The author is Mike Nichols, who's written some pretty wonderful stuff on other topics. (Worth noting, 'cos he's not a fly-by-night fluffhead.) If you're not familiar with the name, google for him; he's worth reading.
I think Mike is oblivious the the rather *drastic* differences between various types of religious witchcraft. His etymology is accurate (or reasonably so), but his insistance that since wicca and witch used to mean the same thing, they still should, is ridiculous.
His point that "wicca is the religion and witchcraft is the practice" is legally dangerous is worth noting. It's a bad idea to allow the religion of wicca to have a legal existence separate from the practice of witchcraft--because while the law can't ban religious practices, it can ban almost everything else, and witchcraft's got a long history of being illegal. It's only by insisting that it's an essential part of the religion that it's allowed today.
However, I think we can claim "essential part of the religion" without claiming "absolute identity of the religion." We don't call Christians "prayerists," even though prayer (of various sorts) is essential to their religion.
I'm not sure why I argue for these points. Sometimes, I think it'd just be easier to start calling myself a Satanic Wiccan and insist "that's the label that best suits me, and it's only my opinion and of course other people might disagree, but only the Goddess can tell you whether you're a real Wiccan."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rosecarmine
(no subject)
Date: 2006-05-21 08:25 am (UTC)I think Mike is oblivious the the rather *drastic* differences between various types of religious witchcraft. His etymology is accurate (or reasonably so), but his insistance that since wicca and witch used to mean the same thing, they still should, is ridiculous.
His point that "wicca is the religion and witchcraft is the practice" is legally dangerous is worth noting. It's a bad idea to allow the religion of wicca to have a legal existence separate from the practice of witchcraft--because while the law can't ban religious practices, it can ban almost everything else, and witchcraft's got a long history of being illegal. It's only by insisting that it's an essential part of the religion that it's allowed today.
However, I think we can claim "essential part of the religion" without claiming "absolute identity of the religion." We don't call Christians "prayerists," even though prayer (of various sorts) is essential to their religion.
I'm not sure why I argue for these points. Sometimes, I think it'd just be easier to start calling myself a Satanic Wiccan and insist "that's the label that best suits me, and it's only my opinion and of course other people might disagree, but only the Goddess can tell you whether you're a real Wiccan."