From: leighann@fugazi.sybase.com (Leigh Ann Hussey)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: updates please
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:27:35 GMT
Organization: Black Oak Coven

In article <1992Sep22.191344.6919@u.washington.edu>, mimir@milton.u.washington.edu (Al Billings) writes:
|>  So, Aidan can be seen as, perhaps, stretching the normal guidelines a
|> bit. He is probably not New York line anyway.
|> 

Actually, he is; I know his initiator.  This is perhaps a big part of
the issue, at least for Gardnerians out here in CA that I know.  The HPs
of that particular coven has a Thing against scourging.  She also has a
thing about "accidentally" not passing on parts of the BoS of which she
disapproves, and this is the big issue that California Gardnerians have
with her; the issue that they have with Aidan is that he appears to have
swallowed her dogma hook, line, and sinker.  I find it interesting that
scourging is included in particular NROOGD rituals (and am reasonably
sure that if scourging wasn't there from the beginning, it was
incorporated while Aidan was still active in the tradition, due to its
presence in bits of the NROOGD BoS written in Aidan's handwriting), and
yet as soon as Aidan gets an initiation from this Lady, scourging
becomes A Bad Thing.  Hmmm...

Two thoughts, anyway, one on this thread, and one on the scourging
business.  Scourging first: what I do to myself, or permit the doing of
upon me, in my own coven, is my own damn business.  If it works as a
magical practise for me, *it works*, and those who have a problem with
it can circle elsewhere -- bedamned if they'll tell me I can't do it
because they don't approve.  No way will I force something on people who
are unwilling, but in the same way I expect them to do me the courtesy
of not forcing anything on me.  Additionally, I'm willing to take part
in any sort of a process that an individual might feel s/he needed in
hir spiritual/magical/whatever development (in fact, I have done some
pretty interesting rituals based on individual's outlines of what they
felt they needed, that became really powerful and transformational for
everyone involved, not just the person on whom the ritual was supposed
to be focussed).  Anyway, to summarize, what works, works, whether or
not somebody's prudishness or offendedness may cause that somebody to
wish that it be eradicated.

And on the subject of whether or not what we do is Real (unless declared
integer).  I don't care how old or young it is, as I have said, continue
to say, and will say until I no longer have breath to speak, IF IT
WORKS, IT WORKS.  Now, there is no way to judge objectively if something
works -- this is the problem facing people who feel a need to take on
the various skeptics' organizations around the country.  It is only
possible to judge subjectively, on a case by case basis.  I know what
works for me, and that's all that matters -- *to me*.  If some of what
works for me works for anybody else, that's cool, that gives us a frame
of reference in which we can work together.  Some of the things others
do may not work for me, but I'm sure willing to help them do them if
they could use my help.  So the age of the tradition is not important.
Consider the ages of the Established Religions (tm) -- they're centuries
older than NROOGD, but for lots of folks I know, NROOGD works better for
them than Christianity, Judaism (lots of ex-Jews in the Craft; I wonder
what this means??), or what-may-you-have.  I don't feel the need to
legitimize my tradition by making up stories about how much more ancient
it is than Christianity (and therefore more valid).  My tradition is
perfectly legitimate without that crap.

Robert Mathiesen writes:
>... Assume, for the sake of argument that (1) Gardner (or some other
>20th-century person) made most of it up, and moreover that (2) he did so
>in a way which secretly ]unethically( gratified a sexual "kink" on false
>pretenses.  Would that make Wicca invalid?  Or could one make a good
>argument that the value of Wicca is independent of its antiquity and the
>motives which may have shaped its rites?

I think that my statements above make my position on these issues quite
clear...

Parenthetical remark: I find it fascinating that the BritTraditionalists
judge a Wiccan, at least in part, on the basis of who initiated hir.
Recently, I met an Alexandrian (I think that's right... Tim?) priestess
who was introduced to me and her first question was, "Who initiated
you?"  I laughed hysterically, caught completely offguard.  I mean, who
*cares* who initiated me?  That's not a big deal in NROOGD.  Strange stuff.

B*B
	- Leigh Ann

----------------
Leigh Ann Hussey 		leighann@sybase.com
CoG #151E
"Take no scorn to wear the Horn; it was the Crest when you were born!"