"Mankind (is) unhappy, in proportion as (it is) deluded by imaginary systems of theology. Taught to attach much importance to belief in religious doctrines, and to mere forms and ceremonies of religious worship, the slightest disagreement among theological dogmatists is oftentimes sufficient to inflame their minds, already excited by bigotry, and to lead them to anathematize and destroy each other without pity, mercy, or remorse."

Diderot, introduction to Baron D. Holbach's "Laws of the Moral and Physical World", or "The System of Nature"

Here's a question for you, which is Satanism? Is it a philosophy, a religion, or a Social movement? If you say philosophy, then is it a closed philosophy or an open philosophy? If you say religion, don't you have to agree it doesn't meet the basic requirements for a religion? That is to say that religion is based upon two words, the roots of which being lig, literally translated as to bind, whence also lic-tor, lex, and ligare come into being, all meaning some form of "binding". This is also etymologically connected to "obligatio", from which we get "obligation". The prefix used is "re", which means "again", so the literal translation of religion through etymological association is "To bind again". Here, we run into the problem of properly defining what the word "religion" means to people and what the requirements are for being a "religion". The other problem is that a religion is the most codified structure there is, but really, Satanism has almost no codified structure. For instance, Aloys Sprenger, a Jewish scholar, defines religion as: "{What} differentiates religion from {a} philosophy {is}: a nationality, ceremonies, historical memories, mysteries, {and} an assurance of entering heaven," though Sprenger was talking in a totally different context, the remark is sufficient for our purposes. Some people have thus labeled Satanism the "un-religion" or a "pseudo-religion" due to this.

Satanism does possess ceremonies, and some historical memories, but no mysteries, no nationality, and no assurance of entering heaven. The final answer is actually the most truthful answer, but very few Satanists will actually admit it. More than anything, Satanism is really a social movement, an undercurrent in society. The same is actually true with all forms of atheism such as Humanism, Empiricism, Rationalism, Nihilism, etc. They aren't religions, they are (loosely) philosophical systems which are closer manifestations of a social movement of like-minded people.

One question that I routinely hear is, "Why do you call yourselves Satanists if you don't worship Satan." First, we must look at what adding the suffix "ist" to a word means. "ist" means "following the specific doctrines of." So, quite literally, a Satanist is one who follows the specific doctrines of Satan. From this line of thinking, it would seem that Satanists would worship the Devil. However, that is not the case, because Satan never once preached for his worship.

One of the pathetically few references in the Old Testament that makes allusion to Satan is Isaiah, Chapter 14. Now, here's a note. This scripture actually refers to the Babylonian Empire, and in particular, to King Nebuchadnezzar. However, as Satanists, we take this symbolically. Thousands of years later, there's still evidence of King Nebuchadnezzar's reign. However, nothing remains of the so-called "Jewish Empire". (Frankly, because there never was such a thing.) Anyway, here's what "Satan" said.

I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Thus we find that according to Satan, it is the "I" which is exalted above all things. To put something above the "I" is to fail in regards to following the teachings of Satan. Thus, you are not a Satanist. Now, this doesn't mean that Satanists don't believe in cosmic forces that can be seen as "dark" or "light". Personally, I view all daemons, angels, etc. as "forces" that we use names for. To me, labeling a force as "good" or "bad" is kind of stupid. It's tantamount to saying that gravity is good, but inertia is bad.

While I'm at it, I think I'll discuss another subject. People always ask me if I view Satanism as a religion. I personally do not. Why? Because of the nature of the definition of "religion". The etymology of the word "religion" was a debated subject in the ancient times. Various opinions were prevalent among the ancients.Modern etymologists mostly agree with this latter view, assuming as root lig, to bind, whence also lic-tor, lex, and ligare; hence, religio sometimes means the same as obligatio; v. Corss. Aussprache, 1, 444 sq.; cf. Munro ad Lucr. 1, 109.]

So, we now must look at what the word "religio" means, then we shall look at the word "obligatio", and see how that relates to Satanism.

I: Reverence for God (the gods), the fear of God, connected with a careful pondering of divine things; piety, religion, both pure inward piety and that which is manifested in religious rites and ceremonies; hence the rites and ceremonies, as well as the entire system of religion and worship, the "res divinae" or "sacrae", were frequently called "religio" or "religiones" (From this, our primary use of the word religion came about):

Obligatio has a lot of meanings, the most common are

• "A binding" (post-class, and very rare)
• "an ensnaring, entangling"
• "An engaging or piedging, an obligation"
• "an obligatory relation between two persons, one of whom has a right and the other a duty"
• "The document which confirms this relation, a bond, obligation"

Thus, we see that religion has very strict demands on being bound, restricted, and in all senses, having a debt to something. That is not the point of Satanism. Satanism is a philosophy that is formed on the basis of making oneself devoid of all superflous attachments to God and man. I think a more appropriate term for Satanism would be more appropriately called a "refîbulo", or literally, "unbuckling". To unshackle yourself from all that unnecessary binding you were doing. That is the meaning of "left-hand path". To stay on the mundane, not concentrate on the ethereal, to soley exist upon the temporal matter. Therefore, by very name and association, Satanism can't be rightly called a religion in my eyes.

What little philosophy Satanism actually has in and of itself is moot, Satanism is really just a conglomerate of social movements ranging from socialism to complete free economy, and ranging from neo-despotic idealism, (the strong shall crush the weak, we are the strong, blah blah), to "sociable anarchy", where society becomes so enlightened that they don't need a government to supervise them anymore. The fact that there's no real ties to anything outside of Lavey, compounded with the problem that some organizations reject Lavey, leads to weird associations. This causes the Satanists to tie themselves to neo-Nazi ideology, socialism, communism, etc., because they really don't have a link in and of themselves. This is the same reason why Augustine and Acquinas had to adopt pagan philosophy to form their idea of Christianity, by itself, no religion actually has a philosophy to it, it is something which is tacked onto the religion.

This is where we come into being. We are actually establishing a real link to legitimate organizations and mystery schools, in an effort to create and maintain a Satanic mystery school, with the overall goal being to create what we see as "active Satanists", not passive troglodytes. We utilize the full scope of Satanic archetypes and imagery to create a needed restoration or revitalizing of the Satanic community. Naturally, joining us doesn't make one "more" or "less" Satanic, someone who doesn't even consider themselves a Satanist could conceivably join and progress strides forward in personal evolution. The imagery and archetypes are for internal ego-friction and conflict with popular ideas, leading to a forceful learning process where all information has to processed and assimilated, old prejudices are brought to the surface and evaluated. Like the deep-rooted wart beneath the skin, the problem is rooted out and then destroyed by first recognizing what is wrong in the first place, and then dealing with what is there. Not just recognizing a problem exists or just knowing what the problem is caused by is enough. Freud found this out whenever he would temporarily cure patients by making them recognize what the conflict was in their lives, but the fix was only temporary because they never resolved the conflict.

Unknown even to many atheists, people who proclaim themselves the most "free" from Christianity and other social superstitions are often the ones most attached to them. There's a theory that whatever system of thought you are brought up with impacts you the rest of your life, you're either stuck rebelling against it or conforming to it. We recognize two kinds of rebellion in this matter. The first might be thought of as the Prometheus rebellion, the rebellion of enlightenment. For instance, someone who is raised to believes African-Americans are genetically inferior can receive enlightenment through studying, and thus consciously reject and expell the belief. The other type of rebellion is the "fire and water" rebellion. It goes along the lines of the old Indian saying that fire and water make good servants, but bad masters. Instead of a positive use of the anger or disposition against a belief, the reaction is one where it becomes destruction both to the person and to the environment.

Having stated that, our first goal is present. The betterment of the people who are becoming part of our school, who are writing our literature, and communicating with society at large. You can think of this as a social aggregated form of altruism. The next piece lies within the bounds of the same reason, to cause a social change. At this point, we can define some differences between politics and social changes, as the two are often confused. A social change is a change in the mass of society, or the mentality of the people who are actually involved inside of a political system. As an example, when the Persians invaded Greece, the Greeks bound together and expelled them, but when Rome conquered Greece, they refused to unite and were thus easily conquered. The same political systems were in place, but a great difference in social reformation had also taken place where even with the same political system, the Greeks of times earlier and of times present at that time were not the same social people. You can change a political system and leave the social idealism of the community the same, and vice versa, you can change the entire nature of the society while still keeping the same political system.

So, while you may read an article or two on ideas or thoughts about politics, the merits of a system, or against a system, we don't advocate or disregard any political system as a whole. Again, while common consensus might be rather blunt on the feelings of neo-nazi ideology, discussing the virtues of libertarianism, democracy, communism, etc. will probably lead to a much different diversity of opinions. Therefore, while opinions regarding politics might be expressed via the messageboard, the newsletter, or the Yahoo group, they do not constitute an opinion on the part of the United Satanic Covenire as a whole.

Finally, our thoughts on other orgs. Some orgs have an exclusionist policy, which is to say, if you join their org you are not allowed to join any other organization out there. This is complete nonsense to us, joining our group in no way means that you still cannot shop around for other organizations which promote the same values you believe in or that give you a further stage of self-development. As such, we link to any Satanic organization that we know of, or that specifically requests to be linked together with us.