Three years ago I posted a text message exchange I had with a friend on secrecy and privacy in Wicca.
I recently had another exchange with that same friend. Here it is, with some edits to preserve their privacy and to keep me from rambling a bit too much.
Me:
*Sigh* No Acorn Garden today. Only one person confirmed that they’d come, so I’ve cancelled the meeting. So be it!
Them:
Only one person confirmed or only one person responded?
I ask because sometimes people show up to archery class even without confirming with coach.
Me:
Only one person responded.
However, I’ve had too many Acorn Garden meetings at which only one person showed up (which is worse than when no one shows up).
In archery, a teacher/coach can easily work with a student one-on-one. It gives them a chance to work on individual problems and get special advice.
In Wicca, if the goal is to build a Circle of trust, that simply doesn’t work if there’s only one person attending. It becomes an apprenticeship. I’ve done that before, but I’m not comfortable with it.
Them:
Ohhh okay.
Uh. Why not?
Me:
For one thing, it’s not how I was taught. I learned in a Circle of ten or so people. It’s good for ritual, good for magic, good for group energy.
Working one-on-one is too much like talking to myself. I already do too much of that!
Also, although I’m trying to move away from the heteronormative gender approach taken in classic Gardnerian Wicca, the reality is that the whole thing doesn’t feel “right” to me when it’s two guys involved. Perhaps with a different teacher it might work, but it doesn’t work for me.
The one person who said they’d come was, as you’ve guessed, a guy.
It’s sexist of me, but I’m more comfortable with two women working together and calling it “Gardnerian Wicca” than I am with two men doing the same thing.
Them:
Huh. But why? I can understand the wanting two people so it is more collaborative but why does the gender matter in this case?
Me:
In general in magic, it doesn’t. But in the Gardnerian Tradition, it’s baked in:
– the roles of “High Priestess” and “High Priest”
– the invocations to “the Lord and the Lady”
– the “dagger dipping” (which I assume you’ve seen, though perhaps the Wiccan rituals you’ve attended don’t do this).
(Edit: For those not familiar with the practice, in many Wiccan rituals the High Priestess holds out a cup and the High Priest dips a magical knife (the athame) into it, in order to bless the ritual beverage.)
Them:
Yes I have seen it, and it is not subtle
This part I understand as part of the historical culture. But I guess I don’t understand why two guys can’t teach each other and two gals can.
Me:
Oh, they can!
Them:
Of note, I have some basic understanding of Wicca, but only to the level an awkward young teenager with no friends had. Prior to my attending some rituals as a guest, through high school, I considered myself wiccan and did some reading on it and stuff like that. A “wanna blessed be” you might call it.
Not to say that that is any sort of actual understanding, but just that I do understand the basic terms without knowing a specific tradition.
But as you have seen, I feel incredibly awkward around the concept of ritual, so while I was and am fine doing small things at home by myself or at parties, when I threw them, the whole being in a group wiccan thing made me feel very weird and awkward and performative
That’s why I’m wondering at the smaller group/individual teaching.
Me:
I forgot one more item on my list: The notion that the “girls are the boss” in the Circle. Wicca has been seen as a vehicle for female empowerment since it came into the US in the 60s. The general attitude among Gards is that a Circle requires a women to be the leader of the Circle. A woman-only Circle is fine, but a men-only Circle is not “Gardnerian”.
Bear in mind that I ran the Hermes Council (an all-mens group) for 19 years. We did magical work just with us. But we never called it “Gardnerian”.
Shifting the topic from “Why Bill feels awkward teaching the Gard Tradition to an all-male group” to “Why you might feel awkward in larger ritual Circles”…
I’ve been in Circles (not Gard!) at festivals with hundreds of people. I can certainly understand anxiety at being in a such a large group.
And your perception is correct: Wiccan ritual is performative. A ritual is a kind of drama in which the audience is expected to participate.
I remember a friend being very uncomfortable when she attended one of our Circles and saw everyone making an invoking pentagram at the same time. She felt it meant that she’d be required to do it too, even if she didn’t want to. She continued to feel uncomfortable even when I told her it was more like a dance, and that she was not required to join in.
Them:
Yes it’s like that.
I don’t have anything against the individual motions, but the concept of needing to do something that’s what you do (ritual) makes me feel weird. Some of it may be my social anxiety for sure, but even at home, I don’t like feeling like I have to do something.
I may just be too much of a contrary bitch. As one of my friends says, my defining feature is “nobody tells me what to do, not even me.”
It probably feels a bit too much like church as a kid too, which also felt performative.
Me:
I don’t usually analogize a Wiccan Circle with sex (it’s too facile a comparison), and usually use relationship analogies (“a training Grove is like dating; a Coven is like marriage”). But to dip into that pond:
Part of sex is to understand what works between the people involved. They lower their boundaries, and work towards a (presumably) common goal. There’s vulnerability and trust involved.
Them:
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Me:
Now extend that to a larger group, not an orgy, but a ritual. There’s a phrase you’ve probably heard: Perfect love and perfect trust.
One of my magical friends has a saying: “Commitment is where the trust comes from. Trust is where the magic comes from.”
If you’re able to lower your boundaries and establish trust among a group of people, you can get more powerful ritual, worship, and magic.
That’s the goal of a Wiccan group, whether it be a Grove, a Circle, or a Coven.
My old group worked because we all grew to understand each other’s foibles, and magical energies, and personal styles. (They didn’t have to adjust anything with regard to me, because I’m practically perfect in every way. They had to adjust to all the others, though.)
It’s in the act of understanding and building that trust that creates the magic.
It takes years. But the bonds that build up can last longer.
The group in which I trained hasn’t existed as a functioning entity since 1999. But I’m still close in a special way to all those people who Circled with me.
The same is true for Hermes Council. If I’m speaking with any of those guys and one of them says/texts/emails “Pick up the stick” I know exactly what they mean. It’s a notion of trust and communication.
I’m not saying this approach to magic and worship is necessary or works for everyone. All I can say is that it works for me.
Edit: I note that we did not discuss non-heteronormative participation in a Circle. For my part, my notion of empowerment places non-heteronormative people in the same category as women: I’d rather see them in the leadership role in a Circle.
Back in the day, my students would occasionally ask me, “Say, Bill, why don’t you take the role of the High Priestess in a ritual?”
My response was always the same: “That would mean, through dint of effort and years of achievement, that a straight white cis-gendered male would finally have a leadership role in a religious ceremony. Such a thing would obviously be completely new in the history of the world.”
Of course, since I wasn’t born yesterday, I also knew that the reason why they asked is so they could skip the work of memorizing the ritual.