The traditional forms of the craft predate the Information Age and were
in no way designed to function optimally in such a wide-open field. If
you'll indulge me in a bit of cane-shaking, back in my day when I
made my first foray into the wider world of witchcraft and pagan
practice, it was very much up to chance as to who you might meet and how
and when. Lacking the internet with portal sites and seekers' email
lists and Facebook groups, your resources were limited to word-of-mouth,
the recommendation of a local shopkeeper, a flyer put out by a brave
coven, or a discreet ad in the back of one of the few major periodicals
available in the local chain bookstore. Even so, if you managed to make a
tenuous connection, you were mostly on your own, with only your own
instincts to guide you as to whether or not the people you met were
legitimate initiates of X tradition; and your only knowledge of X
tradition was likely to come from said people, written material being
scarce and hard to come by. It's difficult to seek further information
if you have no idea where to look for it, or even what questions you
need to be asking. The tide was shifting by the early to mid 1990s when I
was initiated into my first trad, thanks to the explosion of popular
pagan and Wiccan books, but it was still a very different time. Secrecy
and mystery were experienced in a far different way.
Here in the 21st century, information is out there--in books, on web
sites, in blogs and podcasts and every other form of social media. Where
in older times the prospective initiate was the one who was being
interviewed for a position, so to speak, now it isn't at all uncommon to
see seekers quite openly checking up on the bona fides of the coven
leaders and teachers they meet. There are email lists and open Facebook
groups that exist specifically for such exchange, allowing cautious
cowans to ask questions about tradition-specific practices and even
about the lineages of specific people. When I was new into all of this,
such exchange was all but unheard-of, and perhaps in some cases it still
is; there are traditions still in which one's initiatory lineage is a
secret only discussed with other initiates, where even the craft
pseudonyms of one's upline are not mentioned among those outside the
trad, but in the free-market of ideas that is our modern age it is only
going to become harder and harder to maintain such secrecy. Seekers
today are far from the tabula rasa of those from earlier eras; they
read, they listen, they interact in a vastly interconnected way, and
they come to pre-initiate practice with ideas and understandings their
predecessors lacked. The challenges, then, for the teachers and leaders
of today are amplified over what their own teachers faced back in the day.
I'll admit that I do not know the best way to navigate these challenges;
much of this is still uncharted territory, still changing every day.
Each tradition, each group, each person will ultimately decide for
itself how much to reveal, and to whom, and when. Because there are no
central registries, or for that matter any truly unbiased sources, a
vouch is not always going to be available; and some initiates will be
unwilling to reveal too much of their background to a questioning
stranger. Documents can be easily faked. Ultimately a seeker is left to
his or her own instincts as to who they can trust, who they want to work
with, whether or not they can ferret out any information about their
prospective teachers beyond what those teachers themselves are able or
willing to share. In that way, at least, perhaps things haven't changed
all that much from earlier times. More information may be available in
our age, but more doesn't necessarily equal better. If
anything, the technological revolution has made it easier to create and
distribute misinformation, lies, and rumors than ever before.
So the need for secrecy--though I would personally term it confidentiality--must
be weighed against the equally-vital need for transparency, and a
balance must be struck. I would argue that there are things that a
prospective initiate absolutely has the right to know upfront, things
that trump concepts of "it's a secret" and "that's oathbound"--for if
your oaths require you to lie to people about what will be expected of
them, then that is an unethical oath, and you become an unethical leader
by upholding it. (For the record, the oaths I've taken were all rather
damnably vague about just what the "secrets" I was to be keeping were;
oral tradition, I suppose, with variable mileage between trads and
lines!) There are things that people want, and need, to know going in,
things that in our modern age particularly simply cannot be swept aside
as being degree-specific secrets. A balance between maintaining
sufficient confidentiality to neither reveal too much of a trad's
practices (thus spoiling the esoteric effects thereof) and allowing
adequate accountability so that the seeker goes in confidently aware of
what will or will not be expected of them (primarily in those areas
about which seekers are always most concerned: sexually, physically,
psychologically, monetarily). If your trad works heavily with
entheogens, for example, and their usage is expected and required of
initiates, then those seeking initiation need to be clearly aware of
that upfront; and if they have read of the trad's usage of psychoactive
substances and ask you about it, only to have you deny said usage
categorically, then you have acted unethically, and betrayed your
position as a leader. Denying things that are now common knowledge makes
you look untrustworthy when the time comes that the truth is revealed.
Balancing the need for confidentiality, the desire to preserve mystery,
and the necessity of transparency and accountability is difficult, but
not impossible. It requires discipline, honesty, and integrity, all of
which are important qualities in an initiate. You can preserve
tradition, preserve the craft, and still be an ethical person, upfront
and accountable.
