Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 64
benighted Christians, not, as does the report, in favor of an attack on Christianity and, we
should add, on scientifically grounded rationalism. It is highly unlikely that Ockham would
have supported hysterical fundamentalists, but, given the weight of physical evidence, he
probably would have agreed with those who view the current outbreak of Satanism as a
serious issue. Whether or not Anton LaVey, Zeena LaVey, Michael Aquino, or Shawn Carlson
and his colleagues are comfortable acknowledging the fact, it remains that for Ockham,
scriptural revelation provides the most “economical” ground from which a judgment about
Satan can be made. This acknowledgement of Ockham‟s ontological leaning does not reflect
any tendency on our own part to disregard proper rationality. Nor, in fact, is our rejection of
his theological simplicity contrary to Christian tradition. SL Augustine acknowledged that the
Bible is not a scientific handbook, and St. Thomas Aquinas clearly stated the individual‟s
obligation to use his or her own powers of reason, rather than rely upon mere authority,
when he wrote that “truth properly speaking -and error in attendance -enters with the
judgment and its expression in a statement, rather dm with simple apprehension [i.e.,
perception] and its manifestation in definition.”99
Summary
The CSER report‟s attempt to analyze a serious social problem has not only failed, but its
acceptance is, ironically, serving the cause it claims to challenge: confusion. And this leaves
us with a disquieting observation. As Aquinas also noted, “the end sought by the
intemperate man is not the loss of the benefit of reason, but sense-delight involving rational
disorder.”100 The CSER reports efforts to rationalize our society‟s spreading disorder tends
import to the intent of the aphorism which has inspired our reply. For the ancient Chinese
did not intend their admonition about living in “interesting times” to be a blessing. It was a
curse.
Notes
1. Carlson, Shawn and Gerald A. Larne, Satanism in America, San Francisco, Gaia
press, 1989, p.2.
2. Carlson and Larne, p. 16.
3. Carlson and Larne, p. 16.
4. Carlson and Larne, p. 16.
5. Carlson and Larne, p.ii.
6. Encyclopedia of Philosophy, V. 7-8, p.307. Copyright 1976 by Macmillan, Inc.
7. Aquino, Michael, “The Initiatory Degree System of Western Occultism,” Temple of
Set Information Paper distributed at Ritualistic Crimes Seminar, Killeen, Texas,
February 1989, p.4.
8. “[T]hose of low intelligence ...consider good/evil objective and those of high
intelligence... consider good/evil subjective.” Aquino, Michael, Temple of Set
Reading List, Temple of Set, 1990, Preface to Category 16.
9. Carlson and Larne, p. 13.
10. Farrar, Janet and Stewart, The Witches’ Goddess:The Feminine Principle of
Divinity, Custer, WA: Phoenix Publishing, Inc., 1987, p.3.
11. Farrar, p.4.
12. Farrar, p.19.
13. Carlson and Larne, p. 12.
14. Farrar, p. 19.
15. Farrar, p.64.
16. Farrar, p.64.
17. Farrar, p.64.
18. Farrar, p.65.
benighted Christians, not, as does the report, in favor of an attack on Christianity and, we
should add, on scientifically grounded rationalism. It is highly unlikely that Ockham would
have supported hysterical fundamentalists, but, given the weight of physical evidence, he
probably would have agreed with those who view the current outbreak of Satanism as a
serious issue. Whether or not Anton LaVey, Zeena LaVey, Michael Aquino, or Shawn Carlson
and his colleagues are comfortable acknowledging the fact, it remains that for Ockham,
scriptural revelation provides the most “economical” ground from which a judgment about
Satan can be made. This acknowledgement of Ockham‟s ontological leaning does not reflect
any tendency on our own part to disregard proper rationality. Nor, in fact, is our rejection of
his theological simplicity contrary to Christian tradition. SL Augustine acknowledged that the
Bible is not a scientific handbook, and St. Thomas Aquinas clearly stated the individual‟s
obligation to use his or her own powers of reason, rather than rely upon mere authority,
when he wrote that “truth properly speaking -and error in attendance -enters with the
judgment and its expression in a statement, rather dm with simple apprehension [i.e.,
perception] and its manifestation in definition.”99
Summary
The CSER report‟s attempt to analyze a serious social problem has not only failed, but its
acceptance is, ironically, serving the cause it claims to challenge: confusion. And this leaves
us with a disquieting observation. As Aquinas also noted, “the end sought by the
intemperate man is not the loss of the benefit of reason, but sense-delight involving rational
disorder.”100 The CSER reports efforts to rationalize our society‟s spreading disorder tends
import to the intent of the aphorism which has inspired our reply. For the ancient Chinese
did not intend their admonition about living in “interesting times” to be a blessing. It was a
curse.
Notes
1. Carlson, Shawn and Gerald A. Larne, Satanism in America, San Francisco, Gaia
press, 1989, p.2.
2. Carlson and Larne, p. 16.
3. Carlson and Larne, p. 16.
4. Carlson and Larne, p. 16.
5. Carlson and Larne, p.ii.
6. Encyclopedia of Philosophy, V. 7-8, p.307. Copyright 1976 by Macmillan, Inc.
7. Aquino, Michael, “The Initiatory Degree System of Western Occultism,” Temple of
Set Information Paper distributed at Ritualistic Crimes Seminar, Killeen, Texas,
February 1989, p.4.
8. “[T]hose of low intelligence ...consider good/evil objective and those of high
intelligence... consider good/evil subjective.” Aquino, Michael, Temple of Set
Reading List, Temple of Set, 1990, Preface to Category 16.
9. Carlson and Larne, p. 13.
10. Farrar, Janet and Stewart, The Witches’ Goddess:The Feminine Principle of
Divinity, Custer, WA: Phoenix Publishing, Inc., 1987, p.3.
11. Farrar, p.4.
12. Farrar, p.19.
13. Carlson and Larne, p. 12.
14. Farrar, p. 19.
15. Farrar, p.64.
16. Farrar, p.64.
17. Farrar, p.64.
18. Farrar, p.65.
