The Satanic Bible

Most young people who develop an interest in Satanism eventually find their way to the standard book of Satanism, The Satanic Bible. This book was first published in 1969 by Anton LaVey, a former circus animal trainer and huckster, as well as the founder of the first Satanic church in the United States. This church still stands in San Francisco with LaVey at its helm.

The Satanic Bible is a collection of essays, most of which argue against the legitimacy of mainstream religion. The remaining essays attempt to explain the basic concepts of what LaVey believes to be the philosophy of Satanism. The final part of his book contains a series of rituals that LaVey suggests be used for the “mastery of the earth.” These rituals are cleverly designed to give the illusion of greater power in areas that are most commonly sources of insecurity in the lives of many adolescents. Quite predictably, they emphasize sexual prowess and the ability to control others.

This book has enjoyed a revival in recent years and has become the standard reference for most young Satanists who are eager to learn the alleged craft of the devil. Their eagerness, however, surpasses their thinking skills, leaving them to uncritically accept some rather unusual arguments. LaVey lays the groundwork for the uninformed reader to conclude that Satanism is the only logical choice of religion in contemporary America, the only reasonable religion for a normal, healthy young person. He also implies, of course, that there must be something wrong with anyone inclined to believe otherwise. Addressing a common adolescent insecurity, LaVey argues that embracing Satanism is an affirmation that you are not as disturbed as you or others might think.

Adolescents who are alienated, estranged, and angry at the world are typically vulnerable to anyone who affirms them as acceptable. Preying on their inability to discriminate, LaVey tries to persuade young readers that his philosophy is the only solution to the many problems that confront them. His powerful appeal effectively overcomes the lack of logic and substance of his philosophy. Parents and those who work with young people experiencing emotional difficulties should have a basic understanding of what LaVey has to say in order to address his arguments.

In The Satanic Bible LaVey attempts to discredit Christianity by identifying a variety of ideas from mainstream Christianity that are not widely accepted or popular among young people today. In a process of creating a mutually exclusive dichotomy between his philosophy and all religions, LaVey exaggerates the unpopular practices and beliefs of these religions, takes them out of context, and proceeds to reject all Christian religion from this amplified and narrow point of view.

For example, in his discussion of sexuality, LaVey contends that anyone who is a Christian is guilty of lust if he or she experiences “the faintest stirring of sexual desire” (1969, p. 47). This statement seriously distorts any theological or practical position on sexuality and illustrates the style with which LaVey develops contrasts to further support his arguments about the acceptability of Satanism. LaVey’s exaggerated claims are followed by the assurance that these stirrings of sexuality are good feelings—healthy, normal experiences—and desirable emotions in the heart of a Satanist. Aren’t we all Satanists by this logic?

For the troubled adolescent experiencing difficulty with religiously inspired guilt about sexuality, LaVey’s position appears to be extremely attractive, especially when the inescapable conclusion is considered: any experience of one’s sexuality is Satanic.

A young reader who has little or no exposure to the theological aspects of his or her religion has little basis upon which to properly evaluate the arguments presented by LaVey. The founder of the Church of Satan did not leave his persuasive skills behind at the circus. He skillfully chose bits and pieces of antiquated theology and wove them into a tapestry of religion that no one could accept. And, if there are only two choices, Satanism is the only acceptable alternative.

To reject his ideas, according to LaVey, implies that there is something wrong with you, or at least something wrong with the way you think. Since most adolescents need affirmation that they are normal, this argument holds great power to sustain their attention.

LaVey enhances his position by frequently describing Satanism as strong and Christianity as weak. To the insecure and disempowered teenager, a position of alleged strength is a powerful attraction. Accepting it makes good sense as long as one also accepts the corresponding argument that other religions represent weakness. An individual’s attraction to Satanism, in reality, has little at all to do with religion. It is simply a predictable consequence of living too long with emotional problems that have not been resolved. What today’s adolescents need from parents is guidance in dealing with life’s problems, not delusions about the existence of problems.

Occult, by precise definition, means hidden. It is the darkness surrounding LaVey that gives him the power he possesses. His ideas are lacking in logic and substance. The mystique of Satan can only exist under the protective shroud of ignorance that blankets the cult believers, as well as many who attempt to positively influence the lives of young people.

LAVEY’S SEVEN MAJOR ASSUMPTIONS

Nearly all of LaVey’s philosophy is based on seven major assumptions, none of which are derived from a logical or accurate assessment of contemporary religious belief systems.

Assumption I: Religion and Pleasure Are Mutually Exclusive

The first major assumption of LaVey is the incompatibility between a religious commitment and the enjoyment of life. He argues that anyone who accepts religion as a significant life influence must totally give up all pleasure and enjoyment. A Christian having some fun in life is just not possible, according to LaVey.

We must choose, he claims, between the path of being a religious person and that of being a seeker of pleasure. The gloomy, ascetic life of a religious person is portrayed in bleak and depressing terms. In fact, if we were to take LaVey seriously, only masochists would accept Christianity into their lives. The naive acceptance of this departure from reality is an essential prerequisite for adopting LaVey’s Satanism.

Assumption II: Man Is Inherently Violent

LaVey argues that all mankind has a tendency toward violence. He gives a number of examples that would persuade a young, frustrated, and angry reader to believe that violence is hereditary and not learned behavior. When violence is accepted as natural, it follows closely that the use of this “natural violence” is also acceptable, and, in some cases, to be encouraged when it propagates the Satanic belief system and gives more power to its leaders.

Once this idea is established and accepted as true, LaVey encourages the Satanist to strike out against anyone who becomes a problem. He mocks the “turn the other cheek” Christian, exhorting his readers to smash anyone who dares to strike out at them. Rather than viewing anger as one of the seven deadly sins, LaVey argues that we are better off considering anger as necessary to self-preservation and, therefore, natural to our instinctive selves.

This argument is persuasive to the frustrated adolescent who is drawn to The Satanic Bible for answers to his or her life problems, especially when these problems are complicated by feelings of diffuse anger. The young person learns a dangerous lesson: pervasive feelings of anger are normal and instinctive. Further, LaVey implies that since they are a normal part of human nature, they cannot be changed. He combines hostility with helplessness, leading a disturbed person to a perilous lack of motivation to try solving these problems. When stripped of the motivation to change problems, the adolescent is left only to justify their existence.

LaVey also argues a theory of innate aggression in humankind, despite the fact that a good deal of anthropological research has concluded otherwise. The definitive and classic study of human aggression conducted by Montagu (1950) concluded that aggression is not innate to the human species. In a later work on social aggression, Bandura (1973) concluded that aggression is learned from the environment and is rewarded by others in that environment. Baron (1985) concludes that we are bom with few aggressive responses. We all enter the world with an inherent tendency toward cooperative behavior, and anything that is indicative of aggressive behavior is the result of the frustrations of our natural tendencies. To be aggressive is unnatural, according to Montagu. Therefore, Satanism is equally unnatural.

LaVey insidiously reverses bad to good. Rather than see that aggressive feelings are the result of frustration and failure in life, LaVey persuades the reader to conclude that they must be normal and that everyone feels that way. Finally, he concludes, there is no point in trying to change that which is normal.

Assumption III: Bad and Good Are Reversed

LaVey argues that religion cannot meet the needs of today’s young people, and that religion is inherently wrong. Since it is all wrong, LaVey continues, the values it teaches must also be wrong as well. Further, if religion and what it teaches is all bad, it follows that what religion claims to be bad must be good. Through this round of double-talk, LaVey attempts to reverse the semantic meaning of good and bad. For the emotionally troubled adolescent reader, the acceptance of this logic is inviting for two reasons.

First, LaVey allows young people to turn feelings of guilt into a positive emotion. An adolescent exposed to stem and rigid religious upbringing diminishes his guilt completely by accepting LaVey’s reversal of good and bad. The relief from guilt feelings is a powerful reinforcer to the adolescent who accepts LaVey’s arguments. Consequently, some young people find themselves attracted to Satanism not so much on the basis of its merits, but on the unacceptability of its alternative, that is, religion. Through the manipulation of psychological factors, LaVey exploits the powerful learning process of negative reinforcement to his advantage. In effect, if the reader is not persuaded by the merits of Satanism, he or she will find in it consolation from escaping the intolerable alternative—religion as described by LaVey.

Second, the reversal of good and bad also affects the meanings of messages sent by parents and other well-intended adults to a young cult member. Parents, unaware of this reversal of good and evil, are naturally inclined to plead with the disgruntled adolescent to consider the evil of this decision to become involved with Satanism. Once the adolescent has reversed good and evil, any strategy on the parents’ part to attack Satanic philosophy by labeling it as evil is totally counterproductive. It simply encourages further involvement with Satanism, the opposite of what a parent hopes to accomplish.

Assumption IV: Satanism Is Strength

LaVey correctly assumes that young people have a desire and need to be strong and powerful. The fundamental need for power and personal significance drives most people, especially adolescents caught in the midst of personal conflicts. LaVey associates Satanism with the acquisition of power, an association that captures the attention of many young people. All he needs to complete this act of persuasion is to convince the reader that religionists, LaVey’s term for Christians, are weak by virtue of their “turn the other cheek” attitude toward others. Instead, he exhorts the reader to “make yourself a terror to your adversary. . . . Thus shall you make yourself respected” (p. 33). He frequently refers to one’s enemies, leaving his readers to identify personal enemies as anyone who tries to influence them away from these beliefs.

LaVey probably anticipates that anyone who takes the time to read his book must have enemies against whom the reader is compelled to defend himself or herself. The “us against them” dichotomy furthers the alienation from mainstream society and makes the ideas of Satanism more acceptable.

Assumption V: Satanism Is Now

Satanism, according to LaVey, is the only religion that has any concern for the here and now. He mocks Christians and their view of any meaningful life after death by referring to them as “gazers beyond the grave.” LaVey tells the reader that if he or she has any concern for the here and now, Satanism is the only choice. After all, he suggests, Christianity can only deal with the remote future.

Many young people find themselves caught up in impulsive behavior patterns that focus exclusively on the present. These patterns of behavior are typical of young people who are unable to deal constructively with their problems. They are given a justification for ignoring the future and find consolation in their failure to attend to the consequences of their behavior.

Assumption VI: Satanism Is Power

The promise of power through Satanism is central to all of LaVey’s arguments. The lure of some acquisition of greater power is the major single attraction of all occult ideas, and it will continue to interest a great number of young people. LaVey literally enchants a young and naive reader with the “Enochian Keys,” a long list of ritualistic and rambling prayers to Satan that are supposed to give young Satanists power over others for whatever desire they need to express.

This assumption is so important to LaVey’s philosophy that the next chapter is devoted to a greater exploration of this promise of power and how it attracts so many young people to Satanism. There is little question that the interest in Satanism as a source of power is fully dependent on psychologically helpless young people. In reality, the appeal of Satanism is a symptom, masking feelings of helplessness in the face of real life problems. The reasons for these feelings of helplessness will be discussed in the chapter on power.

Assumption VII: We Must Choose between Sex and Religion

LaVey argues that religion and sex are totally incompatible. He makes use of another dichotomy that leads the reader to a forced choice between religion and sexual identity. When expressed in this context, it is unlikely that anyone would forsake all sexual identity to embrace religion. As a result, LaVey makes Satanism out to appear as a matter of logical choice. Nowhere in his book does LaVey give credence to the possibility that an individual can be a religious person and concurrently have a well-defined sense of sexual identity.

Since many adolescents struggle with sexual identity issues, promoting sexual expression as desirable can be especially attractive to a troubled adolescent. LaVey’s most insidious statement may be the implication that if you have any sexual feelings you must be a Satanist. Young people who read LaVey’s book uncritically and do not question his assumptions are particularly vulnerable to this line of persuasion. Once they read that their sexual emotions or sexual anxieties simply mean they are Satanists, what follows is an enormous sense of relief from the entire constellation of emotional pressures in the area of developing sexual identity that commonly beleaguer so many troubled adolescents.

In the second part of his analysis of sexuality, LaVey devotes an entire chapter to the idea that autoerotic behavior is acceptable and normal activity for an individual. This argument is appealing to a troubled adolescent reader who identifies with this argument in the context of a strict and conservative religious practice that holds masturbation to be sinful and forbidden. Given that masturbation is an experience virtually universal to adolescents, it is understandable that a young reader of The Satanic Bible might find consolation in LaVey’s arguments, especially if his or her own religious training strictly forbids this sexual experimentation.

The issue for parents is clear. They need to be more understanding of and accepting of the reality that masturbation is common to the adolescent experience. Forbidding this type of sexual experimentation will virtually guarantee that most adolescents will either accept it only marginally or reject it outright. Young people need a religious experience, especially during the difficult time of adolescence. They also need to develop a strong and appropriate sense of sexual identity. Neither one should be forsaken for the other.

The experience of adolescence is universally characterized by an upsurge of sexual drive, and it is simply naive or foolish to deny that this exists. It also follows that a parental attitude toward sexuality as a subject for open and honest discussion is an effective way to ensure that an adolescent will not be unduly persuaded by the arguments presented by LaVey in The Satanic Bible.

CONCLUSION

The implications of LaVey’s arguments for parents are several. First, a reasonably objective understanding of the principles of Satanism is important for parents to obtain. In knowledge there is power. The knowledge of LaVey’s Satanic principles enables parents to understand the process of Satanism and to better recognize the steps through which a young person moves toward greater involvement. In addition, and probably more important, the mystique of Satanism is a major source of power in itself. When Satanic ideas are discussed openly, intelligently, and without confrontation, they lose considerable power in the context of this objectivity. Parents might find these objective questions useful in opening dialogue with their children:

What does power mean to you?

How do you get power?

Can you just feel power, or do you have to do something to get it?

What power comes from helping other people?

The bulk of LaVey’s ideas are valued by young people because of their alleged secrecy. Parents should be concerned enough to learn what beliefs attract their children. It is also important that parents show their children that LaVey and other proponents of Satanism have no magic. Their ideas and arguments simply warp logic with clever bits of delusion.

Parents would do well to evaluate the way they teach religion to their children. Religious belief systems that promote an oppressively rigid and narrow perception of morality are more vulnerable to the criticisms leveled by LaVey. A religious practice that includes a concern for one’s neighbor and encourages action to promote the betterment of the community has more power than any of the vague Satanic beliefs. This power is enhanced by involvement rather than simply by belief. Power comes to us when we give power to others. This can be experienced in many ways by doing things for people less fortunate than we. It is a powerful experience to empower others.

A young person who experiences the need to take action on the basis of religious convictions and appreciates the outcome of that action learns that religion is a source of significant power in one’s personal life. This approach to religion also builds feelings of personal integrity and self-esteem, psychological characteristics notably absent in the development of young people attracted to Satanism.

The same year that Christian Science was launched, three students of the esoteric tradition, Helena P. Blavatsky (1831-1891), Henry Steele Olcott (1832—1907), and William Q. Judge (1851-1896) created the Theosophical Society. The three were familiar with spiritualism and its attempt to demonstrate the reality of life after death but also wished to appropriate the rich resources of the older Western Gnostic esoteric spirituality that had for almost two millennia been the major alternative to Christianity.Throughout the years of Christian dominance of Western culture, there repeatedly arose dissenting groups that proposed a spiritual vision that envisioned an unknowable transcendent deity (rather than a personal deity to which one could relate) who produced the world through a series of emanations (rather than a single act of creation). Rather than creatures of God, this tradition suggested, humans were in fact particles of God trapped in the lesser reality called matter. Salvation consisted of leaving the world of matter behind and escaping through the levels of spiritual reality created by successive emanations back to God’s realm. Assisting humans in their efforts to escape were various master teachers who existed on the spiritual levels and evolved beings in this life who were in contact with these masters.

Through the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, esotericism had found expression in movements such as Rosicrucianism and Speculative Freemasonry. The Theosophical Society, however, aligned the tradition with new perspectives about science and evolution, and it struck a responsive chord in many. Thousands of people around the world flocked to its banner, and the society grew in spite of scandals that surrounded Blavatsky and several other leading Theosophists during its early years.

Then during the 1920s, the society promoted a young Indian teacher, Jiddu Krishnamurti (1895—1986), as the embodiment of the coming World Savior, who would lead humanity into its next phase of spiritual evolvement. In 1929, after traveling around the world for several years on this campaign, Krishnamurti suddenly resigned his messianic role. The blow, coming just as the world plunged into an economic depression, severely undercut the society, and it has spent the intervening years trying to recover.

If one measured success in terms of membership, the Theosophical Society would not rank very high. However, its influence in attracting people to the Gnostic vision had been immense. In the United States alone, over 100 esoteric organizations can be traced directly to the society. It was also among these esoteric groups that a new movement was born that remade its image in the 1970s.

The New Age movement accepted all of the elements of the esoteric tradition, from contact with highly evolved masters to the use of various occult practices like astrology and meditation. Where Theosophy had brought thousands into occult teachings, the New Age movement attracted millions to the transformative vision of a golden age of wisdom and peace.

Theosophists picture the spiritual world as divided into many levels above the physical existence. (pic related)

JZ Knight, here channeling the Enlightened entity named Ramtha, was the most successful channeler of the 1980s.

On 5 November 1966, the Saturday Evening Post featured John Kobler's essay, "Out for a Night at the Local Caldron."

"To her neighbors,"Kobler began, "Mrs. Eunice Jenkins(as we will call her, to avoid alarming them) is a plump, cheerful London housewife who exemplifies middle-class, middle-aged British decorum. But at the approach of Halloween, she prepares to perform some of the most bizarre pagan rites to have survived into the 20th century." The article was about British Neopagan Wicca, an eclectic occult religious movement made up of loosely connected groups and individuals who look to nature-oriented, often polytheistic religions and myths for inspiration.

Kobler gave a history of the movement and its founder, Gerald Gardner. A retired British civil servant, Gardner is viewed by scholars of new religious movements as one of the "founders" of contemporary Neopaganism. Kobler also interviewed practicing witches like Sybil Leek and Doreen Valiente. Throughout, he depicted the British witches as curiosities who were simultaneously exotic and harmlessly domestic.

Kobler's prose and the accompanying illustrations by the Addams Family creator Charles Addams were lighthearted. The article's subheading announced that "witchcraft in Britain can be fun, one reason there are thousands of real British witches."

The first drawing showed dozens of fathers and children standing at the doorways of their homes. They waved to their wives and mothers —who just happened to be wearing pointy black hats and black gowns, and carrying broomsticks. These domestic witches waved back as they walked to their station wagons. The second illustration showed six overweight, middle-aged men and women dancing nude around a caldron. Above them, a younger woman danced in a cage, while a witch in the corner of the castle-like room spun records at a turntable. "Witchcraft a Go Go," the caption read, "more frenzied than most discotheques."

While Kobler noted that exposés on black magic remained "a staple of the British press," he suggested that "Britain's witches are not especially sinister." The characters in Kobler's article appeared humorous, even charming. They were simultaneously exotic and banal: they danced naked around bonfires, but drove to them in station wagons. They cast spells and dabbled in the occult, but they were white, middle aged, middle class, and English. The British witches appeared in the Halloween issue of the Post as entertaining holiday curiosities. They were offbeat, but much too familiar to be frightening.

Some Asian religions appearing in the United States received similar journalistic treatment. On 17 January 1969, for example, Time published "Sects: The Power of Positive Chanting."

The article introduced readers to Nichiren Shoshu Sokkagakkai International of America (NSA), a Japanese Buddhist movement which entered the United States in 1960. Time described NSA as "an odd blend of militant Buddhism, the power of positive thinking and showbiz uplift." Unlike other Buddhist groups, NSA focused exclusively on the Lotus Sutra, a Mahayana scripture dating from the first century.34 Followers chant Lotus Sutra excerpts and practice Daimoku, which consists of repeating the mantra "Nam Myoho Renge Kyo." This roughly translates as "devotion to the Lotus Sutra." Members suggest that chanting this can make one wealthy, cure illnesses, and assure happiness. In addition to these personal benefits, members believe that chanting the Daimoku will also reap global rewards. Participants assert that if a certain portion of the world's population practices chanting, world peace will ensue, called "kosen rufu."

Like Kobler's article in the Post, Time presented a positive mixture of the exotic and humorous. Evoking the potentially exotic, mysterious "Orient" traditionally associated with Western conceptions of Asia, the article described followers at one meeting in Hollywood sitting "Oriental-style" with Buddhist prayer beads between their fingers.35 The accompanying photograph showed the group facing a stage, where an Asian priest, dressed in robes, knelt with his back to the audience. The caption read "Soka Gakkai Conversion Ceremony: Doing It with Daimoku." Showing the group in a positive light, Time reported that "Negroes who join the movement claim to be impressed by the absence of racial prejudice." "Ultimately, the goal of Soka Gakkai," Time noted, "is the establishment of an earthly kingdom come—an era of world peace that will be achieved when at least one-third of mankind adopts the sect's version of true Buddhism."

Though it interpreted NSA as intrinsically oriental, the magazine also represented the movement as familiar. Through vivid description, for example, Time humorously recounted that followers enthusiastically sang "Chant Daimoku! Yeah! Yeah! Yeah!" to the tune of the Beatles' "She Loves You." No doubt, relatively few readers in the 1960s would have found Beatle tunes exotic. One article in Newsweek directly stated that the movement was"neither exotic nor mysterious."38 And by reporting on the group's annual convention, Newsweek allotted NSA the type of coverage that it usually reserved for established Christian denominations. However, the accompanying photograph—which showed smiling NSA conventioneers performing an elaborate dance in space suits—certainly evoked the offbeat.

Robert Galbreath is right to suggest that little evidence exists for an increase in occult participation in the late 1960s. However, using Galbreath's definition of the occult as encompassing secret or hidden matters like omens, apparitions, psychic abilities, secret societies, and mystery schools, there is also no doubt that it received heightened commercial and media attention. Movies like Rosemary's Baby and television shows like Dark Shadows appeared. A plethora of mass-market books on the occult were also published, ranging from sympathetic popular overviews like John Godwin's Occult America to scathing critiques like Owen Rachleff's The Occult Conceit.

Always on the lookout for heresy, Evangelicals contributed dozens of polemics against the occult, and their most visible periodical, Christianity Today, reviewed dozens of texts on it. Children's board games even reflected growing attention to the occult. In 1967, for example, Parker Brothers' Ouija board game moved ahead of Monopoly as the most popular game as measured in yearly sales. Other children's games of the period included "Mystique Astrology" and "Prediction," both purporting to allow the players to foretell future events. The religious historian Robert Ellwood correctly suggests that the occult had become popular culture in the 1960s.

As part of mass culture in the 1960s, the occult received attention from the print media. Like the Third Force and California cults, occultism was a malleable and inclusive rubric that connected a wide range of disparate groups, including Anton LaVey's Church of Satan, a colorful movement in southern California that attracted celebrities like Sammy Davis Jr. and Jayne Mansfield; Puerto Rican Espiritismo, a laity-based Afro-Caribbean faith that used herbs, healing, and spells; and American Neopaganism.

Just as the occult could refer to a plethora of groups, journalistic representations contained a variety of framing motifs. Strikingly, occult depictions in the largest news and general-interest magazines simultaneously evoked exotic curiosity and dangerous deviancy.

On 19 June 1972, for example, the cover of Time featured an unidentified hooded figure. Two nondescript eyes gazed at the reader from the dark pointed hood, which was decorated with a pentagram and goat. Large white letters announced, "The Occult Revival: Satan Returns." Like the article on British witches in the Saturday Evening Post in 1966, the story opened with a scene that mixed the domestic and the exotic. In the first paragraph, the magazine's unnamed writers described neatly dressed people gathered in a "comfortable split-level home" in Louisville, Kentucky. The hosts were a young Army officer and his wife, and their guests included a computer programmer, a dog trainer, and a college student. This seemingly reputable group, Time recounted, proceeded solemnly to the vinyl-floored recreation room. But instead of talking over coffee, watching television, or playing cards, the group had another activity planned. It ritually invoked Satan. "This recent scene—and many a similarly bizarre one—," Time warned, "is being re-enacted all across the U.S. nowadays."

The article proceeded to discuss crystal balls, Spiritualism, witchcraft, the history of the devil, and prophecies, among other topics. Sixteen accompanying photographs also ran the gamut, showing everything from a nude witchcraft coven to a Protestant youth group called the "Evangelical Teen Challenge Jesus People," pictured exorcising a demon from a young woman. Whether it was paintings of the devil or Satanists in full costume, the photos evoked the exotic. But like Kobler's British witches, Time suggested, some occultists were only exotic in appearance. Writing about LaVey's Church of Satan, for example, the magazine asserted that the most striking thing about the members was "that instead of being exotic, they are almost banal in their normality." For Time, it seemed, the Church of Satan—like Mahesh Maharishi Yogi—was just not exotic enough.

Time described the Church of Satan as banal and, by implication, harmless. But the magazine also suggested that the occult had a more seamy and dangerous side. "But the darker, more malevolent Satanists," the article claimed, "give only rare and tantalizing hints of their existence." The most famous of these groups, the magazine asserted, was Charles Manson's "family," the group that committed the widely publicized torture and murder of the actress Sharon Tate and three of her friends in 1969. The murder and court case were the subject of a bestseller by Vincent Bugliosi and Curt Gentry titled Helter Skelter (1969).

Time continued its discussion of underground Satanism by suggesting that "now and again other grisly items in the news reveal the breed." Time related that "in New York this spring, police were searching for possible Devil worshipers in a grave robbery incident. In Miami last summer, a 22-year-old woman Satanist killed a 62-year-old friend, stabbing him 46 times. Convicted of manslaughter, she drew a seven-year sentence, thanked Satan for her light penalty, and said that she had ‘enjoyed' the killing. In April she escaped from prison, and has not been recaptured."

In 1970, in an article titled "Cult of the Occult," Newsweek had evoked similar foreboding. As the writers at Time later would, the Newsweek reporter Nick Kazan called LaVey's Satanic Church banal, "‘a highly stylized, arcane bore."'

But the article warned, "the farthest-out cults that glorify evil are pervaded by an air of secrecy and aberration. Tales of murder and human sacrifice sometimes surround them." In supporting this claim, Newsweek included rumors about a police raid in Houston on a "satanic sanctum" that uncovered the bones of sacrificed animals. It also quoted the popular author Arthur Lyons Jr., who suggested that "intense devil dabblers ‘are insane—really dangerous."'

The "breed" of Satanist described by Time and the "farthest-out cults" in Newsweek closely resembled those later portrayed in the Satanic cult legends of the 1980s. As several scholars have noted, and as I discuss more in Chapter 5, the decade saw a number of rumor panics about underground Satanic cults who robbed graves, abducted children, and practiced human sacrifice. The sociologist Jeffrey Victor has identified sixty-two panic-inducing rumors about devil-worshiping cults in the United States between 1982 and 1992. This figure does not include the hundreds of allegations since the late 1980s by individuals of ritual child abuse at the hands of Satanist parents. The most striking thing about all these rumors and claims was that they lacked confirming evidence.

Despite sympathetic police and favorable coverage in local newspapers, as well as a prime-time television special in 1988 in which the host, Geraldo Rivera, affirmed the existence of an immense underground Satanist network, no such groups were ever uncovered.

The evidence hinted at in Time and Newsweek of "the darker, more malevolent Satanists" followed the legendary, "friend of a friend" (foaf) tales that fueled many rumors of the 1980s. The magazines failed to name any specifics about the grave robbery in New York or the discovery of animal bones in Houston—or even tell why the police would suspect Satanists. No specific sources were named, making it impossible for readers to investigate the stories further. Time, for example, gave no details about the Satanic murderess in Miami. The magazine's closing note that she escaped from prison and had yet to be caught mirrored the portentous endings of many contemporary foaf legends.

The magazines' assertions that dangerous, even murderous, Satanic groups lurked about the landscape in the late 1960s was based more on rumor and supposition than on material evidence. But inclusion of these phantom-like Satanists in occult stories served to darken depictions of the periphery, adding dangerous deviancy to American religious fringe discourse. For example, while no one would question that the members of the Manson "family " were dangerous deviants, stories about them also proclaimed them to be Satanists, but never explained why. In so doing they connected the Manson family to occult religion—and thus to the religious margins as a whole.

>>541356

Every decent snake oil salesman has some truth in the message.

LaVey came along at a time when morals and religion were being questioned, former absolutes were seen as relative, and he capitalized on the vacuum.

>>541290

>>541497

Everybody was a satanist for about 15 years and then nobody was a satanist.