The Devil's Party: Satanism in Modernity

309 Pages·2012·7.981 MB·English

by  Per Faxneld (editor), Jesper Aa. Petersen (editor)

Title Pages
The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity
Per Faxneld and Jesper Aa. Petersen
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199779239
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2013
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199779239.001.0001
Title Pages
(p.i) The Devil’s Party (p.ii)
(p.iii) The Devil’s Party
(p.iv)
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research,
scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide.
Oxford New York
Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With offices in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the
UK and certain other countries.
Published in the United States of America by
Oxford University Press
Page 1 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Title Pages
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016
© Oxford University Press 2013
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior
permission in writing of
Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license,
or under terms agreed with the
appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning
reproduction outside the scope
of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford
University Press, at the address above.
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
The Devil’s party: Satanism in modernity / edited by Per Faxneld and
Jesper Aa. Petersen.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-19-977923-9 (hardcover : alk. paper)—ISBN
978-0-19-977924-6 (pbk. : alk. paper)
1. Satanism. I. Faxneld, Per. II. Petersen, Jesper Aagaard.
BF1548.D48 2012
133.4′22—dc23  2012007394
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Printed in the United States of America
on acid-free paper
Access brought to you by:
Page 2 of 2
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Contributors
The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity
Per Faxneld and Jesper Aa. Petersen
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199779239
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2013
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199779239.001.0001
(p.vii) Contributors
Asbjørn Dyrendal is a professor of Religious Studies at the
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). He has
published extensively and broadly, with current research projects
focusing on contemporary religious Satanism, religion and popular
culture, occulture, alternative medicine, and conspiracy theories. He
has published the monograph Demoner (‘Demons’, Humanist, 2006)
as well as co-edited Dommedag! (‘Apocalypse!’ Humanist, 2008) and
Fundamentalism in the Modern World (2.vols., I.B. Tauris 2011).
Recent publications include articles on Satanism, conspiracy theories,
and apocalypticism.
Per Faxneld is a research fellow at the department of the History of
Religions at Stockholm University, Sweden. He has written several
peer-reviewed articles and book chapters on Satanism and Western
esotericism, co-edited Förborgade Tecken (‘Hidden Signs’, H:Ströms,
2010)—a book on esotericism in literature—and is the author of
Mörkrets apostlar (‘Apostles of Darkness’, Ouroboros, 2006), a study
of early Satanism. His research focuses on gender issues in Satanism
and the literary roots of contemporary religious constructions of the
Devil as a hero and helper.
Eugene V. Gallagher is the Rosemary Park Professor of Religious
Studies at Connecticut College, New London, Connecticut, in the
United States. He is the author of Expectation and Experience:
Explaining Religious Conversion (Scholars Press, 1990); The New
Religious Movements Experience in America (Greenwood, 2004); and
with James D. Tabor Why Waco? Cults and the Battle for Religious
Freedom in America (University of California, 1995). With W. Michael
Ashcraft he edited the five volumes of Introduction to New and
Page 1 of 3
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Contributors
Alternative Religions in America (Greenwood, 2006). He is currently
working on the uses and interpretations of scripture in new religions.
Kennet Granholm is a docent (adjunct professor) in the Department
of Comparative Religion at Åbo Akademi University, Finland, and an
assistant (p.viii) professor in the History of Religions at Stockholm
University, Sweden. In his research, he has focused on contemporary
esotericism and new religiosity. He is author of the book Embracing
the Dark: The Magic Order of Dragon Rouge (Åbo Akademi University
Press, 2005), numerous articles in collected volumes and journals, as
well as co-editor of the forthcoming anthology Contemporary
Esotericism (Equinox, 2012).
Fredrik Gregorius has a PhD from the Centre for Theology and
Religious Studies at the University of Lund with a dissertation on
modern heathenism. His previous work includes the monograph
Satanismen i Sverige (‘Satanism in Sweden’, Sitra Ahra, 2006) and
articles dealing with neopaganism, modern esoteric movements, and
nationalist movements. He is currently pursuing postdoctoral studies
at Penn State.
Mikael Häll is a research fellow at the Department of History, Lund
University, Sweden. He is currently working on his PhD thesis,
examining erotic nature-spirits and sexual demons in early modern
Sweden. His recent publications include the essay Näckens dödliga
dop: Manliga vattenväsen, död och förbjuden sexualitet i det
tidigmoderna Sverige (‘The deadly touch of the waterman: Male
water-spirits, death and forbidden sexuality in early modern Sweden’,
2011). He has also studied the phenomenon of modern Satanism in
his MA thesis in the History of Religions.
Amina Olander Lap has a master’s degree in the Study of Religion
and the Humanities from the University of Aarhus, Denmark. She has
co-written a comparative study on Satanism in the News Media in
Norway and Denmark with Asbjørn Dyrendal, published in The
Encyclopedic Sourcebook of Satanism (Prometheus, 2008).
James R. Lewis is an associate professor of Religious Studies at the
University of Tromsø and Honorary Senior Research Fellow at the
University of Wales Lampeter. His publications include the Oxford
Handbook of New Religious Movements, Controversial New Religions
(co-edited with Jesper Aagaard Petersen, Oxford, 2008); Scientology
(Oxford, 2009); The Children of Jesus and Mary (Oxford, 2009, co-
authored with Nick Levine); and Violence and New Religious
Movements (Oxford, 2011). He edits Brill’s Handbooks on
Contemporary Religion series and co-edits Ashgate’s New Religions
series.
Ruben van Luijk is a research fellow at the Faculty of Catholic
Theology, University of Tilburg, the Netherlands. He is preparing a
Page 2 of 3
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Contributors
PhD thesis on the history of Satanism, predominantly during the
nineteenth century, provisionally entitled Children of Lucifer: The
Origins of Modern Satanism.
(p.ix) Jesper Aagaard Petersen is an associate professor at the
Programme for Teacher Education, Norwegian University of Science
and Technology (NTNU). He has published extensively on modern
Satanism; is the editor of Contemporary Religious Satanism: A
Critical Anthology (Ashgate, 2009); and the co-editor of Controversial
New Religions (Oxford, 2005) and The Encyclopedic Sourcebook of
Satanism (Prometheus, 2008). He has a PhD from the Department of
Archaeology and Religious Studies at NTNU with the thesis ‘Between
Darwin and the Devil: Modern Satanism as Discourse, Milieu, and
Self’ (2011).
Jacob Christiansen Senholt is a research fellow at the University of
Aarhus, pursuing a PhD with a thesis on antimodern thought and
religious identity of the European New Right. He finished his MA in
Mysticism and Western Esotericism from the University of
Amsterdam with a thesis on the Order of Nine Angles and has for the
last few years dealt extensively with the field of Western esotericism
and politics with articles on ariosophy, political neopaganism, radical
traditionalism, and the New Right.
Rafal Smoczynski is an assistant professor at the Polish Academy of
Sciences. His interests include social control studies, discourse
theory, and sociology of religion. In 2008–2009 he researched new
religious movements within the EU’s REVACERN project funded
under the Sixth Framework Programme. Recently he authored a
piece for the final REVACERN publication (Walter de Gruyter, 2011),
and he is co-editor of New Religious Movements and Conflict in
Central Europe (PAN, 2010).
(p.x)
Access brought to you by:
Page 3 of 3
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Introduction
The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity
Per Faxneld and Jesper Aa. Petersen
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199779239
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2013
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199779239.001.0001
Introduction
At the Devil’s Crossroads
Per Faxneld
Jesper Aagaard Petersen
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199779239.003.0000
Abstract and Keywords
This introductory chapter offers some basic elements to situate the study of
Satanism. First, the nature of modern Satanism is delineated through a
distinction between discourse on the satanic and satanic discourse. This
distinction relates to the difference between cultural stereotypes and self-
ascribed satanic identities, a move from a negative other to a positive self
through de-otherization. Second, the chapter provides a brief presentation of the
history of Satanism, followed by a discussion of seminal research on the subject.
The chapter concludes with a summary of chapters and an extensive
bibliography useful for further study.
Keywords:   Satanism, satanic discourse, de-otherization, history of Satanism, research on Satanism
Satanism. Taste the word. To most it will conjure feelings of anxiety, while others
may feel it is a ridiculous and immature pseudo-religion. Few people are likely to
have a positive reaction. Yet, in a scholarly context, such feelings need to be put
to the side. Satanism, like all other religions, can and should be studied in a
detached manner, focusing on rigorous analysis and gathering of data. All the
scholars involved in the present volume have taken this path at the crossroads.
They have chosen historical-critical, sociological, or other methods to treat the
highly controversial topic at hand like any other cultural phenomenon, no matter
what their personal feelings, positive or negative, may be.
Page 1 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Introduction
The chapters of the book offer the reader an overview of the dark kaleidoscope
that is Satanism: From early modern outlaws and Romantic poets to the
Californian ‘black pope’ of 1960s Satanism. From playful ‘self-spirituality’ to the
infiltration of violent neo-Nazi and Islamist terrorist groups by Satanists with
sinister agendas. The chapters tackle very different varieties of enthusiasm for
the Devil, approaching them from widely different angles, allowing for a
nuanced view of this variegated phenomenon. This introduction will briefly
discuss demarcations, history, and research before providing an overview of the
individual chapters.
(p.4) Demarcations
The subject of modern Satanism is best described inclusively when viewed as a
social and cultural phenomenon, and exclusively when viewed as a religious and
philosophical one. One should separate the popular cultural conceptions of
Satanism from actual satanic beliefs held by a group of some sort. A first step is
thus a distinction between discourse on the satanic and satanic discourse, an
analytical dichotomy between broader demonological narratives on Satan and
Satanism circulating in Western culture and the narrower satanic discourse of
self-declared Satanists operating within a satanic milieu (Petersen 2011a: 62–
67). Although they are related in content, there are important differences
between the self-image of Satanists and outsiders’ perception of what Satanists
are.
The popular understanding of Satanism is rooted in Christian values and
concepts, that is, a myth of the enemy or the opposition, and is supported by
highly visible individuals and groups living out this mythical frame. Whether it is
Satanism in popular culture—as when some heavy metal groups, role-playing
games, movies, or television series use ‘occult’ or even overtly satanic
iconography, references, or plotlines to sell material—or it is Satanism as
popular culture—found in adolescent ‘dabbling’ with forbidden emotions and
desires—it is based on society’s fears and prohibitions. By ‘playing evil’, a
symbolic resistance can be voiced against dominant society. Inversely, through
anti-satanic sentiments, society also negotiates values by acting on the side of
‘goodness’, illustrating the circular structure of demonological discourse on the
satanic.
In contrast, satanic discourse goes beyond the Christian framework by
incorporating Satan as an ideal with religious aspirations similar to the Human
Potential Movement or Western esotericism. Although the symbolic resistance
can be similar to that of ‘reactive’ Satanism, the focus has changed from
reaction to religious engagement and from mimesis as an end in itself to a
means found outside the norm (and often inside the self). Common discourses
circulating in the satanic milieu include the more secular and rationalist, yet
provocative, ones using Satan as a symbol for nonconformity and material
wisdom, and the syncretistic and esoteric discourses honouring Satan as a
Page 2 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Introduction
metaphysical force or a personified being. That said, an interest in pop-culture
Satanism can, in fact, not unlike what Christian moralists warn people of,
eventually lead to a serious involvement with groups and literature expounding
discourses which are part of modern religious Satanism proper (Lewis 2001;
Petersen and Dyrendal, 2012).
A useful parallel is Joseph Laycock’s discussion of discursive changes in the
meaning of the term ‘vampire’, producing a ‘vampire community’ (p.5) roughly
equivalent to the satanic milieu. He proposes a four-stage process of emergence
of the self-identified vampire: First, an ostracized category of person is identified
with by an individual or group, subsequently ‘de-otherizing’ the cultural
category, making it ‘familiar’. Third, it is transformed from within, which finally
makes it a tool for constructing and defining the self (Laycock, 2009: 28–31,
135). This move from negative ‘other’ to positive ‘self’ can be applied to other
discursive identities based on mythological narratives. More to the point, the
categories of vampirism or Satanism become statements of identity implying
active ascription. This is directly relevant for the language of satanic discourse,
especially in terms of subcultural ancestry, which can now be viewed as a milieu
apart from a Christian ‘underground’, populated with actors retroactively using
historical people, processes and products to construct identity and tradition.
Here, it seems appropriate to address an often asked question: how many self-
identified Satanists are there worldwide? The 2001 UK national census indicated
about 1,600 Satanists in that country, while in the 2006 Australian census, 2,247
individuals declared it to be their religion. Extrapolating from this, Chris
Mathews makes a very tentative estimate at 30,000–100,000 Satanists
worldwide (Mathews 2009: 160), and this appears quite reasonable (but see also
Evans 2009 for some cautionary remarks). Let us now turn to history to view the
changing images of Satanism in time and space.
A brief history of Satanism
Conceptions about Satanists have been present in Western culture for a long
time. Early modern ‘witches’, abortionists and poisoners close to the court of
Louis XIV, certain English rakes, and many others, have been slandered as Devil-
worshippers. On closer inspection, none of these seem to actually have been
Satanists, with the French seventeenth-century example as a possible exception
(Medway 2001: 70–99). An enduring and public tradition of Satanism was first
instated in 1966, with the founding of the Church of Satan. There were, however,
people who nourished an intense sympathy for the Devil much earlier. In the late
eighteenth century, we can find purely literary Satanists, but the Luciferian
leanings of these authors seldom extended beyond occasional outbursts in a text
or two (Schock 2003). One later exception to this rule is the Polish decadent
Stanislaw Przybyszewski (1868–1927), who is the subject of a chapter in the
present volume. Satan was also popular among nineteenth-century socialists as
a symbol of revolt against capitalism and the bourgeoisie, with some reds (p.6)
Page 3 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Introduction
using the figure in a fairly sustained and consistent manner (Faxneld,
forthcoming d).
In the context of Western esotericism, one of the first to express unequivocal
praise of Satan was H. P. Blavatsky, chief ideologist of the Theosophical Society,
in her magnum opus The Secret Doctrine (1888). If her system is considered in
its entirety, however, these ideas are peripheral (Faxneld, forthcoming a). The
first person to construct an entire esoteric system, if a rather miniscule one,
around Satan was the obscure Danish occultist Ben Kadosh (Carl William
Hansen, 1872–1936). His satanic circle, if it was even realized in the manner he
intended, was as tiny as the volume of his writings (Faxneld 2011). The German
1920s esoteric order Fraternitas Saturni was considerably more populated. It
viewed Satan as an initiator and celebrated Luciferian masses, but whether
these features were pronounced enough to make it correct to label the entire
group satanic is not self-evident (Faxneld 2006: 177–188). The ‘satanic’ temple (a
term she herself used) briefly operated by Maria de Naglowska in 1930s Paris
presents similar problems. Its aim was an integration of Satan and God, and
ultimately God seems to have been more important to Naglowska (Hakl 2008:
465–474).
None of these groups and individuals founded lasting satanic traditions.
Fraternitas Saturni still exists but seems to have toned down the satanic content
almost entirely. This applies even more to the Theosophical Society. A small
Scandinavian group today draws on Kadosh’s ideas, but this is a revival rather
than a direct continuation (Faxneld 2011).
The undoubtedly most important and influential Satanist group is the Church of
Satan, founded by Anton Szandor LaVey (1930–1997) in San Francisco in 1966.
LaVey claimed a colourful background as a former police photographer, carny,
and lover of the young Marilyn Monroe. Most of this was challenged later, and
some of it disproven. Regardless, LaVey had a highly charismatic personality and
soon attracted followers, as well as plentiful media attention to his church. Even
some high-profile celebrities, notably Sammy Davis Jr. and Jayne Mansfield, were
briefly attracted to the Devil’s congregation.
The 1969 Satanic Bible presented LaVey’s worldview to the public. Satan, to him,
was a symbol of man’s carnal nature, and LaVey’s Satanism was a blend of
Epicureanism, elitism, and streetwise cynicism. He once himself described it as
‘Ayn Rand with trappings’ (Klein 1970: 20). In LaVey’s more or less atheist and
materialist system, ritual and magic mostly function as theatre, psychodrama,
and self-therapy. There is, however, also an unresolved tension present between
ideas based strictly on the natural sciences and notions inspired by fringe
science and ‘rejected knowledge’, such as the (p.7) theories of Wilhem Reich
Page 4 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020
Introduction
and the fiction of H. P. Lovecraft (Faxneld, forthcoming b; Petersen 2009a, 2011c,
2012).
In subsequent books, like The Compleat Witch (1971) and The Satanic Rituals
(1972), LaVey kept disseminating his teachings. After only a few years, he grew
tired of being in the spotlight and stopped hosting public rituals. The
organizational system with ‘grottos’ spread across the United States, and in
some places in Europe, was also disbanded after administrative troubles started
growing. In 1975, LaVey’s right-hand man Michael Aquino and other high-
ranking members left the church and formed the splinter group Temple of Set.
Their focus was openly theistic, and they distanced themselves from the figure of
Satan, claiming he was a later corruption of the ‘original’ Prince of Darkness,
the Egyptian god Set. Aquino, a high-ranking military officer and assistant
professor in political science, created an organization that aimed to be an
esoteric academy, in sharp contrast to the deliberately seedy satanic carnival
LaVey had set up (Gardell 2003: 290–292, 389; Petersen 2009a). Patterning
themselves after fin-de-siècle initiatory orders, the Temple postulated self-
deification as the ultimate goal of the practitioner. The tools to achieve this were
an eclectic selection of techniques drawn from Western esotericism.
In spite of having mostly discarded Lucifer, Aquino filled LaVey’s role as
America’s number one mass media Satanist in the 1980s, with appearances on
talk shows like Oprah and Geraldo. Though soon acquitted, he was for a short
time suspected of so-called Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) of children. This was part
of the SRA scare, a rumour panic fired by fundamentalist Christians and dubious
psychotherapists, which for a period spread like wildfire, mostly across the
United States and England (Richardson et al. 1991; Lewis and Petersen 2008).
The 1980s was also the age of satanic avant-garde artistic and (ambiguous)
political provocation, courtesy of Church of Satan members like noise musician
Boyd Rice (Baddeley 2000; Petros 2007).
During the 1990s, LaVey made something of a return to the public sphere,
publishing two books and granting several interviews. The dawning of the
Internet age also saw interest in Satanism grow, as adherents could interact on a
global basis and more easily access information (Lewis 2001; Petersen,
forthcoming). This led to an upsurge of theistic Satanism, with ideologists like
Diane Vera of New York City propagating their interpretation of Satanism
primarily online. Various new forms of atheistic Satanism, typically drawing
heavily on LaVey, yet subtly different, also appeared. LaVey died in 1997, and the
Church of Satan is today led by Peter H. Gilmore, who has further emphasized
the rationalist and atheist elements in the original teachings.
(p.8) The first years of the 1990s also witnessed the rise of Scandinavian black
metal: a form of extreme satanic music where musicians competed to outdo one
another in being ‘evil’, which led to several murders and anti-Christian acts of
Page 5 of 18
PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All
Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. 
Subscriber: York University; date: 28 June 2020