Tag Archives: magus peter gilmore

Singular Satanism


 I’ve told you about Magus Peter H. Gilmore’s criticism of atheists and other Satanists. I was hoping maybe he would chill out and go do his thing while leaving people who are interested in actually doing things to bring positive change alone.

I guess that isn’t the case.

In a recent post on the COS “newsfeed” titled “Satanic Monuments” Peter says some interesting things. The first thing I found interesting was the way Peter refers to Anton LaVey, it’s a lot like hero worship.

Peter is constantly talking about how Anton did this, Anton didn’t do that,  what would Anton do? I mean give the guy credit but damn. You are close to becoming what you hate. Does Peter want Satanism to be stuck in a single form that adheres to a single man’s instructions or beliefs? What if you don’t want to do things exactly the way Anton LaVey would want? You can’t be a Satanist? Really? That’s what it sounds like Peter is saying to me.

In another part Peter says-

“Our religion is young, but I suspect that if the philosophy can be communicated with clarity for years to come, that ever more wonderful things will be wrought.”

Didn’t Peter Gilmore tell us not long ago he frowns on evangelical satanism? Where is the difference between communicating and being evangelical? Did Anton tell all the Satanists about that too? Just like the problems Christians have with their bible and addressing subjects that never existed 2000 years ago it seems that Anton LaVey’s version of Satanism is stuck in the era in which it was created in some ways.

Then Peter says this

“These will stand as testaments to the value of Satanism in a powerful way, demonstrating well-lived lives, and that is the ultimate goal of every Satanist, and a fitting monument for the legacy of Anton Szandor LaVey.”

What? So Peter is against tangible monuments that represent a way of thinking but is okay with people living their lives as to represent a (albeit intangible) monument to a single man? i would be uncomfortable with doing that I would think Peter would be uncomfortable saying it.

Of course Peter also does something else I would advise him of not doing in the future for his own benefit…Quoting himself in articles he takes credit for writing. It really defines conceit and it makes you look silly and/or really creepy. It leaves me wondering if Peter talks like that to himself throughout the day. “Peter would like some coffee. Peter would be happy to get Peter some coffee. Peter Gilmore said Thank you. You’re welcome Peter” ugh, stop doing that!

While all of this is interesting to me it leads to this conclusion- Magus Peter Gilmore and The Church of Satan can do as it pleases. I hope they are very successful and I hope that they manage to communicate their philosophy despite being discouraged to do so most  times. More power to them. It would be nice if the spokesman for the COS would get the chip off his shoulder and quit acting like his organization owns satanism. It isn’t as if Anton LaVey coined the phrase. Is Peter expecting us to allow him to tell us what the definition of satanism is just like the Christians want to tell us what the definition of marriage is?  I’m beginning to think Peter should change his first name to  “Contradiction”