Unexpected Experiments in Religion

I've been teaching a college course on American Religion for a year now.  The students I have this semester are very engaging, and I have several who are clearly well-versed in their own traditions.  This I consider a decided plus because the other students can learn first hand about other people's beliefs and because I certainly cannot cover every belief with the same depth of knowledge.

We talk about damn near everything in that class, both the light side and dark side of religions.  Last week the main topic was Islam, and a couple of my online students (students can take the class either in a classroom or online) admitted rather shamefacedly that 9/11 was one of the things they associate with Islam.  I repeated this story to the classroom class this week with the message there's nothing wrong with associating the two events so long as you see there is more to Islam than 9/11.  The terrorists, no matter how small of a minority they represent, most definitely had religious motivations and most definitely wrap their ideals in religious language and, thus, 9/11 is most definitely associated with Islam.  No one objected.  I had no expectations that they would.

The main topic for this week was Satanism, cults, and the Satanic Panic of the 1980s.  I teach it as an example of how religion can fuel hysteria and the power of certain ideas such as Satan.  For example, accusations of Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) led to a backhoe being brought in to dig up a schoolyard to find the underground Satanic ritual chamber, even though every single supposed child victim pointed to a different place on a map as to where the entrance supposedly was.  In the end it was concluded that not only was there no chamber, there were no Satanists and no actual abuse: just a lot of overly protective parents and counselors feeding images into the minds of their impressionable seven year olds. 

We discussed other common things denounced as "Satanic" such as Dungeons & Dragons and, more recently, Harry Potter.  A whole lot was written in the 80s about the "overt" Satanic connections to D&D, most of which is not merely opinionated but flat out factually wrong.  One author, for example, complained that any game that included a spell called Slow Poison must be evil for teaching players it's ok to not merely poison people, but to do it slowly and excruciatingly.  Set aside, for the moment, that if the game had such a spell the writers might have designed it for the bad guys.  The fact is that Slow Poison was used to slow a poison down so that the party had time to cure the poison before it killed its victim.  It's a healing spell.  Another author claims that D&D creator Gary Gygax admitted in an interview that he asked local Satanists about their magical chants so he could make the books more realistic... even though D&D has never included chants for its spells.  The way you cast a fireball is to say "I am casting a fireball" and then rolling a handful of dice.

And people believed these stories:  lots of people.  People who had never read a D&D  book denounced them on the word of others who had also clearly never actually read a book.  The backlash was so bad that demons and devils were entirely removed from the game's 2nd edition and renamed for the 3rd edition, and Slow Poison has now become Delay Poison. 

One student objected that I was singling out Christianity.  Another objected to what I was implying about the religion.

I'm not sure I even used the word "Christian" in my description of the above examples, but I certainly wouldn't argue it.  But I found it fascinating that connecting Islam with 9/11 was acceptable, but for certain students (both born-agains), the idea of connecting Christianity with bad behavior was unacceptable.  I also found it interesting that despite accusations of insulting Christianity, I never made a value judgment.  I stated what certain people had done and presented evidence pertaining to the factualness of their claims.  If a listener comes to the conclusion that these people were behaving badly, that would be their judgment, not mine.

To be clear, both of these students are very bright, and both actively chose their spiritual path.  They are not mere yes-men.  One is always a joy to have in class.  The other is a joy except when he's being disruptive.  He's a continuing source of frustration because he cannot objectify anything.  He turns every writing assignment into a propaganda and/or evangelizing piece (including random Bible quotes) at the expense of the actual assignment.  I'm always super-defensive about being able to justify every single point I take away from him so that he can't cry religious persecution.

Let me reiterate here the point of this week's topic in the first place:  what the mere suggestion of Satan can cause in American culture.

One of the reading assignments for this week can be found here: http://www.rickross.com/reference/satanism/satanism12.html.  The article opens up with an extremely disturbing account of one alleged case of Satanic Ritual Abuse:

A young teenage girl, impregnated during a satanic ritual, is forcibly delivered of her nearly term baby, forced to ritually kill the child and then to cannibalize its heart as cult members watch. Another girl, a small child, is sealed inside the cavity of a disemboweled animal and "rebirthed" by her cultic captors during a ceremony. A preschool class is systematically sexually, emotionally, and physically abused by part of a nationwide, nearly invincible network of satanic pedophiles and pornographers. A young girl is thrown into an electrified cage with wolves and ritually tortured to deliberately produce a "wolf personality," part of her multiple personality disorder (MPD).

It is one paragraph in length in an article I would guess prints out to about 12-15 pages.  Multiple students stopped reading because it was too horrible to learn about and objected to us discussing Satanism in any sort of positive light.

The point of the article, however, is that "There is no evidence that SRA stories are true."  The point of the article was that people hear these sorts of wild tales and jump to conclusions and that those conclusions have caused a lot of damage in the form of false accusations (leading to embarrassment, harassment, loss of livelihood and loss of child custody during investigations) and horrific "memories" that vulnerable "victims" are forced to relive even though they never actually happened.

When I studied in England several years ago, my circle of friends consisted entirely of role-players (fans of D&D and other similar games).  They asked me about the Satanic Panic and why D&D could be confused with Satanism, because the entire mentality left my English friends baffled.  While I certainly don't agree with the belief, I had always accepted it as a sort of "common mistake" people could make.  But it's not common, at least on a worldwide scale.  The more I tried to explain to my English friends, the more I realized I couldn't give an adequate explanation why this happens again and again in this country. 

And this week I watched it happen in my class, as several of my brightest students read a one paragraph description of a story that never happened, believed it, and refused to read on.  And I entirely expect at least one student will write about Satanism on the final exam and tell me what an evil, murderous religion it is.  They might even justify their answer with "because that's what I've always been told," which was the line one student used last year in such an exam answer, despite the pages and pages of material they are required to read for the class that says differently.

Comments

[Sue]

My PhD dissertation contains a chapter that is about the history of evil and covers a lot of what you've written about, although its early 90s date pre-dates the full rise of Christian fundamentalism in the U.S. The issues you raise were alive back then, although they did not focus on "picking on Christianity" or the "war against Christians" as is so common today.

However, WAY back when I was an undergrad, we had a class on "The Bible as Literature." This fabulous class had a great prof who had to remind students (that'd be me and others) that this wasn't about your religious beliefs; rather, it was about the literary merit, stories, and teachings of holy texts.

We nodded and understood. Leave your beliefs at the door while you appreciate other people's religious stories. I know that today we can neither tell people to leave those feelings/beliefs at the door nor remind them that they are not trying to hear another message (that should not threaten them) without being called a "criminal" in the "war" against their religion(s).

The odd thing is that it's mostly, if not exclusively, Christians who are calling normal discussion to be a 'war' against 'their' religion. Jews, of course, are fairly used to lies and slander and shrug it off. Perhaps those who feel threatened should do what they tell others to do (and have told others to do for centuries) - shrug it off. Don't let it bother you.

Yup, it's VERY hard to do. But it takes inner strength and belief in your beliefs. Then pot-shots (or Protocols) just don't matter.

[Tim]

Speak of the Devil: Tales of Satanic Abuse in Contemporary England

[Tim]

Nightwind, how many Muslim students are in your class?

[jaz]

It's pretty old-school human for folks to scapegoat and demonize others, Night. I reckon we've been doing that since caveman days or Cain and Abel, take your pick.

Whatever else the human race may be, we are highly skilled in the use of deception and manipulation. It isn't too much of a stretch of the imagination for someone who wants to condemn or control others to see how perfectly suited religion is to that purpose.

Convince someone that you are the personal spokesman (or spokeswoman) of the most powerful being in the universe and what is left to be said? They will do as you say even if they themselves or others die in the process. How many examples of exactly that are sprinkled throughout history?

A lot of lines get blurred between those who believe and those who are using belief as a political tool to manipulate others.

Which is a shame because religion applied internally as a guide to personal behavior can be a very good thing. It's when the power-hungry sink their talons in it that it gets ugly.

[Nightwind]

Tim,
There are no Muslim students in the class. I find it sad that the question even needs to be asked. Bad behavior should offend all of us regardless whether the miscreant is of the same faith as us. I might go so far as to suggest we should be more offended by the bad behavior of those in our own camps, because they misrepresent the beliefs that we hold dear.

[Tim]

Why sad? You compare the behavior of your students in two situations: Islam/9-11 and Christianity/Satanic Panic. Why sad that I should ask if the student behavior includes Muslim students?

Sue also picks up on this comparison of behavior based on religious identity in the first comment.

I'm curious why my question is deemed by you as a defense of bad behavior? Please explain.

[ben]

Greetings from China, where I can't believe I'm spending time commenting on Xark!

I think Christians, particularly evangelicals, take to heart the New Testament verses about the inevitability of suffering/persecution for Christian faith. I think part of the evangelical self-identification as "persecuted" has to do with an association of persecution and "faithfulness." Certainly Christians were persecuted, and often martyred, before Constantine converted.

In one way, in a country with an evangelical president, Christian persecution is a ridiculous concept. In elite and academic circles, I think it IS true that Christians, and particularly evangelicals, are viewed as intellectually suspect. But I wouldn't call that "persecution" - certainly not in a New Testament sense. But in any case, maybe some of this plays into the class discussions Nightwind describes.

Certainly, demonizing (or propagandizing against) other religions is something that happens FAR beyond Christianity - but you're not arguing it doesn't. I DO think, however, that secular liberals have panicked about the Christian Right more than they really need to. The movement is ebbing (my opinion), but if you read magazines like Harper's (which my aunt got me), you'd think theocracy is imminent.

I DO think the Christian Right should be resisted. I just also think it might be a litle overhyped. Maybe this is a counterpoint to the Satanic Panic.

Again, my point to other Christians: A religion that stresses human sinfulness and fallibility should be FAR more willing to admit error than we are. That would be my main critique of your students.

One last point: I disagree that Jews "shrug it off." I would submit that the reaction to the Jimmy Carter book, as well as the existence and activism of the Anti-Defamation League, show that at least some Jews take criticism quite seriously.

I don't think Muslims would be much different. For that matter, neither are, say, Scientologists or vegetarians or anyone. Few people deal well with criticism.

[DeweyS]

It appears to me that isolated religion will never adequately explain the activities we're observing, whether we're talking about the crusade against D&D or 9/11. I'm sure the fact that I'm currently reading Chrysanthemum and the Sword. Patterns of Japanese Culture has an impact on my view.

In both cases (D&D and 9/11), religion is a significant part of the stated motivation or justification but I think reality, as Night experienced in England, needs to be interpreted against a broader and deeper cultural background.

While I consider it logical to wonder about the opinion of Muslims in Night's class as a natural parallell to the Christians discussing actions of other Christians, I don't think that Muslims in the class would necessarily shed more light on the issues.

I think the key would be: how close can we come to someone who has direct experience in the culture of the person we're trying to analyze.

I'm not assuming that the above cultural prototype (who happens to be Muslim) would automatically approve of the terrorists actions. However, neither am I assuming that they would disapprove for the same reasons that I do. My assumption is that someone from a similar cultural heritage -- including nation and probably economic class as well as religion -- would better understand their motivations and actions.

I believe that most people act morally most of the time from their own perspective of morality. I believe that moral systems often have similar components. I even believe that some moral systems are "superior" to others. However, I don't believe that morality is universal and as such even obvious questions are quite valid to find the answers. Perhaps obvious questions are the *most* important to ask.

[Nightwind]

Tim, I'm sorry, I wasn't meaning to imply that you specifically were defending bad behavior.

Ben, I think comparing the theocracy conspiracy theories to the Satanic Panic is a GREAT idea. Probably too late in the semester to fit it in, but definitely something to try to incorporate next time I teach (hopefully in the fall).

Xarker, your site is going wonky. I sign in, type my comment, hit "post", and it tells me my name and address are required. I've tried it twice with the same result.

[Ex-drone]

I read a great book debunking SRA called Satanic Panic by Jeffery Victor. He was a sociology professor at SUNY when a satanism scare occurred in his local area. His analysis provides many clues on how these events occur and get out of hand.