The following passage from The Roebuck in the Thicket is very informative on this point.

"Q: When is a witch not a witch? A: When they are a pagan. This was probably the first lesson that Robert Cochrane taught us when we joined his group. In the whole time I worked with him he tried his hardest to get this message over, unfortunately with very little success. This is not to say that he belittled paganism in any way, but he accepted it for what it was - something very different from the Craft, even though in the past both had shared common roots.

"So what is so different about them? According to Cochrane's definition, paganism is a religious pantheism, an understanding that nature is a reflection of the Hand of God and that god is nature total and complete. Whereas with witchcraft you have an occult science with its own distinct and separate traditions and philosophy. Unfortunately, in its lower stages, the Craft can and very often is confused with paganism. ...

"I suppose that if one had to define the true nature of the witch the most accurate picture would be that of an unlicensed practitioner of the mysteries of witchcraft ...

"To quote Cochrane: 'In other words, there is only one way of finding a witch, judge them by their works and by their silence - unless there is a need to speak out. ... Now what do I call myself? I don't, but witch is as good a word as any. Failing that, perhaps "Fool" might be a better name ... '"

- The Roebuck in the Thicket: An Anthology of the Robert Cochrane Witchcraft Tradition, Chapter Eighteen, Will of the Gods, pp. 152 - 153; By Evan John Jones & Robert Cochrane, Edited by Michael Howard, Chieveley U.K.: Capall Bann Publishing, 2001, ISBN 186163 155-3