the majority are.

Pagan: The "tree" of which Wicca and Witch are, but these are just two of the many and varied "branches".

So,
All Witches are Pagans.
All Wiccans are Pagans.
Some Witches are Wiccans.
Some Wiccans are Witches.
Some Pagans are neither Witches nor Wiccans.

Or maybe it would help to illustrate using something completely different. I choose Pies

Some Pies are made with Strawberries.
Some Pies are made with Rhubarb.
Some Pies are made with both Strawberries and Rhubarb.
Some Pies are made with neither Strawberries nor Rhubarb.
But they're all Pies.

[roseonfire]

The technical definition of Wicca is a religion centered around witchcraft, that was founded by Gerald Gardner. Wicca is an initiatory mystery religion, and to call yourself "Wicca" implies that you can trace an initiatory lineage back to the New Forest Coven. This doesn't mean that you have to be Gardnarian. That sect was later followed by Alexandrian, Blue Moon, ect. But they all could trace themselves back to Gardner.

There are some groups, the biggest one being eclectic, that claim to be Wicca but can't claim this title without their prefix (such as Eclectic Wicca) because they aren't, by proper definition, Wicca.

Someone practicing an offshoot of Wicca may or may not be a witch. But someone practicing Wicca by its definition (British Traditional Wicca) is also a witch.

[Starwitch]

if one person gains, another generally looses, which is harm

That's the second time I've seen you post that opinion recently.

Why do you think someone else has to be harmed because something good happened to someone?

I don't get it. If I did a healing spell to heal my mother, how could that harm someone? How could that take away from other people or hurt them in some way? The healthier my mother is, the more children she can teach, and we're far better off to have my mother teaching kids than to have some of these other egotistical teachers or inept substitute teachers be left in charge of the children.

Even if I used the example of casting a spell to make money... If I made money because of that spell, how does that harm another person? Assuming I didn't rob them or hurt them intentionally in order to make money, I don't see how it hurts anyone. When 10% of the world's population holds 85% of the world's wealth, I can't conceive of how it's going to hurt that greedy top 10% if $1000 of their billions of dollars winds up in my bank account. In fact, I can only see how it helps the world since I'm much more likely to help other people with my money than a billionaire is. Rich men are nearly always money hoarders who only give to charity when it benefits their tax situation.

There are superstitious witches who claim that if you cast a money spell then your granny could die and leave you the money. But that's just superstition and fear-based thinking. The gods are NOT going to go around killing people just so you can have the money that you wanted. Think how much more chaotic the Earth would be if that was really how magic and spells worked.

I definitely don't believe that something bad will happen to you or anyone else because you've cast a spell for something good to happen in your life. The law of attraction doesn't work that way.