Greetings Melissa - thank you!
and yes, this post of yours re: GG did make it to the list. I've
quoted it in its entirety, below.
I have yet to see another post from you other than the test,
however.
Christopher - Thank you for sharing that bit re: Pearson's book.
Felicia Swayne-Heidrick
On Jan 31, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Melissa Harrington wrote:
> Dear Dave, Ken, Felicia, Caroline, Mogg and all
>
> Thanks for the interesting conversation, and to Dave, Felicia and
> Caroline for inviting me to join the debate, I am here but usually
> just lurk due to time pressure of being mum-of-small-kids, but this
> thread was tempting me already.
>
> Ken, I must admit I was a little perplexed about the 'non-British
> Wicca'. I've always seen it as a syncretised living religion that has
> taken on board material, influences and ideas from many sources,
> including classical influences that would have been part of the
> education of the people who made up the magickal milieu from whence
> Wicca emerged. I would be interested to hear more on non-British
> Wicca if possible.
>
> Felicia, I think you particularly hit the nail on the head by saying
> that plagiarism does not a corpus make. Regarding the Charge, it was
> extent, and more overtly thelemic, before Doreen Valiente rewrote it,
> but as you said also included pieces from other sources, including the
> Aradia. Now the vast majority of the form and content is in Doreen's
> words, so it is attributed to her.
>
> There has indeed been some conjecture that when GG referred to a coven
> he was in fact referring to the Rosicrucian Theatre group. However,
> the research of Philip Heselton on the roots of Wicca has shown that
> there may have been a coven, who were linkede to the theatre, but had
> their own group. So much of the mythmaking around the origins of Wicca
> is indeed conjecture, which then rapidly becomes 'fact', i.e. the old
> chestnut that Crowley wrote the Book of Shadows. For a good read on
> Wicca's roots I cannot recommend Heselton's books enough,
> particularly when read in conjunction with Hutton's Triumph of the
> Moon.
>
> Congratulations for your work on Parsons. I too would be interested to
> know whether Aleister Crowley or Gerald Gardner were ever in
> possession of Jack Parsons' writings regarding witchcraft. I am also
> curious as to who it is that suggests Gardner was influenced by
> Parsons and what evidence they present to support their claim. I have
> an idea where this may have come from, but will wait for Mogg's
> answer in case I am completely wrong.
>
> Regarding the initiations, I would not say that Gardnerian
> initiations are
> straight out of the OTO's Man of Earth initiations. Like Caroline
> (hello again Caroline) I can see where both the OTO and Wicca have
> borrowed from Freemasonry, or indeed from archetypal initiation
> ceremony. Although the two first degrees have freemasonic elements and
> some obvious symbology in common, the rest of the OTO Man of Earth
> does not, in my opinion, relate to the Wiccan initiations. I won't
> go into it any further here, but if comparisons are to be drawn, from
> my experience and from what I understand of the rituals, I would
> rather tend to see each Wiccan degree to correspond to a triad of
> initiations within in the OTO, both in what is conveyed to the
> candidate, and what is expected of them. This also fits with the
> ethos of each tradition. Both seek to initiate and empower their
> initiatory candidates, and do so via a three part system; however
> Wicca, the segmented polycephalus Nature religion, maintains fewer
> formal degrees and more individualistic initiation criteria than the
> OTO, the hierarchical organisation which splits its grades into a
> number of subsidiary degrees. That of course is just my opinion but I
> hope it is helpful ,or at least opens up more cordial dialogue on this
> thread.
>
> With regards
>
> Melissa.
|