Why I wrote 'Satan Is The New Cupid'

[Christy]

Satan Is The New Cupid

There are a lot of magical studies books on Halloween and spells to use on that specific sabbat, and most of them have a lot to do with divination of love or matchmaking so I decided to do a whole book dedicated to it.

[Minnie]

Christy wrote: "Satan Is The New Cupid

There are a lot of magical studies books on Halloween and spells to use on that specific sabbat, and most of them have a lot to do with divination of love o..."

Ouuu. I like the sound of that book. Some magazines and eZines are calling for stories for Halloween. If I run across names, I'll forward them to you.

[Christy]

Thanks

[Sharon]

Be prepared for some blowback, Christy. Sabbats =/= Satanic, and a lot of people in the Old Religion have to deal with the conflation of Wicca with Satanism. They are not related at all, as Satan is a Judeo-Christian concept.

[Christy]

Oh, you mean my title?

I mentioned Satan because I used some theory from LaVey writings and some of the traditional lore I added involves Satan.

Also, I thought it would be cute.

I would be happy to argue how Wicca may or may not involve Satanism though, it could kill some time.

[Sharon]

Christy wrote: "I would be happy to argue how Wicca may or may not involve Satanism though, it could kill some time. "

I wouldn't recommend arguing that idea with someone who's been practicing Wicca for longer than you've been alive, to be perfectly frank ...

[Christy]

I'll aruge anything as long as Dr. Phil is still in reruns, I have nothing better to do.

I assume you're Wiccan?

[Sharon]

Christy wrote: "I'll aruge anything as long as Dr. Phil is still in reruns, I have nothing better to do.

I assume you're Wiccan?"

I am. However, I am not interested in engaging in "debate" about my religious practices in this forum with you.

[Christy]

Dude, I didn't mean to upset you. I thought it was obvious I was teasing.

[Sharon]

Christy wrote: "Dude, I didn't mean to upset you. I thought it was obvious I was teasing."

It wasn't. I offered you a serious piece of advice about the title of you work and you responded as follows: "I would be happy to argue how Wicca may or may not involve Satanism though, it could kill some time." This was in your post of 8/30/09, at 7:30 PM.

You have been informed by someone with primary source authority that Wicca and Satanism have no connection whatsoever, and you wouldn't leave it alone. You can take my advice or leave it ... but be advised that no reputable publisher of Pagan works would take *anything* that attempts to connect Satanism and Wicca in any way, shape or form -- because they know better.

Thank you.

[Christy]

You were supposed to notice the teasing tone by the 'it could kill some time'

Also, that's funny because I've read published work on the ties between Wicca and Alister Crowley and Satanism.

I think the real argument here is, how do we decide which publishers are the reputable or not.

[Sharon]

Christy wrote: "You were supposed to notice the teasing tone by the 'it could kill some time'

Also, that's funny because I've read published work on the ties between Wicca and Alister Crowley and Satanism.

I..."

Since I do not know you other than words on a screen, I could not "notice a teasing tone."

If you can not distinguish between Wicca, Thelema and Satanism (to say nothing of mis-spelling Aleister Crowley's name), I hope you reconsider this publication project of yours. You posit expertise, but provide no sources. Aleister Crowley has no more to do with Gerald Gardner et al than I have to do with, oh, Richard Nixon.

You don't have the critical thinking skills necessary to establish your expertise. I'm sorry. And no, I am not teasing. I'm very disappointed by your attitude. I am now bowing out of this conversation before I lose my ability to remain cordial with someone whom I must remind myself is a *child.*

[Christy]

My apologias on the misspelling, I was distracted when writing last night’s post, that's all I'll say about that.

Just as people believe Elvis is alive, people believe Gardner and Crowley were tag team partners. Does this mean I believe it? No. Does this mean I disbelieve it? No. I think everyone should believe what they like and since none of us were there, we should make good use of the pass time that is speculation.

I have nothing against Wicca, Wiccans, or being called a child. I'm sorry that my flippant attitude offended you, but this has nothing to do with my book. The book doesn't argue whether Gardner was Crowley's lackey or whether he was reincarnation of Jack The Ripper. And so, I don't know why you think comments like "You posit expertise, but provide no sources." have any relation to this conversation.

It can't apply to my book, so it must apply to something I have said here. Please point out which of the self-deprecating remarks you took as me declaring my expertise on ANYTHING.

I wouldn't make the claim to be an expert on the back of my hand.

Obviously, you are the self proclaimed expert (who, judging by the times you've mentioned my age, must be old enough to have her name announced by Willard Scott on the Today Show) so why don’t we end this by saying you are right because you are an old Wiccan.

[Sharon]

Christy wrote: "My apologias on the misspelling, I was distracted when writing last night’s post, that's all I'll say about that.

Just as people believe Elvis is alive, people believe Gardner and Crowley were t..."

Little girl, you were the one who stated, as I already mentioned, that you could "argue how Wicca and Satanism are related." I quoted you, and gave the time and date of your post. Yet, you provided no such arguments and laid the blame on me, to wit: "You should have known I was teasing."

You also said "I've read published work on the ties between Wicca and Alister Crowley and Satanism" in your post of 13 hours, 14 minutes ago. Really? What are they? That's what I mean by positing expertise but providing no sources. Saying "I've read it somewhere" is no different from saying "Some bloke down the pub told me." It holds no water.

Your original post says that you give spells for Sabbats, which are Wiccan holidays, and your title is "Satan is the New Cupid," because you reference LaVey. Your own words. If you have forgotten them, go back to your first post and re-read them. You, therefore, are conflating Wicca, which has nothing to do with Judeo-Christianity, with a Judeo-Christian entity. A visit to crackafrigginbook.com would tell you that much.

I never claimed to be the expert; I'm not the one going around writing books on Sabbats and calling them Satanic. While I am not old enough to be announced on Willard Scott's segment, I AM old enough to be your mother and have been practicing Wicca for longer than you have been alive. I think I know my own religion just a little bit better than you as a result.

So, dear, why don't we end it indeed. May you receive all that you deserve.

[Christy]

Little girl, you were the one who stated, as I already mentioned, that you could "argue how Wicca and Satanism are related." I quoted you, and gave the time and date of your post. Yet, you provided no such arguments and laid the blame on me, to wit: "You should have known I was teasing."

Madam, I did, indeed, mean that I COULD argue it. I didn't say that I would or even cared to. The flippant way I ended the post was suppose to convey that, and the teasing tone I meant it in. That blame can be placed on me. The emotional outbursts can be...well, left at your doorstep for now.

You also said "I've read published work on the ties between Wicca and Alister Crowley and Satanism" in your post of 13 hours, 14 minutes ago. Really? What are they? That's what I mean by positing expertise but providing no sources. Saying "I've read it somewhere" is no different from saying "Some bloke down the pub told me." It holds no water.

I didn't know you actually wanted sources, my apologies.

The Secret History of Modern Witchcraft by Tau Allen Greenfield is the most succinct work I can offer you now.

Your original post says that you give spells for Sabbats, which are Wiccan holidays, and your title is "Satan is the New Cupid," because you reference LaVey. Your own words. If you have forgotten them, go back to your first post and re-read them. You, therefore, are conflating Wicca, which has nothing to do with Judeo-Christianity, with a Judeo-Christian entity. A visit to crackafrigginbook.com would tell you that much.

'Sabbat' is used by many pagan groups, even Satanic ones. Just because the Wiccan religion uses it, doesn't mean they own it.

I did include Satan in the title because I cited some LaVey writings and also "some of the traditional lore I added involves Satan." (My Words. If you have forgotten them, go back to my first post and re-read them, as you would say).

The book is not meant to be a Wiccan text. It is a mixture of many pagan beliefs.

I, therefore, am not conflating Wicca, which has nothing to do with Judeo-Christianity, with a Judeo-Christian entity. A visit to crackafrigginbook.com would tell you that much.

I never claimed to be the expert; I'm not the one going around writing books on Sabbats and calling them Satanic. While I am not old enough to be announced on Willard Scott's segment, I AM old enough to be your mother and have been practicing Wicca for longer than you have been alive. I think I know my own religion just a little bit better than you as a result.

You are also old enough not to jump to conclusions or be so combative to people behind a computer screen, as if their opinion will effect you somehow.

So, dear, why don't we end it indeed. May you receive all that you deserve.

That's very Satanic of you, my dear.