Disc 2 offers a sweet behind-the-scenes treat: 10 tortures and how they did 'em. You'll see the craft that went into shots of a woman's chest cage ripped apart, a black man's body broken to pieces. Honestly, folks, which is weirder: taking pleasure in the depiction of pain, or being so anesthetized to it that you want to study the particulars of its creation? It occurred to me that the connoisseurs of these extras are like the Mr. Smith character in Mr. Brooks, wetting themselves from excitement at the sight of bodies in agony and life snuffed out.

When the characters are triumphant, the art is not deep horror but generative comedy. So too, tragedy cannot be deep horror because tragedy's characters are sacrificed for valuable causes. The audience witnesses what it expects should be (Affron 54). In deep horror, the victims must be elementally violated, and this is most effective when they have been rendered completely powerless (Dickstein 32, Durgnant 880). Self control and assertiveness are useless, and surrender is inevitable despite all efforts. The self is completely and unredeemably dissolved as in Daniel Keyes' Flowers for Algernon and the most recent remake of The Fly (1986). The rape-murder of his wife by a masked husband in the film Jagged Edge (1985) is a distillation of deep horror's anonymous, nonredemptive sundering of all things human: spirit, soul, inner being, love, intimacy, and body.

...Yet another major way in which deep horror accomplishes its effects is by offering participation in the sacrificial scapegoating of the characters, a process that takes place for the characters without the usual Judeo-Christian requirement of sin preceding penance. For the maladjusted adolescent, for example, films like Carrie (1976) and The Spell (1977) serve as vicarious vengeance against adults and peers. Roger Ebert cites two incidents of such behavior among adults. The distinguished, white-haired sadist has already been mentioned. The second is the audience that found the mentally retard rapist in I Spit on Your Grave uproariously funny (54). Indeed, in deep horror, the most ghastly suffering, pain, and denial take place without justification or rationale and are enjoyed by audiences without fear of retribution, punishment, or revenge. As Stephen King has observed, "The horror film is an invitation to indulge in deviant, antisocial behavior by proxy -- to commit gratuitous acts of violence, indulge our puerile dreams of power, to give in to our worst craven fears".

The heart of the matter, for me, at least, isn't even whether or not Halloween is something to be "celebrated". I'm not sure that I'll let my daughter participate in anything more than a church-sponsored "Harvest Festival", simply because I loathe the very real, and very troubling emphases on death, fear, and darkness that surround the more prevalent mores of the day. That having been said, we do our faith, and our God no service when we're willing to spread falsehoods and misinformation, simply because they fit with our view of "how things really work". I'm not calling for widespread Christian acceptance, or celebration of Halloween. What I am saying, however, is that we owe it to our witness as the Body of Christ to be fair and accurate in our presentation of our (very real) concerns, and to be disciplined and wise in how we approach such matters. Continuing to hang on to the discredited claims of Warnke, et. al., simply becuase they "might" be true is indefensible.

Myth #1: "Halloween was originally a Celtic festival for the dead, celebrated on the last day of the Celtic year, Oct. 31."

This is actually a quotation from the 1996 CD version of Grolier Encyclopedia, widely viewed as one of the most scholarly of the CD encyclopedias, since it gives a signed bibliography after each entry. But when one comes to the "Halloween" article, there are no signed bibliographical entries. This should be a tip off right away that something is amiss. Such is the case with many, if not, most, mainline encyclopedias. No references are given. But this doesn't stop many Christians from repeating this argument ad infinitum.

First, we need to be clear about sources of information about the ancient Druids and the Celts of the British Isles. We don't have much. Part of the problem is that the Druids, priests and guardians of Celtic religion did not put their learning in written form. So are there any historical sources that provide information about the Druids and Celtic culture from Roman or pre-Roman times? Yes. We have accounts of them from Julius Caesar, Strabo, and Diodorus. These records are supplemented by some early Irish/Celtic Literature.

But there are two problems with the Roman sources that inject an element of doubt into them. First, Caesar and the Romans were at war with the Celts of Gaul. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that Caesar would make the Celts and Druids sound worse than they really were in order to justify the war. Recall how the Romans had accused Christians of practicing cannibalism, incest, and orgies. Therefore it is difficult to distinguish between truth and Roman propaganda.

You will often read in the literature published by Christian organizations (such as the tracts and comic books from publisher Jack Chick) that, "Samhain was the Celtic God of the Dead, worshipped by the Druids with dreadful bloody sacrifices at Halloween." Chick embroiders this fantasy in a tract called "The Trick" and a full-sized comic book called, "Spellbound?"...

His writings describe evil Druids going from castle-door-to-door seeking virgin princesses to rape and sacrifice, leaving carved pumpkins illuminated by candles ("made from human fat!") for those who cooperated, and arranging demonic assassinations for those who refused to give them what they wanted. This, according to Mr. Chick, is supposed to be the "true" origin of trick or treating.

Let's look at a few historical facts...

Contrary to information published by many Christian organizations, there is no historical or archeological evidence of any Celtic deity of the dead named "Samhain." We know the names of some 350 Celtic deities and Samhain isn't found among them. The Celtic gods of the dead were Gwynn ap Nudd for the British, and Arawn for the Welsh. The Irish did not have a "lord of death" as such. McBain's Etymological Dictionary of the Gaelic Language says that "samhuinn" (the Scots Gaelic spelling) means "summer's end."

It's not just Christian organizations that perpetuate this fallacy -- even the World Book encyclopedia (1990) writes about "Samhain, the Celtic lord of death" (World Book is in discussion with scholars in order to change this in future additions.) This idea is based on a fallacy that seems to have come from Col. Charles Vallency's books in the 1770s before the reliable translations of existing Celtic literary works and before archaeological excavations. (Col. Charles Vallency also tried to prove that the Irish were descended from the inhabitants of Armenia!) Samhain is the name of the holiday. There is no evidence of any god or demon named "Samhain," "Samain," "Sam Hane," or however you want to vary the spelling.

Myth #4: The practice of "trick or treat" and costumes originated with an ancient Druid practice. [Here follow three variations that I have seen in Christian writings] (a) The Druids, in costume, went door to door asking for contributions of food for their demonic worship services. Those who didn't give them a treat, they would play a trick on by killing them (b) Spirits of the dead would go from house to house haunting the living. Those who didn't set out food for them would be harmed by them; (c) Peasants dressed in outlandish costumes went from house to house asking for contributions to buy food for the Samhain festival in the name of a Celtic deity named Muck Olla. A feast was prepared for ghosts. At the end of the feast, the costumed peasants would lead the ghosts out of the village.

...we just don't have any evidence to back up these claims. The only mention of Muck Olla, reveals him not as a Celtic deity but as a mythical figure from a much later period in Britain. All major studies show that the earliest mention we have of dressing in costumes and soliciting food comes from Christian times. Throughout the Middle Ages we know of the practice of "masked guisers" dressing in horrific masks to scare off demons. We also know of beggars and later children going from house to house asking for "soul cakes" or performing and asking for something in return. Actually, the phrase "trick or treat" is a modern one, being widespread from the late 1930s on.

There's zero evidence that the ancient Druids or their congregants ever dressed in costume or engaged in ritualized begging at harvest time. One Christian tract (Trick or Treat - by the unctuous Jack Chick) says:

"The Druids went from house to house asking for a contribution to their demonic worship celebration. If a person didn't give, their trick was to kill him. The people feared the phrase 'Trick or Treat.'"

This charge has been laid at the door step of the Celts so often that it's hard to believe there is no evidence for it, but there is absolutely none. Tad Tuleja (a folklore expert) writes:

"An exhaustive Victorian survey of Irish calendar customs mentions divination games and apple bobbing as Halloween pastimes, but says nothing about food collection or a procession of "spirits."...On the question of masked begging at the Celtic New Year, authorities on the Druids do not say a word. (Halloween and Other Festivals of Death and Life, p. 83)."

Where did costuming at Halloween come from? There is a lot of confusion on this point. But in spite of what you may have read in an encyclopedia or seen on the History Channel, I can find absolutely NO historical evidence of costumed begging among the Druids or as part of the Samhain festival.

We do have records of costumed processions in a much later time (Christian times), but these costumed processions were NOT limited to the Halloween holiday. They appear much more frequently at Christmas. The earliest actual historic practice seems to have been poor folk in masks and costumes going from house to house. They would put on a simple play or musical performance in return for food and drink. This practice is called mumming or guising and has no discernible connection to the Celts.

You may be surprised to learn that your parents or grandparents know nothing about costuming on Halloween. A reader sent me this email:

"You mentioned in your article that the American custom came about in the 1930s as a reaction to vandalism. My parents were kids in New York City in those days, and I started looking for more info because of a comment my mom made on Halloween night. It seems that Halloween as we know it did not exist at the time--it was all pranks, as you mentioned (my mom mentioned taking gates off posts and moving outhouses, as you did, and my dad said that in the days of coal fuel there were big cans of ashes that the kids would tip over--a big mess).

The interesting part was that both of them said (Dad was born in 1924 and Mom in 1927) that each year as kids, they did go from door to door begging for food--but it was on Thanksgiving Day, not Halloween! My mom said that rather than 'Trick or Treat!' their line at each door was 'Anything for the poor? Anything for the poor?' They were given fruit, nuts, a cup of cider, or the occasional coin--that sort of thing."

...The actual phrase "trick or treat" is not Druidic! The oldest citation in print dates only to 1939! The phrase is not recorded by the Merriam-Webster Company until 1941. And the term is actually American, not European (Halloween and Other Festivals of Death and Life, p. 47,86-90)!

It's not only the phrase that is American, the practice is too! In America in the late 1800s and early 1900s, there was a custom of playing pranks on Halloween. This custom appears to have come from immigrants from Ireland and Scotland which had a practice called Mischief Night. Favorite pranks included tipping over outhouses and unhinging fence gates (Charles Panati, Extraordinary Origins of Everyday Things). The pleasant fiction was that such rambunctiousness was the work of "fairies," "elves," "witches" and "goblins" (Halloween and Other Festivals of Death and Life, p. 87). That's the "trick" part of Halloween. Where did the "treat" part of Halloween come from? Jill Pederson Meyer writes:

"By the turn of the century, Halloween had become an ever more destructive way to 'let off steam' for crowded and poor urban dwellers. As Stuart Schneider writes in 'Halloween in America' (1995), vandalism that had been limited to tipping outhouses; removing gates, soaping windows and switching shop signs, by the 1920s had become nasty -- with real destruction of property and cruelty to animals and people. Perhaps not coincidentally, the disguised nighttime terrorism and murders by the Ku Klux Klan reached their apex during this decade. Schneider writes that neighborhood committees and local city clubs such as the Boy Scouts then mobilized to organize safe and fun alternatives to vandalism. School posters of the time call for a 'Sane Halloween.' Good children were encouraged to go door to door and receive treats from homes and shop owners, thereby keeping troublemakers away. By the 1930s, these 'beggar's nights' were enormously popular and being practiced nationwide, with the 'trick or treat' greeting widespread from the late 1930s."

The Halloween begging activity known as trick-or-treat comes from America in the 1930s, not the British Isles. The custom was intended to control and displace disruptive pranks.

Contrary to popular belief Halloween is not the most important celebration for Satanists. Most Satanists celebrate their own birthdays as their most important "unholi"-day, which is to be expected from adherents of a religion that believes that the highest form of religion is "worship of self" (The Satanic Bible, Anton LaVey). Some of the stories of Satanic ritual abuse that are passed around in Christian circles may have no basis in fact (like those found in Rebecca Brown's book "He Came to Set the Captives Free"). According to Christian researchers Bob and Gretchen Passantino (What About Halloween?):

"The actual incidence level of satanic-associated crime is very low, and on Halloween consists mostly of petty vandalism and desecration of graveyards and churches; satanic graffiti; raucous rituals including drug and/or alcohol use and sexual promiscuity; and very rarely sexual violence or animal killing. The most well-known documented criminal activity associated with Halloween are the 'Devil's Night' fires that were rampant in the Detroit area. These destructive bonfires were not religiously inspired, but were a convenient excuse for out-of-control juveniles to act destructively, often in their own communities.

It is not true that satanists look for 'Christian virgins' to rape during Halloween rituals. A young Christian is much more likely to be in danger of a drunk driver, or a party that gets out of hand with drug or alcohol use than of satanic abduction. Occasional anti-social, criminally committed individuals or small groups that also practice self-styled Satanism commit crimes on Halloween, but they invariably betray a pattern of sociopathy at other times as well.

It is not true that poisoning or sabotaging of Halloween treats is a significant risk if parents take sensible precautions. Most horror stories are unsubstantiated rumors that quickly cross the country, gaining embellishments, and unnecessarily frightening parents. If parents are careful about restricting their children's treats to ones from people they know and trust, or from a formal program run by a church, community group, or merchant association, they should be fairly safe. In many communities, local hospitals and/or police stations will screen treats free of charge."

What I have tried to show is that much of the association with witchcraft and Satanic elements has actually come from Christian misinformation attempting to "demonize" this holiday. There is no evidence that the original Celtic celebration was Satanic. Much of the information on Halloween that Christians preach and write about is plainly based on shoddy research. While Christians should absolutely avoid pagan practices, Christian hype tends to make us overreact to benign folk elements of Halloween. We appear like zany buffoons to the world when there is no necessity for doing so. Furthermore, our groundless retreat from all elements of Halloween leaves a vacuum that wicked elements delight to fill.

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. - Romans 14:1-8 (NIV)

Murphy, 29, was leading a four-man reconnaissance and surveillance team during Operation Red Wing in Afghanistan’s rugged Hindu Kush mountains June 28, 2005, when the team was spotted by Taliban fighters. During the intense battle that followed, Murphy and two of his men — Gunner’s Mate 2nd Class (SEAL) Danny Dietz and Sonar Technician (Surface) 2nd Class (SEAL) Matthew Axelson — were killed. A fourth man, then-Hospital Corpsman 2nd Class (SEAL) Marcus Luttrell, was seriously wounded and knocked unconscious, but managed to escape. Luttrell was rescued days later.

Murphy was killed while phoning in for reinforcements. The tragedy continued when enemy fighters shot down one of the transport helicopters carrying the rescue force, killing eight more SEALs and eight Special Forces operators. The 11 SEALs killed marked the largest single-day loss of life for the tight-knit community.

...In addition to the Oval Office ceremony, the fallen SEAL will be honored at two other Washington events: the inclusion of his name on a wall at the Pentagon’s Hall of Heroes at 11 a.m. Oct. 23, and the presentation of the Medal of Honor flag at the Navy Memorial at 6 p.m. Oct. 23. Additional ceremonies are planned next month at Calverton National Cemetery in eastern Long Island, where Murphy is buried, and on his birthday next year at the Patchogue post office that bears his name, his family said.

When he deployed overseas, Murphy carried a patch from New York Fire Department’s Engine Company 53 and Ladder Company 43, in Manhattan’s El Barrio neighborhood, “as a symbol of why he was there and what he was doing,” Daniel Murphy said.

The team was taking heavy fire in the close-quarters battle as Taliban fighters continued to close in, firing weapons and rocket-propelled grenades. At one point, Murphy took his mobile phone and “walked to open ground. He walked until he was more or less in the center, gunfire all around him, and he sat on a small rock and began punching in the numbers to HQ,” according to Luttrell, the surviving SEAL, who wrote a book called “Lone Survivor.”

“I could hear him talking,” Luttrell wrote. “My men are taking heavy fire ... we’re getting picked apart. My guys are dying out here ... we need help.

“And right then Mikey took a bullet straight in the back. I saw the blood spurt from his chest. He slumped forward, dropping his phone and his rifle. But then he braced himself, grabbed them both, sat upright again, and once more put the phone to his ear.”

Then, Luttrell heard Murphy say, “Roger that, sir. Thank you.” The lieutenant continued to train fire on the enemy fighters.

“Only I knew what Mikey had done. He’d understood we had only one realistic chance, and that was to call in help,” Luttrell wrote. “Knowing the risk, understanding the danger, in the full knowledge the phone call could cost him his life, Lieutenant Michael Patrick Murphy, son of Maureen, fiancé of the beautiful Heather, walked out into the firestorm.

“His objective was clear: to make one last valiant attempt to save his two teammates.”