If you enter "Satanism" in any internet search engine you are likely to find what seems like hundreds of Satanic organizations. Page after page of results implies a veritable plethora of Satanic people and groups, able to cater to any particular slant or interest in the occult . Anyone unfamiliar with the occuilt subculture would no doubt get a tad nervous thinking so many of these dark and gloomy groups of Satanists exist. The fact remains, however, while there IS no shortage of gloomy, occultnik, magickal, devil worshiping malcontents, there is only one group that has a legitimate right to call themselves Satanists: The Church of Satan.
Founded in 1966 by Anton Szandor LaVey the Church of Satan was the first group in the history of the world to describe themselves as Satanists. This is incredibly important. Prior to 1966 the only time the word Satanist/ism was used was by Christians or other religious bigots as a derogatory. Even those who embraced what we would consider modern Satanic ideals did not use the word "Satanist" to define themselves. So, to reiterate, we, The Church of Satan, were the first to take that name and embrace it and even more importantly, to strictly define it.
Among those hundreds of others who want to be seen as Satanists, very few have what would be considered a cohesive philosophy. Some of them worship a literal devil. Some worship an amalgam of Christian created demons and demi-gods combined with ancient Pagan deities. Some have elaborate rituals and ceremonies, extensive (albeit laughable) hierarchies, and swell web pages announcing that they are the REAL Satanism. What most of them lack is what makes the Church of Satan the legitimate religious organization it is.
The Satanic Bible, published in 1969, is the first book of that title to be published by a mainstream publisher, offered in entire world, and in consistent print since it's first edition. It lays out the foundation for the religion of Satanism. Any human who can read can pick it up, read it, and have a working knowledge of the basic rules of Satanism.
This codification of a religion, the providing of a structured dogma, had never (again in the entire history of the world) been applied to Satanism before. Once that book was published, regardless of the slow and negligent responses of dictionary and encyclopedia editors, Satanism had a new and decisive definition.
Religion is defined by ritual, dogma, and fellowship. The Church of Satan provided those to the world regarding Satanism. The Satanic Rituals were published. The book The Church of Satan (by Magistra Blanche Barton) further established dogma, and LaVey himself created a structured degree system to establish a clerical hierarchy. These three factors allowed the Church of Satan to grow in both membership and in canon. Today there are three authors responsible for the written dogma of Satanism: Anton LaVey, Blanche Barton, and Peter Gilmore. Additionally many of the hierarchy have written books that demonstrate the practice of this religious dogma, including Matt Paradise, James Sass (aka Svengali,) Nemo, and others. The religion of Satanism has the dogmatic structure of any other religion while simultaneously finding new ways to explore and practice the living philosophy.
The problem arose, however, when the mentally challenged or psychologically impaired took a liking to the Satanic aesthetic, but refused to follow the Satanic rules. Anton LaVey was no fan of sociopathy. His religious tenets Found Here Under Theory & Practice were specific and demanding. Regardless of Hollywood's prurient ideals, and the dirty minds of the repressed Christian clergy, Satanism is not simply mindless hedonism. Religious prohibitions include any sort of living sacrifice, the harming of children, sexual abuse, drug use, and any illegal activity.
Yet many people wanted to be "Satanists" but refused to accept the rules. Unlike Christianity, Satanism doesn't adhere to the concept of forgiveness, and those found to be violating these religious rules soon found themselves removed from the membership of the Church of Satan. Undaunted, and seemingly without imagination, instead of creating something new, these people tried to redefine Satanism. Moreover, they decided to return to their Christian roots and call basic devil worship "Satanism" and insist that their "brand" of Satanism was the real/true/actual one.
Keeping in mind that not a single one of these so-called religions can come close to the body of work that forms the canon of The Church of Satan, their arguments are predictable. Claiming that because they actually worship a literal deity named Satan and therefore have a greater right to the title "Satanist" might hold weight had there been a group of genuine Satan worshipers who called themselves that before--but there wasn't. No matter how hard they try these groups cannot link their chosen name and a historical group that used it. That being the case the only reasonable assumption about why they choose the name Satanist is to confuse the populace and imply they are the real Church of Satan. In short, they want to steal the history, prestige, and name from the only legitimate Satanic organization in the world, the Church of Satan, while breaking every Satanic law and embarrassing the established members.
They call themselves "theistic satanists," or "spiritual satanists," or "traditional satanists." They call members of the Church of Satan "LaVeyan Satanists." The Church of Satan calls them what they truly are, Christian heretics. While The Satanic Bible acknowledges Satan as a metaphor, and Satanists are atheistic, these devil worshipers are every stereotype the mainstream believes about Satanism and the 40 years of work done by members of the Church of Satan to dispel misconceptions is laid to ruin by these miscreants. They pray to Satan. They identify his alleged power from Christian scripture. They are locked in a philosophical loop, bearing a hatred for the thing they are dependent upon, Christianity, and yet utilizing it's definitions and mythologies to support their belief structure. Additionally they are angry and full of vitriol at the true Satanists of the Church of Satan.
After the Satanic Panic ended but prior to the pervasiveness of the internet there was a brief but rational time when it was relatively easy for Satanists to deal with misconceptions about the religion of Satanism. If a crime, perhaps a animal mutilation, was being blamed on Satanism one of the Church of Satan's spokespeople could easily show the accusers the passages in The Satanic Bible or other dogmatic writings to substantiate that such an act was un-Satanic. If there was a custody debate, or occult vandalism, the codified dogma of Satanism was easily produced to demonstrate the Satanic position. These would-be Satanists, these devil worshipers, have destroyed that ability, and have allowed all who are called Satanist to be of questionable ethics.
By there being just one Satanic church, with one set dogma, with one hierarchy, Satanism is in a position to police itself. The Church of Satan has always supported and endorsed law enforcement, going so far as to assist the authorities even in cases against members who have violated the laws of both man and Satanism. Being one's own God requires a higher, not diminished, requirement of responsibility. The heretics who steal the name Satanist are merely inverse Christians, relinquishing personal responsibility to a deity named Satan, who not only exists, but must possess the same powers as the mythological God that they so despise.
The Church of Satan would have no problem if these people called themselves Demonologists. Dark Pagans. Devil Worshipers. Followers of Lucifer. The Moose Club. Even, in a pinch, Satan Worshipers, as Satanists believe in study, not worship, and find the very idea of worship distasteful.. Any name other than Satanist would do.
Satanists support the freedom of religion and minding one's own business is practically a Satanic hallmark, so regardless of the revulsion Satanists feel for the beliefs of these heretics, it isn't their religion per se, that is the problem. After all, Satanists are repulsed by 99% of the religions out there or they wouldn't be Satanists. It is the disregard for the history, the accomplishments, and the revolutionary theology of true Satanism that illicits such disdain. Satanists know that no one would be safe using the name Satanist today if a man named Anton LaVey didn't create a religious revolution 40+ years ago. Satanists know that in the blink of an eye a new Satanic panic could begin, and all the dedication and work of the Satanists on the front lines will be for nothing when that search engine brings up names like the anti-semetic Joy of Satan, or the copycat First Church of Satan, or one of the many new groups that advocate blood letting, or graveyard hazings, or allow drug use.
By maintaining that there is only one Satanism, as created by Anton LaVey, as stated in The Satanic Bible, as practiced by those who adhere to The Satanic Bible and/or are members of The Church of Satan, we pay respect to history, we provide society with an understandable philosophy and a means to receive information through an educated Satanic clergy, and we provide members with a solid religion replete with the rituals, the dogma, and the fellowship the human animal is proven to require.
Eric
Invite as author
re: There Is Only One Form of Satanism
Logically, Theistic Satanism is the real Satanism, because they actually ARE worshiping the Abrahamic god, Satan. Of all the deities in the Abrahamic pantheon, Satan is the most reviled and hated of all the gods of the Abrahamic faiths. You get absolutely no possible benefit in American society for identifying yourself as being one. Most Christians at least pay lip service to the right of Muslims to worship Allah as do the Jews. Muslims recognize Jesus as one of the prophets preceding Mohammad. They also recognize Moses as an earlier prophet . Christians and Jews understand that Allah is the Arabic name for God. They all see Satan as the god of evil.
There's only two reasons to call yourself a Satanist. The logical reason to call yourself a Satanist is when you, in fact, worship that deity, that you believe he exists and by worshiping him you can gain something. The illogical one, is when you're calling yourself a Satanist to tweak the other Abrahamics, the Christians, in particular. Now tweaking Christians is fun, but there are so many ways to do so. You can do so in many different ways without representing yourself as something you're not. Especially when it's detrimental. If you're an Kratocratic Atheist who believes in embracing the darker side of human nature, then represent yourself as such. Only a moron wraps themselves in the mantle of Satanism, when it's both inaccurate and detrimental to do so.
LaVeyian non-theistic 'Satanism' is really stupid concept and practice. Call yourself a Satanist, yet you don't actually worship that particular god. Open yourself up to all the hostility that that god engenders for nothing. At least when L. Ron Hubbard, created Scientology, he created a faith that had an unoffensive mythology and was financially lucrative. That's the difference between a intelligent writer and an stupid low-life carny. Claiming to be a LaVeyian Satanist should be considered prima facie that one is mentally challenged.
Tossing academic phrases like "Kratokratic Athiest" and"Abrahamic Gods" about leads one to think that religion is of some interest to Eric.
To Eric, the Church of Satan and myself have long been seen as arrogant. It is yet another Satanic trait a la Milton that we've noticed among our members.
You have now had the opportunity to voice your opinion on something you claim not to care about.
I was given the opportunity and the duty to post about something I do care about. I'll keep my arrogance, you can hold onto feeling superior about things that hold no meaning for you.
As for your post, it serves me well. You have managed to compact into a few short paragraphs the arguments that we have heard every day for over 40 years. It sure would be a time saver if everyone would read your post and then simply type "What Eric said," for their comment.
Obviously I disagree, but don't you wonder---why did it take LaVey to start a religion with an atheistic slant, but calling itself Satanism to get the "real" devil-worshippers, those theistics, traditionals, and the like to sudddenly want to call themselves "Satanists?" History proves they never did before.
As an arrogant twit I think I know why, but I'd love to hear your take on it Eric.
EditSaveCancelDeleteDeleteBlock this userReport abusive commentHide report window
As for arrogance being Satanic trait a la Milton, wouldn't that be a violation of many of LaVey's Nine Satanic Sins and that we've noticed among our members.
I have no doubt that there were theistic Satanists practicing before LaVey set up his carnival sideshow. Given that what was considered witchcraft was illegal in many western nations up till quite recently, there was a really good reason for not being 'out and proud'.
As a student of history, I find it quite interesting that about a decade after the witchcraft laws were repealed in the UK, when Gerald Gardner went public with Wicca and L. Ron Hubbard created Scientology here in America and neither were prosecuted, the far less gifted or educated Anton LaVey concluded that the time was right for creating a money making religion. So he came out with his Satanic sideshow, a carny's version of lurid titilating forbidden pleasure that people would pay for. The psychedelic sixties was the perfect time for it.
EditSaveCancelDeleteDeleteBlock this userReport abusive commentHide report window
magisteroftruth 13
Invite as author
Satanism:A lot older than Anton La Vey
Instead I will allow negative responses a voice because I believe they further, not diminish, my position.
First note that while truth13 says "Various men and women have contributed greatly to Satanism over the years," they are neither identified, nor does she mention whether they fit the criteria of having established a complete and codified dogma, a base of religious ritual, and most importantly---as it is a name we are discussing, whether they themselves, prior to LaVey, identified themselves as Satanist(s?)
Nor do I deny the vast and impressive contributions of people, works, and the history that found it's way into LaVey's creation. I repeat, there is nothing new under the sun, and amalgamations are all that is left religiously.
Right about now someone mentions Ragnar Redbeard's Might Is Right, and accuses LaVey of stealing it.The irony of this is that for the most part nobody had ever heard of Redbeard or his book, let alone dreamed of re-printing it until LaVey brought attention to it!
Finally, where Truth13 loses any credibility is all this higher power nonsense. I have boatloads of friends who have belief in God. Most people do. I try to be respectful by not bringing up the subject. However......
There is nothing as repugnant to me as the irresponsibility that accompanies a belief in a higher power. The minute one accepts a god figure one must accept a lack of control in your destiny. Gods demand homage. Gods demand worship. Gods demand faith. All those things are barbaric, weak, and inherently dangerous.
I have no desire to " truly seek the real Satan." I'd sooner hunt for dragons and the tooth fairy. I already know Satan. Satan lives in my mirror, and we are doing just fine.
EditSaveCancelDeleteDeleteBlock this userReport abusive commentHide report window
EditSaveCancelDeleteDeleteBlock this userReport abusive commentHide report window