So I was wandering around the internet, as one does, and came across a couple of stories involving curious goings on at a couple of grave sites. Some of the stories were really poorly written.
Take this one, for instance in Norwalk, Conn.’s The Hour:
New evidence in the case of a toddler who was exhumed from her grave and dumped in a New Jersey river this week leads police to believe the body was taken for ritualistic purposes.
Capt. Richard Conklin of the Stamford Detective Bureau said Wednesday that police are targeting people of African, Central American, Haitian, Cuban or Caribbean decent who practice satanic rituals as potential suspects in the grave robbing.
Come again? The article doesn’t even come close to alleging “satanic” rituals and it doesn’t even have a good handle on the religion angles, non-satanic though they may be, the police are pursuing.
Or check out this section:
They now believe that a person, or persons, practicing a dark form of black magic known as Santeria or Palo Mayombe may be responsible.
“Because the baby had some mysticism to it, we believe that it was targeted,” Conklin said.
According to Columbia University adjunct professor, Daniel Dawson, who has written extensively on the subject, Palo Mayombe originated in the Congo of Cuba.
Palo Mayombe is rooted in the use of elements from the natural world and is based on the belief that all natural elements have distinctive powers that can be harnessed for protection and for healing, Dawson has written.
So it’s not just black magic, it’s a dark form of black magic. What does that even mean? And what the heck is the Congo of Cuba? Palo did develop in Cuba and it has its roots in the Congo of Africa. And because of the poor writing or proofreading, I’m not sure if the writer intentionally or unintentionally conflates Santeria and Palo Mayombe. These are distinct religious expressions.
And while it’s helpful to have information from Dawson, perhaps the reporter could interview someone who could discuss whether there’s any relationship between Palo and the facts of the case in question.
The Advocate did better with its related story. Staff writer Michael Mayko looked at three local incidents involving human remains. It’s written in a riveting but not too sensationalistic manner. Particularly considering it involves alligator skulls and blood-stained paper and stolen remains.
But the reporter also asks decent questions. Are the three scenes related? There’s no evidence to suggest they are. He contacts a number of academics and other experts to discuss which religions might be involved:
“I can tell you this,” said Leslie G. Desmangles, a professor of religion at Trinity College in Hartford, about the incidents. “It is not Santeria.”
He bases his decision on the absence of flowers and pictures of saints.
“It doesn’t sound like Santeria at all,” adds Margarite Fernandez Olmos, a Brooklyn College professor who co-authored “Creole Religions of the Caribbean.” She suspects Regla de Palo (which also goes by many different names), a religion which works with spirits.
“While this is not the usual practice, some may search for skulls of persons they believe can help them in their quest,” she said.
As for the Stamford incident, her research uncovered no religion that involves transporting a whole body to a river.
The story makes heavy use of Amy Blackthorn, who holds a Ph.D. in theology and is a Wiccan high priestess. She helps the paper with a sidebar distinguishing the various religions. After a police captain says the investigations have been a learning experience, the reporter adds:
That’s why Blackthorn said, “Every police department should have reference material. My choice would be ‘A Cop’s Guide to Occult Investigations: Understanding Satanism, Santeria, Wicca, and Other Alternative Religions’ by Tony M. Kail. Police are too quick to attribute everything to Voodoo, Satanism or Santeria.”
I kind of want that book. If that first story is any indication — and it is — the media could also use a helpful guide. Just because these religions aren’t terribly prominent in the United States isn’t an excuse to wildly misrepresent them. There’s a lot of work to be done increasing the accuracy and de-sensationalizing the reporting on these minority religions.
While Jason Pitzl-Waters hasn’t yet analyzed the latter story, he has some interesting thoughts on the former one as well as a few other related stories. As always, go check The Wild Hunt for more.
 | Posted at 8:26 am |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (13) |
July 14, 2009, at 9:39 am
A simple typo that would slip past spell-check could convert “the Congo or Cuba” to “the Congo of Cuba.”
July 14, 2009, at 10:35 am
““Because the baby had some mysticism to it, we believe that it was targeted,” Conklin said.”
What does that sentence even mean? The baby had some mysticism to it? Huh?
So - it could be anything from muti to Santeria? That’s a very broad range of activity. I’m no advocate of Santeria, but I imagine that the practitioners of it would be very upset, to say the least, to hear it described as “satanic”, “dark form of black magic” and involved in chopping up corpses.
Or it could be idiots desecrating a grave for no better reason than mindless vandalism and drunken (or stoned) stupidity. Or a grudge against the family. That happens, too.
July 14, 2009, at 11:21 am
All I can say is “sheesh” and sigh at the ignorance demonstrated.
July 14, 2009, at 12:56 pm
it’s a great book. The Author is very knowledgeable and provides some really good information.
July 14, 2009, at 1:13 pm
Hey, Mollie
As another Wiccan High Priestess, I just want to express my appreciation for the fair-mindedness of your post. I am not familiar with Ton’y Ksil’s book, so can’t comment on its reliability. Just thanks again!
warmly / Judy
July 14, 2009, at 1:41 pm
Interesting that the stories do not distinguish between magic and religion. Putting magic back into religion is something that theologians have been fighting for a long time.
I thought Santeria was a fold practice that can be either a system of low magic or a religion. Or sometimes both.
July 14, 2009, at 2:36 pm
Let me add my kudos to Judy’s, Mollie.
July 14, 2009, at 3:35 pm
First, apologies to all for the typos in my last post. I am working with an unfamiliar keyboard at the moment.
Second, to dalea:
That distinction between religion and magic really boils down to a false distinction between magic done within the context of what we perceive to be a true religion (often called petitionary prayer) and magic done within what we perceive to be a false religion (often called spellcraft). The practices are not all that different — the only difference is in our perception of the Sacred Spirit that empowers our wishes.
Another distinction, more commonly made amongst those of us for whom magic is part of our religious practice, is in the intent or purpose of the magic. It is evil magic to ask any Deity to strike your opponent dead, or even to control or manipulate others against their will. Magic to heal and help is always blessed.
Also, when you work blessing magic and really understand what the ability to to this means, it is a *spiritual* practice, a direct experience of our unity with Sacred Immanence. It’s both empowering and humbling, although I guess this makes no sense at all to those who have not had the experience. (I would also guess that any Pentecostal readers know precisely what I mean) And there’s no way that experience can be separated from religion.
July 14, 2009, at 4:48 pm
What does this mean? “Because the baby had some mysticism to it”
The U.S. Army Chaplain Center and School publishes a very hlpful Field Manual of world religions. It is designed mainly for Chaplain Assistants so they can serve soldiers of every religion. It contains a brief sysnopsis of what the religion professes and detailed instructions for how to set up the chapel for services of the various religions. It has instructions for everything from Assemblies of God to Zoroastrianism, including (the last time I checked) Wicca and Satanism.
July 14, 2009, at 5:12 pm
Thus the “love potion” or “love spell” request is moral only if its intent is to make the requestor more loveable. It is immoral if it attempts to subvert a third party’s will to love the requestor if that love was not initially present.
July 14, 2009, at 11:08 pm
Judy Harrow wrote:
I disagree; there’s a difference between magic and petitionary prayer that doesn’t impose a judgment about a religion’s validity. Magic has to do with the manipulation of nonpersonal forces— a spiritual analogy to mechanical arts. If the practitioner performs a ritual in the prescribed manner, magic produces the effect intended by the magician.
Petitionary prayer is a request addressed to a personal god, who is capable of forming his/her own intention, and who may or may not grant a request. Petitionary prayer is analogous to a request one makes to another human being. If the practitioner performs a petitionary prayer, a god may answer, but is not compelled to do so.
It’s a useful distinction. Magic and prayer can be combined, but they’re not the same thing.
July 16, 2009, at 9:59 am
I will say as a practitioner of Wicca, that it is not a form of dark magic. Wicca is about doing no harm, there are witches who practice witchcraft that is not Wicca, therefore potentially could be considered dark magic.
July 18, 2009, at 10:34 pm
As a member of the clergy of The Church of Satan, one who’s specialty is PR, public education, and civil rights, I can say with some authority that the whole SRA/Satanic Panic hysteria is making a comeback.
It is almost as if people have gotten bored with rational thought or something.
I can prove that Satanism is pro law and order, anti-sacrifice, and atheistic until I am blue. I can elaborate the differences between Christian Heresy/Devil Worship and Satanism until the cows come home. I can demonstrate that the Church of Satan has reported more criminals than we’ve ever housed, and that our religion is one of personal responsibility….and yet, one of the first questions is always some reference to goats and babies.
‘makes a girl downright antsy.
Y~