 |
 Dark Matter Satanic Readings : Theistic or Traditional Satanism Information on Satanic beliefs. Articles, comments, links, recommended books, and more. |
| Main page >> On the need for a Satanic creed |
|
On the need for a Satanic creed.
What is a creed? From the Latin word credo meaning I believe, a formal definition or summary of the faith. A statement of religious beliefs agreed by the church to be true. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913): 1. A definite summary of what is believed; esp., a summary of the articles of Christian faith; a confession of faith for public use; esp., one which is brief and comprehensive. 2. Any summary of principles or opinions professed or adhered to. WordNet Dictionary: 1. Any system of principles or beliefs. 2. The written body of teachings of a religious group that are generally accepted by that group. The Catechism of the Catholic Church: "170 We do not believe in formulae, but in those realities they express, which faith allows us to touch. "The believer's act [of faith] does not terminate in the propositions, but in the realities [which they express]." (St. Thomas Aquinas). All the same, we do approach these realities with the help of formulations of the faith which permit us to express the faith and to hand it on, to celebrate it in community, to assimilate and live on it more and more." "185 Whoever says "I believe" says "I pledge myself to what we believe." Communion in faith needs a common language of faith, normative for all and uniting all in the same confession of faith." "188 The Greek word symbolon meant half of a broken object, for example, a seal presented as a token of recognition. The broken parts were placed together to verify the bearer's identity. The symbol of faith, then, is a sign of recognition and communion between believers. Symbolon also means a gathering, collection or summary. A symbol of faith is a summary of the principal truths of the faith and therefore serves as the first and fundamental point of reference for catechesis." Why do we need a creed? Posted by me in the Church of Azazel Yahoo! Group on Tue Jul 20, 2004: Even though I to some degree appreciate the fact that Satanists usually prefer to think of themselves as free spirits, not subjects to any kind of dogma, please allow me to express my own, personal feelings. If you're an atheist - such as LaVeyan Satanists are - it obviously doesn't matter what you believe (so to speak), 'cause it's all just psychic theatre. Any suggestion that you can have a RELIGION without at least some basic articles of faith seems downright ludicrous to me. Satanists can easily do without a catechism as such, but if there are no articles of faith, there simply is no religion. At most there is a gathering of religiously inclined people who agree to disagree. The articles should be stated in such a way that there is room for some interpretation, obviously. But we need them. Either we believe in SOMETHING, and this something can be expressed in articles of faith, or we do not believe in anything, really, 'cause we're just making it up as we go along. Satanists need a creed for the very same reason that Christians need a creed, in order to properly express our beliefs, in order to establish a common language, in order to unite, and in order to - as the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it - approach the realities expressed. (Furthermore, even though this is of course of less importance: On the Church of Azazel website, Ms. Diane Vera expresses the hope that the CoAz will be able to "raise the intellectual level of the Satanist scene as a whole" (see http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/dvera/CoAz/who.html). Adding to this, I would suggest that having a creed could possibly help raise the poetic level of Satanic ritual language (including prayers and hymns). Satanic prayers, even though well-intended, are generally of very poor quality in regard to both theological content and poetic strength.) There are many forms of Satanism (see http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/dvera/CoAz/belief/interpret.html), and it would not be possible to formulate a creed that would fully satisfy them all. This, however, is hardly an excuse for not expressing (or trying to express) our beliefs. As D. Vera point out, some Satanists believe that gods are actually extraterrestrial humanoids. A creed for the followers of Azazel would obviously not satisfy those who believe that Satan is an E.T. - but then, I see no reason why it should. Also, the creed should of course be formulated in such a manner that there is plenty of room for interpretation. Satanists are rebels, or at least they like to think of themselves as rebels. They do not like dogmas, and they do not like creeds that are - again quoting the Catechism of the Catholic Church - normative. This is one reason why Satanism is such a vital and refreshing force, and this is the main reason why Satanists have such a hard time coming together in order to actually do something. Communion in faith does need a common language of faith. Since trying to establish such a common language will almost certainly be interpreted as an attempt to exercise authority, and since Satanists generally distrusts authorities, there is little hope that formulating a creed would work to unite large groups of individuals. However, I propose that it would work to unite those of us who believe that the time has now come for Satanists to grow up, to leave the rebel attitudes behind, and to come together in a serious effort to turn theistic Satanism into a true church. Not a church for the many, but a church for the chosen few. What should the creed contain? I have some problems with Ms. Diane Vera's notion of the "here-and-now principle in theology" (see http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/dvera/CoAz/belief/here-now.html), but I very much agree with her (even though I don't like the word "symbolic"), that if "myth has any real meaning at all, it most likely has a symbolic meaning in terms of the here-and-now." This, obviously, is the reason why we have myths: They give "symbolic" answers to questions that can not be answered in any other way. What are we here for? What is the purpose of my life? There are no rational answers to such questions. There are, however, religious answers, and often such answers are supported by the use of myths. If Ms. Vera's "here-and-now principle" states that we should not even ask such questions to begin with, I believe that it is wrong. Man can not not ask such questions, and he will continue to do so until the end of time. Myths, obviously, should not be taken literally. Most people know this. Most Christians are well aware that their god did not create the world in just 6 days; it is just a myth. But this doesn't mean that the Jewish-Christian myth of creation is not important. On the contrary. As bible readers will know, Genesis contains two different creation myths, and they very much contradict one another (see A comment on biblical contradictions). According to the first one, god let it rain upon the earth, filling the oceans, and then plants started to grow. This is the kind of creation myth that we would expect to find among desert nomads for whom rain is essential. God provided them with water, and only because of the water could life be sustained. The second myth tells the exact opposite tale: God divided the waters, so that dry land appeared. This myth probably originates from when the Jews were in Egypt. Living in a river delta, dry land is vital. Despite the contradictions, both myths basically say the same thing: It was god who gave us circumstances under which we can sustain life, and for this we ought to be gratefull. Also, god can at any moment change those circumstances - he can stop the rain from falling, or he can let the rivers rise - and if he chooses to do so, it's probably because we've deserved it. So, we better behave. A Satanic creed, I believe, should not contain various commandments, or teach Satanic ethics. It should basically tell the mythological story of Satan according to the available sources, ie. The Book of Enoch, biblical writings, and a few other. Even though interpretations may vary, there are certain things that we ought to be able to agree upon: We believe in Azazel 1. who came to us, who decended upon earth to be with us humans, or perhaps who decended from heaven 2. to bring us wisdom, or to bring us heavenly wisdom 3. who stayed in the wilderness 4. who now dwells underground 5. who is calling us and so on. Formulating such a Satanic creed should not be taken lightly. Much consideration would be required, but I firmly believe that it would be worth the effort. If you're interested in taking part, please do not hesitate to mail me. You will find my email address at the bottom of this page. Posted by Geifodd in the Church of Azazel Yahoo! Group on Mon Jul 26, 2004: "1. We believe in Azazel" The problem we have here is that not everyone here is convinced that Satan and Azazel are identical. Some folks feel that to call him anything other than Satan is to run the risk of falling away from Satan and embracing some other deity (such as how the Setians called him "Set," and now they appear to be following an entity that is distinct from Satan, though of course we have no way of objectively knowing if they really are distinct or not). Personally, however, I regard Azazel as the closest thing we have to a "true name" for this entity, and "Satan" as more of a derogatory term that is used to demean him by the Abrahamics; so I would certainly agree with the above statement. "1. who came to us, who decended upon earth to be with us humans, or perhaps who decended from heaven" To be honest I am not sure what I believe about Azazel's origins. The original myths portray him as a celestial being who came to earth to live among us; later on Christians began to believe that he had been "kicked out" from heaven instead. I'm more inclined to agree with the former notion than the latter. Assuming that Azazel did originally come from the heavens, I find it more likely that he came to this world out of a genuine interest in doing so, rather than as a sentence of punishment. For some reason, when I pray to Azazel, I always subconsciously look upward at the nighttime sky. I feel particularly close to him when I can see the stars. I am unsure as to what this might implicate, but I have always felt that there somehow exists a connection between the Prince of Darkness and the nighttime sky. So I suppose that it is reasonable to believe that he was perhaps originally not of this earth (which I suppose would qualify him as an "extra-terrestrial" strictly in the sense that he originally was not of this world, but I'm nervous that I might be steeping myself in science fiction here). This is not to imply, however, that I am open to believing that Azazel is really a physical, humanoid creature living on a distant planet who communicates with humans telepathically (i.e., the Joy of Satan). "2. to bring us wisdom, or to bring us heavenly wisdom" What is meant by "heavenly?" I agree that Azazel is a bringer of wisdom, but I am more inclined to see it as a "down-to-earth," worldly sort of wisdom. I feel that he encourages us to be worldly, in the sense of focusing on our lives here on earth rather than meditating on some faraway spiritual paradise, and in the sense of embracing the pleasures and pains of worldly existence rather than rejecting them to attain some sort of "nirvana" or other spiritual "purity," these things normally being associated with "heaven." So I'm unsure how to regard your characterization of Azazel's wisdom as being "heavenly." When you have time, please elaborate on what you mean here. "3. who stayed in the wilderness" I would say that Azazel is a "god of wilderness," not necessarily a god who stayed *in* the wilderness. This would seem to imply that he exists outside of human civilization, which I don't agree with. I believe that even human civilization is part of the wilderness, as man is just another animal, and our cities are pretty much the same thing as beehives, just bigger and immensely more complicated. Humans like to imagine themselves as somehow existing "apart" from Nature, but we really don't. New York City is just as much a "wilderness" as the Amazon jungle. "4. who now dwells underground" I'm more inclined to view Azazel as roaming the surface of the earth rather than dwelling someplace underground. "5. who is calling us" I certainly can't debate you on this point. I agree with this fully. The question is, for what purpose is he calling us? Below is a link to a theological outline concerning the nature of the Prince as I understand him. I would be interested in any comments anyone might have on it, in light of Dark Matter's proposal for a Satanic creed. My Theology Concerning the Prince of Darkness: http://www.geocities.com/geifodd/statements.html Geifodd |
| Copyright. Please notice: All texts contained on these pages are copyright © Dark Matter 2004. Do not copy without permission. Send e-mail. Quoting is allowed if the author and Dark Matter website URL are both reckognized. Add "Courtesy of Reginald Osiris, http://www.angelfire.com/alt2/darkmatter". |
| Contact. Send e-mail. Please notice: Only serious e-mails are answered. |
