Christ's Advocate: An Incarnational Apologetic to Satanism

51 Pages·2004·0.19 MB·English

Christ’s Advocate:

An Incarnational Apologetic

to Satanism

Copyright © John Smulo 2001

Email: [email protected]
Introduction
The primary objective of this thesis is to develop a Christian apologetic that is
appropriate to modern day Satanism. In order to accomplish this, we will divide the thesis
into three main sections. Firstly, we will outline a brief history of Satanism, ending in a
short description of the beliefs of modern Satanism. Secondly, we will include a brief
outline of the main apologetic approaches that have been used by Christians to respond to
Satanism. Due to its formative influence in shaping the Christian understanding of
Satanism, the “testimonial model” of apologetics will be analyzed and critiqued in this
section. Thirdly, in light of the deficiency of existing apologetic models to Satanism, we
will seek to develop what is termed an “incarnational apologetic” model to Satanism.
This apologetic approach has been used by the author to interact with “LaVeyan
Satanists” and other forms of Satanism that have been influenced by Anton LaVey.1
1. A Brief History of Satanism.
Satanism has never been a unified movement. During approximately the last five-
hundred years there have been various forms or expressions of Satanism that have
appeared. Drury and Tillett suggest that there are two main categories of Satanism, which
they have termed “traditional Satanism” and “secular Satanism”.2 Traditional Satanism
often refers to the worship of the Satan of the Christian Bible and the inversion of
Christian practices. As Melton writes,

Traditionally Satanism has been associated with a variety of practices which parody Roman Catholic
Christianity. The major ritual is the black mass, the essence of which is the profaning of the central
acts of worship, and might include the repeating of the Lord’s Prayer backwards, the use of a host
which has been dyed black, the slaughter of an animal (usually a cat or dog) to parody the crucifixion,
or the rape of a woman upon the altar. The climax of the worship is the invocation of Satan for the
working of malevolent magic.3

However, Melton qualifies this description by noting,

This form of Satanism, as a parody of Catholicism, appeared in the fifteenth century as the
construct of the Inquisition in preparation for its move against “witchcraft,” which was redefined
as Satanism.4

1
When seeking to provide even a brief history of Satanism, difficulties
immediately arise. It appears that much of the historical material that we have in this
regard is based on sensational accounts that make truth difficult to discern from fiction.5
Since most of the accounts of traditional Satanism are sensationalized or, as Melton
stated, created for self-serving purposes by the Christian church, it appears that the type
of Satanism that involves worship of the Christian Satan, ritual abuse, and a parody of
especially Roman Catholicism, is much rarer during any time in history than has
commonly been assumed.6 Furthermore, as we will note later, the belief that modern
Satanists are involved in Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) as part of their belief system has
been thoroughly discredited.
Strictly speaking, what Drury and Tillett have referred to as secular Satanism has its
historical origins in Anton LaVey and the founding of the Church of Satan in 1966.
Those involved in LaVeyan Satanism, and most other forms of Satanism today do not
believe in a literal Satan, nor do they worship anyone, other than, perhaps, themselves.7
Unfortunately, as will be shown below, Christian apologists have often failed to make the
distinction between secular and traditional Satanism.
Even though modern Satanism explicitly begins in 1966 with LaVey, it appears that
one can trace examples of Satanist prototypes in several earlier historical persons. Since
we have space for only the briefest treatments of a history of Satanism, we will center our
discussion on three important “forerunners” who are linked together by the phrase Do
What Thou Wilt.8 This phrase, which many secular Satanists utilize, succinctly expresses
their belief system.
1.1. A Brief Background of Historical Satanic Prototypes: Pre-1966AD.
Francois Rabelais (1483-1553) was a Franciscan and subsequently Benedictine
French priest who is best known for his voluminous writings centered on the characters
Gargantua and Pantagruel.9 In this work, Rabelais creates a fictional place called the
Abbey of Theléme, which was “to be an anti-monastery.”10 Rather than vows of
abstinence and poverty, men and women in this monastery could be married, rich, and
live at liberty.11 Rabelais writes,

2
In their rule was only this clause: DO WHAT YOU WILL [FAY CE QUE VOULDRAS], because
people who are free, well born, well bred, moving in honorable social circles, have by nature an
instinct and goad which always impels them to virtuous deeds and holds them back from vice, which
they called honor. These people, when by vile subjection and constraint they are oppressed and
enslaved, turn aside this noble affection by which they freely tended toward virtue, to throw off and
infringe this yoke of servitude: for we always undertake forbidden things and covet that which is
denied us.12

The Thelemites, as Rabelais called them, certainly weren’t Satanists in that they
worshipped a literal or metaphorical Satan. Rather, in their historical context, their one
rule proved to be anti-Christianity and anti-conventional morality. They believed that it
was unnecessary to be governed by the church, and purposefully lived in an opposite
manner to monks.
Sir Francis Dashwood (1708-1781) founded The Order of the Friars of St Francis
of Wycombe. Though there is relatively little known about the Order, it appears that
some of what they did parodied the Christian religion.13 This is shown in part by
Dashwood’s name for his order, inasmuch as it parodies the Saint Francis. Their meeting
place was an Elizabethan manor house at Medmenham by the Thames, which served as
their mock abbey. “Do what thou wilt”, was carved above the doorway of the Order’s
meeting place.14
Aleister Crowley is without doubt the most notorious figure to adopt the phrase
“Do what thou wilt.” Following Rabelais, Crowley founded what this time was a literal
Abbey of Thelema.15 Crowley taught his Thelemites, “Do what thou wilt shall be the
whole of the Law…There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt. Love is the law, love
under will.”16
1.2. A Brief History of Satanism: 1966 until Present.
Though some of the practices and beliefs of the figures we mentioned were adopted
by Satanists, much of them were not. However, they are representative of several of the
ideals that secular Satanists have adopted, especially their anti-Christianity and anti-
morality sentiments.17 Below we will look at what can explicitly be defined as the
modern history of Satanism.

3
1.2.1. Anton LaVey and The Church of Satan.
Anton Szandor LaVey (1930-1997) is undoubtedly the central figure in the
history of Satanism. LaVey founded the Church of Satan on Walpurgisnacht, April 30,
1966. The church was located at LaVey’s home in San Francisco, California, known as
the “Black House”.18 LaVey’s church received rapid notoriety initially due to the
widespread publicity of a Satanic wedding, baptism, and funeral, all conducted by LaVey
in 1967.19 Satanism continued to enjoy growth due to the success of LaVey’s writings,
particularly The Satanic Bible.20 Peter Gilmore serves as the current High Priest of the
Church of Satan.
Other Satanic organizations were spawned from individuals formerly involved in
the Church of Satan. Michael Aquino’s Temple of Set, and Lord Egan’s First Church of
Satan, are the most notable. To them, we now turn.
1.2.2. Michael Aquino and the Temple of Set.
The Temple of Set was started in California in 1975 by former Church of Satan
member and U.S. Army officer, Michael Aquino. Aquino, who was the editor of the
Church of Satan’s newsletter, The Cloven Hoof, became disillusioned along with many
other members largely due to LaVey’s hypocrisy in making all higher degrees of
initiation in the church contingent on contributions of cash, real estate, or valuable art
objects.21 On June 21, 1975, Aquino summoned the Prince of Darkness in a ritual that
resulted in an automatic writing entitled the Book of Coming Forth by Night.22 During
this revelation, Aquino said that the ancient Egyptian deity Set appeared to him and
informed him of his true name. The Temple of Set continues today with Don Webb as its
High Priest. 23
1.2.3. Lord Egan and The First Church of Satan.
Lord Egan (John Dewey Allee) is the High Priest of the First Church of Satan,
which he founded on October 31, 1996. At the age of nineteen, Egan left Christianity and
joined the Church of Satan in 1970. Egan left what he calls the “Satanic scene” for a time
only to return to a new generation of LaVeyan Satanists who had become, in his opinion,
something less than what they were originally. Egan writes, “I founded the First Church
of Satan as an attempt to recapture our early legacy and reintroduce free thought
Satanism.”24
4
1.3. Basic Beliefs of Modern Satanism.
Satanism has grown and evolved both numerically and in diversity since LaVey
founded the Church of Satan. Satanism is not monolithic, however there are certain core
beliefs that are generally held by most Satanists. Below we will explore these beliefs and
identify the main differences.
1.3.1. Satan.
As previously mentioned, secular Satanists do not believe in a literal being called
Satan, but rather view Satan as an archetype representative of the ideals of Satanism.25
When asked why he chose Satan as the name for the entity he believed in, one prominent
Satanist responded,

It’s a very potent, shocking term—LaVey was right about that. But, as I got older I realised Satan was
the perfect term because He embodies ideas of freedom and individuality you don’t find in other
concepts of religion or God. Satan represents liberty in its utmost form. There’s no guilt involved in
being who you are, standing up for what you believe in, even if it is contradictory to social mores.26

From the author’s interaction with secular Satanists, there has been clear evidence of
a contemptuous dismissal of traditional Satanists for being “devil-worshippers”. Don
Webb, High Priest of The Temple of Set states, “We have no "religious" interest in the
figure of Satan, and indeed we do not worship Set—worshipping instead only our own
potential.”27
1.3.2. Satanic Ideals.
The word “Satan” for LaVeyan and most other Satanists is used metaphorically to
represent Satanic ideals such as antinomianism, anti-herd mentality, rational self-interest,
and indulgence. This is shown in LaVey’s Nine Satanic Statements. They are:

1. Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!
2. Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!
5. Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!
6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!
5
7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those
that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has
become the most vicious animal of all!
8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional
gratification!
9. Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these
years!28

Regardless of whether one is a LaVeyan, free thought, Setian, or traditional Satanist,
these ideals are among the core principles of Satanism. In section three several of these
ideals will be analyzed and challenged.
2. Apologetic Models to Satanism.
Upon examination of evangelical literature to new religious movements generally,
certain apologetic styles become apparent. Philip Johnson has observed that evangelicals
have used several apologetic styles to respond to the New Age. They include: heresy-
rationalist apologetics, end-times prophecy, spiritual warfare, personal testimonies, and
cultural apologetics.29 Johnson’s article is helpful in distinguishing the different
approaches that evangelicals have used to interact with not only New Age, but competing
religious movements in general. In regard to Satanism, the personal testimonies and
spiritual warfare models have especially been used.30 The heresy-rationalist model has
been used less often, but by some prominent apologists.31 The end-times prophecy32 and
especially cultural model have been used less often.33 Due to space limitations, we can
only focus on one model. However, it needs to be noted that there are serious difficulties
with each of these models. In general they suffer from a lack of reliance on primary
source material, a naïve reliance on sensationalized testimonies, a misunderstanding of
Satanism, and an apparent unwillingness to interact with Satanists themselves. Because
of its particular influence within evangelical circles, we will explore what is here called
the “testimonial model”.
2.1. Testimonial Model.
Responding to the apostle Peter’s challenge to “Always be prepared to give an answer
to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have” (1 Peter 3:15),
many have presented their testimony of converting from Satanism to Christianity. Some
6
of the better-known proponents of the testimonial model include Rebecca Brown34 and
Lauren Stratford.35 Both of these persons have reached near celebrity status within
evangelical circles. However, none has achieved the popularity or influence that Mike
Warnke has. Warnke has become well known through his best-selling autobiography, The
Satan Seller, as well as through his popular stand up comedy routines.36
Warnke claims to have met Anton LaVey at a San Francisco Satanism conference.
Warnke recalls,

There was one noteworthy moment at this conference, however; my encounter with Anton LaVey. He
was pushing his Church of Satan which was only a “Rosemary’s Baby” at the time. I was not
impressed with LaVey; I detected a certain phoniness about him, but I admired his showmanship and
decided I would show LaVey and his cronies that Mike Warnke could put on quite a show, too, and be
one-up on the evil, even if my style was different from his.37

This encounter implies that Warnke understood Satanism as believed by LaVey, and that
Satanism was a term that described something mutual between the two. However, a
comparison of LaVeyan Satanism, as propounded by LaVey’s writings and the Church of
Satan, shows several important differences. For example, LaVey clearly is not a
traditional Satanist. He does not worship or believe in a literal Satan. Furthermore, LaVey
is clearly against breaking the law, or any type of SRA. LaVey also makes a clear
distinction between modern witchcraft and Satanism. Warnke’s Satanism, as will be
shown below, is the opposite in every one of these respects.
From the outset, this raises serious difficulties with Warnke’s approach. Because
Warnke claims to be giving first hand testimony in The Satan Seller about his
involvement in Satanism, and hence, Satanism itself, the major discrepancies we will
demonstrate put into question the validity of using anything Warnke has said in
apologetic interaction with LaVeyan Satanists at the very least. Further difficulties arise
when we realize that the adherents of most other apologetic models to Satanism have
relied on Warnke to understand Satanism. Of course, Warnke isn’t completely at fault. If
apologists writing on Satanism would have researched their subject responsibly—namely,
sought to understand Satanism from primary rather than secondary source material, and
7
interacted with Satanists themselves—Warnke’s lack of truthfulness might have been
exposed literally decades earlier.38
Because of Warnke’s continued influence, we will devote the bulk of our assessment
of the testimonial model to him. However, before critiquing Warnke and the testimonial
model, we will let Warnke speak for himself.
2.2. Warnke’s Satanism.
Hertenstein and Trott exaggerate little when they assert, “A generation of Christians
learned what they knew of Satanism and the occult from The Satan Seller.”39 Warnke
allegedly led a 1,500 member Satanic group called The Brotherhood. According to
Rebecca Brown and others who claimed to write firsthand accounts of Satanism, they or
those they wrote of were at one time or another involved with the same group. Speaking
of ex-Satanist Elaine’s involvement in The Brotherhood, she writes,

This is the same cult written about in Hal Lindsey’s book, Satan Is Alive And Well On Planet Earth,
and in Mike Warneke’s [sic] book, The Satan Seller. It is also the U.S. counterpart of the group in
England written about in the book Freed From Witchcraft, by Doreen Irvine.40

Because of the widespread influence Warnke’s teaching on Satanism has had, it is
important that we look at exactly what his description of Satanic beliefs and practices
consist of.
For Warnke and others who were a part of the 1,500 member satanic group he
claimed to have led, the experience of becoming a Satanist involved two main actions.
First, one repeated words of commitment to Satan. The result being that one submitted
their “soul to the custody and care of his Highness of Darkness, Satan, Master of the
World.”41 Second, this involved a ritual where another Satanist made an incision into an
artery on the initiate’s right arm to draw blood. The blood was then caught in an eyecup.
Using ones own blood, the initiate was then instructed to dip a quill into his blood and
sign his new name in a book that was large, black, and bound with leather. It contained
other names that were written in blood that had given their soul to Satan.42 As is shown
from the above description, Satanists needed to be completely dedicated to the service of
Satan. Some Satanists had missing fingers because they had sacrificed them to Satan.43
Warnke himself claims to have taken off the finger of one who desired to offer it to
8
Satan. Immediately afterwards Warnke offered the man’s finger back to him in order to
“taste a bit of his own flesh”.44
From Warnke’s experience, the practice of Satanism involves a multitude of
illegal activities, including what has been termed “Satanic Ritual Abuse” (SRA).45 This
may include sacrificing cats and dogs,46 as well as gang rape. Warnke recounts one such
instance when he says,

What I was really thinking—according to the Book, we’re supposed to use an unwilling virgin.
We’re not doing it. Let’s kidnap a broad and go through the fertility scene the right way. You
know—lay her on the altar and take turns.47

Crimes are also committed as Satanists involve themselves in active recruiting for
Satanism. Satanists are to use any means possible to attract others to Satanism, including
using sex and drugs.48 In whatever manner necessary, “The idea was to get Satan’s
message across in a way that would appeal to young sophisticated malcontents.”49
Warnke would later claim that crime and occult involvement are closely connected. After
renouncing Satanism for Christianity, one reporter asked Warnke, “What would you say
about the Manson murders?” He responded,

Well, the main point there is that lots of crimes are committed as a result of occult involvement,
and people should report to the police if they see someone going around wearing human bones as
jewelry, or if there’s a group meeting under the full moon.50

Satanism is also about gaining progressive amounts of power. Warnke claims he
was one of the three high priests, or Master Counselors, of the Brotherhood. This meant
that he would have all the alcohol, women, and life or death control over a whole legion
of people that he wanted.51 Warnke also claimed that he was able to put a hex on
buildings and burn them down if he chose.52
Apart from one’s personal power, Satanists have power over demons whose
destructive force is harnessed for evil purposes. As Warnke states,

9