From tyagi@HouseofKaos.Abyss.com Fri Jun 21 12:24:00 1996 Received: (tyagi@localhost) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) id MAA22762; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 12:24:00 -0700 Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 12:24:00 -0700 Message-Id: <199606211924.MAA22762@jobe.shell.portal.com> To: tyagi Newsgroups: alt.pagan,alt.religion.wicca,tx.religion.pagan,alt.religion.all-worlds,talk.religion.misc,alt.satanism,alt.magick.tyagi Subject: Re: CAW and Satanism REF (was something more rude :>) References: <31b03210.1265526@news.alt.net> <4p1j6o$249o@troy.la.platsol.com> <31b4e267.1953242@news.alt.net> <4p51tn$1leg@troy.la.platsol.com> <31b97d96.211131@news.alt.net> <4pcp7h$1ur@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com> <4pk3p6$8rg@jobe.shell.portal.com> <4q54kb$mje@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com> From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nocTifer) Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nocTifer) Status: RO kaliyuga 49960621 AA1 Happy Happy Litha indeed! [ad hominems omitted for the benefit your reading eyes] cdeville@ix.netcom.com (Catherine Deville): |...I very much doubt that you interpreted Oberon's statement's clearly, |since what you say he said sounds like something he would never say. that is quite possible. I do not have the texts to hand and was commenting from memory. also, our correspondence was rather short-lived and, within the medium of asynchronous letter-exchange things can become blurry if we are not careful in how we express ourselves (myself included). I was being sincere in how I interpreted his text, and my postings of it at that time elicited similar responses to my own within the online community. if he has changed his mind or if I have misunderstood then I am very glad to hear this. it is not as important to me that someone be 'right' and 'wrong' so much as that this issue be addressed, and it appears that this is occurring. thank you, Ms. Deville, for the role you are playing. |You and Mr. Scratch try to make it sound as if Oberon was _never_ |responsive to concerns about this issue. This is not true. I have never said that he did not respond to my letters and criticisms. I have in fact said that we exchanged email. I did not at that time understand him to say that he would be changing the publication prior to its renewed issue. perhaps I missed his statement, but I would like to say that your interpretation here is perhaps in error. I omit the details surrounding the Aquino-Zell (neat A-Z!) communication in favor of more positive pursuits. there is a time for harshness and a time for reconciliation. I sense a shift in the winds. |>I would be happy to address the issue with CAW. I sent Otter G'Zell |> email previously and let him know what the problem was in excrutiating |> detail. He indicated that it was a matter of self-defense, and as far |> as I can tell this was a sort of 'Rede-be-damned' warfare mentality. |...Oberon ...denies _ever_ making such a statement as you defined in |this and your other post. fascinating. as I said, as there are ongoing revisions it is rather academic to me at this point, though I am fairly sure that a glimpse at the original exchange will prove me out (or at least provide good reason for my interpretation, if he didn't mean this). |He ...is going to forward me copies of your correspondance. please post or send my way as I have apparently deleted them in haste, error, space-saving, remote-archiving or frustration. |According to Oberon, your letters began inflammatory ...but that when |pressed for a proposal or positive contribution that you did make one. an interesting recounting. it was so long ago that I will not take issue with this, merely encourage a revision of the document as appears to be taking place. |...Oberon has considered your proposals and contributions as valuable |and intended to use them in the 5th edition. this was part of the 'response' of which I spoke. I was not sure that my criticisms would be utilized in the revision. for all I knew he was through with considering the matter and didn't agree with most of what I'd said (we did argue at some length over terminology, my own background and motives, as well as his own). |...the next edition has been on hold since then because Oberon has been |looking for someone to make a constructive contribution .... defining |Satanism from the viewpoint of Satanists which Satanists would consider |'authoritative'. I was not aware of this search, never having been informed of it. I would have and continue to be open to providing either networking assistance to this effect or text from my own studies and practices. good luck with the 'authoritative' part. I find that Satanism is in many ways an EMPHASIS of Neopaganism (perhaps not the Neo-paganism of Zell/CAW), being MORE diverse and LESS centralized away from the popular organizations. my discussions with Satanists online (I don't know any locally and have only recently been informed of a contact a short distance to my south) indicate that only popular authors (LaVey, among them) would be accepted as in any way authoritative, yet even this is a highly contentious presumption as any Usenet FAQ on the subject will make clear (what is considered 'authoritative' by the Satanic public and what might be more reasonable considered so by students of comparative religions and Satanism as an entire movement will surely vary). I think the way you are going about it (assembling a group of people with a diversity of views) is likely the best way to concretize any sort of authority, and even then it will fail in some small measure by exclusion. this small failure is not sufficient to warrant omitting the process, however, and I'm glad you've made the plan more clear to those of us who are concerned. |Per Oberon, the offer that he made in his letter to Aquino is _still |open_. An individual which I believe is involved in the Satanic |community is attempting to put together a committee of Satanists and |"non-Satanist, non-CAW Pagan observers" (i believe is zir intention) |to attempt to provide such a contribution so that the 5th edition can |be completed. thank you for mentioning this. I will attempt to discover more and I offer my assistance should this be desired/necessary. |CAW does _not_ publish this booklet. It is published by Phoenix |Publishing, P.O. Box 10, Custer WA 98240. As I understand it, the GE |Editorial staff (of the time) compiled it and edited it, CAW/Nemeton |_does_ distribute it, but they are not publishing it. thanks for clarifying this. are there OTHER people also selling and distributing this? |This brings up concerns as to whether or not the publication of _this_ |edition will stop when CAW (if the committee will assist them to do |so) corrects and puts together the 5th edition. I don't know the |answer to this one. that is indeed very important, as is the question: WHO IS PHOENIX PUBLISHING? as well as 'what sort of editorial power do they actually wield'? |And again, how much slandering or harm it does in what many Satanists |consider are it's misstatements re: the nature of Satanism is still |something on which everyone does not agree. though I'm glad the conversation continues in a (fairly) reasonable light. |> ...the contents but the sources of these assertions [largely about |>SRA] are fallacious and fraudulent. |...a publication being used to educate the mundane law enforcement |agencies that _NO_ practitioner of an 'alternative religion' can be |assumed to be criminal simply because of their religion, for this I would suggest a revision of the time to: 'Religion and Crime', including all manner of justification for the comment you make above. |that crime and Witchcraft _OR_ crime and Satanism is are not one and |the same, that criminals are criminals regardless of their faith. I hope that this comes through more clearly to me and others who care about religion and Satanism when we read the next revision. |I do not see _unbiased_ 'critical' critiques, I have not offered one recently. as I said, Mr. Scratch was following an old trail, one I made several moons (sols?) ago. if you can get your hands on those files you'd see my critique. I became more blustery as I felt I was being roughly treated by the CAW admin in response to my sincere criticisms. as I said, the past is past for me, I'd rather focus on the future of the publication and the cooperation of the CAW- Nemeton admin and at least the more popular and organized Satanists, if not taking into account the various solitaries such as myself. |I see very biased, 'my way or the highway' bigotry on _your_ part. I'm sure some of that may come from years of frustration at not having felt that the issues would ever be addressed by the CAW. it is not my over-riding attitude, as I hope to make clear to you. |...when it comes to the _POINT_ of this publication, which is to get |the boys in blue to recognize that neither _your_ church |_nor_ mine propogate, promote, condone or _harbor_ criminals my church is the Church of Euthanasia, of which I am the Satanic Outreach Director (SOD). eventually it may be accused of such things, but I doubt it will as much reflect upon me. my own relationship to crimes of passion in response to one's Satanism is at variance with the vast majority of orgSatanists, though I agree with you that these orgs and a great many solitaries accept your assertion as true. personally, while I oppose the typical violation of person and property sometimes associated with Satanism I *still* consider those teens and whatnot to *be* Satanists, if somewhat over- zealous. I also think they are worthy of study and hearing, that their angst and anger is directed toward what are real restrictions upon Satanic religion. this places me in a spot nearer to your statement yet not as extreme as 'rejecting these criminals as psuedoSatanists', which is the high-handed and unjustified arrogance of many orgSatanists, and is at times represented within previous editions of the CAW publication. |the booklet achieves that, and as such does _help_ both your community |_and_ mine. I think the fact of its achievement is what is at issue, and that it is being reviewed (you admit it could benefit from expansion and improvement) and revised is a boon for all, especially if the diversity of perspective resident within Satanism is displayed, rather than some projection of what 'True Satanism' includes (often defined by and solely inclusive of orgSatanism, which is to many of us a self-contradictory term). |...because of Mr. Scratch's 'targeting' me, I have somehow become the |liason between CAW and this committee which is working to correct the |errors that they find in the publication. then I see a progression involved (a complete and somewhat unnecessary tangent this comment is, but important to me): * Aquino's acid response makes known the objection * my own critique makes known the substance * Mr. Scratch's critique elicits response from you * your own involvement initiates coordination * an organized cabal begins negotiations for revision as such I think this has been a useful tactic toward resolution, one which makes clear the intensity and content of the objection from varying points on the globe. now what is called for is reconciliation in an attempt to arrive at a satisfactory compromise. this I would lend great energies to and avail myself to assistance should this be welcomed/necessary. |>|...distribution of it stopped... is to convince CAW to do so. |>|...address the issue with CAW Central, directly. |There are people who have chosen to do this. this may be the 'Good Cop/Bad Cop' strategy to which Mr. Scratch alluded. |_They_ are getting a positive response now from CAW Central.... |It is quite possible that _they_ will achieve what Mr. Scratch |has _stated_ is his 'goal'. excellent. sometimes it takes awkward approaches to resolve a thorny dilemma. alot of the problems here come from misperceptions, and it sounds like those misperceptions are beginning to be cleared up. I'm very reassured and encouraged by your words and hope the negotiations on the revision will continue and finalize something of satisfactory substance to us all. I think some of the vociferousness of the previous communications were in part a response to not having felt like this was the INITIAL approach by Zell or CAW, as well as the continuing misperceptions between the Neopagan and Neo-pagan communities and that of org- and lone-Satanists. |>I put it more bluntly in a point-by-point analysis of the problems with |> the publication and distributed these to the Neopagan and Satanic |> online communities. Nothing could be clearer. Mr. Scratch is merely |> following up on old, OLD criticisms which have never been answered by |> the CAW CENTRAL (Otter at least has an ear, we must presume). |CAW Central _has_ answered many of these criticisms. I didn't mean that the email wasn't returned with comment in response. I meant that I don't remember being informed that our concerns were going to be utilized in any kind of revision. this is what I mean by 'answered'. my apologies for any unclarity. |Oberon/Otter _did_ hear you when you wrote him and has your contributions |to be used in correcting the problems that you discussed. if I might be sent these documents (I'd presumed they had been archived and it appears that they were deleted by Ceci or myself) I'd greatly appreciate it. eventually I'll happily delete them again once I see that the revision accomodates them or I feel that I have been corrected in my limited perceptions. |It is possible that you are misinterpreting the fact that he then |discontinued correspondence with you because he had other concerns |besides this one which demanded his time. a lack of communication is not a sign of concerns being addressed, and it sounds as if I was mistaken as to the weight Oberon gave to my critique. I did eventually feel respectably addressed by him and am glad that he has been taking this seriously. |..._your_ contribution, once you got to it, was much more viable |and he plans to include it. I would consider -that- an 'answer'. if I'd known this was his intent I'd have had less concern to support the Aquino tirade or the recent Usenet Scratchings. thank you for relaying this. I have, since speaking with Oberon, studied a bit more about Satanism as a field and self-initiated within it according to my own standards (these do not entirely meet with orgSatanism or indeed many other solitaries aside from some of the writings of authors online and off such as Diane Vera and in many cases Anton LaVey). if Oberon still wishes to use those critiques I hope that he coordinates with me or allows me to see them again so that I may provide additioanl corrections should they be necessary. it is somewhat difficult to tell all of what Satanism includes in a similar manner as is the case with Neopaganism (apparently not Zell's Neo-paganism). this is well-shown by the recent spate of 'Satanists, Neopagan?' threads and their very cogent and often quite penetrating discussion. I cc this to the cawnemeton@aol.com eddress and hope for the files in return and/or some sort of communique. |...this mess took me _4 hours_ to compile. I don't intend |to expend any more of my precious time for _his_ benefit. I greatly appreciate the time and expenditure of your person within this debate and encourage you, now that you have made clear the CAW's intentions in the matter, to abate your defense, as I shall happily lend my support of what you have accomplished. |...I am replying to _this_ in public and, because of your tag line |request cc'g you (as a courtesy) in e-mail. thank you greatly for this as well. |>....my aim is the demolition of the CAW's publication on Satanism |>and I hope to rally a great deal of public pressure against it |>and your organization for supporting [it]. it sounds as if the previous version of the publication is indeed going to be abandoned for revision. this was my objective and I am satisfied that we are achieving it with the beautific assistance of people like yourself and the open-mindedness (finally?) of the Church of All Worlds. thank you for your consideration and your perserverance in what must at times seem like torture. |...should you wish to make an _effective_ and productive contribution |to this concern (as I understand from Oberon that you were willing to |do in the past), then I'm sure that it will be recieved as well as |the others who have made such proposals have been. that is my intent indeed and I will presently cease my online opposition to CAW, now defending it as I see it attempts to take the concerns and pathways of Satanists into consideration beyond the small mentions made there previously. Hail Satan! (which I personally interpret as a blessing upon wild nature) tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com nocTifer