Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (lorax) Newsgroups: alt.satanism,alt.pagan,alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick.tyagi,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage Subject: Neopagans/Satanists/Christians (was Re: people of the candle) Date: 15 Jul 1996 18:54:40 -0700 Organization: Portal Communications (shell) Lines: 202 Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com Message-ID: <4sesp0$o7@jobe.shell.portal.com> References: <31E2D067.1B04@ling.gu.se> <31E6F190.396@ling.gu.se> Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (lorax) NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com Xref: shell.portal.com alt.satanism:47090 alt.pagan:166262 alt.religion.wicca:33880 alt.magick.tyagi:9412 talk.religion.misc:229439 talk.religion.newage:54435 kaliyuga 49960715 AA1 NULatix! Thomas Hrouda : |A common name for pagans implies a common definition of Pagan. implies but does not require. |What seems to be the problem is no one definition makes anyone happy. definition is death. |...I have yet to see anyone -ANYONE- ... [come up with] a definition |of Pagan or even neopagan that didn't put these two opposing groups |[Satanist/Neopagan] into the same catagory. ...definitions did occur |but those definitions were so narrow that if applied they not only |kept the two groups separate, but also exclude huge numbers of other |Pagans form either catagory.... as I said, these are descriptors. you don't believe me, hmm? :> |Noone was happy, because when the lines were drawn someone felt left |out of what they thought was "thier movement". I can describe the relationship quite easily, but if you are asking for a great number of people to be 'happy', I'll refer you to Lincoln. Christianity and Neopaganism are linked due to being within the same culture and often being reactionary or inclusionary/co-optive. the term 'pagan' was extensively used by the Christian establishment as a term of slander, and as such the revisionaries of the Great Martyrdom Cult have taken up that standard (in 'Pagan' and 'Neopagan' or 'Neo-Pagan') so as to contest the religious ground gained through the oppression of the previous composite religious. in this way "Neopagan" (or "pagan") only has meaning insofar as those who originally set about describing the practices of those who emerge utilizing it for their purposes will set an initial standard. as long as there is no central authority for this DESCRIPTOR, others will of course co-opt the term's meaning, and this is the reason that firm and lasting hierarchical structures have developed in religious traditions of various sorts: so as to set into concrete such doctrinal ideations. now the problem with this is not only that the Christian establishment oppressed the pre-Christian peoples, but the way in which they did this was to draw from pre-Christian and non-Christian deities in the formation of their Satan-Golem. the Satan/Hell/Underworld/Bottomless-Pit paradigm was used to coerce conversion through fear, and the origins of these ideas came from "pagan" religious traditions almost without exception. one may see this as the emergence of the suppressed pre-Christian religious traditions within the dominating Christian consciousness/culture or as the fabrication of lies utilizing post-trauma mythotypes after the destruction of pre-Christian religious structures. it is of little importance given the ROLE OF THE ACTORS IN THE PARADIGM. eventually this transforms into the situation wherein the Shadow of the Christian regime's oppression (largely the natural world) takes on conscious and intentional opposition to the establishment, which is what happened to the Romans with the Christians and what happened with the Christians as regards Wiccans, Witches and Satanists. the ultimate variety of this eggregore is 'the Heretic', which will probably manifest if there is still social psychic content left to be ritualized through the identification-game. just as the Christian establishment utilized remnants of the pre-Christian religious tradition in the formation of its projected Shadow-Golem, so did the Neopagans (Wiccans, Witches and many Satanists, along with all others who cannot be named by virtue of their eclectic and peculiar tastes) derive their own religious tradition in contemplation of these same pre-Christian remnants (albeit perhaps reflected through anthropological means rather than relying on the church clergy's researches and accounts as had previously occurred). the possible exception to this is the truly Christian Satanist (who actively represents the fears and Urban Legends of the greater society and who worships the malefic entity, the Golem, which Christians have fabricated for the conversion effort). this is what many Neopagans continue to identify all Satanists *as*, and so it is understandable that there exists a great divide within the Neopagan community on this point (that is in part the point of the Golem-construction: divide and conquer). in this scenario most Satanists are actually Neopagan, though the ethics instituted *by* the Christian culture forbids Neopagans from allowing certain pre-Christian elements of practice and thought from being considered as 'theirs' (their 'civilized' ways still cannot absorb and accept what even the anthropologists from which many of these religious ideas/practices derived say they once included -- human sacrifice, child-killing, etc.). we therefore have a Neopagan culture fractured by the Judeochristian oppression, a kind of social mind-fuck whereby it may take several centuries to get to a resolution of the various religious currents and return to 'naturalized human ritual activity' (which may include *voluntary human sacrifice*, *abortion as ritual*, etc.). 'Satanists' are a truly novel (re)creation, in that they represent the ethical standards of pre-Christian cultures coming forth to oppose the Christian establishment in ways which the original cultures got killed for doing. if you look carefully at the bulk of today's Satanists they do not in fact worship Satan or indeed even believe in the existence of the Christian Golem. many of us actually worship nonChristian and Neopagan gods in the pursuit of our POLITICAL ends. the category is almost entirely fictitious, and yet it points out a very important linguistic and oppressive tool which the Christian establishment exemplifies with its comments about 'God' (non- existent to the bulk of pagan religious) and a variety of other absolutes (which do not hold within the Neopagan community except in certain extreme fractions such as the intermediate 'Wicca' -- arguably, in terms of thealogy which includes absolutes and rite- structures derived of Rosicrucians, a Xtian-pagan hatchling). |I still like - People of the Wild as a overgroup. eventually this may take, and yet to imagine that some or even most Neopagans truly worship the wild is to continue a disservice not only to the pre-Christian religious (who were arguably almost always afraid of and opposed to the wildness of nature), but to Satan (wild nature) Hirself, since worship of this energy will not truly assist Hir. |People of the Candle can be applied to some subcatagory, but at this |point I don't know who. Christians use candles quite a bit (Candlemas being a good example). unless you are not placing large barriers to a mergence of religion within these FURTHER DESCRIPTORS, you won't get what you want, and there will be too many exceptions. a great many ceremonialists are not all that centered on *light*, which is truly what 'candle' implies. |Actually Satanists are pretty well defined as a group, though most |people are pretty ignorant over what they stand for. it is fascinating that you say this. I don't see that it is at all true. I think that for the present a great many generalizations can be made in the DESCRIPTION of Satanism, but nothing permanent or entirely accurate (because as with all other Neopaganism, there is no central authority limiting the tribe contents). |The same can be Said for Wicca and Asatru. only the most structured and exclusive groups. there are too many cross- overs even amongst these to really make any accurate descriptions any more. 'Asatruar', as it develops into a tribal network does have some *defining* characteristics (along genetic and perhaps initiatory lines), and the latter (initiation) is also true as regards Wicca. but by and large neither is exclusive on the whole, and a good number of Satanists are likely worshipping nordic and other Neopagan deities. |...have decided to create a hybrid* of Wicca, Asatru and Satanism isn't that great? we can do whatever we want in this regard, and even form ties with the various factions of our brew-making. only those which are very fundamentalist will object and ostracize us. the same may be said of many religious (even many Christians, which hive off in the forms of 'churches' within and outside trad-lineages -- at least the NON-RCatholics and other hierarchies). |I will publish a sort of Basic Book of Shadows for the general public. this is an unusual step: the publishing of a Book of Shadows, and it shows to me a fundamental change in the nature of this magical tool. typically such books do not define the tradition itself but reflect it, and only within the lineage in which it is wrought, not published like a Manifesto. |...I'll just be an eclectic pagan- whatever that means. Neopagans are eclectic. those who aren't venture outside the bounds of Neopaganism into something new and defined/rigid/structured/dead. Thomas Hrouda (elsewhere): | People of the Black Flame = Satanist | People of the Hammer = Asatru | People of the Candle = Ceremonial Magicians | People of the Goddess = General Goddess Worship | People of the Axe = Non-Asatru with neo-Asatru Morality | People of the Bending Wood = Wiccans | People of the Divine Sneeze= An Adamsian Cult | People of the Bob = Church of the Subgenius | People of the Divine Slack = An alternative name for | the Church of the Subgenius very clever! I'm curious where this concept of the Black Flame arises. if anyone knows, please post it to alt.satanism. thanks. tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com nocTifer