Page 2 of 17 <12345>Last »
Topic Options
#29539 - 09/14/09 05:26 AM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Final Conflict]
GillesdeRais Offline
member


Registered: 09/08/09
Posts: 141
Once you become a 'Priest/ess' in the ToS, belief in the Prince of Darkness is not only expected, but demanded. If you have problems with understanding this very simple idea, you should spend more time shopping for jeans at WalMart.
_________________________
Philosophy, n. A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing.

Top
#29540 - 09/14/09 05:56 AM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Final Conflict]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3117
 Quote:
But when most of the leadership of the Church of Satan are not only members of the ToV, but actively recruit people, particularly younger CoS members, into the ToV with the promise of uncovering the hidden secrets to physical and spiritual immortality, there is clearly a problem.

First time I actually hear that the CoS "leadership" are recruiting younger members to become part of ToV.. Mind to back that part up? Or at least give some decent links/references about that matter.

As for the rest of the matter: life is being judged and made-up with and by choices; being it your own or by others. Joining a clan, grotto, church, organisation,... is a personnal choice. If in the end your choice turns out badly then it was but a bad choice from which you have to cope with the negative consequences. Information is available about everywhere if you search hard enough and should form a raw image from what you may encounter and/or experience.

 Quote:
I agree that there are no special forms of Satanism, but this is precisely the problem. Satanism as a religion and philosophy begins with Dr. LaVey and there was absolutely no theism involved.

Just playing the devil's advocate now;
If there was no Theistic view involved, why the Satanic rituals?
Because some people need some drama in their life? The symbols are merely metaphorical, yet upon taking a closer look they reveal and show an idea of deitification? I might as well use a waggling dildo on the altar and call it Sammael (or Mammon when it's golden).
It should be clear that a discussion about "Atheistic" or "Theistic" Satanism is utterly pointless. The principles of self-betterment are universal, the Satanic Statements and sins are universally accepted. The (dis)belief in a god is but a personal likeness and in fact has nothing to do with the core of the philosophy UNLESS you are uncapable of taking on an objective view about the whole matter.

To focus it on this matter it is best summarized in a few words being "So what?". As far as I am concerned no one here is carrying a warm heart to both of the (current) organizations for various reasons nor want to have any contact with it in it's current state. The only idea floating my mind about this topic is but the mere thought that their ship is sinking in open sea whilst the captains are being keelhauled by ignorance and blind posturing.

Satanism as a philosophy is but a mere tool for self-betterment, it's principles as the mere "guidelines" and your own intellect as the vessel of succes.


Edited by Dimitri (09/14/09 06:05 AM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#29542 - 09/14/09 08:07 AM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
GillesdeRais Offline
member


Registered: 09/08/09
Posts: 141
Wow, I got sidetracked and ended up missing the point of this entire argument. Sorry. But as far as my own personal beliefs concern my view of spirituality, I've made myself quite clear. Whether or not other folks believe in an archetype or in a fluffy-bunny doesn't matter to me. I defend my views in this world, and the next.

Edited by GillesdeRais (09/14/09 08:12 AM)
_________________________
Philosophy, n. A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing.

Top
#29544 - 09/14/09 08:35 AM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
GillesdeRais Offline
member


Registered: 09/08/09
Posts: 141
You make good points as far as misuse of the English language is concerned. I looked up the words you pointed out and then remembered I had them on a vocabulary test when I was seven years old. Here's one for you: hane ;\)
_________________________
Philosophy, n. A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing.

Top
#29556 - 09/14/09 02:41 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2517
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: MawhrinSkel
Intransigent.

A dignified man in the midst of a journey somewhere?

 Quote:
Egregious.

Land areas well-suited for poultry farming?

 Quote:
Obtuse.

The only thing you can put an obt to?
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#29558 - 09/14/09 03:36 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
 Quote:
Could you stop trolling my posts? It's getting wearisome to respond to posts that contain little in the way of sense and much in the way of nonsense.


Just an observation, but it might be interesting to consider. If a person continously responds to "Trolling" posts which annoys them, and perhaps annoys others, isn't the person responding almost as guilty as the person doing the trolling? I think it might be what some might call an "Enabler."

I am of the opinion that often the biggest slap in the face is being completely ignored. Makes a grand statement also.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#29559 - 09/14/09 03:37 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Dimitri]
Final Conflict Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 47
 Quote:
First time I actually hear that the CoS "leadership" are recruiting younger members to become part of ToV.. Mind to back that part up? Or at least give some decent links/references about that matter.


You're free to disbelieve me if you wish. I could easily reveal my identity and be very public about what goes on with the CoS hierarchy, but until my membership is revoked, I'm not doing that. Thanks, but no thanks.

Anything I write about the CoS is intended as a warning to those who choose to get involved and what they may expect if they are coerced into joining the ToV. Many people who are here, I suspect, already know a great deal about the ToV. If you don't, that's your problem.

 Quote:
As for the rest of the matter: life is being judged and made-up with and by choices; being it your own or by others. Joining a clan, grotto, church, organisation,... is a personnal choice. If in the end your choice turns out badly then it was but a bad choice from which you have to cope with the negative consequences. Information is available about everywhere if you search hard enough and should form a raw image from what you may encounter and/or experience.


That's fine and everything, but when people join the CoS and remain in it for a few years, they tend to develop close bonds and friendships with other members. They trust that the people who are at high levels of the hierarchy are true to Dr. LaVey's philosophy.

Obviously, this is not the case. Plenty of people have come away disillusioned. However, those very same people would never have joined if they had known that there are problems with the CoS.

And contrary to what you think, the "inconvenient truths" about the CoS are not so readily available, since most of the anti-CoS websites cannot be taken seriously the way they are presented.

 Quote:

If there was no Theistic view involved, why the Satanic rituals?
Because some people need some drama in their life?


Dr. LaVey clearly answers all your questions and concerns in The Satanic Bible.

 Quote:
Satanism as a philosophy is but a mere tool for self-betterment, it's principles as the mere "guidelines" and your own intellect as the vessel of succes.


I've been a Satanist and a card-carrying member of the CoS for over 27 years. I don't need anyone to explain these things to me like I'm a child.

This discussion was originally about the bizarre relationship between the CoS and the ToV. You have taken this discussion far off-topic.

Top
#29561 - 09/14/09 04:13 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Final Conflict]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3117
 Quote:
You're free to disbelieve me if you wish. I could easily reveal my identity and be very public about what goes on with the CoS hierarchy, but until my membership is revoked, I'm not doing that. Thanks, but no thanks.

Only asking if you know other sources which go on a bit deeply into the matter and give evidence of your claims. I'm not asking your CoS membership nor about your identity (which is the least of my concerns). Surely you aren't the ONLY one having this noticed, and surely other ex-members must have written something about it.

 Quote:
That's fine and everything, but when people join the CoS and remain in it for a few years, they tend to develop close bonds and friendships with other members. They trust that the people who are at high levels of the hierarchy are true to Dr. LaVey's philosophy.

Friendships and bonds will always be made, even tough the institute where you find them is thoroughly hated. Humans are social animals and will always befriend with people even tough the situation isn't appropriate. A friendship is based on several aspects and not only on personal philosophy alone.

Anyway wasn't there a passage in the SB which said that Satanism was an individualistic path? That mere passage indicates that CoS already is in contradiction with the philosophy it promotes...
Not that important, but just a slight reminder.

 Quote:
I've been a Satanist and a card-carrying member of the CoS for over 27 years. I don't need anyone to explain these things to me like I'm a child.

And I already encountered card-carrying members who were a part of the church for 15 years, 27 years, 18,.. and still didn't understand the basics. In other words: it doesn't impress me the least.

 Quote:
Dr. LaVey clearly answers all your questions and concerns in The Satanic Bible.

I was merely playing the devils advocate, please refrain making comments when "picking and choosing to fit".
I would like to point out that despite LaVey having covered the topic in his SB that you also have a mind of your own and don't have to act as a parrot imitating and repeating the same useless sentence which is the one I quoted. You surely have an opinion and can think for your own without anyone or anything telling you what to do... right?

Also, I already had covered my opinion about the union/relationship between both organisations, just reread the responses.

Do I sense a disturbance? It almost seemed I touched a sensitive spot..


Edited by Dimitri (09/14/09 04:19 PM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#29562 - 09/14/09 04:29 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Final Conflict]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
It’s very difficult to turn ones back on an organization in which they at one time believed in. Even when all evident’s point to the fact that the organization has become something other then what the member originally joined.

I would think it is kind of like wanting to let go of a longtime marriage which has turned sour, and no longer holds any joy for either party. Perhaps it is the feeling of losing time and effort put into the union, which we can not get back.

Although I could never quite convince my self to join the Church of Satan, part of me did want to because I wanted to be a part of what it stood for. Even though I knew it wasn’t necessary, I wanted to give them that “nod” of approval and support which Mr LaVey mentioned a few times.
And Hell, quite frankly, I wanted the damn red card just to occasionally show it off.

Yet, on a deeper level I felt that if I did so, I would be a “joiner,” of sorts, which to ME is anti-Satanic. While on another level I realized that to deny my human desire to be part of something such as a group was also anti-satanic, because I was denying something that was part of my nature.

Over the years I found that the Church of Satan’s publicly proclaimed ideals and my private ideals were in conflict. However, even at that point I wanted to make excuses and believe that perhaps there was a middle ground, since comrades do not always have to agree on things in order to hold the same core values. But a deep part of me (dare I say the true satanist in me) knew that our differences were too great to be overlooked. Yet even at this point I was not ready to publicly speak against the organization because of a feeling of loyalty towards them because of their early history, and that at least on their unofficial forum the LTTD, they did treat me fair and with consideration for the most part as a “Newbie,” Satanist.

I would have felt like a traitor of sorts if I spoke against them. Which on a side thought is interesting, because a traitor is rarely viewed in a positive light, even by the other side that they go over to, even if what they betray is viewed as a corrupted and “evil” government. If one is speaking of countries that is.
Judas was a scum bag, even if Jesus was a nut and a tyrant. (My opinion)

The final “straw,” for me was when I discovered the ToV connection. That is when I was glad that I listened to my deepest “Gut” instinct, and did not fall into the wanting to be a part of something trap. At that point even if I wanted to fool myself into believing in what they stood for, it would have been impossible.

And yet.....I still want to hold at least a flicker of hope for them, that eventually they will come around, and don’t want them to seize to exist.

So yes, I can understand the conflict that a long time member of the organization might feel about cutting ties to them, especially if there are friends who are still apart of said organization.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#29563 - 09/14/09 05:17 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Dimitri]
Final Conflict Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 47
 Quote:
Only asking if you know other sources which go on a bit deeply into the matter and give evidence of your claims. I'm not asking your CoS membership nor about your identity (which is the least of my concerns). Surely you aren't the ONLY one having this noticed, and surely other ex-members must have written something about it.


Really? Well, my friend, you are more than welcome to find those former members of the CoS hierarchy who have divulged all the wonderful secrets of the inner circle for everyone in the world to see.

I guarantee you that you will not find a single one. In case you didn't know, and perhaps you really don't, in order to become an "active" member (a prerequisite towards any rank promotion), a person must disclose a great deal of personal information to our good friend Magus Gilmore. Prior to Dr. LaVey's passing, this was generally handled by Magistra Barton. Gilmore, in other words, is in possession of hundreds and hundreds of files containing all sorts of personal information about their active members.

Generally, this information would never be publicly disclosed, but all that is required to get people to not talk about what goes on inside the CoS is the threat of disclosure. That's enough for most. So far, it's worked.

None of this applies to honorary ranks granted by Dr. LaVey or Gilmore - people with such ranks have no position of authority and would generally not be privy to anything not particularly "kosher," so to speak.

 Quote:
Friendships and bonds will always be made, even tough the institute where you find them is thoroughly hated. Humans are social animals and will always befriend with people even tough the situation isn't appropriate. A friendship is based on several aspects and not only on personal philosophy alone.


This is a very naive viewpoint. If a person leaves the CoS and spills their guts about the group or attacks it in any way whatsoever, all CoS members in good standing are required to cut off all contact with that person. It doesn't matter how long you've been friends with all these people. There have been those who have been in the CoS since the 1970s and 1980s who have been treated this way, including people who have known Dr. LaVey and were close to him.

This fact is very well known. Are you unaware of this? A similar tactic is used in Scientology. It's a blatant cult tactic.

This doesn't mean that anyone who leaves the CoS will be excommunicated - if you present a formal resignation and are polite enough about it, they will leave you alone. Even in such instances though it's not likely you're going to remain close friends with those people.

Gilmore and his entourage require absolute loyalty and devotion to the group.

 Quote:
Anyway wasn't there a passage in the SB which said that Satanism was an individualistic path? That mere passage indicates that CoS already is in contradiction with the philosophy it promotes... Not that important, but just a slight reminder.


If you know anything about the history of the CoS, you'll know that the CoS was not intended to be a group of "joiners". It was supposed to be, and was for many years, a loose association of like-minded individuals.

It wasn't until Gilmore took the reins that the CoS has become a cult requiring total obedience to the hierarchy. Any criticism of the CoS or the ToV is considered treason and is grounds for membership being revoked.

Again, your points in this regard are off-topic.

 Quote:
And I already encountered card-carrying members who were a part of the church for 15 years, 27 years, 18,.. and still didn't understand the basics. In other words: it doesn't impress me the least.


I don't expect you to be impressed. But I do expect that you understand that you're not dealing with a neophyte based on my other posts which I'm sure you've read, and if you consider me as someone who "doesn't understand the basics," I highly suggest you take a look in the mirror. It's unfortunate, because I've read many of your posts and had thought you to be a bit above of this type of behavior.

 Quote:
I would like to point out that despite LaVey having covered the topic in his SB that you also have a mind of your own and don't have to act as a parrot imitating and repeating the same useless sentence which is the one I quoted. You surely have an opinion and can think for your own without anyone or anything telling you what to do... right?


There is such a thing as not having to re-invent the wheel. The basics of Satanism are all contained in The Satanic Bible. You were bringing up basic issues which not only have nothing to do with the discussion topic, but were presented to me as if I don't know a single thing about Satanism and have got to be educated about what it is. The only reason I bother to respond is that you are a long-time poster here.

However, by all means, if you feel you truly are the superior and penultimate arbiter and judge of all things Satanic and everything in between, let me not shove you off your high and mighty pedestal and allow you the indulgence to bask in the roaring fires of your own superior Satanic wisdom. Verily, you have proven yourself to be the one and true Grand Master of Satanic Theology (TM).

 Quote:
Do I sense a disturbance? It almost seemed I touched a sensitive spot..


Yes, it's called annoyance. Annoyance that instead of concentrating on the topic at hand, you decided instead to critique in a rather tactless way my knowledge and understanding of Satanism, while completely disregarding the main points of the discussion, which were based on discussing the relationship between the CoS and the ToV.

Top
#29568 - 09/14/09 06:27 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Final Conflict]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Forgive them, FC, for they know not what they do.

Most of those here in the 600 Club are people who've really known nothing of Satanism first hand, and all that they know of The Church of Satan and especially "Pre Gilmorian" Church of Satan is what little they can glean from Wikipedia, or some of the online bitchfests that people take for gospel, never questioning the agendized presentations or those who might have axes to grind. In many cases they can't wrap their heads around the concept that The Church of Satan under Anton LaVey and the Church of Satan under Peter Gilmore are two separate entities, loosely connected by a philosophy that seems to hold very little relevance within the organization as it stands today.

They can't understand that there were purges of members who were loyalist to the philosophy of The Church of Satan under Dr. LaVey. Hell, they can't even comprehend that you can find NONE of the previous administration's hierarchy within the current Church of Satan's who's who. Where are they? Is it any wonder that the ship is off course when those who plotted it are no longer aboard?

There are some intelligent and well thought individuals on the 600 Club's list, else I wouldn't be here and wouldn't waste my time trying to keep it real in the face of the rampant bullshit that's out there. But I learned a long time ago that there are people in the group that have their own set ideas and agendas and comfortable misconceptions about The Church of Satan, some romanticized and some blatantly silly. But MEMBERS of the organization are few and far between. Members of longevity, even moreso, so they guess and the postulate, sometimes getting it right and more often getting it wrong to a greater or lesser degree.

Dimitri's a "sharp cookie," as they used to say, but he's cloistered and used to the world of academia. It's in print. It's in a book. Read it, consider it, recite it for credit. It's the world of ideal instead of reality that soon becomes evident once one is "in the trenches." I've seen him at his best, and when he's firing on all cylinders, he can be formidable... but there is, for some, a tendency to debate in order to look right, rather than to know, to fall into the trap of past philosophy and debates on philosophical points, rather than to realize that life goes beyond what one can find in books. Books are great, but they are no substitute for reality and experience.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#29571 - 09/14/09 06:58 PM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Asmedious]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
Just would like to clear something up, where I feel that I have mis-spoke when I wrote the following,

 Quote:
I would have felt like a traitor of sorts if I spoke against them. Which on a side thought is interesting, because a traitor is rarely viewed in a positive light, even by the other side that they go over to, even if what they betray is viewed as a corrupted and “evil” government. If one is speaking of countries that is.
Judas was a scum bag, even if Jesus was a nut and a tyrant. (My opinion)


By no means did I mean to imply that any ex-member of the CoS, or any other organization who speaks against such organization is like a traitor.

I was speaking of how at one point I felt about speaking against the CoS, after they in a sense allowed me some limited access into their online forum. If I continued to go to that site, and post there as if everything was rosey, then outside of that forum spoke negatively against them, I would have been two faced.

Just like Judas who kissed Jesus and to his face was a friend, yet betrayed him was two faced, and deserves no respect, even if Jesus was a nut case and dangerous.

It’s totally different if a person is disillusioned with a person or group, and holds no pretenses about it when in the company of that person or group, and then publicly speaks against it, because in that case they are not betraying a trust that was placed in them, and are no longer acting as if they supported their previous ally when in their company.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#29591 - 09/15/09 02:00 AM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Nemesis]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2517
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
The more I read here from persons whose only experience with the "Church of Satan" is post-1975, the sorrier I feel for them. Up to 1975 the Church was a very open, friendly, happy, and - how can I put it? - kick-ass organization. Sure, there was an occasional jerk, but such was utterly incidental to the overall pleasure and exuberance of the Satanist experience. Anton bounced around the country visiting Grottos, whose members heralded him at ceremonies, took him to dinner, and showed him the town; there was a lively succession of interGrotto activities, regional conclaves, newsletters everywhere. In those pre-Internet times the personal, telephone, and postal activity was a constant cascade.

And of course it was an organization of "joiners"! Most people who encountered the Church didn't know squat about Satanism, witchcraft, Black Magic, and all the other topics of interest. They joined the Church precisely to learn about these things, test-drive them individually and cooperatively, influence & prank society, and have some pizza & root beer betweentimes. The initiatory degrees were all methodically refined and formalized over the years; if a Warlock II° or a Priestess III° from anywhere walked through the door, everyone knew to what extent they had their Satanic shit together.

Did I forget to mention that we all believed in the literal existence of Satan and the Dæmons/Powers of Darkness? Hey, that's why it was called THE-CHURCH-OF-SATAN. Was there a lot of metaphorical use of Satan's name too? Sure, as with any divinity and its cultural influences throughout history. Today I am still stunned by the number of atheists, both post-75-Anton-affiliates and others, who have this bizarre, even frantic compulsion to style themselves "Satanists". Yes, it's a cooler name than "Atheist" or "materialist". Yes, it just makes you sound pretentious, silly, and glamour-wistful if you really, finally, aren't one.

I sought to preserve something of the great Magical Mystery Tour of the real Church of Satan in my Church of Satan ebook, which if you haven't yet read I invite you to download. I wanted - still want - to take you back there, share the adventure, meet Satan face-to-face as we all did.

As for the crisis of 1975, it was sudden, shocking, and incomprehensible. Thereafter we tried to pay as little attention to what was happening under the Church's name as possible, frankly because everything we did hear was degrading, embarrassing, and depressing. I can't tell you how many times I had to apologize to people that it wasn't anything like that 1966-75; that's one of the reasons I finally took the time to write the ebook.

What I see today under the area of "Satanism" is, in a word, chaos. Anton, Gilmore, Densley, et al. fucked the concept up so thoroughly in the last 34 years that it's a wonder anyone bothers with it anymore. People occasionally ask me to recommend a good purely-Satanist religious institution; I can't think of one anywhere on the planet to which I would recommend a discerning adult. Can any of you?

Just look at this Forum, which is as sincere and serious a venue for Satanism as I've currently encountered. The undercurrent and outbursts of defensiveness, bitterness, and frustration here are palpable. These things don't just happen spontaneously; they are the result of idealism shattered, curiosity disillusioned, the creative impulse thwarted. At its core, Satanism is an atomic explosion in your soul; like Dr. Frankenstein you "want to see it at its full power". You absolutely don't have time for villagers with torches.

As some of you know, the Temple of Set includes a number of specialized Orders , for Setians with concentrated interests and experience. Some years ago we wondered about an Order of Satan, for Satanism - the idea being to recapture the original vision that we had left behind us in 1975. We concluded that we couldn't do it - not because we couldn't do a great pageant of it, but because we had all gone so far beyond that idiom that it would be pointless beyond Halloween-party theatrics. Once having met Obi-wan Kenobi, Luke Skywalker cannot just go back to his farm again.

So what can I say to today's aspiring Satanists: the real ones who have the courage, honor, and dignity to, as per G.B. Shaw, "promise him your soul, to stand up for him in this world and stand by him in the next"?

I would first exhort you that, if sincere, this is the highest and most noble affirmation you will ever experience. All that it brings to you, all the doors it opens, all of its dangers and delights will follow from this sacred moment. And no, you will never be able to go back to the Tatooine farm again either.

I would not bother advising you to disregard the atheists trying to clothe themselves in the magic robes of Satanists. They do not fool the Prince of Darkness, nor you, nor even themselves. They are but dust in the wind.

Finally I think I would - and speaking here again to those undrawn to Setian initiation - say to you that you are now to see humanity in all of its incarnate dimensions as never before. I can perhaps put this no more eloquently than thus:

 Originally Posted By: "Albert Camus, 'A Letter to a Friend'"
You never believed in the meaning of this world, and you therefore deduced the idea that everything was equivalent and that good and evil could be defined according to one’s wishes. You supposed that in the absence of any human or divine code the only values were those of the animal world - in other words, violence and cunning. Hence you concluded that man was negligible and that his soul could be killed, that in the maddest of histories the only pursuit for the individual was the adventure of power and his only morality, the realism of conquests. And, to tell the truth, I, believing I thought as you did, saw no valid argument to answer you except a fierce love of justice which, after all, seemed to me as unreasonable as the most sudden passion.

Where lay the difference? Simply that you readily accepted despair and I never yielded to it. Simply that you saw the injustice of our condition to the point of being willing to add to it, whereas it seemed to me that man must exalt justice in order to fight against eternal injustice, create happiness in order to protest against the universe of unhappiness. Because you turned your despair into intoxication, because you freed yourself from it by making a principle of it, you were willing to destroy man’s works and to fight him in order to add to his basic misery. Meanwhile, refusing to accept that despair and that tortured world, I merely wanted men to rediscover their solidarity in order to wage war against their revolting fate.

As you can see, from the same principles we derived quite different codes. Because you were tired of fighting heaven, you chose injustice and sided with the gods.

I, on the contrary, chose justice in order to remain faithful to the world. I continue to believe that this world has no ultimate meaning. But I know that something in it has a meaning, and that is man, because he is the only creature to insist on having one. This world has at least the truth of man, and our task is to provide its justifications against fate itself. And it has no justification but man; hence he must be saved if we want to save the idea we have of life. With your scornful smile you will ask me: What do you mean by saving man? And with all my being I shout to you that I mean not mutilating him and yet giving a chance to the justice that man alone can conceive.

_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#29593 - 09/15/09 02:24 AM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Final Conflict]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3117
 Quote:
I guarantee you that you will not find a single one. In case you didn't know, and perhaps you really don't, in order to become an "active" member (a prerequisite towards any rank promotion), a person must disclose a great deal of personal information to our good friend Magus Gilmore. Prior to Dr. LaVey's passing, this was generally handled by Magistra Barton. Gilmore, in other words, is in possession of hundreds and hundreds of files containing all sorts of personal information about their active members.

Quite well aware of that, it's not that I never looked up anything about CoS.

 Quote:
Generally, this information would never be publicly disclosed, but all that is required to get people to not talk about what goes on inside the CoS is the threat of disclosure. That's enough for most. So far, it's worked.

At least you think it worked, I can suspect that the system was waterproof from the very beginning till the appearance of the internet. A side-effect (be it negative or positive) is the "total" anonimity you can have. Just a bit of knowledge of modern ICT and anyone can make a site or webpage where there sour acid of critics can be spit. Sites such as Ning, trihost,.. are a necessary tool for those with such ideas in mind.
You have the possibility to dedicate a whole page to the subject and give arguments, statements which critize the whole organisation without EVER giving information free about yourself. Keeping in mind that internet is filled with thousands of sites dedicated and searchable with the mere term "Satanism" (and even more when searching with other parameters) it is almost impossible to pick any out and ask the server it is hosted on to delete it.

 Quote:


This is a very naive viewpoint. If a person leaves the CoS and spills their guts about the group or attacks it in any way whatsoever, all CoS members in good standing are required to cut off all contact with that person. It doesn't matter how long you've been friends with all these people. There have been those who have been in the CoS since the 1970s and 1980s who have been treated this way, including people who have known Dr. LaVey and were close to him.

Indeed, there you have it: "require to". If I may; assuming that the church has a few ten-thousands of members, and as you said, friendships and bonds are being made, doesn't it occur that if someone get's kicked out (for one reason or another) that maybe at least from the 20 members he was befriend with actually 2 indeed would break everything and that the other 18 still would have some contact in one way or another. Keeping the bonds tight? Zooming in on the mere aspect of humans being social animals it makes it very probably such situations occur and indeed pass on as I came to describe. Maybe with a few number changes, yet still valid.

 Quote:

If you know anything about the history of the CoS, you'll know that the CoS was not intended to be a group of "joiners". It was supposed to be, and was for many years, a loose association of like-minded individuals.

I know about it's history, yet I can only speak about the present situation of the church. My age only permits me to see how it is from the past, let's say... 7-8 years, before that I have to rely on people like you or Jake or Aquino or...
And it has indeed occured to me that in the very beginning people were more or less "chosen" or contacted or simply joined in because of having and sharing the same views.

 Quote:
Yes, it's called annoyance. Annoyance that instead of concentrating on the topic at hand, you decided instead to critique in a rather tactless way my knowledge and understanding of Satanism, while completely disregarding the main points of the discussion, which were based on discussing the relationship between the CoS and the ToV.

If I'm not mistaking I had included a line which said it wasn't adressed at you personally Final conflict, which means I was speaking in general. ;\)

edit: on a second note I just noticed that it was in the response before that. My apologies...


Edited by Dimitri (09/15/09 03:11 AM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#29599 - 09/15/09 05:34 AM Re: Church of Satan & Temple of The Vampire [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Final Conflict Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 47
Since we've all gone quite a bit off-topic here, we might as well further indulge ourselves.

 Quote:
The more I read here from persons whose only experience with the "Church of Satan" is post-1975, the sorrier I feel for them.


Worry yourself not, Dr. Aquino. Rest assured, we don't need anyone feeling "sorry" for us. With all due respect, save your pity for Gilmore and his fellow sycophants who have driven the CoS into the ground and ruined what was once a great and illustrious organization.

 Quote:
And of course it was an organization of "joiners"! Most people who encountered the Church didn't know squat about Satanism, witchcraft, Black Magic, and all the other topics of interest.


While there is no question that you are correct that during the period you were involved with the Church most people who chose to affiliate had no knowledge of Satanism and magic and joined precisely to learn more of such things, the experience of the Church during the 1980s and 1990s was very different.

Most people affiliating with the Church during this latter period were generally much better informed and having access to a much larger library of metaphysical works that were not in print during the 1960s and 1970s, particularly reprints of once obscure occult texts. Anyone who was interested in learning about such topics could freely peruse these texts without having to join any kind of esoteric organization.

Thus, the Church expanded beyond what it had originally started out as, and this was a natural and positive development. As I described in an earlier post, it evolved into a loose association of like-minded individuals who shared a common philosophical orientation.

Though I am probably biased because I became a member in the early 1980s, in my humble opinion the work and aesthetic of Dr. LaVey during this later period of the Church was far more cultivated and refined than during the first phase in the 1960s and 1970s.

On those occasions that I met Dr. LaVey, I always found him to be an extremely gracious and generous host, and very much full of life. If you speak with others who also had occasion to interact with the Doctor during this period, you will also find that they never found him to be the broken shell of a man you speculated him to have become after 1975. That was not my experience at all.

 Quote:
Did I forget to mention that we all believed in the literal existence of Satan and the Dæmons/Powers of Darkness?


No, you have never forgotten to mention this and you have reminded us time and time again. I, for one, appreciate this because there is no question in my mind whatsoever that there were more than a few individuals in the CoS, including yourself, who strongly believed in the literal existence of the Devil.

And it was for that very reason that Dr. LaVey decided to do away with all the kitsch and Halloween horrorshow that he had indulged all the curiosity seekers back in the 1960s and early 1970s. Such carnival hucksterism had long since outlived its purpose and it was time to move on.

The truth regarding the birth of the Temple of Set is that you and a number of others vehemently disagreed with this action and took the metaphorical language the Doctor had used in Church rituals far too literally. When the Doctor attempted to clarify the misunderstanding, you and the others were left disillusioned and left to start the Temple of Set.

There are two sides to every story. You have every right to your side. But the Doctor's interpretation of those events were very different and have been corroborated by others who had known the man since the early years of the Church and lived through what you call the "Great Schism."

 Quote:
I would not bother advising you to disregard the atheists trying to clothe themselves in the magic robes of Satanists.


This is a bit rich, Dr. Aquino, considering that this is a forum that is far from theistic in orientation. While I respect you as a person and likewise I respect your views, while I may disagree with them, I have no absolutely no respect for such an attitude of contempt that you hold for those of us who disagree with you regarding the literal existence of a Prince of Darkness.

Since you've once again brought this up, let me ask you, why do you care so much, after all these years, about what we infidels who dare deny the existence of the Dark Lord think or call ourselves?

In your view, were the Romantic poets any less Satanic because they did not believe in the Devil? What about Nietzsche, that most Satanic of philosophers? How about Baudelaire? The French surrealists? Indeed, what of all the artists and thinkers throughout history who held true to the Promethean spirit and were - metaphorically speaking - in league with the Devil through and through?

Now, since you've opened up the discussion and berated those of us who are godless - a thoroughly Satanic virtue - perhaps you can enlighten one such as myself, ignorant as I must be in your eyes, as to what you believe in exactly?

My understanding is that you have long since abandoned Satan in favor of Set, or are they the same? And what do you say of those theistic Satanists who worship the Prince of Darkness? Was I wrong to assume that Setians did not worship any deity and instead aspired to become "god-like" themselves?

And what of Zeena, what is her story? Why did she leave the Temple and run off to Germany to start an even more orthodox Setian - pardon me, Sethian organization?

Satan, Set, Seth, Santa. So many gods, so little time.

With all due respect, and make no mistake, Dr. Aquino, I do respect you, because it takes a lot of respect for someone to be condemned for his or her beliefs (in this case, Atheism) by another and still hold that person in high enough esteem.

But you are a man of many great accomplishments and virtue, and though there are those who would ridicule and mock you for your beliefs, I honestly have never found any fault with those who choose to believe in the existence of a power greater than themselves. We are all free to believe in whatever we want to believe, just as we are all free to indulge ourselves in whatever delusion we choose to fancy.

That said, for the life of me I cannot see how a man as educated and as literate and as long lived as yourself could possibly believe in the existence of a literal Devil with cloven hoofs and horns and choose to worship such a thing?

Furthermore, I cannot see how you could possibly even sanction the very notion of devil worship or encourage this behavior amongst those youth who, I guarantee you, will one day grow up and look back on those innocent years with folly and laughter at how ridiculous they had been.

Dr. Aquino, while you may not convince me, and I may not convince you, let us agree upon one thing that I had thought you had agreed upon with others beforehand: to not berate and scold others for not accepting as truth the reality that you believe to be true, in this case, the idea of a literal Devil.

Otherwise, how different are you from Gilmore, who berates and scolds anyone who dares voice an opinion contrary to his view that there is only the flesh and no reality beyond the flesh?

Gilmore considers any belief other than absolute materialism as a sign of mental illness. He even considers agnostics and non-theists who don't conform to his definition of "Atheism" as being idiots.

Dr. LaVey, for all his faults, and we're all human, at the very least respected everyone worthy of such respect, including those who shared very different beliefs. He was a true mensch. Ironically your book on the CoS only further confirmed and cemented my respect and admiration for the Doctor.

Top
Page 2 of 17 <12345>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.033 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 29 queries. Zlib compression disabled.