Harvard's Satanic Mass

[Arrow Gamer]

Basically, Harvard is holding a satanic mass and tons of religious leaders are getting upset.

“While we support the ability of all our students to explore difficult issues, we also encourage them to do so in ways that are sensitive to others,” Neugeboren said in a statement. “To that end, the Harvard Extension School has worked with the club’s student leaders to address specific concerns that have been expressed.”


I think both sides have a point: on one side, there is the freedom of speech involved, but on the other Harvard is a private institution and could shut it down if they wanted to. Is it disrespectful to other religions to hold such a mass? Does it send the wrong message were Harvard to stop it? Are religious leaders justified in their outrage?

 

[timtofly]

It is a public institution and while I do not endorse satanic rituals, there are those in the public that do. The college was not even started by Catholics, so I am not sure why they are attempting to interfere. I am pretty sure that if you push God out of the public sphere there are other ideologies that would be glad to step in to fill the void.

 

[Traitorfish]

The only grounds on which I think you'd be able to argue for preventing this event would be if they were mistreating sacred objects, and the article seems to say that this won't be the case. So apart from that, they have nothing to appeal to but offended sensibilities, which is no grounds for complaint at all. If it was, after all, they'd also be obliged to prohibit Catholic events, the idolatry of which offends Jew, Muslim and Protestant alike.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Satanism is a weird phenomenon for me.

I don't understand what could motivate choosing the representation of evil from one religion and making it the focus of a new religion except the desire to mock that first religion. For me the logic of Satanism is this: "the guy you say is bad, we take as our hero, precisely because you say he is bad and we don't like you; we like you and your religion so little that we want to offend you by doing the exact opposite."

That's all fine, except when you then make the claim (from the article): "The flawed assumption seems to be that because Satan is the representation of evil incarnate for some faiths, that Satanist are part of a hate group and their practice devoted toward denigrating Catholicism."

Yes. They are! That's precisely what they are. That's not a "flawed assumption" about them; that's their chosen self-definition! Again from the article: "ritual of sacrilege of the Catholic host, or the sacred bread used in the Eucharist [is] a common component of black masses." (though not to be conducted in this instance apparently).

If you hate Christianity and you want to twit Christians by practicing patently-opposite-of-Christianity, then fine; freedom of speech and freedom of religion protect you in doing so. But have the courage of your convictions! Be willing to say flatly that your religion is motivated by hatred for another religion.

Anyway, I like this resolution--"The best way to combat hateful speech is to overwhelm it with loving and prayerful speech, and that is what we intend to do"--better than the efforts just to shut the satanic mass down.

 

[Kozmos]

Satan helps America stay competitive and important in both marketplaces and academic research. On a more serious note, I don't get how most religions can claim to co-exist with each other, or maybe better said sects within a particular religion when one's version of a holy event/sacrament/ritual is considered blasphemous within another. We really need to build a few coloseeums and arenas and let every religion bring forth its champions and duke it out in gladiotorial combat to finally settle once and for all...the Ultimate Religion.

 

[Traitorfish]

I don't understand what could motivate choosing the representation of evil from one religion and making it the focus of a new religion except the desire to mock that first religion. For me the logic of Satanism is this: "the guy you say is bad, we take as our hero, precisely because you say he is bad and we don't like you; we like you and your religion so little that we want to offend you by doing the exact opposite."

That's all fine, except when you then make the claim (from the article): "The flawed assumption seems to be that because Satan is the representation of evil incarnate for some faiths, that Satanist are part of a hate group and their practice devoted toward denigrating Catholicism."

Yes. They are! That's precisely what they are. That's not a "flawed assumption" about them; that's their chosen self-definition! Again from the article: "ritual of sacrilege of the Catholic host, or the sacred bread used in the Eucharist [is] a common component of black masses." (though not to be conducted in this instance apparently).

Eh, Satanists are mostly just Objectivists with a taste for drama. It's all about self-empowerment and what have you, and all the ritual is just there for show, a sort of half-baked metaphor for their distaste for "collectivist" ethics.

They're basically a bunch of dorks.

 

[GoodGame]

The only grounds on which I think you'd be able to argue for preventing this event would be if they were mistreating sacred objects, and the article seems to say that this won't be the case. So apart from that, they have nothing to appeal to but offended sensibilities, which is no grounds for complaint at all. If it was, after all, they'd also be obliged to prohibit Catholic events, the idolatry of which offends Jew, Muslim and Protestant alike.

This is an interesting point. There are many religions whose theologies don't always see eye to eye. However they are close enough in some regards that there are inter-faith exchanges. But obviously a Satanic religion is going to be at odds with most of the Abrahamic religions. The simple answer is that there has been a long term Church of Satan housed in California. The bigger concern to the state is not whether or not they independently have religious beliefs, but that they aren't a cover for criminal activity.

Kind of trivial, but to confuse the issue even more, I was reading on Wikipedia that one of the believes of the official Church of Satan is 'stratification', which is semi-antithesis to the idea of Constitutional rights.

 

[Light Cleric]

Anyway, I like this resolution--"The best way to combat hateful speech is to overwhelm it with loving and prayerful speech, and that is what we intend to do"--better than the efforts just to shut the satanic mass down.

This is pretty much how I would go about it, although I can't wait to see the "wow universities engage in censorship" shock and surprise that you would only have if you lived beneath a rock

 

[Hygro]

It is a public institution

Wait, what?

 

[timtofly]

Wait, what?

I would not say that it is a strictly private school. It may be one in name, but not totally in practice. The boundaries between public and private in such national and even international recognized colleges may be hard to define.

 

[Hygro]

I would not say that it is a strictly private school. It may be one in name, but not totally in practice. The boundaries between public and private in such national and even international recognized colleges may be hard to define.

I don't disagree with the idea, but Harvard is the epitome of private education.

 

[timtofly]

What makes it that way? I have always seen Harvard as the people of the time getting together as a community and starting a place of learning.

 

[classical_hero]

When you play with fire, don't get burnt.

 

[Traitorfish]

What makes it that way? I have always seen Harvard as the people of the time getting together as a community and starting a place of learning.

Harvard was founded as a private corporation. It's actually the oldest private corporation in the United States.

When you play with fire, don't get burnt.

Witches were hanged, actually. Burning was reserved for heretics. (Y'know, like you.)

 

[Light Cleric]

Witches were hanged, actually. Burning was reserved for heretics. (Y'know, like you.)

That's a vicious stereotype, witches were also drowned, too.

 

[Traitorfish]

True; the point is basically that they didn't burn them, because burning was meant to allow heretics a chance to recant, while witches were already lost to the devil and it was better to dispose of them as quickly as possible.

Now, the Catholics did burn witches, but they did so on the principle that witches don't actually exist, because that would be ridiculous, so anyone claiming to be a witch was actually a heretic. Which makes a certain kind of sense.

(The Scots, unusually, strangled them and then burned them, presumably because any excuse for a free bonfire is welcome to Scots.)

 

[gay_Aleks]

I've heard that also the very same people who told that one individual was a witch were burned too, because only heretics believe in witches.

Did this actually happen?

 

[downtown]

Now that I know that this is, I kinda see why Catholics, or other religious folk, are upset. Makes it seem like the entire event is basically just one big "Screw You" to something Catholics hold to be sacred.

http://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5709946/why-are-people-freaking-out-about-satanism-at-harvard

 

[JollyRoger]

Is Harvard some sort of Cathedral?

 

[timtofly]

Seems it has been canceled.

The church of satan is a religious organization for atheist. I am not sure why atheist or religious people take them seriously.