Is Wicca/Neopaganism ruined?

Post Reply New Topic

Sorry bad choice of words, the OP has moved on...

Modern witches and paganism is simply elaborate cosplay. Prior to a previous census there was a movement to register "Jedis" as a religion on the Australian census. It was gaining so much traction on social media that the then deputy prime minister, Peter Costello, declared anyone who put "Jedi" as their religion would issued with a fine for intentionally interfering with the census. Needless to say Costello's warning did the trick...a meme was doing the rounds with the deputy prime minister as emperor Palpatine saying "execute Order 66".

No, it's not.

Maybe some folks are into it as "simply elaborate cosplay," but the movement as a whole is not.


Not the same thing as neo-Paganism.

there is simply no way to verify that either wiccans or pagans follow unadulterated pre-christian religions. the last vestiges of the old ways died off or were eradicated during the catholic, protestant and puritan inquisitions.

In Victorian Britain there was a revival or nostalgia for pre-christian beliefs but this manifested in distorted way in various forms seeping into popular literature and formation of so-called societies, some of which influenced early Nazi beliefs. The iconic symbols of witch's including brooms, pointy hats, cauldrons, black cats as we know them today, are largely products of cultural imagination and artistic representation rather than historical fact.

Archaeological and historian attempts to reconstruct pre-christian beliefs common to both early Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Celts involve hallucinogenic plants, shaman priests, religious ceremonies involving animal and human sacrifice including cannibalism. Chants and prayers were conducted in now extinct languages.

I'm 100% sure whatever modern neo-pagans or neo-wiccans is simply a hotch potch of practices that at best were made up in the imaginations of bored Victorian aristocrats. I worked with a woman who claimed to be a practicing witch and all her friends were all wiccans, that in itself is a misnomer as you never had tribes/villages where everyone was a witch? Secondly wiccans and pagans claim to be peaceful and one with nature/spirits. All well and good but I highly doubt anything is authentic. Don't get me wrong I am 100% supportive of peoples choices to follow what they want provided they are doing no harm.

They are obviously not "unadulterated pre-christian religions." They are modern religions that draw inspiration from ancient sources.

But they are, nevertheless, real religions, in which many people sincerely believe. They are not mere "cosplay."


Yes, there were some forms of occultism and neo-Paganism that were adopted by some high-ranking Nazis. But this certainly does not mean that all or most occultists and neo-Pagans, or the neo-Pagan scene as a whole, are sympathetic to Nazism.

What was your point in bringing this up?


There is disagreement among historians as to whether, or to what extent, the ancient Romans' accounts of human sacrifice by the Celts and other northern peoples were truthful or mostly just war propaganda.

That said, human sacrifice certainly did occur in some ancient cultures and eras. But other ancient societies banned it. Human sacrifice was far from uniformly characteristic of all ancient societies. See Wikipedia article on human sacrifice.

Ditto for cannibalism. See Wikipedia article on human cannibalism.

Speaking of cannibalism, it's not confined to "pagan" cultures. There's a form of cannibalism that was apparently practiced in the Christian society of early modern Europe, according to the books Medicinal Cannibalism in Early Modern English Literature and Culture by Louise Noble, 2011 (see descriptions here and here) and Mummies, Cannibals and Vampires: The History of Corpse Medicine from the Renaissance to the Victorians by Richard Sugg, 2016 (see descriptions here and here). (See also a review of both books here.)

Anyhow, what was your point in bringing up human sacrifice and cannibalism?


While some of the founders of the modern Pagan movement were aristocrats, many were middle class. Why do you assume that their motive was "boredom"?


... if your measure of "authenticity" is being an exact replica or an unadulterated direct lineal descendant of some ancient religion. But most experienced, educated practitioners don't claim this. They are aware that their practices aren't directly handed down from the stone ages, but only draw inspiration from ancient (and some not-so-ancient) sources.


But you seem to have a habit of talking about various small religious and other subcultures in stigmatizing ways. Why do you do this?

My point (you asked me this three times) is that if neo-paganism and wicca is "inspired" then does anyone really have the right to gatekeep what is neo-pagan or wiccan? I could make up some crap and call it a religion (hence my alluding to the Jedi religion which would have been 100,000 x more popular if it was allowed to registered by the Australian government.

Since you insist on bringing up Jediism, I decided to look up "Jediism" in Wikipedia.

Looks like Jediism began as a joke, then evolved into an actual religion. Adherents don't literally believe in the Star Wars universe, except for the idea of "the Force," which they interpret in a manner derived from Taoism and Buddhism. Apparently they use the Jedi of Star Wars as a ritual template, and they have a code of ethics derived (at least in part) from the Star Wars Jedi.

So far, I see nothing wrong with this. As I see it, the primary functions of religion in today's world are to give people a sense of community and to enable people to build or join an alternative extended family. And it seems to me that Jediism, like various other new religions, has the potential to perform these functions for at least some of the many people who feel alienated from traditional religions.

If one is going to start a new religion, it's probably easier to use an already-existing template, even a fictional one, than to start totally from scratch. And the Jedi code of ethics looks okay to me.

If Jediism looks like "crap" to you, that may be because you are accustomed to thinking of religion in terms of theological dogma. But I don't see theological dogma as the most essential part of religion. Indeed, to me, the very idea of believing in theological dogma, of any kind, does not seem intellectually tenable. But it seems to me that there are plenty of new religions that can serve the community-building functions of religion without theological dogma. It remains to be seen how good a job of this Jediism can do for its adherents.

Although the neo-Pagan movement as a whole is not similarly based on a work of fiction, it does have one branch that does have its origin in fiction -- the Church of All Worlds (CAW), which drew its initial inspiration from the novel Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein. However, CAW soon evolved well beyond its initial fiction-based beginnings. It both strongly influenced and was strongly influenced by the development of Wicca (which was at least a couple of decades older than CAW).

More later.

Yes, it at least has a code
There is no emotion, there is peace. There is no ignorance, there is knowledge. There is no passion, there is serenity. There is no chaos, there is harmony.
https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Jedi_Code/Legends

And hence my point, neo-pagans and wiccans are a cosplay club/society like people who gather for civil war re-enactments. they take it one step further by trying to abide some ritual/practice and set of beliefs. All of which is harmless fun.

However, the OP alluded to how such groups tend to not be very inclusive and put up unrealistic rules on whom is a "true" or "authentic" wiccan or pagan. Now the whole premise starts to unravel. when I was in high school goths and emos were a big thing. the kids playing dress up formed little cliques and lifestyles around where to hang out and what type of music was goth or emo. In reality the cliques weren't very inclusive, just an excuse to both middle class rebellion against society and narcissistically draw attention to themselves.

templates are just that. they provide an excuse to form clubs that exclude others based on made up rules that aren't much evolved more than school playgrounds over things as simple as who wears Jordans or speaks with a certain slang or listens to Taylor Swift in order to be accepted.

That's a quote from the mantra.

Other parts of the code you quoted include:

No, that's not an accurate description of Wicca/neo-Paganism at all.

Perhaps you just have not personally known any Wiccans/Pagans who were serious about their practice? Perhaps you've known only dabblers?

It does happen to be true, in my experience, that Wiccans/Pagans are more likely than the average person to also be interested in things like historical re-enactments too.

But this certainly does not mean that Wicca/neo-Paganism, itself, is merely cosplay carried one step further. And there are plenty of Wiccans/Pagans who are NOT into cosplay at all.


He talked about some specific issues of controversy within the Wiccan/Pagan scene.

Groups of all kinds have internal controversies now and then, and sometimes ongoing controversies.


I strongly suspect you're overgeneralizing about these kids. What you've said is likely true of SOME of them, but perhaps others just enjoy the relevant genre of music?


Groups of all kinds -- not just religious groups, and not just high school cliques either -- will sometimes have controversies about the group's self-definition.

For example, here on Wrong Planet, there have been occasional controversies about the definition of "autism." I've been told that such controversies were especially intense around 2014 or so, when the DSM 5 came out. Also I've heard that there has been, at times, a lot of controversy here about self-diagnosis, thereby making self-diagnosed people feel excluded. (This has been much less of a problem here more recently.)

But this doesn't mean that the very purpose of the groups, in the first place, is merely to have an excuse to exclude people! Surely Wrong Planet, for example, did not have the primary purpose of dunking on self-diagnosed people, even when the debates about self-diagnosis were at their height.

And that sort of thing is certainly not the main point of what I called a "template."

I don't think it's the same thing Mona. Autism (and Aspergers) is a diagnosis. Anyone can, however, dress up in a witches hat and call themselves a witch.

As a self-diagnosed person myself who is neuroatypical passing I respect the need for this site to be a safe space for diagnosed folks to express themselves...

Can be summarised as "teenage rebellion", both movements have a look. I've known goths and emos at school and work with one currently who still sports the "look and attitude". Its the abrasive and elitist/exclusive/snobby attitude that rubs me the wrong way. I know you will defend them, and perhaps its a phase for many, but I stay clear of them and let them do dress-ups.

Of course it isn't. A neurological condition is not the same thing as a religion, which is not the same thing as a high school clique revolving around shared musical taste.

However, certain unfortunate kinds of group dynamics are all too often found in groups of all kinds, regardless of the focus of the group.

My point is that these unfortunate group dynamics should not be confused with the purposes of the groups. And that's true for nonmainstream religious groups as well as for forums like Wrong Planet.

I'm saying wiccans and neo-pagans are similar to cosplay and re-enactments, I'm not saying it is cosplay and re-enactments. I don't even think any two groups who call themselves wiccans or pagans follow the same thing or share the same beliefs. In the UK several hundred might gather on the summer solstice around Avery/Stonehenge chanting Celtic prayers or what they think is druid rituals completely ignorant that it was their Celtic ancestors who murdered the actual builders of Stonehenge. Not that it matters anymore, but if it gives them spiritual enlightenment then who am I to deprive them of such fun and frivolities.

^^^ Fair point.