Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 47
But the CSER report ignores this historical fact, as it does any unpleasant fact about
“alternative religions.” It is patronizing and inaccurate to deny the place of malevolent
“black magic” practices in Voodoo, Santeria, Brujeria etc., especially when its existence is
acknowledged by recognized experts on these religions. As for Palo Mayombe, the very
name means “way of the black witch,” and it is described by Migene Gonzalez-Wippler as
having been derived from the black magic of the Congo.23 Metraux notes that in Voodoo
society sorcerers, or boko, are those whose patron gods, or loa, are believed to be
mercenary and, therefore, amoral.24 Harvard anthropologist Wade Davis has described how
and why some of these boko create “zombies” as a tool of social control. In addition, the
report ignores related issues such as the cult of pain in Native American religion (e.g., the
Sun Dance), the ritual sacrifice of young women by the Blackfeet, the body-piercing rituals
of the ancient Maya, and the wholesale human sacrifices -including the sacrifice of children
-of the Incas and Aztecs. While these practices were not specifically “satanic” in intent,
they certainly give the lie to the notion that these “folk religions” were, or are, all sweetness
and light.
“Black magicians‟ are not limited to practices which might be defined as “legitimate
Satanism” -whatever that is -but are happy to employ whatever works. Authorities in the
field recognize that, due to the inherent moral neutrality of magical practice, certain folk
religions, such as Brujeria and Palo Mayombe, are popular with criminals. Adolfo Constanzo,
high priest of the Matamoros drug-trafficking cult, borrowed liberally from the whole magical
menu, and threw in elements of Aztec ritual sacrifice for good measure. Military
investigators who examined the contents of Manual Noriega‟s headquarters in Panama
discovered that the General apparently had invoked every unorthodox creed he could think
of in an effort to magically confound his enemies.25
For the authors of the CSER report to contend that the Matamoros incident is unrelated to
the phenomenon of “satanic” crime because, in effect, the members of the cult were not
“traditional satanists” is absurd. Complaining that the practices of Constanzo and his cohorts
were a “perverted” form of Palo Mayombe, and hand-wringing over alleged “distorted views”
and “ignorance about minority religions,” cannot wipe out the fact that the Matamoros
massacre is a nearly textbook example of occult-related murder and mayhem.
Unfortunately, readers who are relatively unfamiliar with these folk religions will tend to
accept CSER‟s laundered version of their beliefs and practices. However, our interest lies in
dealing with crimes committed in the name of any form of malevolent occultism, not just
traditional European- American “Satanism.” The focus is on the criminal activity. If, as CSER
implies, criticism of Satanism were merely a case of “religious persecution,” then where
were the persecutors 25 years ago when the Church of Satan announced itself to the world?
Error Number Two: The Nature of Satanism
Another of the Report‟s claims involves an attack on its targets‟ methodology. Its authors
extend their argumentum ad hominem to the point of suggesting that concerns about
satanic influence are the product of prejudgment. Contrary to CSER‟s assertions, however,
reputable investigators in this area did not start out with the assumption that an
“international conspiracy of Devil-worshippers” was plotting atrocities and then attempt to
make the facts of individual crimes fit into that framework. Instead, over a period of several
years, we and others equally concerned were confronted with a series of crimes and
incidents sharing certain characteristics which led us to identify them as part of a pattern of
criminal activity in which practices consistent with malevolent forms of occultism played a
significant role. This pattern is sufficiently consistent to allow the suspicion that a common
source exists. This does not mean that a consensus about a conspiracy also exists. CSER,
on the other hand, apparently began its “investigation” with the attitude that a collection of
venal, demented, and/or hysterical fundamentalist Christians were beating the bushes for
Satanists, and has steadfastly ignored any and all evidence to the contrary.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 48
In their summary of the report published in Free Inquiry, Carlson and Lame refer to
Satanism as a „benign” religion which has been “unfairly maligned and much
misunderstood.”26 Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary defines the word “benign”
as signifying “kind ...gracious ...generous ...beneficial.” Satanism fits that description only
in regard to its own members‟ belief that their deity is a good and gracious god --to them.
However, in its outlook on humanity in general, Satanism is essentially misanthropic and
predatory. In the seventh of his “Nine Satanic Statements‟ Anton LaVey declares that
“Satanism represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than
those that walk on afl-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual
development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!”27 In other words, according to
LaVey, the hallmarks of our humanity -our reason and self-awareness -serve only to mark
us as vicious, predatory beasts whose aim in life should be to dominate others. Nowhere in
any of the “satanic literature” is there any statement acknowledging the existence of human
rights, whether natural or “God- given.” Satanists believe in “rights” only for the satanic
“elite.” The “legitimate” Satanist “churches” must avoid outright violence and illegality, as
well as exhortations to same, in order to stay in business. But their philosophies clearly
demonstrate an “us-versus-them” mentality in the form of contempt for, and hostility
towards, non-satanists.
The CSER report claims that the “modem era” of Satanism was inaugurated in this country
in 1966 with the founding of Anton LaVey‟s Church of Satan.28 Even if this rather arbitrary
assertion is true, it no more grants LaVey the right to establish the definition of “Satanism”
than does a similar Johnny-come-lately position entitle the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-
Day Saints to rewrite the definition of Christianity. The report, however, blithely assumes
that it does -and then proceeds to contradict itself as it lists the following tenets and
conditions of “Satanism”:
1. Satan is the symbol of rebellion against authority inverted anti-Christianity
associated with the Black Mass is not practiced. In fact, the Church of Satan
disbelieves in the existence of the Christian Devil.29
“Rebellion against authority” is a broad term capable of both praiseworthy and sinister
applications. The irrationalist in Dostoesky‟s Notes from the Underground declares, “What
do I care for the laws of nature and arithmetic, when, for some reason, I dislike those laws
and the fact that twice two makes four?” This, too, is “rebellion against authority” -the
authority of reality -and it is essentially this sort of rebellion that is practiced by the
followers of LaVey and Aquino.
In regard to the Black Mass, it has indeed been performed in the Church of Satan, and
LaVey‟s The Satanic Rituals contains a full-length Messe Noir. Michael Aquino notes that
LaVey explains in the Satanic Bible that the purpose of a Black Mass ritual is to:
purge participants or onlookers of any conditioned fears they may have as a
consequence of old superstitions or indoctrinations. Once he has seen his
sacred cows trampled upon with impunity, he will never feel quite the same
about them again, no matter how artificial he recognizes the desecration to
be.30
Lest we confuse this process with harness “psychodrama,” Aquino then goes on to discuss
“an excellent example of a “Black Mass” technique in George Orwell‟s 1984, wherein the
magician O‟Brien forces his victim/student Winston Smith to “trample upon the sacred cow”
of his love for Julia,” thereby destroying the “illusion” of that love.31 The fictional O‟Brien is
not the only “magician” to have recognized the effect of such an “initiatory” experience. In
The Informed Heart, Bruno Bettelheim, writing of his experiences in the Nazi death camps,
notes that new prisoners were “initiated” through a pattern of torture, abuse, and
exhaustion intended to traumatize them and break their resistance: