Editorial Note: As Anton Long notes in his ONA Style, O9A Chic “That we in the text Toward Understanding Satanism use the standard definitions of Satanism and the Satanic, as given in the complete Oxford English Dictionary, to differentiate ourselves from others who claim to represent Satanism – and who claim to be Satanic – is deliberate, although it is only to be expected that (a) only a few will understand why, and (c) many or most will regard it as confirming what they in their delusion believe in, and accept about both themselves and us.”
Toward Understanding Satanism
Understanding and Defining Satanism
To begin to understand and appreciate and thus acquire some knowledge of some subject it is obviously necessary to know what that subject is about, what it deals with, and what its character – its essential nature – is, and this knowing begins, should begin, by defining it.
A definition should have clarity and precision. For a definition is: (1) Stating exactly what a thing is, or what a word means; (2) A precise statement of the essential nature of a thing; (3) A declaration or formal explanation of the signification of a word or phrase; (4) Precision, exactitude; (5) The setting of bounds or limits of something.
Let us therefore, as is only logical and scholarly, begin with the definition of the term Satanism given in the complete Oxford English Dictionary (20 vols, 2nd edition, Oxford, 1989), a work regarded as an authoritative source, and as the definitive record of the English language. The two main definitions of Satanism are:
1. A satanic or diabolical disposition, doctrine, spirit, or contrivance.
2. The worship of Satan, alleged to have been practised in France in the latter part of the 19th century; the principles and rites of the Satanists.
These lead us on to the definitions of words such as satanic, diabolical, and Satan, and thence to words such as Devil, fiendish, evil, and wicked.
Satanic: (1) Of or pertaining to Satan. (2) Characteristic of or befitting Satan; extremely wicked, diabolical, devilish, infernal. (3) Satanic school n. Southey’s designation for Byron, Shelley, and their imitators; subsequently often applied to other writers similarly accused of defiant impiety and delight in the portraiture of lawless passion.
Diabolical: (1) Of or pertaining to the devil; actuated by or proceeding from the devil; of the nature of the devil. (2) Characteristic of or befitting the devil; devilish, fiendish, atrociously wicked or malevolent.
Satan: (1) The proper name of the supreme evil spirit, the Devil. (2) In the etymological sense of ‘adversary’, with allusion to Matt. xvi. 23, Mark viii. 33.
Devil: (1) In Jewish and Christian theology, the proper appellation of the supreme spirit of evil, the tempter and spiritual enemy of mankind, the foe of God and holiness, otherwise called Satan. (2) (transf.) A human being of diabolical character or qualities; a malignantly wicked or cruel man; a ‘fiend in human form’.
Fiendish: Resembling, or characteristic of, a fiend; superhumanly cruel and malignant. Also as adv., excessively, horribly.
(1) Bad in moral character, disposition, or conduct; inclined or addicted to wilful wrong-doing; practising or disposed to practise evil; morally depraved. (A term of wide application, but always of strong reprobation, implying a high degree of evil quality.)
(2) Designating a stock evil character in a fairy-tale, as Wicked Fairy, Wicked Stepmother, etc.
(3) Bad, in various senses (not always clearly distinguishable). Frequent in Middle English use; later chiefly dial., or in colloq. use as a conscious metaphor (now often jocular), and implying ‘very or excessively bad’, ‘horrid’, ‘beastly’.
(4) Actually or potentially harmful, destructive, disastrous, or pernicious; baleful.
(5) In weakened or lighter sense, usually more or less jocular: Malicious; mischievous, sly.
Evil: (1) To harm or injure; to ill-treat. (2) Bad, wicked. (3) Doing or tending to do harm; hurtful, mischievous, misleading. (4) Offensive, disagreeable; troublesome. (5) Hard, difficult, deadly.
These definitions describe in a precise way the character – the essential nature – of Satanism, and set the bounds, the limits of what is Satanic. They also reveal four interesting things. First, the early use of the term Satanic to pejoratively and peripherally describe the life-style of some people as ‘defiantly impious’ and as having a ‘lawless passion’ (that is, and for example, an indulgence in carnality and such things as may excite and intoxicate the senses without due regard to modesty, temperance, and social approbation). Second, the sense of Satan as adversary . Third, how – in the English language – terms such as wicked have more than one sense, depending on context and tone, so that that word wicked can denote someone who is evil or who inclines toward ‘evil’ or someone who is just being horrid or someone who is mischievous and sly. Fourth, how the essence of Satanism, its character and its boundaries, are defined by terms such as wicked, mischievous, sly, harmful, destructive, disastrous, pernicious, baleful, destructive.
Thus it could be argued (with the proviso given below) that the two standard definitions of Satanism given above – and taken in context with how the words used in the definitions are subsequently defined – in some way encompass, and so may describe, much modern (post-Byronic) Satanism and many (perhaps most) individuals who publicly profess or have professed (in the last sixty years or so) to being Satanists. For example, (i) the overt showman-like ‘impiety’ and the ‘deification of the self and indulgence in the pleasures of the flesh’ of LaVey and his Church of Satan; (ii) the Left Hand Path initiatory approach of the Temple of Set (according to how they define the LHP) ; (iii) the eclectic individualism, atheism, ‘social Darwinism’, and ‘rational egoism’ , of many self-professed American Satanists; and (iv) the overtly religious approach of those describing themselves as ‘theistic Satanist’ for whom Satan is or may be a real deity.
For, (i) in respect of LaVey and his Church of Satan, there certainly is a carnal indulgence, not to mention a somewhat ‘stock portrayal’ of a character generally regarded as ‘evil’ – the costumes; the shaved head; the goatee beard; even (sometimes) the horns; (ii) in respect of the Temple of Set (ToS), there is the assertion of “the actual existence of Satan, as Set”; ; (iii) in respect of most modern self-professed Satanists there is the carnal indulgence, and delight in one’s “lawless” (that is, self-indulgent) passions; (iv) in respect of theistic Satanists, there is of course a belief in Satan (whosoever described and of whatever lineage) and an acceptance of or a belief in the supra-personal (supernatural) power of that deity.
Notice, however, that what is lacking in all of these modern groups and individuals are the following standard attributes of Satanism, of the diabolical, and of the Satanic:
(a) practising or disposed to practise evil;
(b) actually or potentially harmful, destructive, disastrous, or pernicious; baleful;
(c) malicious; mischievous, sly;
(d) bad in moral character, disposition
(e) hard, difficult, misleading, deadly, amoral.
Thus such modern groups and individuals are – despite their efforts to promote themselves as Satanists – at best only peripheral, or Byronesque, Satanists, since they do not champion, and certainly do not practice, what is socially and individually harmful, destructive, disastrous, pernicious, baleful, deadly, malicious, malevolent, sly, and offensive.
In comparison to all other modern self-professed Satanist groups, and in contrast to those individuals who publicly profess or have professed (in the last sixty years or so) to being Satanists, the Order of Nine Angles is, and always have been, different and, from the viewpoint of these other Satanists, a Satanic heresy.
A Satanic Heresy
The Satanic Heresy of the Order of Nine Angles is essentially threefold, for the ONA, contrary to how others understand and manifest it, understands Satanism and manifests Satanism (in an esoteric and an exoteric way) as:
1) An amoral, dangerous, practical, exeatic, devilish, way of life.
2) A presencing of ‘dark forces’/acausal energies – a form/mythos – only relevant to the current Aeon.
3) An unrestricted, amoral, diabolical, effective and affective , transformation/development of individual human beings by esoteric and exoteric means.
Heresy (1) implies a particular ethos – a way of living – devoid of dogma, devoid of ideas, devoid of debate, and devoid of intellectual pretension. This is the type of satanism – note the lower case s – that can be readily and easily understood by ‘the hoodie on the Clapham omnibus’. It is the type of Satanism evident in our text A Guide to Satanism for Beginners (The Simple ONA Way) and, more realistically and perhaps more importantly, in the text The Drecc , which is a guide to devilish living in modern society, with the terms drecc and dreccian being easily replaceable by different terms should others, or the hoodie on the Clapham omnibus, want to replace them with something more to their liking.
Such a way of living (and its propagation) is heretical, sly, and devilish because it is so simple and because there is (i) a rejection of (a living outside of) the law and the ‘justice’ of society and governments; (ii) a fierce, clannish, loyalty; and (iii) the understanding that the property, goods, and wealth, of mundanes – non-gang/non-clan members, those not part of our gang/clan or those are not covered by a truce – are a resource we can lawfully use.
Understood esoterically, and Aeonically, this type of satanism is a Dark Art, a work of Black Magick, an act of diabolical Aeonic sorcery.
Heresy (2) implies the ONA concept of Aeons, of Aeonic sorcery, of the Aeonic perspective, and of we human beings (and the ONA itself) as a nexion between the causal, phenomenal/material, universe and the acausal, the ‘living’ – and the sinisterly-numinous (or supernatural) – universe.
“One of the things that sets the ONA apart from other existing Left Hand Path groups relates to their idea of Aeons which naturally leads to long-term goals (meaning about 3-500 years), that go beyond the acts and lifespan of a single individual.” 
It also implies a particular and rational understanding of ‘the dark forces’/Satan: that is, of how acausal energy is or can be presenced to cause changes and of how Aeonic forces are beyond our ideated opposites and thus beyond the morality developed or posited by others and accepted by the majority and often enshrined in religious or political or social dogma.
Exoterically, and importantly, this particular heresy is expressed in (i) our defiant attitude regarding and our affirmation of culling, (ii) in the ONA using, in having used, or being prepared to use, ‘extreme political or religious forms’ (such as National Socialism or radical Islam), and (iii) in our heretical, amoral, wicked, attitude to what is described as ‘terrorism’, an attitude expressed by now well-known quotes such as:
“We of the Order of Nine Angles do not, never have, and never will condemn acts of so-called terrorism (individual or undertaken by some State), nor do we condemn and avoid what mundanes regard as evil or as criminal deeds. For us, all such things are or could be just causal forms or causal means, and thus are regarded by us as falling into three categories, which categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive: (1) things which might or which can be the genesis of our individual pathei-mathos and which thus are the genesis of our own sinister weltanschauung; (2) things which aid our sinister dialectic or which are or might be a Presencing of The Dark; or (3) things that can or could be a test, a challenge, a sinister experience, too far for someone who aspires to be one of our sinister kind, someone who thus fails the test, balks at the challenge, or is destroyed or overcome by the experience.
For our criteria are not those of morality; are not bounded by some abstract good and evil; are not those defined by the laws manufactured by mundanes. Our criteria is the amorality of personal judgement and personal responsibility, whereby we as individuals decide what may be right or wrong for us based on our own pathei-mathos, and act and take responsibility for our acts, knowing such acts for the exeatic living they are or might be, and knowing ourselves as nexions possessed of the ability, the potential, to consciously – via pathei-mathos and practical sinister experience – change ourselves into a new, a more evolved, species of life. Herein is the essence of Satanism, for us.” A Satanism Too Far
“It is of fundamental importance – to evolution both individual and otherwise – that what is Dark, Sinister or Satanic is made real in a practical way, over and over again. That is, that what is dangerous, awesome, numinous, tragic, deadly, terrible, terrifying and beyond the power of ordinary mortals, laws or governments to control is made manifest. In effect, non-Initiates (and even Initiates) need constantly reminding that such things still exist; they need constantly to be brought ‘face-to-face’, and touched, with what is, or appears to be, inexplicable, uncontrollable, powerful and ‘evil’. They need reminding of their own mortality – of the unforeseen, inexplicable ‘powers of Fate’, of the powerful force of ‘Nature’.
If this means killing, wars, suffering, sacrifice, terror, disease, tragedy and disruption, then such things must be – for it is one of the duties of a Satanic Initiate to so Presence The Dark, and prepare the way for, or initiate, the change and evolution which always result from such things. Such things as these must be, and always will be, because the majority of people are or will remain, inert and sub-human unless changed. The majority is – and always will be until it evolves to become something else – raw material to be used, moulded, cut-away and shaped to create what must be. There is no such thing as an innocent person because everyone who exists is part of the whole, the change, the evolution, the presencing of life itself, which is beyond them, and their life only has meaning through the change, development and evolution of life. Their importance is what they can become, or what can be achieved through their death. their tragedy, their living – their importance does not lie in their individual happiness or their individual desires or whatever.” To Presence The Dark
This – and support for and the practice of political and religious extremisms – most certainly is “actually or potentially harmful, destructive, disastrous, or pernicious; baleful,” not to mention also “practising or disposed to practise evil,” and offensive, disagreeable, malevolent, troublesome.
Heresy (3) implies adversarial, amoral, practical, unconventional, individual praxis and The Seven Fold Way of esoteric training and development.
Importantly, this praxis and this Way mean several things:
(i) No restrictions are placed on the individual, so that they are free (and often encouraged) to transgress norms, to be exeatic in a social, personal, and legal, way. For example, to undertake a culling or two; and, should they so desire, to use violence, to go to extremes, to learn certain anti-social, baleful, skills such as those of a fraudster or a robber or dealing in drugs. Of course, this is wicked of us, a diabolical thing to do, which is exactly the heretical point  and most certainly is an example of being conventionally “bad in moral character, disposition.”
(ii) Hard and difficult physical ordeals and challenges, of a severity to test the character of the person and produce endurance and character. For example the basic, the minimum, standards (for men) are: (a) walking thirty-two miles, in hilly terrain, in under seven hours while carrying a pack weighing at least 30 lbs; (b) running twenty-six miles in four hours; (c) cycling two hundred or more miles in twelve hours. For women, the minimum acceptable standards are: (a) walking twenty-seven miles in under seven hours while carrying a pack weighing at least 15 lbs. (b) running twenty-six miles in four and a half hours; (c) cycling one hundred and seventy miles in twelve hours.
[Those who have already achieved such goals in such activities are expected to set themselves and achieve more demanding goals.]
(iii) Hard and difficult esoteric ordeals and challenges, of a severity to test the character and commitment of the person, and produce and/or develop certain necessary esoteric skills. For example, the necessity of undertaking an Insight Rôle or two; and the Rite of Internal Adept involving living alone, in an isolated, wild, area for a minimum of three months.
(iv) Practical tests and the japing of individuals who are curious about us, or who seek us out, and a Labyrinthos Mythologicus to intrigue, select, test, confuse, annoy, mislead, or dissuade, others. Apart from being diabolical fun, such tests and japes or can be mischievous, sly, and us ‘playing the trickster’ in real life, which is exactly the satanic point.
(v) Actually or potentially harmful, destructive, or disastrous, engagement with real-life by overtly championing real (and often illegal and certainly offensive) heresies [such as gang culture, National Socialism, radical Islam, holocaust denial, ‘terrorism’, culling] and engaging in practical adversarial activities and ‘sinister-cloaking’.
These three things, and their implications – only some of which are outlined above  – are, with perhaps one or two recent exceptions, absent from the literature about Satanism, and are certainly not accepted as Satanism by the vast majority of those who today profess to understand and to practice Satanism, which perhaps indicates something in respect of the understanding of Satanism and the practice of Satanism of such modern Satanists.
Given the foregoing concise and precise explanation of the Satanic heresy of the Order of Nine Angles, it should thus be possible to (a) appreciate how the ONA define, practice, and understand Satanism, and (b) whether or not the ONA fits the two standard definitions of Satanism given above, and (c) whether or not, if it does not so fit, the ONA redefines Satanism.
As for how the ONA practice and understand Satanism – and in respect of the first of the two aforementioned standard definitions of Satanism – the ONA is certainly “a satanic or diabolical disposition, doctrine, spirit, or contrivance,” and certainly champions and practices what is diabolical and wicked: what is baleful, what is “bad in moral character, disposition,” and what is “actually or potentially harmful, destructive, disastrous, or pernicious; baleful.” The ONA is certainly “malicious, mischievous, and sly.” The ONA is also certainly “practising or disposed to practise evil” – doing what harms, what injures, what is wicked, what is hurtful, mischievous, misleading, and what is certainly offensive, disagreeable; troublesome, and also hard and difficult.
In respect of the second of the two standard definitions of Satanism, the ONA suggests  that Satan is not only (i) an adversarial archetype , and (ii) an Aeonic mythos/archetype capable of affective, Aeonic, change, but also (iii) suggests that there may be “…a supra-personal being [an acausal entity, one of The Dark Gods] called or termed Satan,” with,
“this entity having or being capable of having some control over, or some influence upon, human beings, individually or otherwise, with such control often or mostly or entirely being beyond the power of individuals to control by whatever means. Importantly, this definition of Satanism places the entity called Satan into a certain, a specific, relation with human beings – that of powerful entity whom human beings cannot really control, whatever means or artifice they may use or devise to attempt such control. This is itself is in contrast to the Nazarene-centric view of Satan.” 
There are, however, two important and necessary clarifications: (1) that, according to the ONA, the myths and legends about Satan – and even the name itself – pre-date the Septuagint and are pre-Hebrew in origin ; and (2) there is no ‘worship’ of Satan, no religious submission, but rather an appreciation of Satan (and many other Dark Gods) as akin to friends, companions, and/or long-lost relatives who have dwelt in some far-off land.
Thus, the ONA not only fits both standard definitions of Satanism but is the only avowedly Satanic association which is:
(a) practising or disposed to practise evil;
(b) actually or potentially harmful, destructive, disastrous, pernicious; baleful;
(c) malicious; mischievous, sly;
(d) bad in moral character, disposition;
(e) hard, difficult, misleading, deadly, amoral;
(f) malevolent, offensive.
Hence it is only logical – and precise – to assert the following:
(1) That the ONA, of all the types modern Satanism, is the most Satanic, and that other self-described Satanists and satanic groups fall well-short of the definition.
Of course, knowing or sensing this, many of these latter-day Satanists have attempted or are attempting to redefine Satanism (often by engaging in pretentious pseudo-intellectual waffle about Reality, religions, science, mythology, and other esoteric traditions), and redefine it as either some sort of tame, non-harmful, law-abiding, philosophy (which ‘sanctifies life’ and leads to self-discovery), or as an excuse for – or a glamorous label to describe – their wilful hedonism and arrogant egoism, an arrogant egoism untouched of course by pathei-mathos. This process of attempting to redefine Satanism and make this new ‘Satanism’ safe and devoid of the personal practice and the personal experience of evil – of what is baleful and socially destructive and malevolent – is risible, and has been somewhat aided by the modern literature, academic and otherwise, regarding ‘esotericism’ and Satanism, focussed as this is and has been on these latter-days types as if they are the beginning and the middle and the end of ‘modern Satanism’.
(2) That the ONA has (i) as stated since its inception restored to Satanism the darkness, the amorality, the malevolence, the causing of conflict and harm, the culling, the evil, that rightly belong to it; (ii) has steadfastly propagated and described the character – its essential satanic, baleful, diabolic, nature – of Satanism; and (iii) also significantly extended and developed Satanism in a manner consistent with that essential nature, a development manifest, for example, in the sly but simple diabolism of ‘the Drecc’ and the lone adversarial practitioner; in the practical and effective Seven Fold Way; and in practical Dark Arts such as esoteric pathei-mathos which requires an exeatic engagement with life, and thus which breeds character and a wordless appreciation and understanding of the Aeonic perspective and of the sinisterly-numinous beyond all abstractions including those of good and evil, light and dark.
As someone once wrote,
” I, and others like me, are the darkness which is necessary and without which evolution and knowledge are impossible. I am also my own opposite, and yet beyond both. This is not a riddle, but a statement of Mastery, and one which, alas, so few have the ability to understand.” 1992 ev
” To aspire to – to gain – Mastery of The Dark Arts is to experience, and to learn the lessons of self-honesty and self-control; to strive, to dream, to quest, to exceed expectations. To move easily, gracefully, from the Light to the Dark, from Dark to Light, until one exists between yet beyond both, treating them (and yourself) for the imposters they (and you) are.” 2008 ev
 For more detail see my brief text The Geryne of Satan (pdf).
 As the ToS [Temple of Set] have stated: “Followers of the Left-Hand Path practice what, in a specific and technical sense, we term Black Magic. Black Magic focuses on self-determined goals. Its formula is my will be done, as opposed to the White Magic of the Right-Hand Path, whose formula is thy will be done.”
The ToS replace the figure/archetype/Being of the Hebrew, Old Testament, Satan with the figure/archetype/Being of Set which/who is understood as a means to/the giver of Xepher, which, according to the ToS, is the act or process of an individual ‘coming into being’, that is, the development and enhancement of the individual self.
In contrast to the ToS the ONA consider that: “In the genuine LHP there is nothing that is not permitted – nothing that is forbidden or restricted. That is, the LHP means the individual takes sole responsibility for their actions and their quest.” The LHP – An Analysis. 1991ev
Thus, the essential attribute of the LHP is that it is a-moral, and un-dogmatic, placing no restrictions, moral, legal or otherwise, on the individual, and – importantly – allowing and encouraging the individual to learn by their own practical experience, and by their mistakes.
 That is, the social and philosophical doctrines such as those propounded by the likes of Ayn Rand, and the type of esotericism propounded by advocates of ‘chaos magick’ and others who assert such things as ‘reality is what I make it or what others have made it, or perceived it to be’, so that Reality is a matter is perspective and thus demons/gods/religions/techniques/beliefs can be usefully used without believing in them’.
 According to Aquino: “Anton LaVey and the Church of Satan were never able to resolve the dilemma of Satan’s actual existence: Was he real or just symbolic? If he were real, it would seem to open the door to the entire Christian concept of the universe. If on the other hand he were merely symbolic, then he didn’t really exist as a self-conscious, willful force which could actualize Satanists’ ritual-magical desires or which could even care about the existence of the Church of Satan. In that case magic would be reduced to mere stage-trickery, and the Church itself would be nothing more than a club for spooky psychodrama. The Temple of Set resolved this dilemma in 1975 CE by asserting the actual existence of Satan as Set…” The Crystal Tablet of Set
 A distinction we have made is between affective and effective change/transformation. Affective change is generally esoteric/alchemical change, and involves acausal (a-temporal) energies. Effective change is generally exoteric change and involves causal energies, that is a direct, linear, cause-and-effect.
Affective change is the change that involves ψυχή and thus describes the emanations of ψυχή and how what we perceive as ‘life’ and ‘living beings’ change. Effective change is the physical and chemical changes described by, for example, the sciences of Physics and Chemistry.
One type of affective (acausal) change is the Aeonic change that can result from Aeonic sorcery and the use of the Dark Arts. Another type is the transformation in the individual that can result from the alchemical (the symbiotic) process known as The Seven Fold Way. One manifestation of affective change is/are ‘archetypes’ and how they arise, develop, and decline over long periods of causal Time (beyond the life-span of individuals).
 This diabolical and sly guide is usefully given in full in the Appendix.
 Jacob C. Senholt. Secret Identities in The Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles.
[Editorial note: A Revised version of this Senholt work has been published in the collection The Devil’s Party. Satanism in Modernity, edited by Per Faxneld and Jesper Petersen. Oxford University Press (USA), 2012.]
 Several older, exoteric, polemical, ONA MSS outline this wickedness, this diabolism. For example the texts (i) Satanism, Sacrifice, and Crime – The Satanic Truth, and (ii) The Practice of Evil, In Context, both originally circulated in 1986 ev, and later included in compilations such as Hysteron Proteron (1992 ev). Most of these early diabolical MSS were (given their irresponsible content) only privately circulated, but a few of them appeared in internal ONA journals such as Exeat and Azoth.
 For example, three implications unmentioned here in respect of point 2 – i.e. in respect of ‘dark forces’/acausal energies, and mythos – concern: (1) the Dark Gods mythos (qv. Pseudo-Mythology and Mythos: Lovecraft, The Dark Gods, and Fallacies About The ONA); (2) mythos in general; and (3) the positing of a possible after-life for certain individuals in the acausal, as for example mentioned in the text A Note Concerning After-Life in the Esoteric Philosophy of The Order of Nine Angles.
As mentioned in the text Pseudo-Mythology and Mythos: Lovecraft, The Dark Gods, and Fallacies About The ONA:
“For the ONA, the mythos of The Dark Gods – and the mythos of the ONA in general, of which the DG mythos is a part – is a means of sinister change, an Aeonic Occult working, a living Black Mass. For it is a manifestation of the sinisterly-numinous acausal energies that the Order of Nine Angles, and thus Satan and Baphomet, re-present.”
 This ‘suggests there may be’ is important, since “each ONA individual must discover – find – the answers for themselves, and this requires using (or by developing and then using) certain esoteric – Occult – abilities. Our Dark Arts are one means of so developing such abilities.” ONA FAQ, v.4.05
 See the ONA text Defining Satanism.
Note for Newbies:
Drecc is pronounced drek, and Dreccian as in Drek-ee-an. Drecce is an old, almost forgotten, word, and one of its many meanings is evident from the following quote, taken from a very old manuscript: “Drecth se deofel mancynn mid mislicum costnungum…”
Step One – The Pledge
To become Drecc you simply make a pledge of Drecc allegiance and pledge yourself to follow the Dreccian way of life. This can be done in three ways.
First, it can be done by yourself, alone. Second, it can be done with a friend or some friends who also desire to become Drecc. Third, you can join an existing Dreccian tribe.
The Pledge can take place at any time, and anywhere, indoors, or out, and no special preparation is necessary or required, although if desired and practical, it can be undertaken in a darkened area with subdued lighting (the source of which is not important) and with the Drecc symbol – as above – in a prominent position and drawn or reproduced on some material or on a banner.
For the pledging, you – and each other participant, if any – will require a small piece of white paper (the actual size and type of paper are not important), a sharp knife (of the hunting or survival kind) – and if possible, a sheath for the knife – plus a small receptacle or container suitable for burning the paper in.
You – and each other participant, if any – then say:
I am here to seal my Fate with blood.
I accept there is no law, no authority, no justice
Except The Drecc
And that culling is a necessary act of Life.
I believe in one guide, Our Dreccian Law,
And in our right to rule mundanes.
You – and each other participant, if any – then make a small cut on your left thumb with the knife and allow several drops of your blood to fall onto the paper. You then place the paper into the small container, and set it alight.
As it burns, you – and each other participant, if any – then say:
I swear on my Dreccian-honour as a Drecc that from this day forth I will never surrender, will die fighting rather than submit to anyone, and will always uphold The Dreccian Code.
You – and each other participant, if any – then place the knife in the sheath (if a sheath is available), conceal or otherwise carry the knife on you, and forever after keep the knife with you, as a sign of your Dreccian-honour and your pledge of allegiance.
The pledging is then complete.
Step Two – Dreccian Living
Dreccian living is simple, and involves:
1) Regarding, and treating, all mundanes (all who are not our pledged Drecc brothers or sisters) as the enemy and whose property, goods, and wealth are a resource we can lawfully use.
2) Living, and if necessary, dying by our Dreccian code [see Section Two, below].
3) Striving to live each day, on Earth, as if it might be our last.
Dreccian Principles and Practices
The Three Fundamental Principles of The Drecc
1) Those who are not our Drecc brothers or sisters are mundanes.
2) By living and if necessary dying by our Dreccian Code we are the best.
3) A person becomes our brother or our sister by making The Pledge of Dreccian Allegiance and by living by our Dreccian Code.
The Dreccian Code
Those who are not our brothers or sisters are mundanes. Those who are our brothers and sisters live by – and are prepared to die by – our unique code of Dreccian honour.
Our Dreccian-honour means we are fiercely loyal to only our own Drecc kind. Our Dreccian-honour means we are wary of, and do not trust – and often despise – all those who are not like us, especially mundanes.
Our duty – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to be ready, willing, and able to defend ourselves, in any situation, and to be prepared to use lethal force to so defend ourselves.
Our duty – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to be loyal to, and to defend, our own kind: to do our duty, even unto death, to those of our brothers and sisters to whom we have sworn a personal oath of loyalty.
Our obligation – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to seek revenge, if necessary unto death, against anyone who acts dishonourably toward us, or who acts dishonourably toward those to whom we have sworn a personal oath of loyalty.
Our obligation – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to never willingly submit to any mundane; to die fighting rather than surrender to them; to die rather (if necessary by our own hand) than allow ourselves to be dishonourably humiliated by them.
Our obligation – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to never trust any oath or any pledge of loyalty given, or any promise made, by any mundane, and to be wary and suspicious of them at all times.
Our duty – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to settle our serious disputes, among ourselves, by either trial by combat, or by a duel involving deadly weapons; and to challenge to a duel anyone – mundane, or one of our own kind – who impugns our Dreccian honour or who makes mundane accusations against us.
Our duty – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to settle our non-serious disputes, among ourselves, by having a man or woman from among us (a brother or sister who is highly esteemed because of their Dreccian deeds), arbitrate and decide the matter for us, and to accept without question, and to abide by, their decision, because of the respect we have accorded them as arbitrator
Our duty – as Dreccian individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to always keep our word to our own kind, once we have given our word on our Dreccian honour, for to break one’s word among our own kind is a cowardly, a mundane, act.
Our duty – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to act with Dreccian honour in all our dealings with our own Dreccian kind.
Our obligation – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – is to marry only those from our own kind, who thus, like us, live by our Code and are prepared to die to save their Dreccian-honour and that of their brothers and sisters.
Our duty – as individuals who live by the Code of Dreccian-honour – means that an oath of Dreccian loyalty or allegiance, once sworn by a man or woman of Dreccian honour (“I swear on my Dreccian-honour that I shall…”) can only be ended either: (1) by the man or woman of Dreccian honour formally asking the person to whom the oath was sworn to release them from that oath, and that person agreeing so to release them; or (2) by the death of the person to whom the oath was sworn. Anything else is unworthy of us, and the act of a mundane.
cc ONA/O9A 122 yfayen Order of Nine Angles
This item is issued under the Creative Commons license Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 and can be freely copied and distributed according to the terms of that license.