“Why Tenebrous Satanism instead of some other Satanic denomination?”, someone recently asked me. Answering said inquiry has inspired me to write the post that follows. Denominations I’ll address include LaVeyan Satanism, The Satanic Temple, Church of Satan, and the Order of Nine Angles (ONA/O9A). Why did I develop my own denomination instead of just joining one of these? Read the post to find out.

Introduction

This post is mainly aimed at people reading my book and weighing whether to view themselves as Tenebrous Satanists. It doesn’t aim to provide a comprehensive view of the denominations it refers to. Its aim is just to elucidate some foremost points I wish to highlight.

Naturally then, this post presupposes, alongside a broad swath of the online Satanic community and scholars who study Satanism, that it makes sense to talk about Satanism as a religion with denominations. If you find that premise objectionable, you’re free to skip this post.

What is Satanism?

I’ve mentioned elsewhere the idea of a common core shared by all Satanic denominations. My argument is that all credible forms of Satanism minimally possess these four features:

1. Some affinity toward this-worldly flourishing, e.g. at minimum, rejection of ideologies that shame humans for having natural desires;
2. Opposition against arbitrary tyranny, whether spiritual or worldly, and against unjust impositions on the individual more generally;
3. Pursuit of self-evolution, often in terms of “becoming one’s own god”;
4. Gravitation toward a dark spiritual aesthetic, e.g., rejecting ideas like “a benevolent God is behind everything” or “the universe is fundamentally love.”

These values are implied in mythological stories about Satan rebelling against God and encouraging humans to do likewise. Said stories are known both to atheistic and theistic Satanists. It should then be no surprise that LaVey’s Church of Satan (CoS), The Satanic Temple (TST), Luciferianism, and the Order of Nine Angles (ONA/O9A) all contain these elements. Obviously, their emphasis and interpretation vary, sometimes drastically. Nonetheless, you can still take each of these ideas and see how it’s manifest in each of those denominations.

Tenebrous Satanism is “Satanic” in this same sense. The first tenet of the Tenebrous Creed (see link for all tenets) asserts that Satan is “for” this-worldly flourishing. Following this is the second, defining Satan as an enemy of dogmatism because it’s a foremost driver of oppression. The third, fourth and fifth tenets say that self-evolution is worth seeking, and outline how to pursue it. Lastly, the sixth and seventh tenets invoke dark spiritual concepts such as “the Will of the Fire.”

How Tenebrous Satanists differ from other Satanists

The preceding section reveals me as something of a Satanic ecumenist. At the same time though, I do disagree with some aspect of each denomination I listed. Otherwise, why would I have come up with Tenebrous Satanism, instead of just identifying with one of them? Below, then, I will articulate the basis of my disagreement and outline what Tenebrous Satanism puts forward instead. Nothing personal against anyone who belongs to any of these other denominations; no personal attack is intended, just clarification of my own position.

Issues with LaVeyan Satanism

I considered myself LaVeyan for over 25 years. LaVeyan Satanism was thus foundational in my understanding of what Satanism is. Satanism rejects servile submission to deities and other forms of dysfunctional otherworldiness. Its ethos and ritual practice alike assert that you have a right to live for yourself instead of for others.

Nonetheless, a few fronts on which I’ve found myself at odds with the typical LaVeyans of today include:

• Almost all LaVeyans I’ve met support LaVey’s philosophy but seem disinterested in the ritual magick the Satanic Bible describes. Vs. ritual magick has always been an important and meaningful dimension of my practice. I find too that LaVeyans not-infrequently underestimate LaVey’s ambiguity re: why ritual is of value and how it works. They thus strike me as taking “Satanism is an earthly religion” too far, disenchanting it beyond LaVey’s own intention.
• I don’t quarrel with Satanists who think we should “work on ourselves” instead of “getting involved in politics.” But I think there’s a difference between this and claiming “I’m apolitical” while engaging in status-quo-supporting behaviors – i.e. being actually and identifiably either conservative or neoliberal and just deflecting discussion of it. Many LaVeyans strike me as lacking self-awareness on this front.
• The proud individualism of LaVeyanism too readily shades into a free-for-all endorsement of arrogance. “We atheists are automatically smarter than all religious people everywhere and always!” “Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps by sheer willpower like I did!” “Obviously my cut-throat view of human nature is objectively true and not a product of being an American capitalist!” Etc.

In summary, you could say I find LaVeyanism both spiritually and politically shallow in a way that leaves me dissatisfied.

Tenebrous Satanism: flourishing and self-evolution in place of indulgence

I do think LaVey was on the right track in orienting human life toward “indulgence.” Tenebrous Satanism’s preferred word for this sort of concept, however, is flourishing. It covers the same ground re: we should pursue our desires freely and fight against forces that oppose this. But flourishing suggests more directly and effectively than “indulgence” that:

• We are here to seek things like meaning, beauty, etc. – not just physical pleasure.
• Like all other living beings, we are embedded in an ecosystem such that our well-being requires some degree of cooperation with others – not just going our own way.
• Therefore, the highest goods we seek should be long-term and sustainable – not just short-term gratification at others’ expense.

Tenebrous Satanism also puts self-evolution forward as a quality for Satanists to pursue in addition to flourishing. This term makes it clearer yet that some goods we seek require struggle, discipline, overcoming adversity, etc.

Now, I personally interpreted LaVey’s “indulgence” to already include all of this implicitly. And I suspect there may be other LaVeyans who see it similarly.

One could argue, though, that there’s a recurring theme in my issues with LaVeyanism: a delusion of “life = me, the individual animal, against all other individual animals.” This is a maladaptive attitude insofar as it claims to be rooted in “nature,” yet nature entails interdependent cooperation. Vs. shifting from “indulgence” to “flourishing and self-evolution” defines an ethos that is more actually in tune with nature.

Therefore, Tenebrous Satanists are primarily different from LaVeyans in seeking “flourishing and self-evolution” in place of “indulgence.” I don’t actually think this is “against” LaVey, as my logic, like his, is affirm nature instead of denying it. But agreeing with my rationale strikes me as one good reason to consider converting to Tenebrous Satanism.

Issues with The Satanic Temple

I had a brief span of TST membership in the mid 2010’s. I was among a lot of leftists, which made TST feel like the right thing for the moment. Even now, I feel TST’s tenets generally promote positive values despite issues that have emerged with the founder/organization.

Nonetheless, here are some reasons why I’m not enthused about TST these days:

• TST long struck me as reducible to political trolling. i.e., just taking generic positive secular values and slapping Satan’s name on it in an attempt to annoy Christians. More explicitness re: why is this actually Satanic would translate into more credibility as an actual religion.
• Some TST types obsess about politics in a way that I think conflicts with fundamentals of what Satanism is all about. e.g., “You can’t be a Satanist if you support/reject [pet political cause].” – this is a demand for herd conformity that every other Satanic denomination in existence is within their rights to greet with get fucked. Like who made these johnny-come-latelies the arbiters of “true” Satanism?
• The tenet about how beliefs should conform to science is something I’m not a fan of. In theory it’s good. In practice though, it empowers atheist bros to dismiss beliefs and practices they don’t actually know much about.

Not unlike LaVeyan Satanism, then, I feel there’s a lack of depth to this denomination. On one hand, they’re shallow in an opposite way: instead of “no politics,” “all politics.” On the other hand though, they’re also shallow in the same way: “we secular atheists are oh-so-smart for dismissing everything esoteric.”

Tenebrous Satanism: integration of the causal and acausal in place of one-sidedness

Something interesting I keep seeing in recent years is TST Satanists who feel a draw toward esotericism. They claim to be TST because “the politics are good.” But then they are messing around with tarot cards, ritual magick, or something else that seems in tension with “science.” They say they do these things because they’ve found psychological benefit from it. But in many cases, it seems to me like they have also experienced effects science can’t explain. Constrained by TST’s science tenet, though, they dance awkwardly around it, or otherwise wind up being dishonest with themselves and others about it.

Tenebrous Satanism acknowledges an acausal dimension to existence in addition to the causal. An advantage to the term “acausal” is that it’s a negation rather than an assertion. You are dealing with what science cannot explain. Leave it at that, then, instead of justifying yourself with pseudoscientific discourse because you feel constrained to try to remain within science’s domain.

Tenebrous Satanism also has the advantage of offering a political horizon without reducing everything to politics. What I say in Nine Keys of Abyssal Darkness about the threat of Dogmagianism most definitely has political implications. At the same time, though, it gives spiritual depth to struggles others frame as purely worldly. It also avoids the simplistic us-vs-them finger-pointing that often infects today’s “secular” politics with uncomfortably RHP-like fanaticism.

Therefore, Tenebrous Satanists are primarily different from TST in integrating esotericism and politics instead of separating them. We do not assert that all Satanists must subscribe to a single narrow set of political views. If you want to focus on individual development in a relatively apolitical way, that is fine. But if a Satanist is passionate about politics, we invite them to bring spiritual insight into that arena.

Issues with Luciferianism

As I’ve explained elsewhere, I don’t mind people describing Tenebrous Satanism as a form of Luciferianism. Note, though, that I have pagan-like forms of Luciferianism in mind when I say this. You’ve allied with a polytheistic pantheon of dark gods to support your spiritual self-evolution? Great – so have I.

Gnostic-like forms of Luciferianism, however, are a different matter. This is something I’ve written on at length elsewhere, so I don’t want to repeat myself too much here. In brief, though: my siblings in Satan, Gnosticism is a Christian heresy. It says the material world is a bad place you’re supposed to escape from with the help of a savior. And I really don’t think you succeed in de-Christianizing that fully by just supposing that the savior is Lucifer.

Insofar as there are Gnostic Luciferians empowering themselves and taking a critical stance against earthly authorities – both of which are well-established Satanic qualities – I won’t go so far as to say it’s “not Satanism” or “just another right-hand-path religion.” My own take, however, has long revolved around pointing out that Satan is said to be Lord of this World. To me, the next logical step is “actually, the Demiurge and the Archons are the good guys” – i.e. the same move Luciferians make with literally every other religion’s mythology except Gnosticism’s! From which it in turn follows that we should celebrate this world instead of denigrating it.

It appears to follow that Anti-Cosmic Satanism may well be the denomination I’m most opposed to. A little awkward when I’m quoting Watain in my Creed, it must be said! I can enjoy their music and aesthetics without buying into their whole package, though.

Tenebrous Satanism: in place of escapism, perseverance in Adventure

Whereas CoS and TST both strike me as too worldly (albeit in different senses), Gnostic Luciferianism is not worldly enough. What does Tenebrous Satanism offer instead? Worldly affirmation that includes an adequate spiritual dimension instead of excluding it.

Tenebrous Satanism has no time for whining about being “imprisoned here” or the quitter-fantasy of “freedom from this world.” If you were enjoying flourishing and self-evolution, you would want life to continue! Accordingly, some may reincarnate, while others may evolve into powers who move the world from behind the scenes. Either way, though, one remains part of the ongoing Adventure. If that prospect depresses you, then fix your life instead of vainly fantasizing about death!

Steadfast adherence to this kind of spiritual optimism is the mark of a Tenebrous Satanist. Do you want a Satanic denomination that has colorful and demanding spiritual practices, but also LaVeyan/TST-style life-affirmation? This combination is the primary differentiator of Tenebrous Satanists from gnostic-style Luciferians.

The primary differentiator of Tenebrous Satanists from pagan-style Luciferians, on the other hand, is which entities we ally with. And that is a topic that I’ll address in the next section…

Issues with the Order of Nine Angles

The most-linked entry on my blog touches on this topic. In brief, though: Nazi-terrorists rationalizing human sacrifice, sex crimes and child abuse? As a mixed-race woman arguing that Satanism offers something positive, I’ve got zero use for that. Nor am I a fan of associated cringe, e.g. cheesy galactic empire fantasies, edgelord vampirism, “self-mutilation is cool,” “I am sooo evil,” etc.

To reduce O9A to these elements, though – as many do – is simplistic and inadequate. Having read thousands of pages of O9A documents, I’m comfortable asserting that there is far more to the Niner current. Here is a Satanic denomination that took “strength through adversity” and “empowerment through transgression” to their furthest logical conclusions. And along the way, they wove an impressive variety of strands of Western esotericism into a cohesive Satanic whole.

I thus agree with O9A that true Satanism requires thinking and living in ways that both mainstream society and your default self will shy away from. True Satanism is militant in its challenge and transformation of both the individual and the collective. And for support in such endeavors, it is to the Dark Gods of O9A – the Nekalah – that I turn.

Conversely, two big things I disagree with O9A on – aside from the aforementioned obvious points – are accelerationism and elitism. There is admittedly something the Niner current does to its adherents’ psyches that accelerationism is an apt expression of. Too often though, said drive terminates in either nihilistic or authoritarian pipe dreams, neither of which I support. As for elitism, I hate “participation-trophy culture” as much as the next Satanist, but I think O9A goes too far in the opposite direction. Set your standards too high, and you just incentivize people to lie to themselves about whether they’re making the grade.

Tenebrous Satanism: in place of evil, creative strife

Characterizing O9A as “militant Satanism”, one could argue the existing current has two strategic deficiencies. One, it is fighting the wrong foe, via cheap anti-Magian tribalism that lazily puts all blame for what’s wrong with the world on “those people.” And two, it is trying to fight that foe solely using a tiny number of elite special forces, in neglect of infantry, engineering, material support, and everything else you need to support a military initiative effectively.

To address the first problem, Tenebrous Satanism shifts focus from Magianism to Dogmagianism. Yes, the Satanist is correct to raise issues with certain manifestations of certain monotheistic religions. But simplistic us-vs-them narratives miss the point, for the actual problems lie both without and within. The Second Key explains what the real enemy of a more Satanic world is and how Satanists can combat it.

To address the second problem, Tenebrous Satanism broadens who can be a Satanist and what is in the Satanist’s toolbox. On the first front, we need disciplined activists guided by wisdom and empathy, not arrogant trolls who accomplish nothing interesting. On the second, we need to quit glorifying violence and related forms of “evil” that serve only to convince people that Satanism is juvenile and destructive. Transgression, for us, is not childish power fantasies, but the fomenting of creative strife. Those who think the Ninth Key’s initiation protocol is “easier” than O9A’s fail to understand that we are actually trying to do something harder: creating mature and effective agents of change.

In sum, then, Tenebrous Satanism is a comprehensive attempt to eliminate unconstructive elements from O9A while building upon constructive ones. Want to be a Niner-style Satanist but without being a fuckhead? That, my friend, is the exact thing we’re here for: please read my book!

Concluding thoughts

The introduction of Nine Keys of Abyssal Darkness asserts that:

(T)wo extremes found among existing Satanic denominations must be reconciled: i) among mainline denominations, a too-vehement humanism which disdains spirituality; and ii) among esoteric denominations, a too-mystical occultism that fails to offer a livable human ethos.

The post above should clarify what I mean by that. I wanted a religion characterized both by full-bodied engagement with the world and by a strong esoteric element: not secularism to the exclusion of spirituality (as is common in LaVeyan and TST circles), but also not otherworldiness to the exclusion of vital existence (as per some forms of Luciferianism). But above all, I desired to have a relationship with the Nekalah and to advance their aeonic goals on my terms, not O9A’s. Tenebrous Satanism is the result.

How have others fared in navigating their personal path among various Satanic denominations?

This or any further inquiries about my path are both welcome in the comments.