Divisiveness in the Left-hand Path
by Ken Olsen
Director of the Prometheus Society
Back

  Divisiveness has played a major role in the history of the modern Left-hand Path.  This is a natural enough phenomenon considering the objectives behind the Left-hand Path philosophy and practice.  However, it is my goal herein to delineate the role which divisiveness plays in the Left-hand Path and to determine whether divisiveness is destructive or constructive for the Left-hand Path.
     To answer these questions, we must observe the background and the process of divisiveness.  Because I am specifically talking about the modern Left-hand Path, I will look at the Left-hand Path only for its brief history since its Renaisance in 1966.
     In 1966 Anton Szandor LaVey and several associates of his pulled together to form an enterprise of enormous importance for the modern Left-hand Path.  No matter what one might say about LaVey the man or the process and purpose of the enterprise which he engaged in, the solid truth is that most of us who practice the Left-hand Path would not be where we are today if LaVey hadn't entered into this enterprise.
     However, over the years, various sects have split away from the main body of LaVey's Church of Satan. Some have left because of ideological differences.  Others have left due to political disagreements.  Still others have left due to the naive ambitions of individuals.  This was the birth of the current divisiveness which exists within the Left-hand Path.  Most of the sects were small and eventually disappeared.  Others, however, have grown large enough to stand on their own for years.
     LaVey, of course, did not give his blessings to any of these heretical sects. Instead, LaVey's Church rose in opposition to these groups, publishing ideological attacks as well as defamatory statements.  One such item stating the ideological position of LaVey's Church on these groups includes the "Satanic Bunco Sheet". 
     Many of these groups did not just disagree with LaVey on ideological grounds, but also began publishing attacks on LaVey's ideologies and on his character.  Thus the divisiveness within the modern Left-hand Path had its beginnings and the Satanic War began. 
     Looking carefully at the reasons why sects left the main body of LaVey's Church will reveal the different types of divisiveness which exist within the Left-hand Path.  I recognize among these types, the following: ideological, political, individual, and characterological.  It is important to recognize that each of these divisions exist not only between sects, but also within sects.  In fact, most sects accept a certain level of divisiveness.
     Ideological differences are differences which occur in the philosophies and practices.  Certainly, many of the sects which separated from the Church of Satan did so on ideological grounds.  Some examples of these sects include the Temple of Set and the First Church of Satan.
     There are sound arguments in this form of divisiveness.  It is an acceptable motive for division and an healthy form of divisiveness.  Such conflict is indeed healthy for the development of the Left-hand Path.  The existence of one universal Left-hand Path Church is as ridiculous as the argument for one universal Christian Church.  This is not to say that there are not those individuals who would like to see this happen.  However, it is as likely for the Church of Satan to become the universal Satanic Church again as it is for the Roman Catholic Church to become the universal Christian Church again.  It is my position that there is strength in diversity.  Ideological conflicts promote thought and debate between sects with ideological differences is an acceptable and even healthy form of divisiveness.
     The second type of divisiveness is fairly common, but does not usually result in succesful sects.  This type is political divisiveness.  Political differences are also understandable most of the time.  What I mean by political differences is when some part of the political structure within a sect disenables an individual or a group of individuals from accomplishing the stated goals of the sect.  Therefore, political divisiveness is also a legitimate form of divisiveness.  However, this is only in the event that the existing political system is resistant to serious efforts to change it.
     Generally, however, what is typically called political does not fit under my definition of political.  This is when some ambitious individual cannot accomplish the political goals they want to achieve within the given organization.  I call this type of divisiveness individual.  Generally, it does not result in successful sects, as very few people follow the dissatisfied individual.  However, there are occasionally successful sects which are based upon this type of separation if ideological changes are presented as well.  One example of a sect which is individually-based which will likely see success is the First Satanic Church, created by Karla LaVey in October, 1999.
     Finally, the most dangerous type of divisiveness within the Left-hand Path, and also a very common one, is characterological.  This is when an individual or a group of individuals dislike another individual or group of individuals for any number of reasons and make that feeling known through either written or spoken statements, basing their attacks on the person's character.  This doesn't occur frequently within a given sect, but rather occurs between sects.  Sometimes these character attacks are based on untrue statements and sometimes they are factual. There are many examples of this type of divisiveness, some of which we will now focus on to determine how it effects the Left-hand Path.
     Some of the more notable character attacks which one can find many examples of, especially on the internet, are the attacks made by  representatives of the Church of Satan against Dr. Michael A. Aquino, founder of the Temple of Set.  These attacks generally focus on a false accusation leveled against Dr. Aquino of child molestation.  This accusation was thrown out of court because it was proven to be false based upon very reliable evidence.  However, one can find many statements by Church of Satan representatives using these false claims against Dr. Aquino.  These defamatory attacks are not only damaging to Dr. Aquino personally or to the Temple of Set institutionally.  They are also damaging to the entire Left-hand Path.  When Christians and others who misunderstand the Left-hand Path read these statements, they assume them to be true and they use them to promote attacks against the Left-hand Path.  This type of attack also shows a deep sense of insecurity within the Church of Satan.  Instead of focusing on the ideological debate, the Church of Satan often reduces themselves to making personal defamatory attacks against individual members of heretical sects of the Left-hand Path.
     What about attacks against Anton Szandor LaVey?  If they are based upon truth are they noble and constructive for the Left-hand Path?  Most notable among the attackers of LaVey are his estranged daughter, Zeena Schreck, and her husband Nikolas Schreck.  The Schrecks attempt to dethrone LaVey by attacking his credentials, as well as his character.  However, from all appearances, these attacks seem to based upon true allegations which are backed up by evidence that is cited and can be indepependently assessed.  However, are these seemingly accurate attacks upon LaVey good for the Left-hand Path?  Certainly, it is noble for those within the Left-hand Path to dwell in the truth.  However, what is not indicated in their attacks is the fact that despite whatever claims are made against LaVey, he is truly the father of the modern Left-hend Path.  His prominence as a master of psychodrama is at the core of the modern Renaissance of the Left-hand Path.  If it weren't for his theatrics and early power, where would anyone who currently practices the Left-hand Path be. Therefore, he as a Black Magician, is the base of the roots the modern Left-hand Path.  To attack him is to attack those very roots.  Therefore, we must either completely turn our backs on his system or we must give him the respect which he deserves as the father of the modern Left-hand Path.
     And finally, the third example of such character attacks is a retaliatory attack made against the Schrecks by a LaVey apologist.  The validity of the attack is questionable, as the author gives no solid traceable evidence for the allegations.  However, even if it were based upon truth, it does not give me great cause to be alarmed. It discusses the pasts of both Zeena and Nikolas Schreck.  My belief is that the Left-hand Path is about overcoming life's ordeals and getting beyond them to be a better person.  I therefore have no doubt that the Schrecks had great adversity in their lives as they struggled along the Path.  Also, I am certain that as humans, they did make some mistakes along the way.  However, knowing the Schrecks personally, I would now characterize them both as being people of strong character and independence.  The people they are now in no way reflects the people that were presented in the attack made against them.  Therefore, I cannot be personally persuaded by the essay to either dislike or devalue them and I think it is a foolish attack with little substance.
     In my opinion, the only time a character attack is useful is to expel someone from the recognized Left-hand Path due to criminal activity.  Such a character attack is fruitful for the Left-hand Path in showing that the Left-hand Path will not tolerate criminal activities..
     I hereby call on all of the representatives of the Left-hand Path to cease all character attacks and to remove the attacks which they have already made.  It is much more noble for these lindividuals to engage in serious ideological debate, which raises the level of thought and consciousness within the Left-hand Path.  It is not my belief that there should be a universal Left-hand Path, but that serious and ethical debate among nobles is good for the Left-hand Path and good for the world we live in.
.

Sources:
Anton LaVey: Legend and Reality by Zeena and Nikolas Schreck
A Tragic End to the Circus of Dr. Lao: Anton's Faked Death Certificate
Anton LaVey's Court Records: Palimony and Bankruptcy
Liar, Liar: The Unauthorized Biography of Nikolas and Zeena Schreck
Pretenders to the Throne: Regarding the Temple of Set by Magister Peter H. Gilmore
Satanic Bunco Sheet