Peter H. Gilmore

Peter Howard Gilmore (born May 24, 1958) is an American author, composer, and LaVeyan Satanist who has served as High Priest of the Church of Satan since 2001.^[1][2] Appointed to the position by Magistra Blanche Barton following Anton LaVey's death, Gilmore has led the organization in promoting its philosophy of rational self-interest, individualism, and skepticism toward supernatural beliefs.^[3] Gilmore earned B.S. and M.A. degrees in music composition from New York University and has pursued a career as a composer, releasing works such as the orchestral-style album Threnody for Humanity.^[3] His literary contributions include The Satanic Scriptures (2007), a collection of essays articulating core tenets of LaVeyan Satanism, including critiques of religious dogma and advocacy for personal responsibility. Since the 1980s "Satanic Panic," he has conducted extensive media interviews defending the Church's atheistic stance against accusations of criminality or occultism, emphasizing empirical reasoning over faith-based narratives.^[3] As High Priest, Gilmore has overseen the Church's operations alongside High Priestess Peggy Nadramia, his wife, maintaining its focus on Anton LaVey's foundational texts while adapting to contemporary cultural challenges.^[3] His 50 years of public advocacy for Satanism, marked in 2024, highlight his commitment to positioning the philosophy as a form of carnal realism rather than theatrical devil-worship.^[4]

Early Life and Influences

Childhood and Education

Peter Howard Gilmore was born on May 24, 1958, in New York. He spent his formative years in upstate New York, though detailed accounts of his family background remain limited in public records.^[5] Gilmore pursued higher education at New York University, where he earned a Bachelor of Science and a Master of Arts, focusing on music composition and studies in film and music. This formal training laid the groundwork for his later creative endeavors in composition and artistic expression.^[5]

Initial Exposure to Occult Ideas

During his early years, Gilmore accessed books on science, astronomy, and theories of lost civilizations, which led him to recognize deities as human inventions from ancient cultures.^[4] He encountered Christianity's doctrines, including its triune deity and associated imagery, which he found unappealing compared to the more vivid figures of pre-Christian pantheons.^[4] Influences such as Ray Harryhausen's stop-motion films and Italian peplum movies featuring "Sons of Hercules" inspired him to draw ancient gods and heroes, fostering an interest in mythological narratives without acceptance of their supernatural claims.^[4] By age eight in 1966, Gilmore had declared himself an atheist, grounded in personal observation and reasoning that rejected theistic explanations.^[4] He explored concepts like fire worship and Zoroastrian dualism, appreciating the dramatic role of ritual in human expression while dismissing mystical elements as unfounded.^[4] This phase marked a shift toward materialism, prioritizing empirical reality over dogmatic or supernatural assertions, and emphasizing self-directed individualism as an alternative to religious conformity.^[4] At age thirteen in 1971, Gilmore encountered The Satanic Bible by Anton Szandor LaVey, which presented Satan as a symbol of carnal rebellion and rational self-interest rather than a literal entity.^[4] Previously identifying as an atheist, he found in its philosophy a validation of his rejection of mysticism, framing Satanism as an atheistic system focused on empirical empowerment and rejection of otherworldly dependencies.^[6][4] This reading crystallized his preference for philosophies that affirm human potential through reason and indulgence over ascetic or theistic occult traditions.^[4]

Entry into Organized Satanism

Discovery of LaVeyan Philosophy

In 1971, at the age of thirteen, Peter H. Gilmore encountered Anton Szandor LaVey's The Satanic Bible, marking a decisive shift in his philosophical outlook. Having already declared himself an atheist by age eight in 1966—rejecting supernatural entities based on studies of science and mythology—Gilmore found LaVey's articulation of Satanism as a carnal, materialist philosophy aligning precisely with his ego-driven, self-deifying worldview.^[4] The text presented Satan not as a literal deity but as a symbol of rebellion and human potential, positing the individual as the ultimate Godhead in an indifferent universe devoid of divine intervention.^[4] This resonated as an accurate self-designation for his rejection of theistic constraints, emphasizing indulgence in natural human drives over ascetic denial or supernatural dependence.^[7] Unlike his earlier fascinations with ritualistic elements—such as fire's transformative energy or Zoroastrian dualism, which he explored but dismissed as incompatible with empirical reality—LaVey's framework offered a first-principles grounded atheism that celebrated human agency without reliance on unverifiable myths.^[4] Gilmore described the discovery as an "unexpected turning point," contrasting the "revolting" fantasies of Christianity and other faiths with Satanism's affirmation that "man has always created his gods, rather than his gods creating him."^[4] This appeal lay in its causal realism: rituals served as psychodramatic tools for emotional catharsis and focus, not faith-based invocations, thereby harnessing verifiable psychological mechanisms to enhance personal power and indulgence.^[4][7] Gilmore's initial self-identification as a Satanist followed immediately upon this reading, viewing it not as a conversion but a realization of innate traits: "We believe that you’re born that way… It’s not a conversion; it’s a realization."^[7] This atheistic stance rejected supernatural beliefs entirely, prioritizing a philosophy rooted in observable human nature—carnal desires, rational self-interest, and egoistic responsibility—over ritualistic faith or external salvation.^[4] By embracing Satanism's anti-theistic core, Gilmore affirmed a worldview that accepted humanity "as he is without trying to change him," free from savior figures or moral impositions.^[7]

Early Advocacy and Membership

Gilmore first encountered Anton Szandor LaVey's The Satanic Bible in 1971, which led him to identify as a Satanist, recognizing its carnal, rational philosophy as aligning with his worldview.^[4] At age 15 in 1973, he contacted the Church of Satan directly using an address from a San Francisco phone book, establishing initial private engagement with the organization during LaVey's leadership.^[4] His public advocacy began in 1974 with a classroom presentation at Monroe Woodbury Senior High School, where he read excerpts from The Satanic Bible, incorporated ritual elements such as a candle, bell, and music, and emphasized Satanic individualism over theistic or diluted interpretations.^[4] This event marked the start of his longstanding representation of LaVeyan principles, culminating in a 50-year advocacy milestone acknowledged in 2024.^[4] Throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s, Gilmore applied these principles empirically in daily life, focusing on rational self-interest and personal responsibility as outlined in LaVey's writings, while avoiding supernatural beliefs.^[4] Gilmore formally joined the Church of Satan as a registered member in 1982, alongside Peggy Nadramia, transitioning from adherent to active participant under LaVey's era.^[4] In this period, he contributed through correspondence with Church officials and early articles promoting its philosophy, building a personal network within the organization via interactions with LaVey and other members.^[4] These efforts reinforced the Church's atheistic stance, prioritizing verifiable, self-directed ethics over ritualistic or ideological deviations.^[4]

Career and Artistic Pursuits

Musical and Creative Work

Gilmore earned a Bachelor of Science and Master of Arts in music composition from New York University, with a focus on orchestral works.^[8][9] His compositions span classical and electronic orchestral styles, emphasizing dramatic human themes such as conflict and fate rather than literal supernaturalism.^[10] Among his notable works is the piano sonata Sonata Infernale et Romantique, composed from 1979 to 1980, finalized in 1982, and premiered in 1998 by pianist Dr. Mark Birnbaum.^[10] This piece follows traditional sonata form, incorporating elements like scherzando and a funeral march to evoke emotional intensity through structured musical progression. In 2003, he released the album Threnody for Humanity via Adversary Recordings, comprising 10 tracks of electronic orchestral music, including "Eternal War" (6:27), "Man's Destiny" (3:27), and "Requiem to Morrow" (4:51).^[11][12] These works project themes of human struggle and inevitability, serving as vehicles for personal aesthetic indulgence and assertive creativity. Gilmore also composed eight introductory tracks in the 1990s for a metal band's album and added ten pieces in 2013, such as settings of the Nine Satanic Statements and a "Nosferatu Prelude" referencing historical figures like Vlad Tepes, all offered as free downloads.^[10] Gilmore's visual and multimedia pursuits include drawing, painting, and early electronic compositions like the Darkscapes series from the 1980s, which range from Haydn-inspired forms to avant-garde experimentation.^[13] These endeavors reflect a commitment to artistic self-expression as a means of exerting influence and deriving satisfaction from crafted output, grounded in material techniques and individual vision rather than otherworldly inspiration. His film-related credits, including contributions to Dead Silence (1989) and Burn Baby Burn: Riots and Violence in the Modern World (1993), further demonstrate application of creative skills in multimedia contexts.^[14]

Professional Background Outside Satanism

Gilmore pursued a career in music composition, earning a Bachelor of Science and Master of Arts from New York University, with emphasis on orchestral composition.^[8][5] His academic training extended to film studies alongside music, informing early creative endeavors.^[5] Prior to his 2001 appointment as High Priest, Gilmore composed and recorded original works, including electronic introductions for a metal band's album in the 1990s and symphonic pieces released as Threnody for Humanity in 2003.^[10] He has produced solo albums such as Sinfonie Sinistre in 2021, featuring experimental and orchestral elements.^[15] These efforts highlight sustained involvement in freelance artistic production, independent of organizational affiliations. Gilmore has also written fiction and screenplays, alongside non-philosophical creative projects, reflecting a multifaceted approach to self-sustaining professional output in the arts.^[13] His credits include contributions to films like Dead Silence (1989), demonstrating application of compositional skills in multimedia.^[14] This versatility in music and writing exemplifies practical self-reliance through diverse, skill-based income sources rather than institutional dependency.

Leadership in the Church of Satan

Appointment as High Priest

Following the death of Church of Satan founder Anton Szandor LaVey on October 29, 1997, from pulmonary edema due to heart disease, Magistra Blanche C. Barton, whom LaVey had designated as his successor, assumed the role of High Priestess and guided the organization through a period of transition.^[16][17] This interim leadership faced immediate pressures, including familial disputes over succession; LaVey's daughter Zeena Schreck and her husband Nikolas Schreck publicly challenged Barton's authority in 1999, forming the rival First Satanic Church and accusing the organization of deviating from LaVey's vision by introducing non-ritualistic changes.^[18] On Walpurgisnacht, April 30, 2001 (Anno Satanas XXXVI), Barton formally appointed longtime Church member and advocate Peter H. Gilmore as High Priest, a decision announced via official declaration emphasizing continuity of LaVey's original structure.^[19] Gilmore, who had joined the Church in the 1980s and contributed to its publications and events while upholding its atheistic framework, was elevated from the rank of Magister to this position, signaling a handover to adherents committed to the founder's doctrines without alteration.^[3] The appointment of Gilmore, followed by that of his wife Peggy Nadramia as High Priestess in 2002, focused on consolidating authority by reinforcing fidelity to LaVey's atheistic, individualistic core principles over post-mortem innovations or dilutions seen in splinter groups.^[4] Early efforts under Gilmore's leadership involved clarifying doctrinal boundaries, such as rejecting theistic interpretations or collective activism that contradicted the emphasis on rational egoism and self-deification outlined in The Satanic Bible, thereby preserving the Church's integrity against external claims of evolution beyond LaVey's blueprint.^[20]

Key Administrative and Doctrinal Decisions

Gilmore, upon his appointment as High Priest on November 7, 2001, following the death of Anton Szandor LaVey in 1997, oversaw the consolidation of Church of Satan administrative functions under a centralized model devoid of intermediary hierarchies, with operations based out of Poughkeepsie, New York, to streamline correspondence and decision-making through a single post office box address (P.O. Box 666, Poughkeepsie, NY 12602-0666) and direct oversight by the High Priest and High Priestess, Peggy Nadramia.^[21][22] This structure rejected delegated authority to local groups or grottos, a policy inherited from LaVey's 1975 dissolution of regional chapters but rigidly enforced under Gilmore to prevent doctrinal dilution and maintain operational efficiency without geographic fragmentation.^[23] Doctrinally, Gilmore issued clarifications affirming Satanism's atheistic foundations, explicitly defining Satan not as a literal entity or deity but as a symbol embodying pride, liberty, individualism, and the untapped reservoir of human carnal power, thereby excluding theistic interpretations that posit supernatural beings or worship.^[24][8] He described this progression from mere atheism to "I-Theism," wherein the individual recognizes themselves as the ultimate authority over their subjective reality, unbound by external moral absolutes or divine oversight.^[24] On rituals, Gilmore codified their role as psychodramatic mechanisms for emotional catharsis and self-empowerment, conducted privately as therapeutic enactments of desires or grievances without expectation of supernatural efficacy, aligning with LaVey's framework in The Satanic Bible but emphasized against any deviation toward magical literalism or public spectacle.^[8][25] Membership policies under his tenure require formal registration via application and fee, with approval contingent on alignment with core tenets, but remain strictly confidential to avoid external scrutiny or internal factionalism, prohibiting public lists or proselytizing.^[26] Gilmore's leadership rejected activist or collectivist pursuits, mandating that Satanists prioritize personal indulgence and pragmatic self-interest over organized political or social campaigns, viewing such deviations as antithetical to individualism and prone to coercive groupthink.^[27] This stance served to distinguish the Church from emerging groups like The Satanic Temple, which Gilmore critiqued for diluting Satanism through public advocacy and symbolic litigation rather than private philosophical adherence.^[28]

Writings and Publications

The Satanic Scriptures

The Satanic Scriptures, published in 2007 as a hardcover edition released on Walpurgisnacht, collects essays, articles, and speeches by Peter H. Gilmore that codify and extend the atheistic philosophy of LaVeyan Satanism originally articulated in Anton LaVey's The Satanic Bible.^[29][30] The volume functions as a companion text, compiling Gilmore's writings to clarify doctrinal positions for Church of Satan adherents while addressing contemporary misconceptions.^[29] Structured with a prelude by Blanche Barton and sections on ritual, philosophy, and cultural analysis, the book emphasizes Satanism as a carnal, non-theistic worldview that prioritizes individual responsibility, rational self-interest, and rejection of unsubstantiated spiritual claims.^[31] Key essays explore atheism through a secular lens, advocate uncompromised individualism as the basis for personal efficacy, and deliver pointed critiques of pseudosatanic groups that incorporate supernaturalism or deviate from empirical self-advancement.^[32][27] For instance, it discloses principles of Satanic ritual, including marriage and funeral rites, framing them as psychological tools for material goals rather than supernatural invocation.^[32] Within orthodox LaVeyan circles, the publication holds authoritative status, with Church of Satan resources designating it essential for understanding ritual mechanics and philosophical consistency.^[33] Adherents value its reinforcement of verifiable, self-centered praxis over abstract ideologies, positioning it as a bulwark against dilutions of core tenets.^[29]

Essays and Theoretical Contributions

Gilmore has authored essays published on the Church of Satan's website that extend LaVeyan Satanic theory, applying rational analysis to concepts like individualism and materialism while rejecting supernatural dilutions.^[29] These writings emphasize empirical reasoning over mysticism, positioning Satanism as compatible with scientific naturalism.^[34] In "Yes, We Have No Occultism," Gilmore delineates Satanism's boundaries by critiquing occult practices as incompatible with its atheistic, materialist foundation, advocating instead for an openness to scientific inquiry into natural phenomena without invoking the supernatural.^[34] He maintains that while members may explore diverse ideas, such explorations do not alter core Satanic doctrine, which prioritizes carnal reality over esoteric promises of spiritual transformation.^[34] Addressing ethics through a Darwinian framework, Gilmore has articulated how evolutionary principles underpin Satanic morality, viewing human behavior as shaped by survival competition yet moderated by pragmatic social contracts for mutual self-interest.^[5] In a 2007 discussion, he described Satanism's ethics as subjective and culturally relative, favoring individual pleasure and strength over altruism, with evolution illustrating the natural hierarchy of the capable over the weak.^[5] Gilmore's essays consistently debunk theistic interpretations of Satanism as illogical deviations, insisting that true Satanism commences with atheism and rejects belief in deities or devils as external forces.^[8] In "“Rebels Without Cause,”" he critiques self-proclaimed Satanists holding incongruent supernatural or collectivist views, arguing such positions undermine the philosophy's focus on rational self-deification.^[35] Similarly, "Self-Realization—The Essence of Satanism" frames Satanic virtue in terms of personal deviancy and an "alien elite" unbound by norms, without reliance on mythological or theistic Satan figures.^[36] These contributions serve to clarify doctrinal nuances for adherents, fostering interpretations aligned with first-hand rational assessment rather than imposed orthodoxy, thereby reinforcing Satanism's non-dogmatic yet principled structure.^[29]

Philosophical Positions

Core Tenets of Atheistic Satanism

Atheistic Satanism, as articulated by Peter H. Gilmore, posits a materialist worldview grounded in the rejection of supernatural entities, asserting that the universe operates indifferently without gods or devils exerting influence over human affairs.^[24][8] Gilmore emphasizes empirical observation of natural processes, dismissing faith-based claims as unsubstantiated, and views Satan not as a literal being but as a potent symbol embodying pride, liberty, and individualism—qualities inherent to human potential rather than divine intervention.^[24][37] This foundation aligns Satanism with atheism, extending it to what Gilmore terms "I-Theism," wherein individuals recognize themselves as the central authority in their subjective reality, harnessing internal capacities for self-determination without reliance on external cosmic forces.^[24][8] Central to these tenets is the affirmation of human agency through self-deification, where adherents cultivate an unapologetic focus on personal achievement and carnal vitality, rejecting subservience to illusory spiritual hierarchies.^[37] Gilmore describes this as tapping into one's innate "Satanic" essence—characterized by rational self-interest and defiance of herd conformity—to navigate life's challenges empirically, prioritizing observable outcomes over metaphysical speculation.^[8] Such a perspective distinguishes atheistic Satanism from theistic variants by insisting on carnal materialism: the body and mind as the sole loci of power, with no appeal to supernatural validation.^[37] Rituals in this framework serve as psychological instruments, functioning as structured psychodramas to reinforce emotional catharsis, build confidence, and actualize desires through focused intent, rather than invoking magical causation.^[38][8] Gilmore underscores their optional, private nature, designed to amplify traits like pride and liberty by dramatizing personal triumphs or venting frustrations, thereby enhancing psychological resilience without presuming supernatural efficacy.^[24] This approach privileges verifiable self-improvement—evident in heightened motivation or clarity post-ritual—over superstitious interpretations, maintaining fidelity to a philosophy rooted in human psychology and observable reality.^[39]

Views on Individualism and Society

Gilmore posits society as a stratified environment where individuals pursue personal advancement through the cultivation of innate abilities, rather than through enforced equality or selfless aid to others. In his essay "Satanism: The Feared Religion," he describes Satanism as endorsing a "brutal religion of elitism and social Darwinism" that prioritizes the capable over the incompetent, advocating merit-based hierarchies where aid operates on reciprocal terms rather than unearned charity.^[40] This framework rejects altruism as a counterproductive ethic that weakens self-reliance, aligning instead with egoistic self-interest as the engine of progress.^[40] Central to Gilmore's philosophy is radical individualism, wherein self-realization emerges from rejecting herd conformity and embracing one's carnal nature as the basis for identity and action. He asserts that Satanists function as "their own gods," crafting personal values and preferences without deference to collective norms, thereby fostering an "alien elite" of diverse, self-directed outsiders.^[41] Society, in this view, serves as an arena for such egoistic realism, where competitive striving yields natural hierarchies reflective of biological variances in talent and drive, rather than imposed uniformity.^[41][40] Gilmore critiques prevailing egalitarian ideals as mythical impediments to human evolution, arguing they stifle meritocracy by equalizing outcomes irrespective of ability. Drawing on principles akin to Darwinian selection, he supports practices like selective mating among the superior to enhance species advancement, viewing unchecked egalitarianism as having "crippled the advancement of the human species."^[40] This stance underscores a causal realism grounded in observable biological competition, where individualism thrives by affirming hierarchies forged through demonstrated competence over sentimental leveling.^[40][5]

Political and Cultural Commentary

Stance on Politics and Libertarianism

Under Peter H. Gilmore's leadership as High Priest since 2001, the Church of Satan has upheld a strictly apolitical organizational policy, refusing to endorse any political party, ideology, or candidate to maintain the integrity of its individualistic philosophy. This position, articulated by Gilmore, holds that Satanism's core tenets—prioritizing self-interest, personal responsibility, and pragmatic individualism—transcend partisan divides and should not be subordinated to collective political agendas. As Gilmore states, "The Church of Satan does not have an ‘official’ political position," emphasizing that official involvement in politics would compromise the Church's non-partisan focus on enabling members' personal advancement.^[42] Individual members bear full responsibility for aligning their political actions with Satanic principles, such as indulgence in self-directed goals and rejection of unnecessary restrictions on personal liberty. While the Church does not prescribe libertarianism, its doctrine's stress on autonomy and critique of coercive collectivism frequently results in libertarian-leaning applications among adherents, who view state overreach as a barrier to individual efficacy. Gilmore reinforces this by noting that "one’s politics are up to each individual member, and most of our members are political pragmatists," allowing diverse affiliations from anarchism to conservatism, provided they serve personal ends rather than group conformity.^[42][43] Satanism, under Gilmore's guidance, functions as a philosophical tool for self-empowerment, adaptable to various political contexts without formal alliances that might impose uniformity. This apolitical framework critiques ideologies promoting state-enforced equality or mass movements, which are seen as eroding individual agency in favor of abstracted group interests. By design, the policy fosters strategic personal engagement over ideological purity tests, ensuring Satanism remains a vehicle for rational self-interest amid political flux.^[43][42]

Critiques of Collectivism and Activism

Gilmore views socio-political collectivism as a direct threat to individual autonomy, equating it with forces that suppress personal sovereignty akin to supernaturalist impositions. In his 2019 Independence Day address, he stated that "acquiescence to those who would limit our autonomy, whether motivated by supernaturalist delusions or socio-political collectivism, will douse that precious fire," emphasizing the need to protect the "flame of freedom" through vigilant self-determination.^[44] This stance aligns with Satanic rejection of herd conformity, where group demands override personal judgment, positioning collectivist ideologies as antithetical to the philosophy's core of radical individualism. Satanic doctrine, as articulated by Gilmore, prioritizes verifiable personal gain and self-indulgence over participation in ideological causes that enforce moral uniformity. Social justice pursuits are critiqued as manifestations of herd morality, compelling individuals to subordinate their interests to collective narratives rather than pursuing tangible, self-serving outcomes.^[29] Gilmore upholds the principle that actions must serve one's own vital existence, dismissing altruism-driven activism as a deviation that dilutes Satanic self-focus and rational self-interest. Gilmore opposes group-oriented activism within Satanism, arguing it disrupts individual peace and imposes unwanted collective agendas. In his essay "There Goes The Neighborhood: Activism and The Devil," he condemns tactics like forced religious pluralism in public spaces, which Satanists reject in favor of personal, non-organizational engagement with causes such as animal rights or political movements.^[45] He further debunks activist "Satanism" as politicized theater lacking causal rigor, exemplified by publicity stunts that prioritize headlines over philosophical integrity, such as framing personal choices like abortion as group "sacraments" to advance agendas.^[46] Such approaches are seen as emotionally driven spectacles that misalign with Satanism's demand for individual responsibility and empirical self-benefit, potentially harming broader freedoms by provoking backlash.^[46] Collectivism's empirical shortcomings reinforce this critique: historical data from regimes like the Soviet Union, which collapsed in 1991 after decades of centralized planning that ignored individual incentives, demonstrate how group mandates distort motivations, leading to inefficiency and coercion—outcomes antithetical to Satanic emphasis on self-directed progress.

Public Representation

Media Appearances and Interviews

Peter H. Gilmore has conducted extensive media interviews as the Church of Satan's High Priest since his appointment in 2001, building on prior engagements dating to the 1980s during the Satanic Panic era, when public fears of ritual abuse prompted defenses of the organization's atheistic stance.^[3][47] These appearances, spanning television, radio, and print, aim to convey uncompromised Satanic philosophy, including the symbolic use of Satan as a provocative emblem to discern serious adherents from those driven by superstition.^[3][8] Notable television contributions include segments on the History Channel, BBC, and Syfy, where Gilmore clarified Satanism's rejection of supernatural entities and emphasis on carnal self-interest.^[3] Radio discussions, such as confrontations on Bob Larson's evangelical program, highlighted doctrinal tenets like responsibility to the responsible, countering Christian critiques with rationalist arguments.^[3] A 2003 BBC Conspiracies episode on Satanic Panic featured Gilmore addressing historical hysteria and affirming the Church's non-violent, egoistic ethos.^[48] In contemporary media, Gilmore appeared in the 2024 documentary Realm of Satan, directed by Scott Cummings, which portrays Church members' routines and rituals, allowing him to demonstrate everyday applications of Satanic individualism amid persistent cultural misunderstandings.^[49][50] This film, premiered at Sundance and later streamed on MUBI, underscores his ongoing role in filtering public discourse through direct representation rather than third-party interpretations.^[51][52]

Representation of Church Doctrines

Gilmore has articulated the Church of Satan's doctrines as atheistic and materialistic, employing Satan as a symbol of carnality, individualism, and rebellion against dogmatic authority rather than as a literal deity or supernatural force.^[26] In public statements and interviews, he stresses that this philosophy rejects supernaturalism, spiritual salvation, and any form of worship, positioning Satanism instead as a rational framework for self-deification through personal achievement and indulgence in life's physical realities.^[53] To counter persistent media portrayals associating Satanism with violence or occult rituals, Gilmore underscores the church's commitment to non-violent, responsible conduct, insisting that adherents must adhere to civil laws and prioritize self-preservation over antisocial or illegal acts.^[29] He has repeatedly clarified that doctrines derived from Anton LaVey's foundational texts promote strategic self-interest and accountability, explicitly disavowing harm to innocents or indiscriminate aggression as distortions incompatible with Satanic individualism.^[54] In addressing sensationalized controversies, such as false claims in August 2024 attributing Church endorsement to the Paris Olympics opening ceremony—amid misinterpretations of its artistic elements as Satanic—Gilmore's official communications dismissed any involvement, labeling the attributions fabricated and affirming disinterest in unrelated public spectacles.^[55][56] This response exemplifies a doctrinal strategy of evidentiary rigor, rejecting unsubstantiated narratives from outlets prone to amplifying fear-driven misinformation about minority philosophies.^[57] Gilmore employs media appearances to project doctrinal consistency unfiltered by external biases, enabling potential adherents to self-select through exposure to the philosophy's pragmatic realism rather than diluted interpretations.^[3] Over decades of representation since the 1980s, this approach filters for individuals aligned with tenets of autonomy and skepticism toward collectivist or theistic impositions, fostering growth among those valuing empirical self-reliance.^[58]

Controversies and Criticisms

Disputes with The Satanic Temple

The Church of Satan has consistently rejected any association with The Satanic Temple (TST), founded in 2013, viewing it as an inauthentic entity that misappropriates Satanic symbolism for political activism rather than adhering to the atheistic philosophy established by Anton LaVey in 1966. Peter H. Gilmore, as High Priest, has emphasized that TST originated as a satirical project tied to a mockumentary film effort by its co-founders, lacking the foundational religious and philosophical depth of LaVeyan Satanism, which prioritizes individualism, self-indulgence, and carnal reality over public campaigns.^[59] CoS officials describe TST's tactics—such as legal challenges invoking religious rights for abortion access or erecting Baphomet statues—as "trolling" and media stunts designed to provoke rather than embody Satanic tenets, thereby confusing the public and diluting the empirical fidelity to LaVey's codified doctrines.^{[60] [61]} Gilmore has explicitly stated that TST's approach opposes core Church of Satan principles, declaring, "I'm absolutely against the idea of trolling. That's what The Satanic Temple does and it's one of many reasons why they're not Satanists. What they stand for is the opposite of what we stand for."^[60] This disavowal aligns with CoS's non-ecumenical policy, as articulated by Gilmore in a 2016 interview: "The Church of Satan is not ecumenical in any way, and never has been, so we have no relationship with any other organisations."^[47] Public critiques intensified in the 2010s, particularly following TST's high-profile actions like the 2015-2019 monument campaigns and the 2019 documentary Hail Satan?, which CoS labeled as promoting a politically motivated group masquerading as devil worshipers without genuine belief.^{[62] [59]} Philosophically, the rift underscores CoS's commitment to apolitical individualism—where Satan represents untapped personal power and ritual serves private catharsis—against TST's collective activism, which CoS regards as conformist alignment with progressive causes, betraying the anti-herd ethos of the Nine Satanic Statements.^{[59] [53]} Gilmore and CoS spokespersons argue that true Satanism demands no proselytizing or ecumenical alliances, positioning TST's ecumenism with other non-theistic groups as a further deviation that undermines causal realism in favor of performative outrage.^[59] This stance reflects CoS's broader guardianship of LaVey's legacy, rejecting dilutions through "politically progressive Satanism" that prioritize social engineering over self-sovereignty.^[53]

Internal and External Critiques of Leadership

Under Gilmore's leadership as High Priest since November 2001, the Church of Satan has prioritized the preservation of Anton LaVey's original atheistic framework, explicitly rejecting theistic dilutions that emerged in splinter groups post-1997. This includes consistent denunciations of supernatural beliefs in Satan, affirming Satan as a symbol of carnal individualism rather than a deity, as reiterated in official Church statements and Gilmore's essays.^[8] Such orthodoxy has been credited with maintaining doctrinal purity amid competing "neo-Satanist" variants, which the Church dismisses as incompatible with LaVeyan principles.^[63] Gilmore's authorship of The Satanic Scriptures (2007) exemplifies this guardianship, compiling essays that defend core tenets like ritual psychodrama and rejection of egalitarian altruism, positioning the Church as a bulwark against interpretive drifts.^[64] Supporters within the organization argue that this pragmatic emphasis on intellectual rigor and real-world accomplishment—evident in the selective Priesthood of Mendes, comprising only those with peer-recognized achievements—ensures institutional longevity by prioritizing quality membership over mass appeal, adapting LaVey's vision to sustain relevance without compromising its elitist ethos.^[20] Internal critiques, primarily from fringe elements in online Satanic forums, contend that Gilmore's tenure has softened LaVey's raw misanthropy and theatrical radicalism into a more polished, Objectivist-inflected moderation, allegedly diluting the founder's provocative edge for institutional stability.^[65] These detractors, often self-identified independents or defectors, decry an overemphasis on orthodoxy as stifling innovation, with some labeling it "Gilmoreian" rigidity that elevates LaVey worship over dynamic individualism.^[66] Externally, media and adversarial analyses have portrayed Gilmore's leadership as fostering elitism, highlighting the Church's invitation-only priesthood and focus on "social Darwinism" as exclusionary barriers that alienate broader occult seekers in favor of an insular cadre of high achievers.^[67] Christian commentators amplify this by framing Satanism under Gilmore as a "brutal religion of elitism" antithetical to universalist ethics, though such views embed theological bias against the philosophy's secular humanism critique.^[68] Defenders counter that this selectivity reflects causal realism in group dynamics, weeding out mediocrity to perpetuate a resilient, non-collectivist structure aligned with LaVey's tenets.^[69]

Legacy and Recent Activities

Impact on Modern Satanism

As High Priest of the Church of Satan since 2001, Peter H. Gilmore has sustained the organization's commitment to atheistic Satanism, rejecting belief in supernatural entities and positioning Satan as a symbol of human carnality and self-deification rather than a literal deity.^[70][40] This doctrinal fidelity counters dilutions that introduce theism or collectivist elements, preserving Anton LaVey's original philosophy of individualism and rational self-interest as articulated in foundational texts.^[40] Gilmore's influence extends globally through digital platforms, including the Church of Satan's official website hosting essays, rituals, and clarifications of Satanic tenets, alongside his 2007 publication The Satanic Scriptures, a compilation reinforcing atheistic principles and strategic living without compromise to external pressures.^[21][71] These resources enable self-identified Satanists to engage independently, fostering adherence to orthodox views amid proliferating variants. In response to mainstream media portrayals—often shaped by institutional biases conflating Satanism with political activism or occult theism—Gilmore's public statements and writings emphasize the philosophy's apolitical, egoistic core, debunking myths of devil worship or conspiratorial rituals through direct refutation supported by empirical dismissals like FBI investigations finding no evidence of such claims.^[40] The Church under Gilmore prioritizes membership quality via a selective registration process that vets for alignment with Satanic values, eschewing congregational structures in favor of solitary practice to maintain elite standards over mass appeal, as members typically conduct rituals privately and interact sparingly through vetted channels.^[72][73] This approach ensures doctrinal endurance by attracting discerning individuals committed to personal mastery rather than group conformity.^[72]

Developments Post-2020

In 2024, Gilmore commemorated 50 years of personal advocacy for Satanism, dating from his initial involvement in 1974, via the essay "Devil Take the Foremost: My 50 Years Advocating Satanism." In it, he detailed his early encounters with Anton LaVey's philosophy, his progression within the Church of Satan, and the philosophy's emphasis on self-directed individualism as a bulwark against collectivist trends in contemporary culture.^[4] Gilmore addressed viral misinformation in August 2024 falsely claiming Church of Satan endorsement of the Paris Olympics opening ceremony, stating explicitly, "I have no interest in the Paris Olympics. Having not viewed it, I could not possibly comment on, nor endorse, the opening ceremonies." This response, issued via the Church's official channels, prioritized factual denial over speculation, aligning with the organization's aversion to unsubstantiated attributions of influence.^[56][57][55] He maintained public engagement through interviews, including a February 2024 discussion on artistic collaborations like The Devil's Reign comic series, where he underscored Satanism's promotion of personal responsibility and aesthetic individualism amid shifting societal norms.^[74] A July 2024 conversation further explored these themes, reinforcing the Church's doctrinal focus on rational self-interest over external activism.^[75]