|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:12 am
To the one that I serve For many years I was very anti-Laurie Cabot. I felt she was over popular and frankly I felt she gave witches a bad name by calling herself the offical witch of Salem. Now the Cabot Tradition of witchcraft is the foundation of my own tradition (As Penczak was trained by Laurie Cabot) so now I'm starting to give her a chance. I've only recently started to read this book and I've found it to be interesting. So far it's very simialer to many other books on the market, but at the same time it's different as Laurie Cabot takes a scientific approach to aspects of the craft and magic. Thoughts? I will give my all
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:30 pm
I'm not sure I've actually read anything by this particular author. Or I may have, but didn't pay much attention to the author. Wait. No, I did. But it was a while ago and I can't say I remember much, except that when I read it, it was very clear and obvious to me that Christopher was a descendent of her tradition. It felt like reading repackaged Chris Penzcak, though really, since Cabot came first, I should be thinking about it the other way around. lol
I shudder, though, whenever any author claims they're taking a "scientific" approach to magic. Pseudoscientific would be accurate. I don't have anything against pseudoscience in itself, so long as one recognizes that that's what it is, but when people start calling magic a science, that rather bugs me. gonk In a very loose sense, you can call magic a science, but too few people in this country actually understand real science enough for me to feel comfortable with people tossing the word around casually alongside magic and metaphysics. Chances are good they don't know WTF they're talking about on the science end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 8:47 am
To the one that I serve I am finding it interesting, even if I dont agree with everything. I still dont understand why all these books say that witchcraft is an Old religion... stressed I will give my all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:33 am
Because most new religious movements like to claim antiquity, as if that somehow gives them more credibility and authority? I don't find it at all surprising and it doesn't bother me at all. From a certain point of view, it can be considered an "old" religion in that some of its principles draw upon antiquity; all new religions pretty much draw upon the foundations of the past's legacy. So long as one doesn't take it literally, I don't really care if authors refer to Neopagan practices in general as the "old religion." I sort of see it as part of the body of Neopagan mythos. Sort of like the burning times. Didn't literally happen, but has meaningful mythopoetic messages that are interesting and say something about our movement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:59 am
To the one that I serve I hadn't thought of it in that regards. I mean from a mythological stand point it would make sense. Still people state it as fact. Myself I just dont like the phrase "never again the burning times" *shudders* Though Penczak consideres the tradition to be a Modern American Tradition of Witchcraft which I agree with. I feel that these are American Traditions as they were developed in the US. While they may have some European heritage, they are American Traditions. Why can't we accept that there are American traditions of witchcraft? I will give my all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:48 pm
Many Christians *still* state their mythology as fact... I accept that the same will likely be true of Neopagan movements, so rather than get upset about it, I just shrug and leave it alone. xd
Good question for that last part. I accept that there are American traditions, since clearly there have been many traditions established in America since Wicca was brought over from the UK. A whole cartload of traditions. I know that many Americans feel a sense of rootlessness since this is primarily a nation of immigrants, so that might explain some of the resistance to plant those roots in America. It's just not "antiquated" enough or some such logic. In a sense this is true. My parents, who have done much traveling over the past few years, have themselves spoken of the true sense of history you get from Europe that is just lacking in the United States; the closest we have to it are some sites on the east coast and even those aren't that old. We're too disconnected from the Native Americans too to regard them as sites we can root to. So what are we left with? Rooting back in Europe, for some. Personally I'd much rather work with local land spirits than decontextualize a Pagan pantheon from another country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:18 am
To the one that I serve Starlock Many Christians *still* state their mythology as fact True. For many religions their myths are facts, but is the history of witchcraft really a myth? Starlock ... I accept that the same will likely be true of Neopagan movements, so rather than get upset about it, I just shrug and leave it alone. xd I think we should have accurate historical information for our foundations, but I guess I can see the poibt of treating the popular history as myth. Starlock Good question for that last part. I accept that there are American traditions, since clearly there have been many traditions established in America since Wicca was brought over from the UK. A whole cartload of traditions. The tradition I am training in is a purely American Tradition. While the roots may have some connection to European witchcraft, it was founded in he US by a US citizen and the teachings reflect the US seasonal cycle (at least in New England XD) Starlock I know that many Americans feel a sense of rootlessness since this is primarily a nation of immigrants, so that might explain some of the resistance to plant those roots in America. It's just not "antiquated" enough or some such logic. Still American witches will have different practices than European witches. Our life styles are different and the culture is different. As such I think American witches are unique. Do we all share some things? Possibly (like a connection to Europe as that is where the roots of most witchcraft come from), but when you think about it after a while the practices in America will be different from Europe is only because of the cultural differences. Starlock In a sense this is true. My parents, who have done much traveling over the past few years, have themselves spoken of the true sense of history you get from Europe that is just lacking in the United States; the closest we have to it are some sites on the east coast and even those aren't that old. While I do agree that there is that sense of history in Europe, I feel that we can respect our roots in Europe and still have our own thing. I personally feel that the culture a tradition arises in is what defines that culture. Modern American witchcraft will have different cultural practices than any British Witchcraft. Starlock We're too disconnected from the Native Americans too to regard them as sites we can root to. So what are we left with? Rooting back in Europe, for some. Personally I'd much rather work with local land spirits than decontextualize a Pagan pantheon from another country. I do work with local spirits. I also believe that the Gods of old travel with us. I try not to take Gods and beings out of context. Which is why my worship of the Nordic Gods is separate from my worship of the deities of my witchcraft path. I will give my all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:02 pm
There was a good point made, that so many books seem to be rehashing of what has already been said. Lots of times it gats watered down. If we go back however to the original authors, well a lot of people think that the writing from the 50's was just SO dry. Still I usually recommend the Late-early authors to people first, unless they seem to be fairly intellegent then I send them to Gardener and Valiente first. I like Cabot though, and Starhawk, and sybil Leek. .I seem to read the Authors from the 70's most.
Another point made was about science. It seems to me the more we learn about science, the more it proves what wiccans are doing. Only a few years ago, people thought auras were a bunch of crap, well now we have kirilian photography to prove they exist. A lot of how wiccans work with energy is now being looked at and proven with quantum physics. I think its an exciting time to be wiccan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:32 pm
Love to Paint Another point made was about science. It seems to me the more we learn about science, the more it proves what wiccans are doing. Only a few years ago, people thought auras were a bunch of crap, well now we have kirilian photography to prove they exist. A lot of how wiccans work with energy is now being looked at and proven with quantum physics. I think its an exciting time to be wiccan Could you possibly point to a source for this? Because Kirlian photography is not science, it's a picture of the electromagnetic field surrounding an object that's created by the way the photograph is taken. And I don't think you quite understand what quantum physics is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 2:00 pm
To the one that I serve Love to Paint There was a good point made, that so many books seem to be rehashing of what has already been said. Well it does seem most of these authors come from simialer traditions and just go off what they learned rather than doing exploring and coming up with their own thing. Love to Paint Lots of times it gats watered down. The worst person for this is Silver Ravenwolf. Love to Paint If we go back however to the original authors, well a lot of people think that the writing from the 50's was just SO dry. Still I usually recommend the Late-early authors to people first, unless they seem to be fairly intellegent then I send them to Gardener and Valiente first. I like Cabot though, and Starhawk, and sybil Leek. .I seem to read the Authors from the 70's most. I read anything I can get my hands on. I figure I can learn something from everything I read. Love to Paint Another point made was about science. It seems to me the more we learn about science, the more it proves what wiccans are doing. With Wicca being an oath bound initiatory witchcult I don't see how you can say sciene shows what Wiccans are doing as the practices of Wicca are only known by initiates. Love to Paint Only a few years ago, people thought auras were a bunch of crap, well now we have kirilian photography to prove they exist. I dont know if I accept that to be honest. I dont think auras can be photographed. I dont think energy can be seen like that. Love to Paint A lot of how wiccans work with energy is now being looked at and proven with quantum physics. I think its an exciting time to be wiccan Um where are you getting this information? I will give my all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sakura_Gekkani_Manjitomoe
|
Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:15 pm
I have yet to read her books. Which one would you recommend?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 6:28 pm
Sakura_Tsuki-no-Mizu I have yet to read her books. Which one would you recommend? To the one that I serve I'm not fully done with the one book I have by her so I can't say. I'm about to get into the wheel of the year thoughts in this book. It will be interesting to read her account of it as compared to others. I will give my all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
