In the previous episode of Satansplain, we explored the notion of religious denominations ,and how various groups being labeled as “Satanism” are NOT in fact, different denominations of the same religion. In this episode, we’ll continue that exploration, with a look at alleged Satanic groups formed SINCE the founding of the Church of Satan, especially in the age of the internet. No, it’s still not analogous to Catholics arguing with Protestants.
[intro]
-----------
“Because Anton LaVey made Satanism so popular, everybody has been wanting to jump on the bandwagon.” That is the opening line to an essay called the Satanic Bunco Sheet, available on Church of Satan dot com. I had mentioned it at the start of the previous episode of Satansplain. The reason I’m mentioning it again now, is because as we’ll SEE in this episode of Satansplain, it sums things up very well.
In the previous episode of Satansplain, we talked about Satanism, what makes it a religion, and the phenomenon in general of religious denominations or religious sects. That’s s-e-C-T-s, sects, of course. If you want a Satansplain talk on s-e-x, sex, see Satansplain episode number 69.
But in the previous episode, we also saw that what may appear to the layman as different denominations of Satanism, are NOT in fact that. If you have not listened to episode number 71 yet, I suggest you stop this episode now and listen to that first. And like before, you’ll find some timestamps in this episode’s description if you want to navigate to different parts. I’m going to try to summarize a few key points from that episode, though, and insert a couple of related points I didn’t get to.
[Summarizing some points from episode 71 (C&P is still a bad analogy)]
Before the Church of Satan was founded in 1966, the word “satanism” was essentially just a pejorative used by Christians to describe any number of practices they didn’t like. Many Christians still carelessly use the word that way today, to the point where some even accuse OTHER Christians of being Satanists, despite the fact that there really IS now a religion called Satanism with people who identify as Satanists, and it’s been established for some time now, so it’s not simply a word for anybody you dislike. In fact, when we look at the various people or groups from before 1966 labeled as Satanists or having practiced Satanism, we don’t find much of any consistency among them. We see some mystics, some occultists, some devil worshipers, some blasphemous aristocrats, and a lot of people merely being ACCUSED of being in-line with the Devil because Christians found them eccentric or whatever. What we DON’T find in those prior centuries some actual spelled-out religion they were all being denominations of, let alone one calling itself Satanism. So although non-Satanists may see these various groups with inverted pentagrams and THINK they’re looking at different denominations of the same religion, this is not the case at all.
Furthermore, pointing out this fact is not some act of religious zealotry on our part. It’s not a “No True Scotsman” fallacy. Like all religions, philosophies, or ideologies, Satanism has some very specific defining characteristics and doctrines, and if your own beliefs and practices are fundamentally contrary to those, it’s simply inaccurate to use the same label to describe them. So pointing out that these other groups aren’t practicing Satanism is not akin to a Scotsman declaring that a Scotsman who puts sugar on his porridge is not a TRUE Scotsman. It’s more like the Scottish embassy explaining why wrapping a roll of Scotch tape around a person doesn’t suddenly make him a Scotsman.
The people who whine that I’m a “gatekeeper”, seem to be under this illusion that when I point out “No, Satanism is this and not that”, that I’m somehow opposing their freedom of religion. They will claim they have an inherent RIGHT to have Satanism be anything they want, and if I disagree, then I’m being oppressive, or fascist, or even UNSATANIC because I’m enforcing rules and Satanism is supposedly about having no rules.
No, this is just stupid. It has nothing to do with freedom of religion. It’s about the practical use of consistency in language. I suppose you also have the “freedom” to refer to a skateboard a Lamborghini, but if you place an ad saying you’re selling a Lamborghini, and I see your ad and meet up with you, only to find out it’s a skateboard, well I’m rightfully going to think you’re just being a jackass, or are insane. “Well, Bill, I have freedom of speech.” Well, I’m not buying your skateboard, nor your argument. Freedom of religion doesn’t grant you some special right to fuck around with the language like this on a whim, and expect an already-established religious group to widen the definition of their religion to until it’s almost meaningless, just so they can include you under the same umbrella, just to accommodate your absurdities.
This whole idea of this fierce relativist attitude, this postmodernism idea of every opinion being valid and so on, is something I was ORIGINALLY planning on exploring as its own Satansplain episode. Maybe some other time.
Getting back to the concept of religious denominations: in the previous episode I explained that in order for two different practices to be considered denominations of the same religion, you at least have to have that religion’s core beliefs in common. We know that both Catholics and Protestants and Baptists and so on are types of Christians, meaning denominations of Christianity, because despite their differences, they all still believe in the core and defining religious dogma of Christianity.
But when we look at the various groups labeling themselves or being labeled BY others as Satanism, we don’t see any kind of common dogma like this, therefore there’s really no reason to view them as different denominations of the same religion. They’re too inherently dissimilar as far as religions go.
