A CRITIQUE OF WICCAN AND OTHER NEO-PAGAN DISCLAIMERS 
ABOUT SATANISM
  
 by Diane Vera
  
  
  
 Nearly every introductory book or article on Wicca contains a
 "We're Not Satanists!" disclaimer.  And it is indeed true that
 Wicca Is Not Satanism.  But the disclaimers are often otherwise
 inaccurate.  Either they misrepresent Satanism, or they make
 highly-questionable claims about Wicca's own history.  And I am
 quite irritated by the "Please don't persecute US, but it's OK
 if you go get THEM!" undertone of the typical not-Satanists
 disclaimer.
  
 Here are some of the more common inaccuracies:
  
  
  
 1)  "We're not Satanists; we don't sacrifice babies."
  
 Both statements by themselves are accurate.  But do they have to
 be said in the same breath?  Satanists don't sacrifice babies
 either.
  
 There are indeed a handful of nutcases who have committed crimes
 in the name of "Satan" (vastly outnumbered by the people, not to
 mention entire governments, that have committed atrocities in the
 name of Christianity).  But to insinuate that Satanists
 _in_general_ do this sort of thing is at least as absurd as judging
 all Christians by the behavior of the Inquisition.  It has been
 documented that most rumors of "Satanic crime" are unfounded. 
 Moreover, sacrificing babies would be contrary to the spirit of
 most modern forms of Satanism, for a variety of reasons, some of
 which are spelled out by Anton LaVey in _The_Satanic_Bible_.  I'll
 add another reason:  most forms of Satanism emphasize the
 individual's self-interest; and most Satanists deem it to be not
 in their interests to commit crimes, especially crimes that serve
 no rational purpose.
  
 For documentation regarding "Satanic crime" scares, see the
 following books:  (a) _Satan_Wants_You_ by Arthur Lyons 
(Mysterious
 Press, 1988).  (b) _In_Pursuit_of_Satan:__The_Police_and_the_
 _Occult_ by Robert D. Hicks (Prometheus Books, 1991).  
 (c) _The_Satanism_ _Scare_ edited by James T. Richardson, Joel
 Best, and David Bromley (Aldine de Gruyter, 1991).  
 (d) _Out_of_Darkness_  edited by Sakheim and Devine (Lexington
 Books/ MacMillan, 1992).  (e) _Satanic_Panic_ by Jeffrey S. Victor
 (Open Court Press, 1993).
  
  
   
 2)  "We're not Satanists; we don't worship Evil.  We reject
     Christian-style Good-vs.-Evil dualism."
  
 Most Satanists don't think of themselves as "worshipping Evil"
 either.  "Satan" is associated with a wide range of human traits
 which Christianity traditionally considers "Evil", but which a non-
 Christian wouldn't necessarily consider evil, as is aptly satirized
 by the Church Lady.  Most Satanists reject the Christian idea of
 cosmic "Good" vs. cosmic "Evil," too.
  
 Most Satanists do differ with most Wiccans on ethics, however. 
 Wiccans can correctly say that most Satanists, unlike most Wiccans,
 do not believe in the "Threefold Law" and do not prohibit
 destructive magic.
  
  
  
 3)  "We can't possibly be Satanists, because we're not Christian. 
     Satanism is a form of Christianity.  Satanism is a Christian
     heresy."
  
 Satanism does, obviously, have roots in Christianity.  But this
 does not make Satanism a _form_of_ Christianity, any more than
 Christianity is a form of Judaism.  Satanism is not just a
 "Christian heresy", any more than Christianity is just a "Jewish
 heresy."  Most Satanists do _not_ believe in Christian theology. 
 Most Satanists have their own interpretations of who/what "Satan"
 is, and do not believe in the Christian God.  (There are many
 different kinds of Satanism, with a variety of different
 interpretations of "Satan.")   Most forms of Satanism derive ideas
 from other sources besides just Christianity, just as Christianity
 derived ideas from other sources besides Judaism.
  
 A more accurate wording of the above disclaimer would be:  "Neo-
 Pagans are into reviving the worship of pre-Christian deities. 
 Satan is not a part of our pantheon."
  
 I should add here that not _ALL_ Wiccans or neo-Pagans completely
 disown Jewish/Christian/Islamic mythology.  Some Wiccans,
 especially Alexandrian Wiccans, incorporate the Kabbalistic Tree
 of Life in their worldview; and some even use Golden Dawn rituals
 like the Lesser Banishing Ritual of the Pentagram, complete with
 Hebrew God-names and archangels.  And let's not forget the many
 feminist Witches who venerate Lilith, a Jewish folkloric near-
 equivalent of the Christian Satan.  (Actually, Lilith more closely
 resembles the Islamic Satan, whose specific initial sin of pride
 was refusing to bow down before Adam.  In any case, in the Middle
 Ages, Lilith was thought to be the consort of you-know-who.)
  
 It can be argued that a TOTAL exclusion of Jewish/Christian ideas
 would be, in itself, contrary to the spirit of Paganism.  The very
 idea of a hard-and-fast wall of separation between different
 religions is itself a Jewish/Christian/Islamic idea, not found in
 most ancient Pagan religions, which borrowed freely from the
 religions of their neighbors.
  
  
  
 4)  "Wicca is The Old Religion.  Christians and Satanists are just
     johnny-come-latelies."
  
 The idea that Wicca is, in fact, "The Old Religion" is not a proven
 historical fact.  Many Wiccans still believe that Wicca is directly
 descended from pre-Christian religion, via an alleged medieval
 underground Pagan "witch-cult."   But most scholars of the subject,
 including the more scholarly Wiccans and neo-Pagans, strongly 
doubt
 that the medieval "witch-cult" existed.  (See Margot Adler,
 _Drawing_Down_the_Moon_, Chapter 4, "The Wiccan Revival."  See 
also
 _A_Razor_for_a_Goat_ by Elliot Rose, _Crafting_the_Art_of_Magic_
 by Aidan Kelly, _Bluenose_Magic_ by Helen Creighton, and
 _The_Night_Battles_ by Carlo Ginzburg.)  What we know today as
 "Wicca" is a modern religion which has drawn inspiration not only
 from pre-Christian religion, but also from modern sources such as
 the Golden Dawn and Aleister Crowley.
  
 The medieval "witch-cult" idea is based on the theories of Margaret
 Murray, an anthropologist who wrote in the 1920's.  According to
 Jeffrey B. Russell in _A_History_of_Witchcraft_, one of Murray's
 main sources of inspiration was _La_Sorciere_ by the 19th-century
 French historian Jules Michelet.  Quite a few other 19th- and early
 20th-century writers on witchcraft have also drawn inspiration 
from
 Michelet, who theorized (1) that medieval witchcraft was a survival
 of Paganism, and (2) that the aim of the European witchhunts was
 to wipe out peasant midwives, who were seen as competition by the
 emerging male medical profession.   More recently Michelet's ideas,
 as paraphrased by feminist writers such as Barbara Ehrenreich and
 Deirdre English in their booklet _Witches,_Midwives,_and_Nurses:_
 _A_History_of_Women_Healers_ (Feminist Press, 1973), have played
 an important role in today's women's health movement.   An ironic
 note:  Among neo-Pagans today, Michelet is rarely given the credit
 he deserves, probably because _La_Sorciere_ is a work of literary
 Satanism.
  
 Some Wiccans remain emotionally attached to the idea that modern
 Wicca is itself an ancient religion.  But, as Margot Adler quotes
 Ed Fitch in _Drawing_Down_the_Moon_ (p.88, 1986 edition), "The
 realization has come around to everyone that it doesn't matter
 whether your tradition is forty thousand years old or whether it
 was created last week.  If there is a proper connection between you
 and the Goddess and the God in the subconscious, and other such
 forces, then that's what matters."
  
  
  
 5)  "Witchcraft has nothing to do with Satanism," or
     "Satanism has nothing to do with Witchcraft."
  
 Many Wiccans use the word "Witchcraft" as a name for their own
 religion, implying that Wiccans are the only true Witches and,
 therefore, Satanists can't be Witches.  But the idea of
 "Witchcraft" as the name for one specific religion is absurd. 
 There are witches all over the world, in many different cultures. 
 They don't all belong to the same religion, and they don't all
 worship The Goddess.
  
 According to recent scholars who have researched this topic (e.g.
 Helen Creighton in _BlueNose_Magic_), the majority of traditional
 folk witches are at least partially Christian; and they regard
 witchcraft as a "craft," not a religion.  My own great-grandfather,
 who lived on a farm in Iowa, was a "water witch" who told people
 where to dig wells.  He was a devout Christian.  Among rural
 witches in Europe today, one of the most popular grimoires is
 _The_Sixth_ _and_Seventh_Books_of_Moses_, which is hardly Pagan 
at
 all.  It makes sense that most European folk witches would be
 Christian after lo these many centuries of Christianity, especially
 since most ancient Pagan religions never were into religious
 purism.  Historian Carlo Ginzburg has theorized, in
 _The_Night_Battles_ (1966), that _IF_ a medieval "witch-cult"
 existed, it was not Pagan in a Wicca-like sense.  Rather, its
 adherents considered themselves to be on the "Good" side of a
 Christianity-like Good-vs.-Evil dualism.
  
 If a Christian can be a witch, then so can a Satanist.  A witch can
 be _any_ religion.  And there have been both Christians and
 Satanists calling themselves witches long before today's Wiccans
 came along.  (Regarding some Satanic folk witches, see _Ozark_
 _Superstition_ by Vance Randolph.)
  
 It _IS_ accurate to say, "Wicca is not Satanism" and "neo-Pagan
 Witchcraft is not Satanism."  But Wiccans and neo-Pagans are not
 justified in claiming the word "Witch" as their sole property.
  

  6)  "The Church has been persecuting Wiccans as 'Devil-
     worshippers' for centuries.  'The Devil' is a Christian
     caricature of our Horned God.  Satanists are just imitating a
     Christian caricature of Wicca; and we resent Satanists for
     stealing the word 'witch' and causing further confusion."
  
 These statements assume that the Murrayite hypothesis is true. 
 They assume (1) that the main aim of the medieval and post-
 Renaissance European witchhunts was to wipe out the remnants of
 Pagan religion, (2) that said remnants in many different parts of
 Europe all worshipped a Pagan "Horned God," whom the Church 
mistook
 for the Devil, and (3) that modern Wicca is directly descended from
 this medieval Pagan worship of a "Horned God."  All three
 assumptions are highly questionable.
  
 If Wicca is a modern reconstruction, then Satanists aren't
 imitating a Christian caricature of Wicca.  Rather, Wicca and
 Satanism _both_ draw some of their inspiration from the records of
 Christian witchhunts.  Satanists did not "steal" the words "witch",
 "coven", and "sabbat" from Wiccans.  Wiccans and Satanists both
 took that constellation of terms from accusations against alleged
 diabolical witches; Wiccans use those terms _because_ of the
 Murrayite interpretation of the witchhunts, or because (in the case
 of those Wiccans who don't accept the Murrayite interpretation)
 they otherwise identify with the victims of witchhunts.  Modern
 Wiccans' use of words like "witch", "coven", and "sabbat" is one
 of the main reasons why Wicca gets confused with Satanism (at least
 by people other than the type of Christian fundamentalists who
 would confuse even Buddhism with Satanism).  Wicca gets confused
 with Satanism because _Wiccans_ use those words, not because
 Satanists have used them.  Regardless of the linguistic origin of
 the words themselves, the _constellation_ of words
 "witch"/"coven"/"sabbat" originated with the Church's accusations
 of diabolical witchcraft.  Thus, of course they would be associated
 with Satanism in the popular mind.
  
 Furthermore, Wicca itself may have borrowed a few ideas, at least
 indirectly, from some late 19th- and early 20th-century forms of
 Satanism, as even some Wiccan scholars are finally starting to
 admit.  (See _Crafting_the_Art_of_Magic_ by Aidan Kelly, pp.21-22,
 25-26, and 176.)  I discuss this further in my article "Satanism
 and the History of Wicca" (SatanWic.TXT).
  
 I'll give just one example for now:  The Wiccan concept of its
 Goddess and God isn't really, as far as I can tell, an ancient
 European concept, although it is based on ancient concepts.  Most
 ancient European religions were polytheistic, regarding their many
 deities as distinct entities, not aspects of a single Goddess and
 God, as many modern Wiccans do.  The Wiccan Goddess and God are
 post-Christian composites of the pre-Christian deities of many
 cultures.  And although the Horned God is not Satan, at least one
 key aspect of modern Wicca's Horned God concept _IS_ historically
 derived, in part, from 19th-century literary Satanism.  The very
 idea of a "Horned God" associated with _witchcraft_ is derived from
 the Christian witchhunters' Devil concept, as re-interpreted by
 19th-century literary-Satanic writers like Michelet and later by
 Murray, and not from any pre-Christian source.  The actual ancient
 horned Gods, like Pan, were not associated with witchcraft.  (There
 were _Goddesses_ associated with witchcraft, like Hekate.)
  
 It isn't necessary to mention, in introductory books or articles
 on Wicca, that modern Wicca may have borrowed an idea or two 
from
 19th-century literary Satanism.  Just don't claim the reverse in
 a tone of self-righteous indignation.
  
  
  
 7)  "Satanism is just upside-down Christianity.  It revolves
     around a travesty of Christian rites.  We Pagans would never
     dream of mocking another religion."
  
 Parodies of Christianity are a part of, but not central to, most
 forms of Satanism.  The Black Mass is not the principal rite of
 most modern forms of Satanism (or at least the more public forms),
 although many Satanists do perform Black Mass-like ceremonies
 _occasionally_, for purposes of catharsis.
  
 Religious parodies are not a part of _MOST_ forms of neo-Paganism,
 but they are indeed a marginal part of the neo-Pagan scene.  See,
 for example, Mary Daly's books, which are widely read by feminist
 Goddess-worshippers.  When it comes to inverting and parodying
 Christian symbolism, Daly's wordplay does it better than a Black
 Mass.  And there are a few joke "religions," such as the
 Discordians and the Church of the Subgenius, which specialize in
 blasphemy to a far greater degree than most forms of Satanism. 
 (They target many religions, not just Christianity.)  Although only
 a tiny minority of neo-Pagans are involved with these groups, and
 although some neo-Pagans are uncomfortable with them, the
 Discordians and the Subgenii seem to be a more-or-less accepted
 part of the neo-Pagan scene.  There are also quite a few more
 mainstream neo-Pagan groups that began as parodies and 
eventually
 included a more serious element, according to Margot Adler in
 _Drawing_Down_the_Moon_ (Chapter 11, "Religions of Paradox and
 Play").
  
  
  
 8)  "Satanism is just rebellion against Christianity."
  
 This may well be true of young people who dabble in "Satanism" as
 a way to shock the grownups.  But for many of the more serious
 practitioners, Satanism is _not_ motivated solely or even primarily
 by rebellion.
  
 Some people are Satanists because they like the highly
 individualistic philosophy of their chosen form of modern Satanism,
 e.g. LaVey Satanism, better than the worldviews of most other
 occult religions.
  
 Other Satanists are motivated by sheer magical practicality.  It
 can be argued, from a standard modern magical point of view, that
 the name "Satan" is associated with a powerful current of magical
 energy _because_ we live in a Christian society where so many
 people fear "Satan."  Conversely, it can be argued that the
 popularity of Christianity, with its Satan concept, reflects a
 spiritual reality, that there really does exist a powerful "Dark
 Force in Nature" which has been felt and feared by a lot of people.

 Either way, the Satanic magician prefers to work with an already-
 existing, already-powerful energy current, rather than try to
 create new currents or revive forgotten ones.
  
 Other people are Satanists because they love dark energy.  And,
 because we happen to live in a Christian culture, the name "Satan"
 can be the most emotionally effective way of connecting with dark
 energy.
  
 Most modern Satanists do not believe in Satan as a literal deity,
 but regard the name "Satan" as a magically-effective symbol for
 various human traits and magical energies.  For some, Satan
 represents defiance.  But for others, Satan is "the Lord of this
 World"; thus their Satanism means acceptance of certain worldly
 realities which other religions attempt to defy.  Many Satanists
 are into a combination of both attitudes.
  
 There are some Satanists who do believe in Satan as a literal
 entity.  Some of these are Satanists because they feel personally
 "called" by this entity.  Others are Satanists because they believe
 that Satan is more powerful than the Christian "God", if the latter
 exists at all; thus they are not "rebelling," but simply accepting
 what they regard as spiritual reality.
  
 Among those who do believe in a literal Satan, he is usually re-
 interpreted in non-Christian terms.  Some regard Satan as the
 Christian-era manifestation of some pre-Christian deity, usually
 either Set or Pan.  Others do not equate Satan with any non-
 Christian deity, but are polytheistic, regarding Satan and the
 Christian "God" as just two of the many Gods.  Still others are
 monotheists who regard "the Dark Force in Nature" as the only true
 God.  Others are neo-Gnostics who regard Satan as the "light-
 bringer" and the Christian "God" as the Demiurge.  (This last view,
 also known as "Luciferianism," is quite different in basic attitude
 from most other forms of Satanism, in which Satan is regarded,
 either actually or symbolically, as "the Lord of this world.")
  
 An introductory article on Wicca is not the place to discuss the
 many varieties of Satanist belief.  In my opinion, an introductory
 article on Wicca should avoid making any statements about Satanist
 beliefs whatsoever.  It's possible to just say that Wicca is not
 Satanism without attempting to "support" that statement by making
 stupid comments about Satanism.  If an author deems it necessary
 to explain _why_ Wicca gets confused with Satanism, the reason
 given should be the real one:  that there are a few superficial
 resemblances between Wicca and Satanism because Wicca and 
Satanism
 have both drawn some of their inspiration from the records of
 European witchhunts.
  
 (Another reason for the confusion, although this doesn't have to
 be mentioned in introductory literature, is that _some_ Wiccans and
 other neo-Pagan Witches enjoy acting weird and spooky, as do 
_some_
 Satanists.)
  
 It _IS_ possible to write a clear, concise, comprehensive
 introductory article on Wicca which includes a brief not-Satanists
 disclaimer without misrepresenting or otherwise bashing Satanism
 and without presenting the Murrayite hypothesis as established
 fact.
  
  
  
 Diane Vera
 dvera@met.com
 February 16, 1994