Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 63
While allegedly representing an “expert” opinion, Stackpole inadvertently demonstrates his
ignorance about the occult subculture when he dismisses the ersatz magical grimoire known
as The Necronomicon as a “joke.”92 While the “Nec” is certainly not what it purports to be,
neither is it merely a hoax. The book was not written by H.P. Lovecraft, but it was directly
inspired by his works. Lovecraft created the legend of the Necronomicon as part of his
Cthulhu mythos, derived from his interest in the power of myth. The “cth-” prefix is a key.
It refers to the cthonic or underground deities so important to early Mediterranean religions.
But the grimoire itself was written by Lovecraft fans -several of them, as Stackpole notes.
A New York occultist named “Simon” is responsible for the paperback edition published by
Avon. This is the Necronomicon used by teenage “dabblers” in black magic.
Once again we are indebted to Michael Aquino for obligingly offering his insights into the
real magical significance of a work such as the Necronomicon -namely, that its potency is
not determined by its “authenticity.” In the chapter on The Satanic Rituals from his
monograph on the Church of Satan, Aquino writes, “Anton LaVey states that the actual
function of Satanic ritual is to enable the mind, whose processes are normally governed by
perceptions of external reality (objectivity), to assume a mode of operation in which it itself
controls reality by expression (subjectivity).”93 (Emphasis his.] Aquino notes that most of
the book‟s readers do not bother to check up on the authenticity of the background
information given for the rituals, but if they did they would soon find out that much of it is
made up out of whole cloth. However, Aquino points out, this is irrelevant -because the
rituals “work.” In Aquino‟s words, they work because “the great truth that underlies the art
and science of magic [is] that both the power to create and the power to define are a
function of the Will...”94 This is a rather overblown way of saying that they work for the
same reason any good work of fiction works, because they create their own worlds. The
same principle is at work with a flight of fancy like the Necronomicon, which in turn grew
out of the bizarre universe of primeval forces created by Lovecraft. That principle is at work
in a Role Playing Game such as Dungeons and Dragons as well. A subjective universe is
created by the game‟s designers and extended by each player.
With respect to Stackpole‟s comments about the application of Ockham‟s Razor to File 18’s
vertical conspiracy theory, we must note that he once again demonstrates that he and the
report‟s authors simply do not understand their topic. This is amply demonstrated by their
ironic reliance upon what they call Ockham‟s Razor. A comment Michael Aquino makes
about his Erstwhile satanic colleague, Anton LaVey, underscores by analogy the absence of
understanding which pervades the CSER report. As Aquinas makes plain, LaVey‟s intention
demands a set of abstract constants to support his metaphysical goals. Aquino and LaVey
appeal to mental and extramental realities in order to entice agreement with their views, as
the report does by substituting innuendo and fabrication for established fact and researched
argument. The irony is that for William of Ockham the metaphysical realm supporting
LaVey‟s concept simply does not exist because, for Ockham, “metaphysics in fact does not
exist.”95 His Nominalism erected a strong barrier between external reality, or objects, and
what the mind speculates about them. LaVey assumes a mind that is capable of abstract
thought, but, for Ockham, “the mental process of abstraction... cannot be shown to exist.”96
On the other hand, Ockham never doubted the independent existence of God and an
independent external reality. This prevents the type of Idealism espoused by LaVey. For
Ockham accepted that the “formal distinction is not made by the discernments of the mind
of the observer. It is there in the object before we discern it.”97 This is the basis for
Ockham‟s principle of Parsimony: because things are there because God placed them there,
Ockham said, “we must not assume anything as indispensable for explaining a certain event
unless reason, experience or revelation requires us to do so.”98
If the CSER authors understood Ockham, they would have realized that, being a faithful
Christian, he would have applied his logical principle of Parsimony in favor of the supposedly
While allegedly representing an “expert” opinion, Stackpole inadvertently demonstrates his
ignorance about the occult subculture when he dismisses the ersatz magical grimoire known
as The Necronomicon as a “joke.”92 While the “Nec” is certainly not what it purports to be,
neither is it merely a hoax. The book was not written by H.P. Lovecraft, but it was directly
inspired by his works. Lovecraft created the legend of the Necronomicon as part of his
Cthulhu mythos, derived from his interest in the power of myth. The “cth-” prefix is a key.
It refers to the cthonic or underground deities so important to early Mediterranean religions.
But the grimoire itself was written by Lovecraft fans -several of them, as Stackpole notes.
A New York occultist named “Simon” is responsible for the paperback edition published by
Avon. This is the Necronomicon used by teenage “dabblers” in black magic.
Once again we are indebted to Michael Aquino for obligingly offering his insights into the
real magical significance of a work such as the Necronomicon -namely, that its potency is
not determined by its “authenticity.” In the chapter on The Satanic Rituals from his
monograph on the Church of Satan, Aquino writes, “Anton LaVey states that the actual
function of Satanic ritual is to enable the mind, whose processes are normally governed by
perceptions of external reality (objectivity), to assume a mode of operation in which it itself
controls reality by expression (subjectivity).”93 (Emphasis his.] Aquino notes that most of
the book‟s readers do not bother to check up on the authenticity of the background
information given for the rituals, but if they did they would soon find out that much of it is
made up out of whole cloth. However, Aquino points out, this is irrelevant -because the
rituals “work.” In Aquino‟s words, they work because “the great truth that underlies the art
and science of magic [is] that both the power to create and the power to define are a
function of the Will...”94 This is a rather overblown way of saying that they work for the
same reason any good work of fiction works, because they create their own worlds. The
same principle is at work with a flight of fancy like the Necronomicon, which in turn grew
out of the bizarre universe of primeval forces created by Lovecraft. That principle is at work
in a Role Playing Game such as Dungeons and Dragons as well. A subjective universe is
created by the game‟s designers and extended by each player.
With respect to Stackpole‟s comments about the application of Ockham‟s Razor to File 18’s
vertical conspiracy theory, we must note that he once again demonstrates that he and the
report‟s authors simply do not understand their topic. This is amply demonstrated by their
ironic reliance upon what they call Ockham‟s Razor. A comment Michael Aquino makes
about his Erstwhile satanic colleague, Anton LaVey, underscores by analogy the absence of
understanding which pervades the CSER report. As Aquinas makes plain, LaVey‟s intention
demands a set of abstract constants to support his metaphysical goals. Aquino and LaVey
appeal to mental and extramental realities in order to entice agreement with their views, as
the report does by substituting innuendo and fabrication for established fact and researched
argument. The irony is that for William of Ockham the metaphysical realm supporting
LaVey‟s concept simply does not exist because, for Ockham, “metaphysics in fact does not
exist.”95 His Nominalism erected a strong barrier between external reality, or objects, and
what the mind speculates about them. LaVey assumes a mind that is capable of abstract
thought, but, for Ockham, “the mental process of abstraction... cannot be shown to exist.”96
On the other hand, Ockham never doubted the independent existence of God and an
independent external reality. This prevents the type of Idealism espoused by LaVey. For
Ockham accepted that the “formal distinction is not made by the discernments of the mind
of the observer. It is there in the object before we discern it.”97 This is the basis for
Ockham‟s principle of Parsimony: because things are there because God placed them there,
Ockham said, “we must not assume anything as indispensable for explaining a certain event
unless reason, experience or revelation requires us to do so.”98
If the CSER authors understood Ockham, they would have realized that, being a faithful
Christian, he would have applied his logical principle of Parsimony in favor of the supposedly
