Satanism

[Silverm00n]

I know the jist of most religions, except satanism and scientology. I've heard all kinds of stuff about it, more often negative than not. The wiki explanation souds a little general to me. Anyone have better insight?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanism

Satanism is a word which has been used over the years to describe a number of different belief systems in a number of contexts. People claiming to be Satanists—or outsiders claiming to describe Satanism—ascribe a wide variety of beliefs to this movement. These range from the literal worship of a malevolent spiritual being (Theistic Satanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_Satanism)); to a kind of subversive ritual performance stressing the mockery of Christian symbols (most notably the Black Mass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mass)); to the claimed rediscovery of an ancient but misunderstood religion (e.g. Setianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setianism), which conflates Satan with the Egytian god Set (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_%28mythology%29)); to the exaltation of hedonistic recreation, and the celebration of selfishness and pleasure.

Perhaps the most prominent spokesman for Satanism in recent years has been Anton Szandor LaVey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Szandor_LaVey), who founded the Church of Satan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Satan) in 1966. LaVey wrote The Satanic Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_Bible) (1969) and other works which remain highly influential (though controversial) among avowed Satanists. LaVey rejects the Black Mass, cruelty to animals, or a literal belief in (or worship of) Satan. Instead he supports a view of human beings as animals and rejects many social structures that inhibit our instincts.
Equally celebrated within Satanic circles (though not technically a Satanist) would be ritual magician (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_magic) Aleister Crowley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleister_Crowley), who referred to himself as "The Great Beast 666." Crowley's maxim, "Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law!" captures a common Satanic attitude, which the myth of Satan's rebellion is thought to exemplify.
Much "Satanic" lore does not originate from actual Satanists, but from Christians. Best-known would be the medieval (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval) folklore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folklore) and theology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology) surrounding demons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demons) and witches (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witches). A more recent example is the so-called Satanic ritual abuse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_ritual_abuse) scare of the 1980's— beginning with the memoir Michelle Remembers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Remembers)--which depicts Satanism as a vast conspiracy of elites with a predilection for child-molesting and human sacrifice. This genre regularly describes Satan as actually appearing in person in order to receive worship.
Another prominent source of "Satanic" imagery is black metal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_metal) or heavy metal music (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metal_music), which has given Satanism the "Hail Satan!" hand-sign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corna). A few rock stars such as Marilyn Manson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_Manson) (alternative rock, industrial artist) appear to actually be bona fide Satanists; many others merely adopt a Satanic persona for the sake of romanticism.
Vandalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandalism), cruelty to animals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals), or grave desecration (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grave_desecration&action=edit) are advanced by some as examples of Satanic crimes (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Satanic_crimes&action=edit). While some high-profile cases of murder or serial murder have been found to have Satanic themes (e.g. the Manson Family (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manson_Family)), these appear to be primarily the work of disturbed individuals, or of several acting together, rather than of organized religious groups.
Many claims of Satanic child-molesting or murder rings have proven to be unsubstantiated. There was little evidence to support the allegations. Few people were convicted though there are now organized efforts to have the charges dropped.

[Silverm00n]

Ok so, wicca is derived from some borrowed concepts of satanism? As I research more, I'm finding that satanism, judeoism, christianity, wicca are all tied in together in some ways. This article is very long but poses for good debate. I think that the writers perspective on the word "witch" as being non respectable and saying that wiccans use the word to create a sense of fear in people is uncalled for. Sounds like a personal, uneducated opinion to me. It also goes on to say that some satanists think wicca is a ripoff of their religion. I think it's fair to say that you can find similarities in all religions. With that, I think that Crowley and Gardner would be the satanic influence in modern wicca. There are those that follow a more pagan approach and do not use written laws such as the rede. I'd like to know what your views are on this article, or topic in general.

Satanism and the history of Wicca

http://www.meta-religion.com/Spiritualism/Wicca/satanism_and_wicca.htm
The following article is written by Diane Vera.

Copyright © 1992, 1994, 1996 by Diane Vera. All rights reserved (http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/dvera/pagan/HistoryWicca.html).


Note: The following article should not be taken as implying that Wicca is a form of Satanism. Although this article focuses on similarities and historical connections between Wicca and 19th century literary Satanism, there are plenty of differences too, and even more differences between Wicca and modern (post-LaVey) Satanism. Wicca is an eclectic modern religion which has drawn inspiration from many sources, both ancient and modern. Literary Satanism is just one of those many sources.

In their attempts to dissociate themselves from Satanism, Wiccans have tended to distort their own history. Wicca and Satanism are indeed very distinct religious categories. But there are some intimate historical ties between the two, as even some Wiccan scholars are finally starting to admit. See, for example, Aidan Kelly's book Crafting the Art of Magic (pp.21-22, 25-26, and 176). Wicca is not "the Old Religion", though it does draw inspiration from various old religions. Wicca, as we now know it, is derived from 19th century occult philosophy - including literary Satanic philosophy, among others - projected onto a non-Christian Goddess and God, plus some de-Christianised Golden Dawn style ceremonial magick, plus assorted turn-of-the-century British folklore, more recently re-shaped by neo-Pagan scholarship and by modern feminist and ecological concerns. At least several different sides of Wicca's convoluted family tree can be traced to 19th century literary Satanism, some forms of which had more in common with present day Wicca than with present-day Satanism.
The prime example of literary Satanism that strongly influenced Wicca, especially feminist Wicca, is the book La Sorciere by the 19th century French historian Jules Michelet (published in English by Citadel Press under the title Satanism and Witchcraft). Michelet's ideas, as paraphrased by feminist writers such as Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English in their booklet Witches, Midwives, and Nurses: A History of Women Healers (Feminist Press, 1973), have played an important role today's women's health movement. (At least Ehrenreich and English were honest enough to list Michelet in their bibliography.) See especially Michelet's introduction. Michelet was, as far as I know, the literary origin of today's feminist image of the Witch as a healer. Among other things, he theorised that the witchhunts were used by the emerging male medical profession to wipe out their peasant female competition.

According to Jeffrey B. Russell in A History of Witchcraft, pre-feminist classical Wicca also drew lots of inspiration indirectly from Michelet. Michelet was a major source of inspiration to Margaret Murray, Charles G. Leland, and Sir James Frazer, whom most knowledgeable Wiccans do recognise as influential. (Russell points this out, yet neglects to inform the reader that Michelet's book is full of passionate, sympathetic depictions of Satan as well as of the medieval witches. Russell too perpetuates the false counter-myth that "Wicca has nothing to do with Satanism".) I'll leave it to folks more scholarly than myself to debate just how indebted Murray and Leland were to Michelet. In any case, the Italian witch mythology Leland presented in Aradia: Gospel of the Witches (originally published 1899), one of Wicca's major sources, contains some diabolical-witchcraft elements of its own. The very first paragraph reads: Diana greatly loved her brother Lucifer, the god of the Sun and of the Moon, the god of Light, who was so proud of his beauty, and who for his pride was driven from Paradise.

Wiccans usually argue that "Lucifer" is not the Christian Devil but is just "the god of the Sun and of the Moon". (I too distinguish between Satan and Lucifer, as do many occultists.) Yet the statement that Lucifer was "driven from Paradise" for his "pride" is clearly a reference to Christianity's Devil myth. Aradia contains a mix of mythologies. Wiccans are correct to say that their Horned God is not Satan. But it isn't historically true that the Christian image of Satan is a re-interpretation of the Wiccan God. On the contrary, the modern Wiccan concept of the Horned God has its literary origin in a Paganised re-interpretation of medieval Christian Devil imagery (as in Margaret Murray's and earlier writings). It's true that medieval Christian Devil imagery, in turn, incorporates distorted versions of many ancient Gods (not all of whom were horned, eg the trident comes from Poseidon/Neptune). But the Wiccan image of its Horned God is not a direct continuation of any ancient religion, and at least one key aspect does come from no source other than the medieval Christian Devil concept as manifest in the witchhunts. The idea of a Horned God associated specifically with witchcraft is derived from the Christian witchhunts, and from no previous source. In pre-Christian European religion, there were Goddesses associated with witchcraft, eg Hecate; but Pan and other horned male Gods were not associated with witchcraft, as far as I know.
Much of Wicca's self-image is based on the Paganised re-interpretation of alleged Devil-worship, rather than on actual ancient religion. Much of Wicca's terminology and imagery, eg. the words "witch", "coven", and "sabbat", are used because of the Wiccan myth that Wicca is the survival of an underground medieval religion that was the target of the witchhunts. (Regardless of the linguistic origin of the words themselves, this constellation of terms comes from the witchhunts.) The related idea that modern Wiccans too are in continual danger of being confused with Satanists is at least partly a self-fulfilling prophecy. Far fewer people would confuse modern Wicca with Satanism if Wicca didn't use so many witchhunt-derived words and other trappings popularly associated with diabolical witchcraft.

My point here is not that Wiccans shouldn't use the words "witch", "coven", and "sabbat". My point is that if they do use these and other diabolical-witchcraft trappings, they should accept responsibility for the consequences. For example, when explaining that Wicca is not Satanism, they should acknowledge the main real reason for the confusion: that modern Wiccans have chosen to identify with the victims of European witchhunts and have chosen their terminology accordingly. Wiccans certainly should not blame Satanists for Wicca's own public-relations difficulties, as some Wiccans do. It also bothers me when Wiccans, in an attempt to distance themselves from Satanism, perpetuate popular misconceptions about Satanism, eg. saying "We're not Satanists!" in a tone which implies you think Satanists are monsters, or saying "We're not Satanists!" in the same breath as saying "We don't sacrifice babies." (The latter point can be made separately and is an obvious corollary of the Wiccan Rede and/or the Threefold Law.) Back to Wicca's history.
Besides Murray, Leland, and other writers on witchcraft, another of Wicca's main sources is Aleister Crowley. Many knowledgeable Wiccans (eg the Farrars and Doreen Valiente) do realise that Gardner's rituals were heavily based on Crowley's rituals, though they tend to overstate the "Crowley was not a Satanist" disclaimer. Crowley was not a Satanist per se, but he definitely was into Satanic symbolism, in addition to the zillion other things he was into. In some defensive neo-Pagan writings (eg the Church of All Worlds booklet Witchcraft, Satanism, and Occult Crime: Who's Who and What's What), it is claimed that Crowley was neither a Satanist nor a Pagan, but was just into Judaeo-Christian ceremonial magick. In fact, Crowley was very eclectic. Even Golden Dawn ceremonial magick included not only Qabalah and the medieval Christian grimoires, but also Egyptian deities, Greek deities, and Yoga. Crowley emphasised the Egyptian elements, downplayed the Christian elements, and added plenty of other things to the mix, including Satanic imagery galore (such as his invocation of Satan in Liber Samekh, not to mention his constant references to himself as "the Beast 666"). Some will insist that Crowley's Satanic symbolism was merely a joke; but Crowley's attitudes were well within the 19th century Satanic literary tradition. (In most of the more sophisticated forms of Satanism, the name "Satan" is understood in an ironic sense.) Others will explain that most of Crowley's Satanic symbolism can be re-interpreted in Pagan terms, but this too is true of many forms of Satanism.

There's also a possibility that Wicca borrowed ideas from writings about actual Satanists living in the late 19th or early 20th century. In Crafting the Art of Magic, Aidan Kelly says Gerald Gardner drew key concepts from the description of Ozark folk witchcraft, including folk Satanism, in the 1947 book Ozark Superstition by Vance Randolph. I'll admit that Kelly's conclusions have been challenged by other historically knowledgeable Wiccans.

Of course, if Gardner was influenced by Randolph's account, Gardner would probably have assumed that the Satanic folk witches were "really" Pagans whom Randolph misrepresented as Satanists. But Gardner's assumption wouldn't necessarily have been correct. An unlettered folk-witch would be far more likely to be either:

a Satanist, or
a devout though unorthodox Christian than to have preserved an ancient Pagan religion intact.

Various Pagan customs have certainly survived, but this is very different from the intact survival of a Pagan religion, for which there is very little evidence. (For a critique of alleged evidence for Pagan survival, see A Razor for a Goat by Elliot Rose. Regarding a possible medieval witch-cult very different from what Murray hypothesised, see The Night Battles by Carlo Ginzburg. Regarding contemporary hereditary witches, many of whom are Christian, see Bluenose Magic by Helen Creighton. For an example of a decidedly non-Pagan grimoire that is very popular among European folk witches today, see The Sixth and Seventh Books of Moses, available in some botanicals.) Some forms of Wicca may have been influenced by Satanists more directly than via Murray, Leland, Crowley, Ehrenreich/English, and possibly Randolph. Two possible examples:

Historically-knowledgeable Wiccans have debated what role, if any, was played in the development of modern Wiccan by a 19th century English farm labourer named George Pickingill who was reputed to be a witch. Aidan Kelly, who does not believe Pickingill contributed anything to Wicca, describes Pickingill as "a garden-variety folk-magic witch and a home-grown Satanist." The assertion that Pickingill did play a major role was originally made by "Lugh" in a newsletter called The Wiccan in 1974. "Lugh", who claimed to be a hereditary witch, described Pickingill as "the world's greatest living authority on Witchcraft, Satanism, and Black Magic" (quoted by Doreen Valiente in Rebirth of Witchcraft).
Starhawk was initiated by Victor Anderson, who once belonged to a coven whose form of witchcraft included a form of "literature-based Satanism" (or at least a religion closely akin to "literature-based Satanism"); or so says Kelly, based on research by Valerie Voigt.

Whether or not Kelly is correct about Victor Anderson, and whether or not Pickingill had anything to do with Wicca, it shouldn't be considered unlikely that some traditions of Wicca originated as forms of Satanism and then gradually grew away from Satanism. To this day, there are occultists who start out as Satanists and eventually become Wiccans or other types of neo-Pagans. It would be very odd if such people's understanding of Wicca was not at all influenced by their previous experience with Satanism. Theistic forms of Satanism have a natural tendency to give birth to new, non-Satanic religions. If you reject Christian theology (as nearly all intelligent Satanists do), but if you nonetheless venerate Satan as a real being or force (not just a symbol as in LaVey Satanism), then the question inevitably arises: Who and what is "Satan"?

Different forms of Satanism have different answers to this question. One of the easier answers is to re-interpret Satan as a pre-Christian deity, usually either Set or Pan. However, once you equate Satan with a specific ancient deity, you have taken the first step away from Satanism. You are no longer venerating Satan per se; you are now venerating a Pagan deity with Satanic overtones. And then, once you develop your Paganised belief system further, the Satanic overtones will eventually seem less and less important. Such has apparently been the case with the Temple of Set, an offshoot of LaVey's Church of Satan. (Setians disagree on whether to call themselves "Satanists".) It seems not at all unlikely that some forms of Wicca, with all its diabolical-witchcraft trappings, would have a similar origin. A group of theistic Satanists who equated Satan with Pan, as some Satanists do, would very likely tend to evolve in a Wicca-like direction.
More about Wicca's diabolical-witchcraft trappings. Wicca's self-image is based on the records of witchhunts, re-interpreting the alleged activities of accused diabolical witches as the worship of a Pagan "Horned God". Wicca thus makes a new use of the same source material that Satanists have been using for centuries.

An interesting question is: Why reconstruct an "Old Religion" this way, rather than just going back to the records of actual old religions? Other forms of neo-Paganism, eg Asatru and neo-Druidism, which do base themselves more on what's known about actual ancient religions, are far less likely than Wicca to be confused with Satanism by outsiders. Why do Wiccans insist on using words like "witch" and "coven" when they could easily use other, more respectable-sounding words?

Despite Wicca's diabolical-witchcraft trappings, or perhaps partly because of those trappings, Wicca has more popular appeal than any other form of neo-Paganism. Certainly Wicca's hot-button terminology has helped Wicca get lots more publicity than it otherwise could. Wiccan spokespeople sometimes bemoan the fact that newspapers interview them only at Halloween, but most small religious sects don't get nearly so much free publicity at any time of the year, not even on Halloween. And, judging by the way some Wiccans keep repeating "We're not Satanists!" far more often than they actually get accused of being Satanists, it seems logical to suspect that at least some of them are using words and images popularly associated with Satanism as a way to attract attention, and/or because they themselves enjoy feeling naughty. (I've actually heard some Wiccans say that if the word "witch" ever became too respectable, it would lose some of its power.) Modern Satanists have long felt that the basis of Wicca's appeal lies in the paradoxical (some would say hypocritical) combination of Wicca's Satanic connotations and the denial of same. Thus, Satanists tend to regard Wicca as a ripoff of Satanism.
I personally don't regard Wicca as a ripoff. In my opinion, Wiccans' use of witchhunt-derived trappings is neither more nor less legitimate than the use of those same trappings by Satanists. And Wicca, as a religion, does have much more substance to it than just its deliberately-adopted superficial resemblances to diabolical witchcraft.

But I'm very irritated by those endless "Wicca has nothing to do with Satanism!" disclaimers. I wouldn't mind if Wiccans merely said that Wicca is not Satanism (at least if they said it without repeating it unnecessarily). It's true that Wicca is not Satanism, but it isn't historically true that Wicca "has nothing to do with" Satanism. Nor is it true that Wicca has nothing in common with Satanism. Some forms of Wicca and neo-Paganism have a lot in common with (some forms of) Satanism.

Oddly enough, of the many Wicca-based forms of neo-Paganism, one of the most "Satanic" (in terms of 19th century literary Satanism) is feminist Goddess religion, despite its frequent omission of even the "Horned God". See, for example, some of Mary Daly's writings. When it comes to inverting and parodying Christian symbolism, Daly's wordplay does it better than an old-fashioned Black Mass. Daly also reclaims and venerates almost every demonised female category conceivable, from Furies to Hags. And let's not forget the many feminists who venerate Lilith, a Jewish folkloric near-equivalent of the Christian Satan. Lilith never made it to the status of a full-fledged anti-god, but otherwise her myth is almost identical to the Christian Satan myth: banished for her pride, she became a dreaded demon and was even blamed for people's sins, especially sexual ones. To be fair, I should mention that not all feminist Goddess-worshippers are into either Mary Daly's writings or the veneration of Lilith. But the feminist counterculture, because it is a counterculture, tends generally to include an extra dose of demon-reclamation beyond what is found in classical Wicca, eg magazine titles like "Sinister Wisdom". All these parallels to Satanism reflect the quintessentially Satanic central theme of some forms of feminist Goddess religion: self-liberation from a socially-imposed mainstream "spiritual" order - even though Goddess religion is in other ways quite "un-Satanic" by the standards of most modern Satanists.
One of the earliest feminist writers on religion had a much friendlier attitude toward Satanism than is common today. As far as I know, the very first feminist writer on witchcraft and Goddess religion was 19th century womens's suffrage leader Matilda Joslyn Gage. Her book Woman, Church, and State contains an enthusiastic depiction of a medieval peasant Black Mass, based on Michelet's account.

I hope today's Wiccans and feminist Goddess-worshippers will stop fearing to recognise that, just as Christianity borrowed heavily from Greek mystery religion yet is a very different religion from the Greek mysteries, so too Wicca and feminist Goddess religion have drawn lots of inspiration from Satanism, though they are very different religions. Kelly's honesty is refreshing. If today's Satanists are sometimes nasty to Wiccans, well, how would you react to a bunch of people who went out of their way to deny their own roots, just so they could disown you?

What's especially annoying is the way many Wiccans claim the word "Witchcraft" as a name for their own religion, defining not only "Wicca" but also "Witchcraft" as a religion distinct from Satanism. Excuse me, but witchcraft is not a religion. There are witches all over the world, in many different cultures. They don't all belong to one religion. A witch can be any religion. One of my great-grandfathers was a "water witch" who told people where to dig wells. He was a devout Christian. If a Christian can be a witch, then so can a Satanist. There have been both Christians and Satanists calling themselves witches long before today's Wiccans came along. (See Randolph's and Creighton's books, for example.) So I really wish Wiccans would stop using the word "witchcraft" as a name for their own specific religion. I don't object to Wiccans calling themselves witches, but I do object to the idea that all true witches are Wiccan (or at least Pagan) and that, therefore, Satanists can't be witches.

Wiccans are welcome to call their specific religion "Wicca", an archaic word that they themselves resurrected. Another good name for their specific religion is "neo-Pagan Witchcraft", a phrase suggesting that their religion is a subcategory of witchcraft, not witchcraft as a whole. Thus, it's accurate to say, "neo-Pagan Witchcraft is not Satanism", whereas it's misleading to say, "witchcraft (in general) is not Satanism".
It would also be nice if Wiccans would stop making inaccurate pronouncements on what Satanism is, such as, "Satanism is a form of Christianity" or "To be a Satanist, you must believe in the Christian God".
Click here to see an updated version of this article (http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/dvera/pagan/intro.html#HistoryWicca)

[TigersEyeAm]

Wow, our talk in the casual corner really got you thinking didn't it? As much research as you've done on Paganism and Satanism, what was the religious background of the authors of these books? Did they have a Christian/Catholic background? The only reason why I ask is because I do believe that Satanic worshipers have branched off of Christianity and I don't believe that Sananists and Pagans are similar in there beliefs at all. That's just my opinion, whether I am right or wrong doesn't bother me because I believe what I believe. I found a few things in my book written by Edain McCoy called "Sabbats - A Witches Approach to Living the Old Ways" about Satan... "The Black Mass - Negative and destructive rites that have nothing to do with Paganism. These rites are performed by those who claim to follow the Christian anti-god called Satan, and they are nothing more than a perversion and mockery of Catholic religious practices." and "Satanist - Those who purport to worship the Christian anti-god, Satan, or the Devil. Witches do not believe in the existence of this entity and therefore cannot worship him." I also found in my Wiccan Rede book written by Mark Ventimiglia, "Contrary to what biblical scholars profess, the human race has existed on the planet Earth for at least four million years. Through archaeological research and findings, scientists have amassed documetned proof that for the majority of our existence, humanity has practiced religion. Paleolithic-age cave drawings of primitive humans executing both religious as well as magickal rites have been found by archeologists.... All primitive and aborigional religious practices and beliefs are shamanistic in origin... Early in the Christian Church's struggle for supremacy, there developed a practice of weeding out, at any cost, the competition to the new religion. Since pagan dieties like Pan and Cernunnos were horned, and since paganism was in direct competition with the new and struggling church, these old gods became the target of their attacks. The church created an all-evil deity in the image of the old Gods with hope of turning people from paganism to Christianity." This is what I believe... take it as you will... I do not follow Christian concepts because I do believe that they turned our gods into something evil to force people to convert to the church... Just my opinion, you don't have to agree... A good resource that I found is the "Witches' League for Public Awareness P.O. Box 8736 Salem, MA 01970" and would recommend people to contact them about topics such as this. :witch_prv:

[DarkFairy]

I agree with TigersEyeAm on the fact that Satanism is stemmed from christianity. Mainly because witchcraft/paganism is much older than christianity. When the christian church first began they stole many symbols, idols, etc. They turned the Horned One into Satan. THey stole the cross from the pagans they sought to destroy. The temples the pagans in the old days used were either destroyed or converted into churches. But I thought all witches knew of this knowkedge... The sources that say anything different obviously have an agenda to follow, naming Chritstianity as the first and true religion.

[Silverm00n]

I completely appreciate what you are saying. I know there are many wiccans/pagans that do not acknowlegde satan. And I definately respect your beliefs, I'm not trying to alter that. But this is a discussion forum, and that's what I'm trying to engage in... a discussion. Maybe I don't follow beliefs that christians have, but I would certainly like to have knowledge of where my ancestors come from, and explore where the path that I am following has been.

I do think that the author has some holes in her research. As for her religious background I think she is a satanist. By the cocky tone in her writing, I think she is doing the very same thing that she claims she hears wiccans do.

"Much of Wicca's self-image is based on the Paganised re-interpretation of alleged Devil-worship, rather than on actual ancient religion." I think her writing sounds more like an attack against wiccans than providing info.

I too think that the church did tear witches down and depict them as evil beings to convert people. That and murder. It's history, right? But technically then the three are connected, just depicted differently in each case. A rose by any other name...

I think satanists argue that their origins are not from christianity but vice versa. Still looking into the subject.

*goes off the create subcategories in the forum...* :roillingcat:

[Silverm00n]

I agree with TigersEyeAm on the fact that Satanism is stemmed from christianity. Mainly because witchcraft/paganism is much older than christianity. When the christian church first began they stole many symbols, idols, etc. They turned the Horned One into Satan. THey stole the cross from the pagans they sought to destroy. The temples the pagans in the old days used were either destroyed or converted into churches. But I thought all witches knew of this knowkedge... The sources that say anything different obviously have an agenda to follow, naming Chritstianity as the first and true religion.

Maybe you two are not reading my posts correctly. The article, and myself is discussing wicca and satanism, not paganism. But since you both mention that paganism and satanism have nothing in common, here's something I found on religioustolerance.org that states otherwise.

"The beliefs, practices and rituals of the Church of Satan have few, if any, points of similarity with the Christian or Muslim concept of Satan. The CoS' Satan is pre-Christian, and derived from the Pagan image of power, virility, sexuality and sensuality. Satan is viewed as a force of nature, not a living quasi-deity. Their Satan has nothing to do with Hell (http://www.religioustolerance.org/heav_hel.htm), demons, pitchforks, sadistic torture, demonic possession, and profound evil."

People first started talking about Satan around the third century B.C., starting in Jewish scriptures. And their worship does not lie with satan, but more of a worship of self.

Some of their beliefs and practices are:

They do not worship a living deity.Major emphasis is placed on the power and authority of the individual Satanist, rather than on a god or goddess.
They believe that "no redeemer liveth" - that each person is their own redeemer, fully responsible for the direction of their own life.

"Satanism respects and exalts life. Children and animals are the purest expressions of that life force, and as such are held sacred and precious..."

And here's some quotes from an atricle interviewing a high priest of the church of satan:

Satanists, Allee says, do not really worship the devil or practice evil. They believe in the balance of forces; the Satanism he describes is more akin to Eastern religions such as Buddhism and Taoism than it is to Christianity in reverse. At times, Allee seems more like a philosopher than a religious leader."

"We believe that good and evil are two forces that define one another and complement one another and complete one another," Allee said. "Good and evil do not exist, but the perception of good and evil does exist."

The line is paraphrased from Nietszche, the turn-of-the-century German philosopher famous for declaring that "God is dead," and the man Allee credits with being the first modern Satanist.

Freedom and magic

Allee said Satanists disagree on whether Satan is a physical being, but they agree that both good and evil exist within everyone. Satanism, he said, is a religion of personal sovereignty, and its tenets sound much like libertarianism: People should be free to do whatever they want, so long as it does not harm others.

"Every man and every woman is the god of his or her own life," he said. "No matter how right I may be in believing the way I do, you have an equal right to believe in what you believe in."

And there are branches of satanism, that don't believe in satan but rather lucifer (luciferianism). The scoop on him is:

"Other early Gnostic sects did revere the figure of Satan specifically, but he wasn't the big red guy with the horns and the tail. Rather, Satan was represented in the context of the name Lucifer, which means "light-bringer." In these cosmologies, Lucifer was the enemy of the blind god, who created the world. By giving the apple to Eve in the Garden of Eden, Lucifer brought knowledge of good and evil (gnosis) to mankind."

And Luciferianism:

is the product of religious engineering, which sociologist William Sims Bainbridge defines as “the conscious, systematic, skilled creation of a new religion” ("New Religions, Science, and Secularization," no pagination). In actuality, this is a tradition that even precedes Bainbridge. It has been the practice of Freemasonry for years. It was also the practice of Masonry’s religious and philosophical progenitors, the ancient pagan Mystery cults. The inner doctrines of the Mesopotamian secret societies provided the theological foundations for the Christian and Judaic heresies, Kabbalism and Gnosticism.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Collins/phillip10.htm


Wicca, said to be founded in the 1950's, and then made popular through a womens movement in the 1960's, clearly is derived from roots of paganism. And some of it's contributors were satanists and masons i.e Gardner and Crowley. Paganism, witchcraft, and witch are such diverse terms that mean lots of things. You can't just lump them into one group.


I have to wonder whether your research on satanism is just derived from one book source, or if either of you have really looked into it before making such bold statements and adopting them as your own. Like I said, I respect all opinions and beliefs. I'd never try to change anyones beliefs or disrespect them. There are many people who are misinformed about wicca and paganism, and I think it's common for others to be misinformed about other religions as well.

And Darkfairy, what do mean that they stole our cross? Are you referring to the ankh, celtic cross, or something else?

[Sukki]

Here's some more indepth info I found on the subject. It's long but really interesting.

THE SINISTER PATH:

An Introduction to Traditional Satanism
Copyright 1994 Anton Long

Essentially, the difference between Traditional Satanic groups and other
organizations which profess to belong to the 'Left Hand' or 'Sinister' Path, or
which claim to be Satanic, is that Traditional groups seek to realistically
guide their members along the difficult and dangerous path of self-development, the goal of which is the creation of an entirely new individual. This path is fundamentally a quest for self-excellence and wisdom.

We believe that there is no easy way to real knowledge and insight of the
'Occult' kind - that each individual must walk this path and achieve things for
themselves. There are no 'ceremonies', no magickal 'rites', not even any
teachings which can provide the individual with genuine wisdom: real wisdom is only and always attained by the personal effort of the individual over many
years. It is the result of a synthesis - a development of the dark side and an
integration of that aspect of our being thus creating a complete, more evolved individual. Furthermore, the means to this attainment are essentially
practical; that is, they involve the individual undergoing certain formative,
character-developing experiences 'in the real world' rather than in some
pseudo-mystical, pseudo-intellectual 'magickal rite' or sitting at the feet of
some pretentious 'master'.

For us, Satanism is a quest involving real personal danger where the individual
Initiate undertakes genuine challenges which take them to and beyond their
limits: physical, 'mental' and psychic. This quest, in its beginnings, involves
the individual in exploring their 'hidden' or 'dark' side - and a part of this
is participation in overtly Occult and magickal ceremonies and rites. This
beginning - where the new Initiate participates in and later conducts Satanic
rituals such as the 'Black Mass' - enables the individual to explore this dark
side, to gradually understand it, make it more conscious, and thus control it.
An aspect of this making- conscious, is symbolism - such as the 'septenary
system' - where various Occult/magickal energies are symbolised in certain ways via a system of correspondences. This symbolism enables the energies dealt with to be objectified and thus consciously understood - this in itself makes possible an integration of the 'dark' side. Thus, there is a synthesis - a
dynamic, conscious, moving-forward by the individual: an evolution of
personality. Insight is gained. In psychological terms, there is the start of
"individuation". This leads to a practical experiencing of the sinister, and
thus further personal development, further building of character.

Because of the type of practical experiences, the type of challenges, the
individual undertakes, the character so formed is - viewed conventionally -
Satanic. There is a defiance of restrictions, a proudness, an experience and
then understanding of those things that the religion of the Nazarene frowns
upon. In Nietzschean terms, there is a practical living of a "master-morality".
The person created via these experiences is the type to inspire a certain
terror/awe in the supine majority, weaned as that majority have been by the
softness of the Nazarene ethic.

However, this individual has only begun the process. That is, the type of
character so described (which results from these early experiences) is not even what we would call an Adept: of the seven stages of this sinister way
(or practical alchemy), this practical involvement in the 'Occult' via ceremonies and such things as organizing and running a Satanic group, describe just the first two stages of the way. Furthermore, even this beginning takes some years- and this beginning requires the individual to succeed by their own efforts, by their own will and determination. That is, there are no 'magickal grades' or titles awarded for money or sycophancy [as in all other so-called 'Satanic' groups] - what the individual achieves, in terms of 'magickal grades', they achieve through their own toil, through undergoing the experiences which create the type of character appropriate to a particular stage of the way being followed.

Thus, each stage of this way has associated with it certain tasks, certain
experiences, which the individual must undertake by themselves in their own
time. It is these and these alone which bring self-insight, mastery,
understanding and skill - both 'occult' and personal. All a traditional group
does, at each stage and for each member, is offer advice - based on experience. That is, the group guides its members - it offers a practical system whereby real wisdom may be attained. The onus is on the individual to achieve the goal.

For us, Satanism is all about the creation of proud, strong, characterful,
insightful individuals - individuals who have gone beyond the majority and who
thus represent a higher type. Genuine Satanic groups do not seek subservient, decadent, weak-willed followers. They seek to create a real elite - almost a new race of beings. Of course, this is not easy - it is really dangerous. Quite often, new Initiates fail because of the difficulty or because they lack the essential desire to succeed. But that is how evolution works - the strong overcome challenges and evolve; the others stay where they are, descend, or are destroyed. Thus, Satanism is elitist - it does not compromise. It is not really for the majority. The tests, the ordeals, the methods of genuine Satanism are tough and severe because only such things will create the right type of person. These things cannot be made easier, less tough, less dangerous: to do so would destroy the essence of Satanism itself.

After the early stages of the way - which involve direct experience of the
sinister both via rituals, magickal groups and undertaking certain sinister
tasks - the individual moves on [if I said one such early task involved
culling, or Satanic sacrifice, it is possible to appreciate the difficulty and
danger]. That is, the Satanic novice gains more understanding of themselves,
and the world, by more experiences - they move toward a real individuation, a
synthesis of conscious/unconscious, light and sinister. Part of this involves
them undertaking a specific task for some months, and it is this task - based
on the foundations the previous, early, stages of the way have built - that
creates a genuine Adept. This task requires the candidate for Adeptship to live alone, in an isolated area, for three months (usually from Spring Equinox to Summer Solstice) - to talk with no one, to live frugally, with no modern
conveniences, no wireless, no modern 'distractions', in a shelter they have
built [in recent years, the rules have been relaxed and a tent is allowed]. The
aim of this is for them to experience themselves and Nature without any
distractions - to really get to know themselves and the natural energies which
exist, as those energies are (and not as books, or 'teachers' or theories
describe those energies). This, of course, is very difficult. It requires real
determination; it requires the individual to face themselves, and all their
fears. It is a severe test of character - and of their Satanic resolve. Most
individuals who get this far (and that is not very many, over the past few
decades) give up after a while - they find excuses to return to the world and
its comforts. The classic excuse is the delusion that they have actually
'attained' Adeptship in a few days or perhaps weeks of isolation. And it is a
delusion - for it is only by living in such a harsh, isolated way for at least
three months that a real Adept is created. Naturally, other so-called Satanic
or Left Hand Path groups award a spurious 'Adeptship' to their
members/followers: or those members/followers award it to themselves, usually after some boring, pompous, totally meaningless ceremony.

The Adept marks the end of the third stage of our seven-fold sinister way - and to reach this stage usually takes three to six years, from Initiation. The task or Grade Ritual which creates the Adept also makes the Adept aware of their unique, personal Destiny - and the fourth stage is all about the Adept seeking to make that Destiny real. This involves a 'return to the world' - the gaining of more experience, the creation of new insights, new skills. This in itself takes some years. The character of the Adept grows and deepens - they achieve the beginning of wisdom. In magickal terms, they gain an understanding of 'Aeonics' - of things like sinister strategy (the use of acausal or supra-personal energies to change societies/civilizations over centuries). Hitherto, most of their experience/learning has been directly personal, relating to their personal development - now, aeonic perspective is gained, it becomes a part of them. That is, they develope still further, again via direct experience - this time, of the acausal itself.

From this, further personal development takes place - they become complete,
highly developed individuals who possess skills and an understanding few
possess. They fulfil the potential of genius which is latent within them. Thus,
they move on to become genuine Masters or Lady Masters/Mistresses. But to reach this stage - the fifth - takes at least ten years (more usual is fifteen to
twenty). And there is another stage beyond this.

Thus, it will be seen that our way is difficult and takes a long time. The
journey of the initiate toward Adeptship and beyond has no mystery about it -
it is actually very simple. Most people could do it - if they possessed the
determination. But the majority are just too lazy or too weak. The same applies to most who apply to join Satanic groups or are interested in Satanism - they go for the easy option; they are not prepared to work at their own self-development. They prefer someone to do it for them. And, furthermore, they are not fundamentally prepared to go to and beyond their limits - to really experience the sinister in a practical way; they want to simply play safe, pseudo-Satanic games. Thus, they gravitate toward what we call the sham-Satanic groups, the poseurs - those who like the glamour associated with Satanism but are basically afraid to experience its realness within and external to them. Thus such groups issue - and believe in! - ethical guidelines as they constantly affirm that Satanism does not condone such things as 'human sacrifice'. We, on the contrary, are dark and really sinister - and propound culling. That is, we uphold human culling as beneficial, for both the individual who does the culling (it being a character-building experience) and for our species in general, since culling by its nature removes the worthless and thus improves the stock. Naturally, there are proper ways to choose who is to be culled - each victim is chosen because they have shown themselves to be suitable. They are never chosen at random, as they are never 'innocent'.

Our affirmation of such things as human culling offends other so-called Satanic groups - which to us just re-affirms our assessment of those groups as pretend Satanic groups. Basically, such groups have little or no real understanding of Satanism, as evident, for instance, in the ethical, meek, Occidental, 'religious' approach of some groups who claim that Satanism is some sort of organized religion. To us, the Occidental religious attitude and mentality -involving as it does dogma, sycophancy, and subservience by the individual to some self-appointed authority - is the antithesis of Satanism.

In essence, we understand Satanism as the individual quest for self-excellence- to create an entirely new type. This quest involves practical experience -for only real experience creates character. The essence that Satanism leads the individual toward is only ever revealed by practical experience - never by books, never by someone else's 'teachings', never by words. Words themselves can never really describe this essence - they can only point the way, hint at it, and usually serve only to obscure it. In the same way, ceremonies and forms such as rituals are only means - they are a means to experience, to symbolize things and thus apprehend what hitherto has been 'hidden' or unconscious or instinctive. Furthermore, this quest is and must be individual - it means the individual develops, via experiences (and sometimes by learning from mistakes) the strength of character needed. Or they fail - usually by deluding themselves about their real level of attainment, their real level of self-insight, their level of self-control and mastery. The aim is self-control, self-mastery, self-understanding - and then a moving-on to what is beyond even this new 'self'. The aim in not a wallowing in decadence, as it is not the encouragement of instinctive, sinister desires/pleasures as an end in themselves. Such things are means, a beginning - to be used, learned from, and then transcended via mastery of one's self.

For us, Satanism is an individual quest because it aims to produce unique,
strong, individuals who do not need the support of groups, of dogma, ethics, a religion, of some pontificating poseur of a 'master'. Thus, Traditional groups
exist to offer advice and guidance - to point the way. The individual must
begin the quest, and they and they alone must continue with it.

Because of the difficulty of our way, few follow it. In some ways, this is
unfortunate - for we believe the way offers anyone the opportunity to advance along the path to genuine Adeptship and beyond. It makes real, or can make real, the potential that most individuals possess - the latent genius within. However, given human nature the small numbers are understandable.

What traditional groups have done - over the past thirty years or so - is to
create a simple practical system which works: which can produce genuine Adepts and Masters/Lady Masters. In effect, we have distilled the essence from thousands of years of conscious understanding, producing an elixir, an
'internal alchemy', which anyone can use.

We describe this system as Satanic, as Sinister because it is. It is a complete
rejection of the philosophy/religion of the Nazarene. The philosophy/religion
of the Nazarene is anti-life and anti-evolutionary, as Nietzsche, for example,
understood. For us, Satan is both an archetype or symbol of our defiance, and some-thing real - the re-presentation of what we describe as 'the acausal'. That is, we understand the 'darker forces' as not simply a part of our psyche (as most modern so-called Satanic groups do) - but as beyond our own, individual psyche. These darker forces - or the acausal - are beyond us, as individuals: they are beyond our conscious control (and even real understanding) until we become a part of them. This does not mean a submission to those forces - but rather an expanding of individual consciousness, a development of individual conscious, to include those forces. This expansion is what marks the genuine Satanic Master/Lady Master.

Other 'Satanic' groups - if they are serious and not just using the Black Arts
for their own weak gratification - claim the darker forces are merely an aspect
of the psyche, the unconscious or whatever. They do this for two reasons.
First, they need to - because they want to feel safe; they want to be able to
play their pseudo-Satanic, pseudo-intellectual, games in a mostly urbanized
safety, because the members of such groups are not proud, characterful,
self-aware individuals: they need the comfort of a group, of a 'leader', of
ethical guidelines, of feeling that Satan can be controlled by some meaningless mumbo-jumbo. In effect, the members and leaders of these groups are weak - they lack self-discipline; they lack even the desire for real self-mastery, content as they are to continue with edifying their own weaknesses, with massaging their inflated egos.

Second, such groups and their members do not really understand the Sinister.
They have had no real experience of the primal, numinous, supra-personal power of the dark forces - of how that power can destroy individuals. In effect, they have never really 'tapped into' the acausal itself - to what is really sinister. They have never really confronted Satan. They have never really striven to be like Satan - to become one with Him; to merge with the acausal itself; to become a 'nexion' for the acausal, for sinister energies. This
becoming-one is what makes, what creates a genuine Satanic Master/Lady Master, as living alone like a hermit creates the Adept. It is dangerous, naturally -but the only means whereby that synthesis which is beyond the synthesis that is individuation can be achieved. There is thus a real, a genuine, transcending beyond 'good' and 'evil'; beyond 'light' and 'dark'. This achievement, as with all real achievements of an Occult kind, derives from practical experience -from a real personal knowledge. Anything else is mere affectation, mere pose.

Other groups have tried to 'intellectualize' Satanism - to take away the real
experiences by which genuine Satanic character is formed. Or they wallow in the weaknesses of those addicted to impulses they cannot understand and do not have the strength to control. They have tried and continue to try and make Satanism respectable and safe - just another 'religion'. They fantasize, and play games. They simply do not understand Satanism as a means to create new, more highly evolved, individuals. In reality, the genuine Satanist creates by participating in real life, the dreams, the standards of excellence, the plan which others often aspire to emulate. A genuine Satanist can be like a beast of prey - in real life. They can be and sometimes are, in real life, assassins, warriors, outlaws. The imitation Satanists pretend to be such things - usually by means of some stupid 'ritual'. The Satanist is sinister and dark, in real life - and then they move on, to new experiences, to even higher levels of understanding until eventually they acquire real wisdom, or are destroyed. Whatever, they will have really lived, 'on the edge'; they will really have achieved something with their lives. They will have inspired others. They will in some way by their living have 'presenced' the dark forces on earth. If they survive - their rewards are their achievements and the wisdom that awaits. If they do not survive, at least they will have done something with their lives.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Printed and Published by:
Renaissance Press
PO Box 1627
Paraparaumu Beach
Wellington
New Zealand

EOF

http://altreligion.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.satanservice.org/theory/onastnsm.txt

[Sukki]

hmmm I don't know why that posted all funny... sorry! :o

[kitsune_shonen]

Thanks for posting this! It's good to see someone with a grasp on it!

[Silverm00n]

It's amazing the backlash that Satanists get. Definately don't want any religious intolerance on here, so I want to cover many religions. Satanism just happened to be the first since it was stated that it derived from Xtianity, which is not true.

[kitsune_shonen]

We'll you did a fine job of doing it. I'd love to help, if I find out about a religion.