Psychology Wiki
Register
m (Automatic delinking using popups)
m (fixing dead links)
(6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{SocPsy}}
 
{{SocPsy}}
  +
{{Expert}}
  +
: ''This article does not discuss "cult" in its original meaning of "religious practice;" for that usage see [[Cult (religious practice)]].
   
  +
{{Main|Cultism}}
In [[religion]] and [[sociology]], a [[cult]] is a cohesive group of people (often a relatively small and recently founded religious movement) devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be far outside the mainstream. Its separate status may come about either due to its novel belief system, because of its idiosyncratic practices or because it opposes the interests of the mainstream culture. Other non-religious groups may also display cult-like characteristics.
 
   
In common usage, "cult" has a negative connotation, and is generally applied to a group by its opponents, for a variety of possible reasons.
 
   
  +
'''Cult''' typically refers to a cohesive social group devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture considers outside the mainstream, with a notably positive or negative popular perception. In common or populist usage, "cult" has a positive connotation for groups of art, music, writing, fiction, and fashion devotees,<ref>''Star Trek'' has an extremely large following but can still be considered 'cult' due to the intense loyalty the franchise inspires; see [[Cult following]]</ref> but a negative connotation for new religious, extreme political, questionable therapeutic, and pyramidal business groups.<ref>''Cult Concerns: An Overview of Cults and their Harmful Methods in the UK''. http://www.cultinformation.org.uk/articles.html</ref> For this reason, most, if not all, non-fan groups that are called cults reject this label.
== Definitions of "cult" ==
 
In the English-speaking countries since about the 1960s, especially in [[North America]], the term ''cult'' has taken on a pejorative and sometimes offensive connotation. This largely originated with highly publicized cults that purportedly exploited their members psychologically and financially, or that allegedly utilized group-based [[persuasion]] and [[Religious conversion|conversion]] techniques. These techniques may include "[[brainwashing]]", "[[thought reform]]", "[[love bombing]]", and "[[mind control]]", whose scientific validity, modern and historical use, and effectiveness (for [[religious conversion]]) are discussed within the linked articles.
 
   
  +
{{TOCright}}
Some groups use the word to label other groups that they consider to be at variance with their own doctrine, or that they consider to be competition. Some groups called "cults" by some critics may consider themselves not to be "cults", but may also consider some other groups to be "cults".
 
  +
A group's populist cult status begins as rumors of its novel belief system, its great devotions, its idiosyncratic practices, its perceived harmful or beneficial effects on members, or its perceived opposition to the interests of mainstream cultures and governments. Cult rumors most often refer to artistic and fashion movements of passing interest, but persistent rumors may escalate popular concern about relatively small and recently founded religious movements, or non-religious groups, perceived to engage in excessive member control or exploitation.
   
  +
Some [[anthropologists]] and [[sociologists]] studying cults have argued that no one has yet been able to define “cult” in a way that enables the term to identify only groups that have been identified as problematic. However, without the "problematic" concern, scientific criteria of characteristics attributed to cults do exist.<ref>Robert J. Lifton, 1961, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism <small>(cited by freedomofmind.com)</small></ref> A little-known example is the Alexander and Rollins, 1984, scientific study concluding that the socially well-received group [[Alcoholics Anonymous]] is a cult by using the model of Lifton's thought reform techniques and applying those to AA group’s indoctrination methodology.<ref>Alexander, F., Rollins, R. (1984). “Alcoholics Anonymous: The Unseen Cult,” California Sociologist, Vol. 7, No. 1, Winter, page 32 as cited in Ragels, L. Allen "Is Alcoholics Anonymous a Cult? An Old Question Revisited" “AA uses all the methods of brain washing, which are also the methods employed by cults ... It is our contention that AA is a cult.” transcribed to Freedom of Mind, website and retrieved on August 23, 2006. </ref> Even though the elements exist, several researchers pointed out the benefit of the organization. Vaillant, 2005, concluded that AA is beneficial.<ref> Vaillant, 2005, concluded that AA "..appears equal to or superior to conventional treatments for alcoholism,..." and "...is probably without serious side-effects." Vaillant GE. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2005 Jun;39(6):431-6. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15943643&dopt=Abstract Pubmed abstract PMID: 15943643]</ref>
Understandably, most, if not all, groups that are called "cults" deny this label. It has been argued that no one yet has been able to define “cult” in a way that enables the term to identify only groups that have been claimed as problematic.
 
   
  +
Laypersons participate in cultic studies to a degree not found in other academic disciplines, making it difficult to demarcate the boundaries of science from theology, politics, news reporting, fashion, and family cultural values. From about 1920 onward,<ref>"During the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists who were studying religion started to use it to refer to those faith groups that were not full denominations or sects." —[http://www.religioustolerance.org/cults.htm Ontario Consultants On Religious Tolerance: Cults, Sects and Denominations]. OCRT references Superior Court of California, 1985: [http://www.contendingforthefaith.com/libel-litigations/god-men/experts/melton.html ''"It began as a sociological term in the twenties and thirties."'']; testimony of Dr. [[J. Gordon Melton]], [[UCSB]] (author of the ''Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America''; see [[Cult#Books|#Bibliography#Books]]). </ref> the populist negative connotation progressively interfered with scientific study using the neutral historical meaning of "cult" in the [[sociology of religion]].<ref>"This popular use of the term has gained such credence and momentum that it has virtually swallowed up the more neutral historical meaning of the term from the [[sociology of religion]]" [[James Richardson (sociologist)|James T. Richardson]] wrote in 1993.</ref> A 20th century attempt by sociologists to replace "cult" with the term [[New Religious Movement]] (NRM), was rejected by the public <ref>"The use of the concept "new religious movements" in public discourse is problematic for the simple reason that it has not gained currency. Speaking bluntly from personal experience, when I use the concept "new religious movements," the large majority of people I encounter don't know what I'm talking about. I am invariably queried as to what I mean. And, at some point in the course of my explanation, the inquirer unfailing responds, "oh, you mean you study cults!" " --Prof. Jeffrey K. Hadden quoted from [http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/cultsect/concult.htm#scholar_v_public Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect"] <small>(cited by cultfaq.org)</small></ref> and only partly accepted by the scientific community. <ref>"...use of the term 'cult' by academics, the public and the mass media, from its early academic use in the sociology of religion to recent calls for the term to be abandoned by scholars of religion because it is now so overladen with negative connotations. But scholars of religion have a duty not to capitulate to popular opinion, media and governments in the arena of the 'politics of representation'. The author argues that we should continue using the term 'cult' as a descriptive technical term. It has considerable educational value in the study of religions.
The literal and traditional meanings of the word ''cult'' is derived from the [[Latin]] ''cultus,'' meaning "care" or "adoration", as "a system of religious belief or [[ritual]]; or: the body of adherents to same"{{fn|32}}. In English, it remains neutral and a technical term within this context to refer to the "cult of [[Artemis]] at [[Ephesus]]" and the "cult figures" that accompanied it, or to "the importance of the ''Ave Maria'' in the cult of the [[Blessed Virgin Mary | Virgin]]." This usage is more fully explored in the entry [[Cult (religion)]].
 
  +
" --Michael York quoted from [http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/diskus/york.html Defending the Cult in the Politics of
  +
Representation] DISKUS Vol.4 No.2 (1996) <small>(cited by cultfaq.org)</small></ref>
   
  +
During the 20th century groups referred to as cults by governments and media became globally controversial. The televised rise and fall of less than 20 [[Destructive cults]] known for mass suicide and murder tarred hundreds of NRM groups having less serious government and civil legal entanglements, against a background of thousands of unremarkable NRM groups known only to their neighbors. Following the [[Solar Temple]] destructive cult incidents on two continents, France authorized the 1995 [[Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France]]. This commission set a mostly non-controversial standard for human rights objections to exploitative group practices, and mandated a controversial remedy for cultic abuse, known in English as ''cult watching'', which was quietly adopted by other countries. The United States responded with human rights challenges to French cult control policies, and France charged the U.S. with interfering in French internal affairs. The United States does not have a classification for cults in its legal system.<ref>{{cite web | first = Frank K. | last = Flinn | title = Scientology | url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/06/30/DI2005063001394.html | work = Live discussion | publisher = [[Washington Post]] | date = [[2005-07-05]] | accessdate = 2008-02-04 }}</ref> In recent years, France's troublesome public cult watching lists appear to have been retired in favor of confidential police intelligence gathering.
In non-English European terms, the cognates of the English word "cult" are neutral, and refer mainly to divisions within a single faith, a case where English speakers might use the word "[[sect]]", as in "[[Roman Catholicism]], [[Eastern Orthodoxy]] and [[Protestantism]] are ''sects'' (or ''denominations'') ''within'' [[Christianity]]". In [[French language|French]] or [[Spanish language|Spanish]], ''culte'' or ''culto'' simply means "worship" or "religious attendance"; thus an ''association cultuelle'' is an association whose goal is to organize religious worship and practices.
 
   
The word for "cult" in the popular English meaning is ''secte'' (French) or ''secta'' (Spanish). In [[German language | German]] the usual word used for the english ''cult'' is ''Sekte'', which also has other definitions. A similar case is the [[Russian language | Russian]] word ''sekta''.
 
   
===Non-Religious Cults===
 
   
  +
==Differing opinions of the various definitions==
Although the majority of groups to which the word "cult" is applied are religious in nature, a significant number are non-religious. These may include political, psychotherapeutic or marketing oriented cults that are organized in a manner very similar to their religious counterparts. The term has also been applied to certain channelling, human-potential and self-improvement organizations that do not define themselves as religious although they clearly draw on ideas derived from various religions.
 
  +
According to professor [[Timothy Miller]] from the [[University of Kansas]] in his 2003 ''Religious Movements in the United States'', during the controversies over the new religious groups in the 1960s, the term "cult" came to mean something sinister, generally used to describe a movement at least potentially destructive to its members or to society. But he argues that no one yet has been able to define a "cult" in a way that enables the term to identify only problematic groups. Miller asserts that the attributes of groups often referred to as cults (see [[cult checklist]]), as defined by cult opponents, can be found in groups that few would consider cultist, such as [[Catholic]] religious orders or many [[evangelicalism|evangelical]] [[Protestant]] churches. Miller argues:
  +
<blockquote>
  +
If the term does not enable us to distinguish between a pathological group and a legitimate one, then it has no real value. It is the religious equivalent of the racial term for African Americans—it conveys disdain and prejudice without having any valuable content.<ref>[[Timothy Miller|Miller, Timothy]], ''Religious Movements in the United States: An Informal Introduction'' (2003) [http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/essays/miller2003.htm]</ref>
  +
</blockquote>
   
  +
Due to the usually pejorative connotation of the word "cult," new religious movements (NRMs) and other purported cults often find the word highly offensive.{{Fact|date=August 2007}} Some purported cults have been known to insist that other similar groups are cults but that they themselves are not. On the other hand, some [[Skepticism|skeptics]] have questioned the distinction between a cult and a mainstream religion, saying that cults only differ from recognized [[religion]]s in their history and the societal familiarity with recognized religions which makes them seem less controversial.
The political cults, mostly far-leftist or far-rightist in their ideologies, have received considerable attention from journalists and scholars but are only a minute percentage of the total number of so-called cults in the United States. Indeed, clear documentation of cult-like practices exists for only about a dozen ideological cadre or racial combat organizations, although vague charges have been leveled at a somewhat larger number. See Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth, "On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left," Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2000. [[http://www.mesharpe.com/mall/resultsa.asp?Title=On+the+Edge%3A+Political+Cults+Right+and+Left]]
 
   
  +
==Study of cults==
Although most [[political cult]]s involve a "[[cult of personality]]", the latter concept is a broader one. It has its origins in the excessive adulation said to have surrounded Soviet leader [[Joseph Stalin]]. It has also been applied to several other despotic heads of state. It is often applied by analogy to refer to adulation of non-political leaders, and sometimes in the context of certain businessmen, management styles, and company work environments. The use of this term in its broadest sense serves as a reminder that cultic phenomena (as opposed to full-blown "cults") are not just found inside small ashrams and splinter churches but also are spread throughout mainstream institutions in democratic societies as well as permeating in a far more toxic form the governments and ruling parties of some nondemocratic societies.
 
  +
{{Original research|date=September 2007}}
  +
Among the experts studying cults and new religious movements are sociologists, religion scholars, psychologists, and psychiatrists. To an unusual extent for an academic/quasi-scientific field, however, nonacademics are involved in the study of and/or debates concerning cults, especially from the "anti-cult" point of view.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} These include investigative journalists and nonacademic book authors who have sometimes examined court records and studied the finances of groups, writers who once were members of purported cults, and professionals such as therapists who work with ex-members of groups referred to cults. Less widely known are the writings by members of organizations that have been labeled cults, defending their organizations and replying to critics.
   
  +
Nonacademics are sometimes published, or their writings cited, in the ''Cultic Studies Journal'' (''CSJ''), the journal of the [[International Cultic Studies Association]] (ICSA), a group which criticizes perceived cultic behavior. Sociologist Janja Lalich began her work and conceptualized many of her ideas while an "anti-cult" activist writing for the "CSJ" years before obtaining academic standing, and incorporated her own experiences in a leftwing political group into her later work as a sociological theorist.
===Definition of "cult" in dictionaries===
 
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary lists five different meanings of the word "cult"{{fn|32}}.
 
   
  +
The hundreds of books on specific groups by nonacademic comprise a large portion of the currently available published record on cults. The books by "anti-cult" critics run from memoirs by ex-members to detailed accounts of the history and alleged misdeeds of a given group written from either a tabloid journalist, investigative journalist, or popular historian perspective.
# formal religious veneration
 
# a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents;
 
# a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents;
 
# a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator;
 
# great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book).
 
   
  +
Journalists [[Flo Conway]] and [[Jim Siegelman]] together wrote the book ''[[Snapping]]'', which set forth speculations on the nature of mind control that have received mixed reviews from psychologists. Others mentioned in this article include Tim Wohlforth (co-author of ''On the Edge'' and a former follower of British Trotskyist [[Gerry Healy]]); Carol Giambalvo, a former [[Erhard Seminars Training|est]] member; activist and consultant [[Rick Ross (consultant)|Rick Ross]]; and mental health counselor [[Steven Hassan]], a former [[Unification Church]] member and author of the book ''[[Combatting Cult Mind Control]]'', who, like Ross, runs a business specializing in servicing people involved with cults or their family members.[http://www.rickross.org/help.html][http://www.freedomofmind.com/stevehassan/fees/] Another example is the work of journalist/activist [[Chip Berlet]], responsible for much of the work on "political cults" which exists today. Current members of the [[Hare Krishna]] movement as well as several former leaders of the [[Worldwide Church of God]] also have written with critical insight on "cult" issues, using terminologies and framings somewhat different from those of secular experts. Members of the [[Unification Church]] have produced books and articles that argue the case against excessive reactions to new religious movements, including their own.
   
  +
Within this larger community of discourse, the debates about "cultism" and specific groups are generally more polarized than among scholars who study new religious movements, although there are heated disagreements among scholars as well. What follows is a summary of that portion of the intellectual debate conducted primarily from inside the universities:
The Random House Unabridged Dictionary definitions are:
 
# a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies;
 
# an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers;
 
# the object of such devotion;
 
# a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc;
 
# group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols;
 
# a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader;
 
# the members of such a religion or sect;
 
# any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.
 
   
=== Definition by the Christian countercult movement ===
+
===Cults, NRMs, and the sociology and psychology of religion===
  +
{{Original research|date=Feb. 2008}}
[[Walter Martin]], the pioneer of the [[Christian countercult movement]] gave in his 1955 book the following definition of a cult:
 
  +
Due to popular connotations of the term "cult," many academic researchers of [[religion]] and [[sociology]] prefer to use the term ''[[new religious movement]]'' (NRM) in their research. However, some researchers have criticized the newer phrase on the ground that some religious movements are "new" without being cults, and have expanded the definition of cult to non-religious groups. Furthermore, some religious groups who have been seen as cults by some are no longer "new"; for instance, [[Scientology]] and the [[Unification Church]] are both over 50 years old, while the [[Hare Krishna]] came out of [[Gaudiya Vaishnavism]], a religious tradition that is approximately 500 years old with roots going back much further.
   
  +
Some mental health professionals use the term ''cult'' generally for groups that practice physical or mental abuse. Others prefer more descriptive terminology such as ''abusive cult'' or ''[[destructive cult]]'', while noting that many groups meet the other criteria without such abuse. A related issue is determining what is abuse, when few members (as opposed to some ex-members) would agree that they have suffered abuse. Other researchers like [[David V. Barrett]] hold the view that classifying a religious movement as a cult is generally used as a subjective and negative label and has no added value; instead, he argues that one should investigate the beliefs and practices of the religious movement.<ref>Barrett, D. V. ''The New Believers - A survey of sects, cults and alternative religions'' 2001 UK, Cassell & Co. ISBN 0-304-35592-5</ref>
:"By cultism we mean the adherence to doctrines which are pointedly contradictory to orthodox Christianity and which yet claim the distinction of either tracing their origin to orthodox sources or of being in essential harmony with those sources. Cultism, in short, is any major deviation from orthodox Christianity relative to the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith."
 
   
  +
According to the Dutch religious scholar [[Wouter Hanegraaff]], another problem with writing about cults comes about because they generally hold [[world view|belief system]]s that give answers to questions about the meaning of [[personal life|life]] and [[morality]]. This makes it difficult not to write in biased terms about a certain group, because writers are rarely neutral about these questions. Some admit this, and try to diffuse the problem by stating their personal sympathies openly.
Robert Bowman defines cult as
 
:''"A religious group originating as a heretical sect and maintaining fervent commitment to heresy. Adj.: "cultic" (may be used with reference to tendencies as well as full cult status)."'' {{fn|33}}
 
   
  +
In the sociology of religion, the term cult is part of the subdivision of religious groups: sects, cults, denominations, and ecclesias. The sociologists [[Rodney Stark]] and William S. Bainbridge define cults in their book, [[Development of religion#"Theory of religion" model|"Theory of Religion"]] and subsequent works, as a "deviant religious organization with novel beliefs and practices", that is, as [[new religious movement]]s that (unlike [[sect]]s) have not separated from another religious organization. Cults, in this sense, may or may not be dangerous, abusive, etc. By this broad definition, most of the groups which have been popularly labeled cults fit this value-neutral definition.
See also:
 
*[[heresy]]
 
   
  +
===Development of groups characterized as cults===
=== Definition by secular cult opposition ===
 
Secular cult opponents define a "cult"
 
as a religious or non-religious group that tends to manipulate, exploit, and control its members. Here two definitions by [[Michael Langone]] and [[Louis Jolyon West]], scholars who are widely recognized among the secular cult opposition:
 
   
  +
Cults based on charismatic leadership often follow the [[Charismatic authority#Routinizing charisma|routinization of charisma]], as described by the German sociologist [[Max Weber]]. In their book ''Theory of Religion'', [[Rodney Stark]] and [[William Sims Bainbridge]] propose that the formation of cults can be explained through a combination of four models:
:''Cults are groups that often exploit members psychologically and/or financially, typically by making members comply with leadership's demands through certain types of psychological manipulation, popularly called ''[[mind control]]'', and through the inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the group and its leaders.''{{fn|1}}
 
   
  +
* The '''psycho-pathological model''' - the cult founder suffers from psychological problems; they develop the cult in order to resolve these problems for themselves, as a form of self-therapy
:''"A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea or thing and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation from former friends and family, debilitation, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc) designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community." ''{{fn|8}}
 
  +
* The '''entrepreneurial model''' - the cult founder acts like an entrepreneur, trying to develop a religion which they think will be most attractive to potential recruits, often based on their experiences from previous cults or other religious groups they have belonged to
  +
* The '''social model''' - the cult is formed through a [[social implosion]], in which cult members dramatically reduce the intensity of their emotional bonds with non-cult members, and dramatically increase the intensity of those bonds with fellow cult members - this emotionally intense situation naturally encourages the formation of a shared belief system and rituals
  +
* The '''normal revelations model''' - the cult is formed when the founder chooses to interpret ordinary natural phenomena as supernatural, such as by ascribing his or her own creativity in inventing the cult to that of the deity.
  +
{{sectstub}}
   
  +
===Leadership===
=== Points of view regarding definitions ===
 
According to Professor [[Timothy Miller]] from the [[University of Kansas]], in his 2003 ''Religious Movements in the United States'', during the controversies over the new religious movements in the 1960s, the term "cult" to mean something sinister, generally used to describe a movement that was at least potentially destructive to its members or to society, or that took advantage of its members and engaged in unethical practices. But he argues that no one yet has been able to define ýcultý in a way that enables the term to identify only problematic groups.
 
   
  +
:''See also [[Development of religion#Role of charismatic figures in the development of religions|Role of charismatic figures in the development of religions'']]
Miller asserts that "cults" are usually defined by [[Anti-cult movement|anticultists]] by a list of attributes they possess (see [[cult checklist]]), but that such attributes are perfectly capable of belonging to groups that few would consider ýculticý, such as [[Catholic]] religious orders or many [[evangelicalism|evangelical]] [[Protestant]] churches. Miller further argues that if the term does not enable the distiction between a pathological group and a legitimate one, then it has no value and it is in fact the religious equivalent of "[[nigger]]": it conveys disdain and prejudice without having any valuable content.{{fn|31}}
 
   
  +
According to Dr. [[Eileen Barker]], new religions are in most cases started by [[charismatic authority|charismatic]] but unpredictable leaders. According to Mikael Rothstein, there is often little access to plain facts about either historical or contemporary religious leaders to compare with the abundance of legends, [[mythology|myth]]s, and theological elaborations. According to Rothstein, most members of new religious movements have little chance to meet the ''Master'' (leader) except as a member of a larger audience.
Due to the usually pejorative connotation of the word "cult", new religious movements (NRMs) and other purported cults often find the word highly offensive. Some purported cults have been known to insist that other similar groups are cults but that they themselves are not. On the other hand, some [[Skepticism| skeptics]] have questioned the distinction between a cult and a mainstream religion. They say that the only difference between a cult and a [[religion]] is that the latter is older and has more followers and, therefore, seems less controversial because society has become used to it. See also ''[[anti-cult movement]]'' and ''[[Opposition to cults and new religious movements]]''.
 
   
  +
===Theories about joining===
[[Unification Church]] member Lloyd Eby calls the third definition of Merriam-Webster problematic, because:
 
  +
====Theories about joining cults====
  +
Michael Langone gives three different models regarding joining a cult. Under the "deliberative model," people are said to join cults primarily because of how they view a particular group. Langone notes that this view is most favored among sociologists and religious scholars. Under the "psychodynamic model," popular with some mental health professionals, individuals choose to join for fulfillment of subconscious psychological needs. Finally, the "thought reform model" posits that people join not because of their own psychological needs, but because of the group's influence through forms of psychological manipulation. Langone states that those mental health experts who have more direct experience with large number of cultists tend to favor this latter view.<ref>[[Michael Langone|Langone, Michael]], ''"Clinical Update on Cults"'', Psychiatric Times July 1996 Vol. XIII Issue 7 [http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p960714.html]</ref>
   
  +
Some scholars favor one particular view, or combine elements of each. According to Gallanter,<ref>Galanter, Marc [[M.D.]](Editor), (1989), ''Cults and new religious movements: a report of the committee on psychiatry and religion of the [[American Psychiatric Association]]'', ISBN 0-89042-212-5</ref> typical reasons why people join cults include a search for community and a spiritual quest. Stark and Bainbridge, in discussing the process by which individuals join new religious groups, have questioned the utility of the concept of ''conversion'', suggesting that ''affiliation'' is a more useful concept.<ref>Bader, Chris & A. Demaris, ''A test of the Stark-Bainbridge theory of affiliation with religious cults and sects.'' Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 35, 285-303. (1996)</ref>
:''"...then we must ask: regarded as spurious or unorthodox ''by whom? Who has or was given this authority to decide what beliefs or practices are orthodox or genuine, and what are unorthodox or spurious? In the realm of religion and belief, one person's or group's norm is another's anathema, and what is regarded as false or counterfeit by one person or group is regarded as genuine and authentic by another.[[...]] This definition is entirely subjective: it means that if you think a religion is unorthodox, then you will call it a cult.''"{{fn|28}}
 
   
  +
====Theories about joining NRMs====
=== Societal and governmental pressures on cults ===
 
  +
Jeffrey Hadden summarizes a lecture entitled "Why Do People Join NRMs?" (a lecture in a series related to the sociology of new religious movements, a term Hadden uses to include both cults and sects<ref>http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/cultsect/concult.htm#scholar_v_public</ref>)<ref>Hadden, Jeffrey K. ''SOC 257: New Religious Movements Lectures'', University of Virginia, Department of Sociology.</ref> as follows:
   
  +
# Belonging to groups is a natural human activity;
American novelist and critic [[Tom Wolfe]] gave the definition of cult as a religion which has no political power, inferring that there is no functional difference between religions and cults except their acceptance within the general community and the way they are perceived by others. Many majoritarian religions generally have their doctrinal tenets legitimized by society in one way or another (and by the state in some countries although not in most modern democracies), while groups with non-mainstream beliefs may experience social and media disapproval either permanently (if their beliefs and practices are just too unorthodox) or until either the group, or society, or both, evolve in a converging way resulting in a higher level of social acceptance.
 
  +
# People belong to religious groups for essentially the same reasons they belong to other groups;
  +
# Conversion is generally understood as an emotionally charged experience that leads to a dramatic reorganization of the convert's life;
  +
# Conversion varies enormously in terms of the intensity of the experience and the degree to which it actually alters the life of the convert;
  +
# Conversion is one, but not the only reason people join religious groups;
  +
# Social scientists have offered a number of theories to explain why people join religious groups;
  +
# Most of these explanations could apply equally well to explain why people join lots of other kinds of groups;
  +
# No one theory can explain all joinings or conversions;
  +
# What all of these theories have in common (deprivation theory excluded) is the view that joining or converting is a natural process.
   
  +
===Reactions to social out-groups===
The question of social acceptance should not be confused, however, with that of governmental acceptance. Most governmental clashes with cult-like groups in the United States in recent years have been the result of real or perceived violations of the law by the groups in question. There have been no well documented recent cases of the U.S. government persecuting a supposedly cult-like group simply because of its religious or political beliefs (as opposed to its alleged illegal ''acts''), although several groups have claimed such persecution. (Of course, it is possible that negative perceptions of a group by prosecutors could make them more quick to prosecute than they might otherwise be; for instance, in the income tax case against Reverend Moon.)
 
   
  +
One issue in the study of cults relates to people's reactions to groups identified as some other form of social outcast or opposition group. A new study by Princeton University psychology researchers Lasana Harris and Susan Fiske shows that when viewing photographs of social out-groups, people respond to them with disgust, not a feeling of fellow humanity. The findings are reported in the article "Dehumanizing the Lowest of the Low: Neuro-imaging responses to Extreme Outgroups" in a forthcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science (previously the American Psychological Society).<ref>[http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-06/afps-dpi062906.php Detecting prejudice in the brain<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>
In addition, the United States has never had an established church and groups widely regarded as cults or as having non-mainstream beliefs have often found it easy to gain political clout; for instance, the Unification Church with the Republicans, Scientology with the Clinton administration, Hassidic groups with the New York City government, and the Dalai Lama with just about everyone. (Needs references)
 
   
  +
According to this research, social out-groups are perceived as unable to experience complex human emotions, share in-group beliefs, or act according to societal norms, moral rules, and values. The authors describe this as "extreme discrimination revealing the worst kind of prejudice: excluding out-groups from full humanity." Their study provides evidence that while individuals may consciously see members of social out-groups as people, the brain processes social out-groups as something less than human, whether we are aware of it or not. According to the authors, brain imaging provides a more accurate depiction of this prejudice than the verbal reporting usually used in research studies.
In the 19th century the Mormons were singled out by the U.S. government, which even sent the U.S. Army against them in 1857. This military action has been referred to as the [[Utah War]] although no battles occurred. The US Army's charge was to depose [[Brigham Young]] as Governor of the Utah Territory and install a more acceptable, non-Mormon individual, [[Alfred Cumming]]. The motivation for this unilateral action by the Federal government was the Mormon practice of [[polygamy]]. In 1862 Congress formally declared polygamy illegal in all US Territories. In 1890 the [[LDS Church]] formally ordered the discontinuation of polygamy within the church. Statehood for Utah was then granted in 1896.
 
   
  +
===Genuine concerns and exaggerations about "cults"===
==Cult, NRM and the sociology and psychology of religion==
 
  +
Some critics of media sensationalism argue that the stigma surrounding the classification of a group as a cult results largely from exaggerated portrayals of weirdness in media stories. The narratives of ill effects include perceived threats presented by a cult to its members, and risks to the ''physical'' safety of its members and to their mental and ''spiritual'' growth.
The problem with defining the word ''cult'' is that (1) the word ''cult'' is often used to marginalize religious groups with which one does not agree or sympathize, and (2) accused cult members generally resist being called a cult. Some serious researchers of [[religion]] and [[sociology]] prefer to use terms such as ''[[new religious movement]]'' (NRM) in their research on religious groups that may be referred to as cults by other religious groups. Such usage may lead to confusion because some religious movements are "new" but not necessarily cults, and some purported cults are not religious or overtly religious. Furthermore, some religious groups commonly regarded as cults are in fact no longer "new"; for instance, the [[Jehovah's Witnesses]] have been around for over 100 years in the USA; [[Scientology]] is over 50 years old; and the [[Hare Krishna]] came out of [[Gaudiya Vaishnavism]], a religious tradition that is approximately 500 years old.
 
   
  +
[[Anti-Cult Movement|Anti-cultists]] in the 1970s and 1980s made heavy accusations regarding the harm and danger of cults for members, their families, and societies. The debate at that time was intense and was sometimes called the ''cult debate'' or ''cult wars''.{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
Where a sect (and generally one with offbeat teachings) practices physical or mental abuse, some [[psychologist]]s and other mental health professionals may use the term ''cult''. However, others prefer the more descriptive terminolgy such as ''abusive cult'' or ''[[destructive cult]]''. Since cult critics using these terms rarely mention any alleged cults ''except'' abusive ones, the two terms are in effect redundant phrases. The popular press also commonly uses these terms.
 
   
  +
Much of the action taken against cults has been in reaction to the real or perceived harm experienced by some members.
However, not all sectarian groups labelled as cults or as "cult-like" function abusively or destructively to any degree greater than many mainstream social institutions, and among those cults that psychologists believe ''are'' abusive to an exceptional degree, few members (as opposed to some ex-members) would agree that they have suffered abuse. Other researchers like David V. Barrett hold the view that classifying a religious movement as a cult is generally used as a subjective and negative label and has no added value; instead, he argues that one should investigate the beliefs and practices of the religious movement.{{fn|9}}
 
   
  +
====Documented crimes====
Some psychologists who specialised in group psychology have studied what cognitive and emotional traits make people join a cult and stay loyal to it. For example, see an analysis in the Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology [http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g2699/is_0004/ai_2699000433].
 
   
  +
[[Image:Jim Jones brochure of Peoples Temple.jpg|thumb|200px|Brochure of the [[Peoples Temple]], portraying its founder [[Jim Jones]] as the loving father of the "Rainbow Family".</sup>]]
Some groups, particularly those labeled by others as cults, view the "cult" designation as insensitive and may feel persecuted by their opponents, who may be in fact be affiliated with organizations that are self-defined as anti-cult (or strongly critical of cults). A discussion (from a moderately pro-cult viewpoint) and list of ACM (anti-cult movement) groups can be found at http://www.religious tolerance/acm4.htm. Even when no affiliation with such a group exists, the opponents of a particular cult will usually be influenced to varying degrees by the [[anti-cult movement]]'s ideas--which are summarized in this article in the sections "Definition by secular cult opposition" and "Definition by Christian anti-cult movement."
 
   
  +
Certain groups that have been characterized as cults, such as [[Heaven's Gate (religious group)|Heaven's Gate]], [[Order of the Solar Temple|Ordre du Temple Solaire]], [[Aum Shinrikyo]], the [[Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God]] in Uganda, the [[Church of the Lamb of God]] of [[Ervil LeBaron]], and the [[Peoples Temple]] have posed or are seen as potentially posing a threat to the well-being and lives of their own members and to society in general. The media has referred to Aum Shinrikyo as a ''doomsday cult'' and to several others as ''suicide cults.'' According to John R. Hall, a professor in sociology at the [[University of California-Davis]] and Philip Schuyler, the Peoples Temple is still seen by some as ''the'' cultus classicus<ref>Hall, John R. and Philip Schuyler (1998), ''Apostasy, Apocalypse, and religious violence: An Exploratory comparison of Peoples Temple, the Branch Davidians, and the Solar Temple'', in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7, page 145 "The tendency to treat Peoples Temple as the ''cultus classicus'' headed by Jim Jones, psychotic megaliomanic par excellence is still with us, like most myths, because it has a grain of truth to it. "</ref><sup>,</sup>,<ref>McLemee, Scott ''Rethinking Jonestown '' on the [[salon.com]] website "If Jones' People's Temple wasn't a cult, then the term has no meaning."</ref> though it did not belong to the set of groups that triggered the cult controversy in United States in the 1970s. Its mass suicide of over 900 members on [[November 18]], [[1978]] led to increased concern about cults. Other groups include the [[Colonia Dignidad]] cult (a German group settled in Chile) that served as a torture center for the Chilean government during the Pinochet dictatorship.
Groups accused of being "cults" or "cult-like" often defend their position by comparing themselves to more established, mainstream religious groups such as [[Catholicism]] and [[Judaism]]. The argument offered can usually be simplified as, "except for size and age, Christianity and Judaism meet all the criteria for a cult, and therefore the term ''cult'' simply means ''small, young religion''."
 
   
  +
In 1984, a [[Bioterrorism|bioterrorist attack]] involving [[salmonella]] typhimurium contamination in the salad bars of 10 restaurants in [[The Dalles, Oregon|The Dalles]], [[Oregon]] was traced to the [[Rajneesh|Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh/Osho]] group.<ref>[http://www.wbur.org/special/specialcoverage/feature_bio.asp Bioterrorism in History - 1984: Rajneesh Cult Attacks Local Salad Bar], ''[[WBUR]]''</ref><ref>[http://www.rickross.org/reference/rajneesh/rajneesh8.html AP The Associated Press/[[October 19]] [[2001]]</ref> The attack sickened about 751 people and hospitalized forty-five, although none died. It was the first known bio-terrorist attack of the 20th century in the United States, and is still known as the largest germ warfare attack in U.S. history. Eventually Ma Anand Sheela and Ma Anand Puja, one of Sheela's close associates, confessed to the attack as well as to attempted poisonings of county officials. The BW incident is used by the Homeland Defense Business Unit in Biological Incidents Operations training for Law Enforcement agencies.{{PDFlink|[http://www.edgewood.army.mil/hld/dl/ecbc_le_bio_guide.pdf]|934&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 957019 bytes -->}}
According to the Dutch religious scholar [[Wouter Hanegraaff]], another problem with writing about cults comes about because they generally hold [[world view|belief system]]s that give answers to questions about the meaning of [[personal life|life]] and [[morality]]. This makes it difficult not to write in biased terms about a certain cult, because writers are rarely neutral about these questions. In an attempt to deal with this difficulty, some writers who deal with the subject choose to explicitly state their ethical values and belief systems.
 
   
  +
The [[Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway]] in 1995 was carried out by members of [[Aum Shinrikyo]], a religious group founded in 1984 by [[Shoko Asahara]]. Aum Shinrikyo had a laboratory in 1990 where they cultured and experimented with [[botulin toxin]], [[anthrax]], [[cholera]] and [[Q fever]]. In 1993 they traveled to Africa to learn about and bring back samples of the [[Ebola]] virus.[http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/olson.htm]
For many scholars and professional commentators, the usage of the word "cult" applies to maleficent or abusive behavior, and not to a belief system. For members of competing religions, use of the word remains pejorative and applies primarily to rival beliefs (see [[meme]]s), and only incidentally to behavior. It should be noted that there is no clear, causal connection between extremist belief and the formation of a so-called destructive cult. Most far-right hate groups are not cults, although they have pathological ideas and are frequently violent. Some groups regarded as cults have relatively benign belief systems.
 
   
  +
Warren Jeffs, of Hildale, Utah, the polygamist sect leader of the [[Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints]], is currently charged with two counts of rape as an accomplice in the spiritual marriage of a 14-year-old girl to her 19-year-old cousin in 2001. Jeffs also faces felony sex charges in Arizona for his alleged role in two underage marriages, and was under federal indictment for unlawful flight to avoid prosecution as of March 2007.[http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/28/polygamist.leader.ap/index.html]
In the sociology of religion, the term cult is a part of the subdivision of religious groups into sects, cults, denominations, and ecclesias. The sociologists [[Rodney Stark]] and [[William Sims Bainbridge|William S. Bainbridge]] define in their book [[Development of religion#"Theory of religion" model|"Theory of Religion"]] and subsequent works cults as "deviant religious organization with novel beliefs and practices", that is as [[new religious movement]]s that unlike [[sect]]s have not separated from another religious organization. Cults, in this sense, may or may not be dangerous, abusive, etc. By this broad definition, most of the groups which have been popularly labeled cults fit the definition.
 
   
  +
[[Edward Morrissey]], husband of [[Mary Manin Morrissey|Rev. Mary Manin Morrissey]], in 2005 pled guilty to [[money laundering]] and using [[Living Enrichment Center]] church money for the personal expenses of himself and his wife. Edward Morrissey spent two years in federal prison.<ref>[http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?s=6615206 KOIN 6 News] Retrieved June 7, 2007</ref><ref>http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian/stories/index.ssf?/base/news/1181267788141050.xml&coll=7</ref><ref>[http://www.wilsonvillenews.com/WVSNews8.shtml Wilsonville Spokesman: Morrissey to meet with LEC 'refugees'] Retrieved June 9, 2007</ref>
====Who studies cults====
 
Among the experts studying cults and new religious movements are sociologists, religious scholars, psychologists, and psychiatrists. To an unusual extent for an academic/quasi-scientific field, however, nonacademics play a vital role in the study of and/or debates concerning cults. These include investigative journalists and nonacademic book authors (who often examine court records and study the finances of cults in a way that academics are not accustomed to doing), writers who once were (or currently are) members of purported cults, and people who work with ex-cult members in a practical way (for instance, as therapists) but are not university affiliated. Nonacademics are frequently published in the Journal of Cultic Studies, present papers at conferences of the International Cultic Studies Association, and have their work cited in articles and books by university scholars. It should be noted that one of the most distinguished thinkers in cultic studies, sociologist Janja Lalich, began her work and conceptualized many of her ideas while an ex-cult activist writing for the JCS years before obtaining academic standing.
 
   
  +
[[Lisa McPherson]], a Dallas native, a line dancing enthusiast, and a dedicated Scientologist for most of her adult life, died on December 5, 1995, after 17 days in the custody of the Church of [[Scientology]]. She was 36 years old.
The work of several non-academic cult experts is cited in this article, including journalists [[Flo Conway]] and [[Jim Siegelman]], whose book ''[[Snapping]]'' is widely used in college courses; Tim Wohlforth, co-author of ''On the Edge''; Carol Giambalvo, a former est member; and exit counselor Rick Ross. Another example is the work of [[Chip Berlet]], without whom the study of political cults might scarcely exist today. Reformers within the [[Hari Krishna]] movement and the former [[Worldwide Church of God]] also have written with insight on cult issues, using terminologies and framings somewhat different from those of secular experts but well within the circle of rational discourse. Barbara G. Harrison's ''Visions of Glory: A History and a Memory of Jehovah's Witnesses'' can be regarded as a deeply serious study of the largest of U.S. cults by an ex-member whose thinking transcends the "cult captivity" ("I Was a Slave of the...") genre. Equally important, members of the [[Unification Church]] have produced books and articles that argue the case against excessive reactions to new religious movements with intellectual rigor and a sense of history.
 
   
  +
The [[Clearwater]] Police Department investigated her death. The State of [[Florida]] ultimately charged the Church of [[Scientology]] with two felonies: abuse/neglect of a disabled adult and the illegal practice of medicine. Although the state later chose not to pursue those charges, a wrongful death case has been brought by her estate. The suit was settled on May 28, 2004.
Within this larger community of discourse, the debates about cultism and specific cults are often polarized with widely divergent opinions, not only among current followers of and disaffected former members of purported cults, but also among scholars, social scientists, therapists, activists and spokespersons for mainstream religious movements. What followers is a summary of that portion of the intellectual debate conducted from inside the universities:
 
  +
<ref>State of Florida vs. Church of Scientology Felony Indictment</ref><ref>[http://www.lisafiles.com/police/4621.html]Retrieved Feb. 1 2008</ref>
   
  +
====Prevalence of doomsday or destructive cults====
===Methodological issues and challenges===
 
Scholars that challenge the validity of [[apostate|critical former members']] testimonies as the basis for studying a religious group include [[David G. Bromley]], [[Anson Shupe]], [[Brian R. Wilson]], and [[Lonnie Kliever]]. Bromley and Shupe, who studied the social influences on such testimonies, asserts that the apostate in his current role is likely to present a caricature of his former group and that the stories of critical ex-members who defect from groups that are subversive (defined as groups with few allies and many opponents) tend to have the form of "captivity narratives" (i.e. the narratives depict the stay in the group as involuntary). Wilson introduces the [[atrocity story]] that is rehearsed by the apostate to explain how, by manipulation, coercion, or deceit, he was recruited to a group that he now condemns. Introvigne found in his study of the [[New Acropolis]] in France, that public negative testimonies and attitudes were only voiced by a minority of the ex-members, who he describes as becoming "professional enemies" of the group they leave. Kliever, when asked by the [[Church of Scientology]] to give his opinion on the reliability of apostate accounts of their former religious beliefs and practices, writes that these dedicated opponents present a distorted view of the new religions and cannot be regarded as reliable informants by responsible journalists, scholars, or jurists. He claims that the reason for the lack of reliability of apostates is due to the traumatic nature of disaffiliation that he compares to a divorce and also due the influence of the anti-cult movement even on those apostates who were not deprogrammed or received exit counseling. Scholars who tend to side more with critical former members include [[David C. Lane]], [[Louis Jolyon West]], [[Margaret Singer]], [[Stephen A. Kent]], [[Benjamin Beith-Hallahmi]] and [[Benjamin Zablocki]]. The latter performed an empirical study that showed that the reliability of former members is equal to that of stayers in one particular group. [[Philip Lucas]] found the same empirical results.
 
   
  +
It has been noted that despite the emphasis on "doomsday cults" by the media, the number of groups in this category is approximately ten, compared with the tens of thousands of new religious movements which are estimated to exist.<ref>[[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] (1984), ''[[The Making of a Moonie]]'', p.147, Oxford: Basil Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-13246-5</ref> (including groups that are psychologically destructive but not extremely violent or doomsday-oriented).
According to Lewis F. Carter, the [[Reliability (statistics)|reliability]] and [[Validity (statistics)|validity]] of the testimonies of believers are influenced by the tendency to justify affiliation with the group, whereas the testimonies of former members and apostates are influenced by a variety of factors.{{fn|21}} Besides, the interpretative frame of members tends to change strongly upon conversion and disaffection and hence may strongly influence their narratives. Carter affirms that the degree of knowledge of different (ex-)members about their (former) group is highly diverse, especially in hierarchically organized groups. Using his experience at [[Rajneeshpuram]] (the [[intentional community]] of the followers of [[Rajneesh]]) as an example, he claims that the [[social influence]] exerted by the group may influence the accounts of [[ethnography|ethnographers]] and of [[participant observation|participant observers]]{{fn|21}}. He proposes a method he calls ''triangulation'' as the best method to study groups, by utilizing three accounts: those of believers, apostates, and ethnographers. Carter asserts that such methodology is difficult to put into practice <sup>[[#References|21]]</sup>. [[Daniel Carson Johnson]]{{fn|22}} writes that even the triangulation method rarely succeeds in making assertions with certitude.{{fn|21}}
 
   
  +
Of the groups that have been characterized as cults in the United States alone, only a hundred or so have ever become notorious for alleged misdeeds either in the national media or in local media. Some writers have argued that the disproportionate focus on these groups gives the public an inaccurate perception of new religious groups generally.{{Fact|date=July 2007}}
[[James Richardson]] contends that there are a large number of cults and a tendency among scholars to make unjustified generalizations about them based on a select sample of observations of life in such groups or the testimonies of (ex-)members. According to Richardson, this tendency is responsible for the widely divergent opinions about cults among scholars and social scientists.{{fn|24}}
 
   
  +
====Potential harm to members====
[[Eileen Barker]] (2001) wrote that critical former members of cults complain that academic observers only notice what the leadership wants them to see.{{fn|23}}
 
   
  +
In the opinion of [[Benjamin Zablocki]], a professor of Sociology at [[Rutgers University]], groups that have been characterized as cults are at high risk of becoming abusive to members. He states that this is in part due to members' adulation of [[charismatic authority|charismatic]] leaders contributing to the leaders becoming corrupted by power. Zablocki defines a cult here as an ideological organization held together by charismatic relationships and that demands total commitment.<ref>Dr. Zablocki, Benjamin [http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~zablocki/] Paper presented to a conference, ''Cults: Theory and Treatment Issues'', [[May 31]] [[1997]] in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.</ref>
''See also [[Apostasy#In purported cults and new religious movements .28NRMs.29|Apostasy in new religious movemets]], and [[Anti-cult movement#Apostates and Apologists|Apostates and Apologists]]''.
 
   
  +
There is no reliable, generally accepted way to determine which groups will harm their members. In an attempt to predict the probability of harm, [[cult checklist]]s have been created, primarily by anti-cultists, for this purpose.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} According to critics of these checklists, they are popular but not scientific.
==Christianity and Cults==
 
Since at least the 1940s, the approach of orthodox, conservative or [[fundamentalist]] Christians was to apply the meaning of ''cult'' such that it included those religious groups who used (possibly exclusively) non-standard translations of the Bible, put additional [[revelation]] on a similar or higher level than the Bible, or had beliefs and/or practices deviant from those of traditional Christianity. Some examples of sources (with published dates where known) that documented this approach are:
 
   
  +
According to Barrett, the most common accusation made against groups referred to as cults is [[sexual abuse]]. See [[Cult#Criticism by former members of purported cults|some allegations made by former members]]. According to [[Reender Kranenborg|Kranenborg]], some groups are risky when they advise their members not to use regular medical care.<ref>Kranenborg, Reender Dr. (Dutch language) ''Sekten... gevaarlijk of niet?/Cults... dangerous or not?'' published in the magazine ''Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands'' nr. 31 ''Sekten II'' by the [[Vrije Universiteit|Free university Amsterdam]] (1996) ISSN 0169-7374 ISBN 90-5383-426-5</ref> Barker, Barrett, and [[Steven Hassan]] all advise seeking information from various sources about a certain group before getting deeply involved, though these three differ in the urgency they suggest.
* ''Heresies and Cults'', by J. Oswald Sanders, pub. 1948.
 
* ''Cults and Isms'', by J. Oswald Sanders, pub. 1962, 1969, 1980 (Arrowsmith), ISBN 0 551 00458 4.
 
* ''Chaos of the Cults'', by J.K. van Baalen.
 
* ''Heresies Exposed'', by W.C. Irvine.
 
* ''Confusion of Tongues'', by C.W. Ferguson.
 
* ''Isms New and Old'', by Julius Bodensieck.
 
* ''Some Latter-Day Religions'', by G.H. Combs.
 
* ''The Kingdom of the Cults'', by Walter Martin, Ph.D., pub. 1965, 1973, 1977, ISBN 0 87123 300 2
 
   
  +
===Non-religious groups characterized as cults===
==Cults and terrorism==
 
The terrorist waves due to Islamic extremist organizations starting with the [[1995 Islamist terror bombings in France]] and [[Al-Qaeda]]'s acts of terrorism, have resulted in the comparison of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups to the ancient [[Hassan-i-Sabah]] cult.
 
   
  +
According to the views of what some scholars call the "[[Anti-Cult Movement]]," although the majority of groups described as "cults" are religious in nature, a significant number are non-religious. These may include political, psychotherapeutic or [[Multi-level marketing|marketing]] oriented cults organized in manners similar to the traditional religious cult. The term has also been applied to certain channeling, human-potential and self-improvement organizations, some of which do not define themselves as religious but are considered to have significant religious influences.
The [[Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway]] in 1995, by members of [[Aum Shinrikyo]] has also raised awareness on the danger of groups that adopt extreme views commonly associated with [[destructive cult]]s.
 
   
  +
Groups that have been labeled as "political cults," mostly far-left or far-right in their ideologies, have received some attention from journalists and scholars, though this usage is less common. Claims of cult-like practices exists for only about a dozen ideological cadre or racial combat organizations, though the allegation is sometimes made more freely.<ref>See Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth, ''[[On the Edge (book)|On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left]]'', Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2000. [http://www.mesharpe.com/mall/resultsa.asp?Title=On+the+Edge%3A+Political+Cults+Right+and+Left]</ref> Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth are two prominent former members of [[Trotskyist]] sects who now attack their former organizations and the Trotskyist movement in general.<ref>Bob Pitt, Review of Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth, On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left. ''What Next Journal'' (online), No. 17, 2000 [http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages//Back/Wnext17/Reviews.html]</ref>
{{sectstub}}
 
   
  +
The concept of the "cult" is applied by analogy to refer to adulation of non-political leaders, and sometimes in the context of certain businessmen, management styles, and company work environments. [[Multi-level marketing]] has often been described as a cult due to the fact that a large part of the operation of a typical multi-level marketing consists of hiring and recruiting other people, selling motivational material, to the point that people involved in the business spend most of their time for the benefit of the organization. Consequently, some MLM companies like [[Amway]] have felt the need to specifically state that they are not cult-like in nature.<ref>{{cite web|title=Amway/Quixtar|publisher=Apologetics Index|url=http://www.apologeticsindex.org/a43.html|accessdate=2007-06-11}}</ref>
==Theories about the reasons for joining a cult==
 
Michael Langone gives three different models regarding joining a cult {{fn|30}}:
 
:''"The definitional ambiguity surrounding the term cult has fueled much controversy regarding why people join cults and other unorthodox groups. Three apparently conflicting models attempt to account for conversion to unorthodox groups. The deliberative model, favored by most sociologists and religious scholars, says that people join because of what they think about the group. The psychodynamic model, favored by many mental health professionals with little direct experience with cultists, says that people join because of what the group does for them - namely, fulfill unconscious psychological needs. The thought reform model, favored by many mental health professionals who have worked with large numbers of cultists, says that people join because of what the group does to them - that is, because of a systematic program of psychological manipulation that exploits, rather than fulfills, needs."''
 
   
  +
Another related term in politics is that of the [[personality cult]]. Although most groups labeled as [[political cult]]s involve a "[[cult of personality]]," the latter concept is a broader one, having its origins in the excessive adulation said to have surrounded Soviet leader [[Joseph Stalin]]. It has also been applied to several other despotic heads of state.
According to Gallanter{{fn|11}}, typical reasons why people join cults include a search for community and a spiritual quest.
 
   
  +
==Stigmatization and discrimination==
Jeffrey Hadden summarizes a lecture entitled "Why Do People Join NRMs?" (a lecture in a series related to the sociology of new religious movements{{fn|12}}) as follows:
 
   
  +
Because of the increasingly pejorative use of the terms "cult" and "cult leader" over recent decades, many argue that these terms are to be avoided.<ref>''Pilgrims of Love: The Anthropology of a Global Sufi Cult. By Pnina Werbner. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003. xvi, 348 pp'' "...the excessive use of “cult” is also potentially misleading. With its pejorative connotations"</ref><ref>''Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-Negative
# Belonging to groups is a natural human activity;
 
  +
James T. Richardson
# People belong to religious groups for essentially the same reasons they belong to other groups;
 
  +
Review of Religious Research, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Jun., 1993), pp. 348-356'' "the term cult is useless, and should be avoided because of the confusion between the historic meaning of the term and current pejorative use"</ref> A website affiliated with [[Adi Da Samraj]] sees the activities of cult opponents as the exercise of prejudice and discrimination against them, and regards the use of the words "cult" and "cult leader" as similar to political or racial epithets.<ref>[http://www.firmstand.org/ FIRM: The Foundation against Intolerance of Religious Minorities<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>
# Conversion is generally understood as an emotionally charged experience that leads to a dramatic reorganization of the convert's life;
 
# Conversion varies enormously in terms of the intensity of the experience and the degree to which it actually alters the life of the convert;
 
# Conversion is one, but not the only reason people join religious groups;
 
# Social scientists have offered a number of theories to explain why people join religious groups;
 
# Most of these explanations could apply equally well to explain why people join lots of other kinds of groups;
 
# No one theory can explain all joinings or conversions;
 
# What all of these theories have in common (deprivation theory excluded) is the view that joining or converting is a natural process.
 
   
  +
[[Amy Ryan]] has argued for the need to differentiate those groups that may be dangerous from groups that are more benign.<ref>[[Amy Ryan]]: ''New Religions and the Anti-Cult Movement: Online Resource Guide in Social Sciences'' (2000) [http://rand.pratt.edu/~giannini/newreligions.html#Definitions]</ref> Ryan notes the sharp differences between definition from cult opponents, who tend to focus on negative characteristics, and those of sociologists, who aim to create definitions that are value-free. The movements themselves may have different definitions of religion as well. [[George Chryssides]] also cites a need to develop better definitions to allow for common ground in the debate.
Stark and Bainbridge have questioned the utility of the concept of ''conversion''. They suggest, instead, that the concept of ''affiliation'' is a more useful concept for understanding how people join religious groups.{{fn|13}}
 
   
  +
These definitions have political and ethical impact beyond just scholarly debate. In ''Defining Religion in American Law'', Bruce J. Casino presents the issue as crucial to international human rights laws. Limiting the definition of religion may interfere with freedom of religion, while too broad a definition may give some dangerous or abusive groups "a limitless excuse for avoiding all unwanted legal obligations."<ref>Casino. Bruce J., ''Defining Religion in American Law'', 1999, [http://www.religiousfreedom.com/articles/casino.htm]</ref>
==Cult leadership==
 
According to Dr. [[Eileen Barker]], new religions are in most cases started by [[charismatic authority|charismatic]] leaders whom she considers unpredictable. According to Mikael Rothstein, there is in many cases no access to plain facts both about historical religious leaders and contemporary ones, though there is an abundance of legends, [[myth]]s, and theological elaborations. According to Rothstein, most members of any new religious movement have little chance of a personal meeting with the ''Master'' (leader) except as a member of big audience when the Master is present on stage.
 
   
  +
Some authors in the cult opposition dislike the word cult to the extent it implies that there is a continuum with a large gray area separating "cult" from "noncult" which they do not see.<ref>Casino. Bruce J., ''Defining Religion in American Law'', 1999, [http://www.religiousfreedom.com/articles/casino.htm]</ref> Others authors, e.g. [[Steven Hassan]], differentiate by using terms like "[[Destructive cult]]", or "Cult" (totalitarian type) vs. "benign cult".
See also [[Development of religion#Role of charismatic figures in the development of religions|''Role of charismatic figures in the development of religions'']]
 
{{sectstub}}
 
   
==Development of cults==
+
===Leaving a "cult"===
Cults based on charismatic leadership often follow the [[Charismatic authority#Routinizing charisma|routinization of charisma]], as described by the German sociologist [[Max Weber]]. The death of the founder may lead to a succession crisis.
 
   
  +
There are at least three ways people leave a cult. These are 1.) On their own decision (walkaways); 2.) Through expulsion (castaways); and 3.) By intervention ([[Exit counseling]], [[deprogramming]]).<ref>Duhaime, Jean ([[Université de Montréal]]), ''Les Témoigagnes de Convertis et d'ex-Adeptes'' (English: ''The testimonies of converts and former followers'', an article which appeared in the book ''New Religions in a Postmodern World'' edited by Mikael Rothstein and Reender Kranenborg, RENNER Studies in New religions, [[Aarhus University]] press, 2003, ISBN 87-7288-748-6</ref><sup>,</sup><ref>Giambalvo, Carol, ''Post-cult problems'' [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/giambalvo_carol_postcult_problems.htm]</ref>
{{sectstub}}
 
   
  +
In ''Bounded Choice'' (2004), Lalich describes a fourth way of leaving — rebelling against the group's majority or leader. This was based on her own experience in the Marxist-Leninist Democratic Workers Party, where the entire membership quit. However, rebellion is more often a combination of the walkaway and castaway patterns in that the rebellion may trigger the expulsion — essentially, the rebels provoke the leadership into being the agency of their break with an over-committed lifestyle. Tourish and Wohlforth (2000) and Dennis King (1989) provide what they consider several examples in the history of political groups that have been characterized as cults. The 'rebellion' response in such groups appears to follow a longstanding behavior pattern among left wing political sects which began long before the emergence of the contemporary political cult.
==Relationships with the outside world==
 
Barker wrote that peripheral members may help to lessen the tension that exists between some groups and the outside world. <sup>[[Cult#References|27]]</sup>
 
   
  +
Most authors agree that some people experience problems after leaving a cult. These include negative reactions in the individual leaving the group as well as negative responses from the group such as [[shunning]]. There are disagreements regarding the frequency of such problems, however, and regarding the cause.
In the case where members live in [[intentional community|intentional communities]], custody disputes (if one parent leaves and one stays) may be a source of confrontation between the cult and the outside world.
 
   
  +
According to Barker (1989), the greatest worry about potential harm concerns the central and most dedicated followers of a [[new religious movement]] (NRM). Barker mentions that some former members may not take new initiatives for quite a long time after disaffiliation from the NRM. This generally does not concern the many superficial, short-lived, or peripheral supporters of a NRM. <!-- Membership in a cult usually does not last forever: 90% or more of cult members ultimately leave their group by death<ref>[[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] ''The Ones Who Got Away: People Who Attend Unification Church Workshops and Do Not Become Moonies''. In: Barker E, ed. ''Of Gods and Men: New Religious Movements in the West'''. Macon, Ga. : Mercer University Press; 1983. ISBN 0-86554-095-0</ref><sup>,</sup>.<ref>Galanter M. ''[[Unification Church]] ('Moonie') dropouts: psychological readjustment after leaving a charismatic religious group'', ''American Journal of Psychiatry''. 1983;140(8):984-989.</ref> -->
{{sectstub}}
 
   
  +
Exit Counselor Carol Giambalvo believes most people leaving a cult have associated psychological problems, such as feelings of guilt or shame, depression, feeling of inadequacy, or fear, that are independent of their manner of leaving the cult. Feelings of guilt, shame, or anger are by her observation worst with castaways, but walkaways can also have similar problems. She says people who had interventions or a rehabilitation therapy do have similar problems but are usually better prepared to deal with them.<ref>Giambalvo, Carol, ''Post-cult problems'' [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/giambalvo_carol_postcult_problems.htm]</ref>
==Cults: genuine concerns and exaggerations==
 
The stigma surrounding the classification of a group as a cult stems from the purported ill effect the group's influence has on its members. The narratives of ill effect include threats presented by a cult to its members (whether real or perceived), and risks to the ''physical'' safety of its members and to their mental and ''spiritual'' growth. Much of the actions taken against cults and alleged cults have been in reaction to the harm experienced by some members due to their affiliation with the groups in question. Members of alleged cult groups have taken pains to emphasize that not all groups called cults are dangerous. Over a period of time, some minority religious organizations that were at one point in time considered cults have been accepted by mainstream society, such as the [[Amish]] and [[Christian Science]] in the USA. Christian Science has been the focus of controversy in recent years over its policy of discouraging members from seeking medical care for their children, but the media has generally treated this as a specific doctrinal issue--like the celibacy of the Catholic priesthood--rather than suggesting that Christian Science is a cult that controls all aspects of a member's life.
 
   
  +
Sociologists Bromley and Hadden note a lack of empirical support for alleged consequences of having been a member of a cult or sect, and substantial empirical evidence against it. These include the fact that the overwhelming proportion of people who get involved in NRMs leave, most short of two years; the overwhelming proportion of people who leave of their own volition; and that two-thirds (67%) felt "wiser for the experience."<ref>Hadden, J and Bromley, D eds. (1993), ''The Handbook of Cults and Sects in America.'' Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc., pp. 75-97.</ref>
[[image:Jim_Jones_brochure_of_Peoples_Temple.jpg|thumb|200px|Brochure of the [[Peoples Temple]], portraying its founder [[Jim Jones]] as the loving father of the "Rainbow Family".</sup> ]]
 
   
  +
Popular authors Conway and Siegelman conducted a survey and published it in the book ''Snapping'' regarding after-cult effects and deprogramming and concluded that people deprogrammed had fewer problems than people not deprogrammed. The [[BBC]] writes that in a survey done by Jill Mytton on 200 former cult members most of them reported problems adjusting to society and about a third would benefit from some counseling.<ref>BBC News [[20 May]] [[2000]]: Sect leavers have mental problems [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/755588.stm]</ref>
Certain cults, such as [[Heaven's Gate (cult)|Heaven's Gate]], [[Order of the Solar Temple|Ordre du Temple Solaire]], [[Aum Shinrikyo]], the [[Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God]] in Uganda, the
 
[[Church of the Lamb of God]] of [[Ervil LeBaron]], and the [[Peoples Temple]] have demonstrated by their actions that they do pose a threat to the well-being of both their own members and to society in general; these organizations are often referred to as doomsday cults by the media, and their mass suicides and mass murders are well-documented. According to John R. Hall, a professor in sociology at the [[University of California-Davis]] and Philip Schuyler, the Peoples Temple is still seen by some as ''the'' cultus classicus{{fn|25}}<sup>,</sup>{{fn|26}}, though it did not belong to the set of groups that triggered the cult controversy in United States in the 1970s. Its mass suicide on [[November 18]], [[1978]] led to increased concern about cults. Other groups include the [[Colonia Dignidad]] cult (a German group settled in Chile) that served as a torture center for the Chilean government during the Pinochet dictatorship.
 
   
  +
Burks (2002), in a study comparing Group Psychological Abuse Scale (GPA) and Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) scores in 132 former members of cults and cultic relationships, found a positive correlation between intensity of thought reform environment as measured by the GPA and cognitive impairment as measured by the NIS. Additional findings were a reduced earning potential in view of the education level that corroborates earlier studies of cult critics (Martin 1993; Singer & Ofshe, 1990; West & Martin, 1994) and significant levels of depression and dissociation agreeing with Conway & Siegelman, (1982), Lewis & Bromley, (1987) and Martin, et al. (1992).<ref>Burks, Ronald, ''Cognitive Impairment in Thought Reform Environments'' [http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~rb267689/#_Toc2952976]</ref>
Certain other groups, while not universally condemned, remain suspect in the minds of the general public, such as [[Scientology]] and to a lesser extent the [[Unification Church]] and the [[Children of God]]. A problem in studying such high-profile groups is to distinguish between a group's public image (which may have become fixed decades earlier) and the group's actual practices in the here and now. This is especially important when one is studying a group whose founder has died or that has splintered, or a group with foreign origins that is gradually integrating itself into another culture.
 
   
  +
According to Barret, in many cases the problems do not happen while in a movement, but when leaving, which can be difficult for some members and may include [[psychological trauma]]. Reasons for this trauma may include: [[conditioning]] by the religious movement; avoidance of uncertainties about life and its meaning; having had powerful religious experiences; love for the founder of the religion; emotional investment; fear of losing [[salvation]]; bonding with other members; anticipation of the realization that time, money, and efforts donated to the group were a waste; and the new freedom with its corresponding responsibilities, especially for people who lived in a community. Those reasons may prevent a member from leaving even if the member realizes that some things in the NRM are wrong. According to Kranenborg, in some religious groups, members have all their social contacts within the group, which makes disaffection and disaffiliation very traumatic.<ref>Kranenborg, Reender Dr. (Dutch language) ''Sekten... gevaarlijk of niet?/Cults... dangerous or not?'' published in the magazine ''Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands'' nr. 31 ''Sekten II'' by the [[Vrije Universiteit|Free university Amsterdam]] (1996) ISSN 0169-7374 ISBN 90-5383-426-5</ref>
It is worth noting that despite the emphasis on narratives of "doomsday cults" by the media and the anti-cult movement, the number of cults known to have fallen into that category is approximately ten, which is very few when compared with the total number of new religious movements (including cults that are psychologically destructive but not extremely violent or doomsday-oriented), which E. Barker estimates to be in the tens of thousands.{{fn|10}}
 
   
  +
According to F. Derks and J. van der Lans, there is no uniform [[post-cult trauma]]. While psychological and social problems upon resignation are not uncommon, their character and intensity are greatly dependent on the personal history and on the traits of the ex-member, and on the reasons for and way of resignation.<ref>F. Derks and the professor of [[psychology of religion]] [[Jan van der Lans]] ''The post-cult syndrome: Fact or Fiction?'', paper presented at conference of Psychologists of Religion, [[Radboud University Nijmegen|Catholic University Nijmegen]], 1981, also appeared in Dutch language as ''Post-cult-syndroom; feit of fictie?'', published in the magazine ''Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands'' nr. 6 pages 58-75 published by the [[Vrije Universiteit|Free university Amsterdam]] (1983)</ref>
Furthermore of the total number of cults in the United States alone, only a hundred or so have ever become notorious for alleged misdeeds either in the national media or in local media; it is essentially these groups that are to varying degrees the targets of the so-called anticult and countercult movements in any meaningful sense. As scholarly study of cults is to an extent media driven, with notorious groups inviting sympathetic scholars to study them and provide a more favorable picture than the media has, and "anti-cult" scholars looking for a publishable topic, it is mostly the notorious groups that are studied. The vast majority of cults are terra incognita with no one having anything more than rough estimates of the number of cults and number of cult adherents either in the U.S. or internationally, or indeed if the majority of the groups in such tallies are cults at all.
 
   
  +
==Criticism by former members of purported cults==
According to Benjamin Zablocki, a professor of Sociology at [[Rutgers University]], cults are at high risk of becoming abusive to members. He states that this is in part due to members' adulation of [[charismatic authority|charismatic]] leaders contributing to the leaders becoming corrupted by power. Zablocki defines a cult here as an ideological organization held together by charismatic relationships and that demands total commitment.{{fn|17}}
 
   
  +
The role of former members, sometimes called "[[apostate]]s". in the controversy surrounding cults has been widely studied by social scientists. Former members in some cases become public opponents against their former group. The former members' motivations, the roles they play in the anti-cult movement, the validity of their testimony, and the kinds of narratives they construct, are controversial with some scholars who suspect that at least some of the narratives are colored by a need of self-justification, seeking to reconstruct their own past and to excuse their former affiliations, while blaming those who were formerly their closest associates,<ref>Wilson, Bryan R. ''Apostates and New Religious Movements'', Oxford, England, 1994</ref> and that hostile ex-members would invariably shade the truth and blow out of proportion minor incidents, turning them into major incidents.<ref>Melton, Gordon J., ''Brainwashing and the Cults: The Rise and Fall of a Theory'', 1999</ref> Other scholars conclude that testimonies of former members are at least as accurate as testimonies of current members.{{Fact|date=July 2007}}
There is no reliable, generally accepted way to determine which groups will harm their members. In an attempt to predict the probability of harm, popular but non-scientific [[cult checklist]]s have been created by anti-cultists for this purpose.
 
   
  +
Scholars that challenge the validity of critical former members testimonies as the basis for studying a religious group include [[David G. Bromley]], [[Anson Shupe]], [[Brian R. Wilson]], and [[Lonnie Kliever]]. Bromley and Shupe, who studied the social influences on such testimonies, assert that the apostate in his current role is likely to present a caricature of his former group and that the stories of critical ex-members who defect from groups that are subversive (defined as groups with few allies and many opponents) tend to have the form of "captivity narratives" (i.e. the narratives depict the stay in the group as involuntary). Wilson introduces the [[atrocity story]] that is rehearsed by the apostate to explain how, by manipulation, coercion, or deceit, he was recruited to a group that he now condemns. Introvigne found in his study of the [[New Acropolis]] in France, that public negative testimonies and attitudes were only voiced by a minority of the ex-members, who he describes as becoming "professional enemies" of the group they leave. Kliever, when asked by the [[Church of Scientology]] to give his opinion on the reliability of apostate accounts of their former religious beliefs and practices, writes that these dedicated opponents present a distorted view of the new religions, and cannot be regarded as reliable informants by responsible journalists, scholars, or jurists. He claims that the reason for the lack of reliability of apostates is due to the traumatic nature of disaffiliation that he compares to a divorce and also due the influence of the anti-cult movement even on those apostates who were not deprogrammed or received exit counseling. Scholars and psychologists who tend to side more with critical former members include [[David C. Lane]], [[Louis Jolyon West]], [[Margaret Singer]], [[Stephen A. Kent]], [[Benjamin Beith-Hallahmi]] and [[Benjamin Zablocki]]. Zablocki performed an empirical study that showed that the reliability of former members is equal to that of stayers in one particular group. [[Philip Lucas]] found the same empirical results.
According to Barrett, the most common accusation made against alleged "cults" is [[sexual abuse]]. See [[Cult#Criticism by former members of purported cults|some allegations made by former members]].
 
   
  +
According to Lewis F. Carter, the [[Reliability (statistics)|reliability]] and [[Validity (statistics)|validity]] of the testimonies of believers are influenced by the tendency to justify affiliation with the group, whereas the testimonies of former members and apostates are influenced by a variety of factors.<ref>Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, ''Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices'' published in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7</ref> Besides, the interpretative frame of members tends to change strongly upon conversion and disaffection and hence may strongly influence their narratives. Carter affirms that the degree of knowledge of different (ex-)members about their (former) group is highly diverse, especially in hierarchically organized groups. Using his experience at [[Rajneeshpuram]] (the [[intentional community]] of the followers of [[Rajneesh]]) as an example, he claims that the [[social influence]] exerted by the group may influence the accounts of [[ethnography|ethnographers]] and of [[participant observation|participant observers]].<ref>Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, ''Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices'' published in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7</ref> He proposes a method he calls ''triangulation'' as the best method to study groups, by utilizing three accounts: those of believers, apostates, and ethnographers. Carter asserts that such methodology is difficult to put into practice.<ref>Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, ''Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices'' published in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7</ref> [[Daniel Carson Johnson]]<ref>Johnson, Daniel Carson (1998) ''Apostates Who Never were: the Social Construction of Absque Facto Apostate Narratives'', published in the book ''The ''Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7</ref> writes that even the triangulation method rarely succeeds in making assertions with certitude.<ref>Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, ''Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices'' published in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7</ref>
According to Kranenborg, some groups, like [[Christian Science]] and [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], are risky when they advise their members not to use regular medical care.{{fn|15}}
 
   
  +
[[James Richardson (sociologist)|James T. Richardson]] contends that there are a large number of cults, and a tendency among scholars to make unjustified generalizations about them based on a select sample of observations of life in such groups or the testimonies of (ex-)members. According to Richardson, this tendency is responsible for the widely divergent opinions about cults among scholars and social scientists.<ref>[[James Richardson (sociologist)|Richardson, James T.]] (1989) ''The Psychology of Induction: A Review and Interpretation'', article that appeared in the book edited by Marc Galanter M.D. (1989) ''Cults and new religious movements: a report of the committee on psychiatry and religion of the [[American Psychiatric Association]]'' ISBN 0-89042-212-5
Barker, Barrett, and the anti-cult activist [[Steven Hassan]] all advise seeking information from various sources about a certain group before getting deeply involved, though these sources differ in the urgency they suggest.
 
  +
</ref>
   
  +
[[Eileen Barker]] (2001) wrote that critical former members of cults complain that academic observers only notice what the leadership wants them to see.<ref>[[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] (2001), ''Watching for Violence: A Comparative Analysis of the Roles of Five Types of Cult-Watching Groups'', [http://www.cesnur.org/2001/london2001/barker.htm available online]</ref>
===Stigmatization and discrimination===
 
Some feel that the terms "cult" and "cult leader" are used pejoratively by opponents of cults, asserting that they are to be avoided to prevent harm. A website affiliated with [[Adi Da Samraj]] [http://www.firmstand.org/] sees the activities of cult opponents as the exercise of prejudice and discrimination against them, and regards the use of the words "cult" and "cult leader" as similar to the manner in which "nigger" and "commie" were used in the past to denigrate blacks and Communists.
 
   
  +
''See also [[Apostasy#In purported cults and new religious movements.28NRMs.29|Apostasy in new religious movements]], and [[Anti-cult movement#Apostates and Apologists|Apostates and Apologists]]''.
In an essay by [[Amy Ryan]]{{fn|20}}, the argument is made for the need to differentiate those groups that may be dangerous from groups that are more benign. Ryan refers to '' New Religious Movements: Some Problems of Definition'', were [[George Chryssides]] identifies two types of definitions: opponents define them in terms of negative characteristics, while scholars attempt to study these groups and be value free. The movements themselves may have different definitions of religion as well. Chryssides cites a need to develop more appropriate definitions to and allow for common ground in the debate. These definitions have political and ethical impact beyond just scholarly debate. In ''Defining Religion in American Law'', for example, Bruce J. Casino presents the issue as crucial to international human rights laws. Limiting the definition of religion may interfere with freedom of religion, while too broad a definition may give some dangerous or abusive groups "a limitless excuse for avoiding all unwanted legal obligations."{{fn|34}}
 
   
  +
===Allegations made by scholars or skeptics===
Also, several authors in the cult opposition are not happy with the word cult. Some definitions used imply that there is a continuum with a large gray area separating "cult" from "noncult". {{fn|34}} Others authors, e.g. [[Steven Hassan]], differentiate by using terms like [[Destructive cult]] or ''Cult (totalitarian type) vs. benign cult.
 
   
  +
* False, irrational or even contradictory teaching, made by [[David C. Lane]] with regards to [[Paul Twitchell]];
===Leaving a cult ===
 
  +
* False [[miracle]]s performed or endorsed by the leadership, made by the [[scientific skepticism|skeptic]]s [[Abraham Kovoor]], [[H. Narasimhaiah]], and [[Basava Premanand]] for a variety of [[guru]]s and [[fakir]]s;
There are at least three ways people leave a cult: {{fn|18}}<sup>,</sup>{{fn|37}}
 
  +
* Discouraging regular medical care but instead relying on [[faith healing]], made by the magazine [[salon.com]] with regards to [[Christian Science]];
  +
* [[Plagiarism]], allegations made by David C. Lane;
  +
* Incitement to [[anti-Semitism]] and other forms of hate, as documented in the writings of [[Dennis King]] and [[Chip Berlet]];
  +
* Child abuse, for example subjecting blindfolded children to many hours of meditation, as documented by Dr. [[David C. Lane]] with regards to [[Thakar Singh]];<ref>[[David C. Lane|Lane, David C.]], ''The Guru Has No Turban: Part 2'' [http://members.tripod.com/~dlane5/thakar.html]</ref> and
  +
* Forced labor and confinement of members, made by [[Stephen A. Kent]] regarding [[Scientology]].<ref>[[Stephen A. Kent|Kent, Stephen A.]] ''Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF)'', 1997 [http://www.lermanet2.com/scientology/gulags/BrainwashinginScientology'sRehabilitationProjectForce.htm]</ref>
  +
* Threats, harassment, excessive lawsuits and [[ad hominem]] attacks against critics. Allegations regarding the use of such tactics have been made against [[Scientology]], the [[Lyndon LaRouche]] organization, and the now defunct [[Synanon]] drug-treatment cult.
   
  +
==Prevalence of purported cults==
* by intervention ([[Exit counseling]], [[deprogramming]]);
 
* on their own decision (walkaways); or
 
* through expulsion (castaways).
 
   
  +
By one measure, between 3,000 and 5,000 purported cults existed in the [[United States]] in 1995.<ref>[[Margaret Singer|Singer, M]] with Lalich, J (1995). ''Cults in Our Midst'', San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0-7879-0051-6
Lalich in ''Bounded Choice'' (2004) describes a fourth way of leaving--rebellion against the cult leader or cult majority. Although in the atypical case she describes, the entire cult membership quit, more often rebellion is a combination of the walkaway and castaway patterns in that the rebellion may trigger the expulsion--essentially, the rebels provoke the cult leadership into being the agency of their break with an over-committed lifestyle. Tourish and Wohlforth (2000) and Dennis King (1989) provide several examples in the history of political cults. The rebellion response in such groups appears to follow a longstanding behavior pattern among Trotskyist and other political sects which began long before the emergence of the contemporary political cult.
 
  +
</ref> Some of the more well-known and influential of these groups are frequently labelled as cults in the mass media. Most of these well-known groups vigorously [[protest]] the label and refuse to be classified as such, and often expend great efforts in [[public relations]] campaigns to rid themselves of the stigma associated with the term ''cult''. But most of the thousands of purported cults live below the media's radar and are rarely or ever the subject of significant public scrutiny. Such groups rarely need to speak up in their own defense, and some of them just ignore the occasional fleeting attention they may get from the media.
   
  +
==Cults and governments==
The majority of authors agree that there are some people who experience problems after leaving a cult. There are, though, disagreements regarding the frequency of such problems and regarding the cause.
 
  +
{{main|Cults and governments}}
   
  +
In many countries there exists a [[separation of church and state]] and [[freedom of religion]]. Governments of some of these countries, concerned with possible abuses by groups they deem cults, have taken restrictive measures against some of their activities. Critics of such measures claim that the counter-cult movement and the anti-cult movement have succeeded in influencing governments in transferring the publics abhorrence of doomsday cults and make the generalization that it is directed against all small or new religious movements without discrimination. The critique is countered by stressing that the measures are directed not against any religious beliefs, but specifically against groups whom they see as inimical to the public order due to their totalitarianism, violations of fundamental liberties, inordinate emphasis on finances, and/or disregard for appropriate medical care.<ref>[[Stephen A. Kent|Kent, Stephen A.]] ''Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF)'', 1997 [http://www.lermanet2.com/scientology/gulags/BrainwashinginScientology'sRehabilitationProjectForce.htm]</ref>
According to [[Cult#References|Barker (1989)]], the biggest worry about possible harm concerns the relatively few dedicated followers of a [[new religious movement]] (NRM). Barker also mentions that some former members may not take new initatives for quite a long time after disaffiliation from the NRM. This generally does not concern the many superficial, short-lived, or peripheral supporters of a NRM. Membership in a cult usually does not last forever: 90% or more of cult members ultimately leave their group{{fn|2}}<sup>,</sup>{{fn|4}}.
 
   
  +
There exists a controversy regarding religious tolerance between the [[United States]] and several European countries, especially [[France]] and [[Germany]], that have taken legal measures directed against "cultic" groups that they believe violate human rights. The 2004 annual report by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom states that these initiatives have "...fueled an atmosphere of intolerance toward members of minority religions in France". On the other hand, the countries confronted with such allegations see the United States' attitude towards NRMs as failing to take into account the responsibility of the state for the wellbeing of its citizens, especially concerning children and incapacitated persons. They further claim that the interference of the United States in their internal affairs is at least partially due to the domestic lobbying of cults and cult apologists.<ref>[[Stephen A. Kent|Kent, Stephen A.]] ''Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF)'', 1997 [http://www.lermanet2.com/scientology/gulags/BrainwashinginScientology'sRehabilitationProjectForce.htm]</ref>
According to Carol Giambalvo, most people leaving a cult do have associated psychological problems, such as feelings of guilt or shame, depression, feeling of inadequacy, or fear, that are independent of their manner of leaving the cult. Feelings of guilt, shame, or anger are by her observation worst with castaways, but walkaways can also have serious problems with feeling inadequate or guilty. People who had interventions or a rehabilitation therapy do have similar problems but are usually better prepared to deal with them.{{fn|37}}
 
   
  +
Most governmental clashes with groups alleged to have cult-like characteristics in the [[United States]] in recent years have been the result of real or perceived violations of the law by the groups in question.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} There have been no well documented recent cases of the U.S. government persecuting a supposedly cult-like group based solely on its religious beliefs. It has been argued that the "[[brainwashing]]" ideology promulgated by theorists in the anti-cult movement has been a key contributing factor in recent violent events, including the deaths of close to 100 members of the [[Branch Davidian]] group in [[Waco, Texas|Waco]], [[Texas]].<ref>Anthony D, Robbins T, Barrie-Anthony S. Cult and Anticult Totalism: Reciprocal Escalation and Violence. Terrorism and Political Violence, Volume 14, Special Issue 1, Spring 2002, pp. 211-240.</ref> Revelations in the 1970s by the U.S. Senate's [[Church Committee]] investigating the FBI's [[COINTELPRO]] program revealed extensive evidence that the Agency had engaged in an illegal, large-scale covert program which included portraying various political dissident organizations as violent criminals and extremists as a prelude to and justification for crackdowns on these groups.<ref>[http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointelsources.htm Bibliography compiled by www.cointelpro.org]</ref> It is also possible that negative perceptions of a group by prosecutors could make them more quick to prosecute than they might otherwise be; the [[income tax]] case against Reverend Moon is sometimes cited as such an incident.)<ref>Sherwood, Carlton (1991) Inquisition: The Persecution and Prosecution of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon. Washington, D.C.: Regnery (ISBN 0-89526-532-X)</ref>
Bromley and Hadden say that there is lack of empirical support for alleged consequences of having been a member of a cult or sect, and that there is substantial empirical evidence against it such as: the fact that the overwhelming proportion of people who get involved in NRMs do leave, most short of two years; the overwhelming proportion of people leave of their own volition; and that two-thirds (67%) felt "wiser for the experience"{{fn|14}}.
 
   
  +
A 1996 French Parliamentary Commission issued a [http://www.assemblee-nat.fr/rap-enq/r2468.asp report] [http://cftf.com/french/Les_Sectes_en_France/cults.html unofficial translations], in which a list of purported cults compiled by the general information division of the [[French National Police]] ([[Renseignements généraux]]) was reprinted. In it were listed 173 groups. Members of some of the groups included in the list have alleged instances of intolerance due to the ensuing negative publicity. Although this list has no statutory or regulatory value, it is at the background of the criticism directed at France with respect to freedom of religion.
Flo and Conway in ''Snapping'' described a survey regarding after-cult effects and deprogramming and concluded that people deprogrammed had less problems than people not deprogrammed. "...Our last block of findings concerned the controversial issue of deprogramming. The numbers confirmed that deprogramming was indeed a vital first step on the road back from cult control. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of the people in our survey were deprogrammed, about half voluntarily and half involuntarily. As a group, they reported a third less, and in many cases only half as many, post-cult effects than those who weren’t deprogrammed. Average rehabilitation time was one-third longer--more than a year and a half--for those who weren’t deprogrammed compared to just over a year for those who were. Overall, deprogrammees reported a third fewer months of depression, forty percent less disorientation, half as many sleepless nights--clearly, something in the process worked! ..." {{fn|38}}
 
   
  +
The "Interministerial Mission in the Fight Against Sects/Cults" (MILS) was formed in 1998 to coordinate government monitoring of sect (name given to cults in France). In February 1998 MILS released its annual report on the monitoring of "sectes". The president of MILS resigned in June under criticism and an interministerial working group was formed to determine the future parameters of the Government's monitoring of "sectes". In November the Government announced the formation of the Interministerial Monitoring Mission Against Sectarian Abuses (MIVILUDES), which is charged with observing and analyzing movements that constitute a threat to public order or that violate French law, coordinating the appropriate response, informing the public about potential risks, and helping victims to receive aid. In its announcement of the formation of MIVILUDES, the Government acknowledged that its predecessor, MILS, had been criticized for certain actions abroad that could have been perceived as contrary to religious freedom. On May 2005, former prime minister [[Jean-Pierre Raffarin]] issued a circular indicating that the list of cults published on the parliamentary report of 1966 should no longer be used to identify groups.<ref>[http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/WAspad/UnTexteDeJorf?numjo=PRMX0508471C Circulaire du 27 mai 2005 relative à la lutte contre les dérives sectaires]</ref>
The [[BBC]] writes that in a survey done by Jill Mytton on 200 former cult members most of them reported problems adjusting to society and about a third would benefit from some counseling. {{fn|36}}
 
   
  +
==Cults in literature==
Burks (2002), in a study comparing Group Psychological Abuse Scale (GPA9 and Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) scores in 132 former members of cults and cultic relationships, found a positive correlation between intensity of thought reform environment as measured by the GPA and cognitive impairment as measured by the NIS. Additional findings were a reduced earning potential in view of the education level that corroborates earlier studies of cult critics ( (Martin 1993; Singer & Ofshe, 1990; West & Martin, 1994) and significant levels of depression and dissociation agreeing with Conway & Siegelman, (1982), Lewis & Bromley, (1987) and Martin, et al. (1992). {{fn|39}}
 
  +
:<div class="noprint">''Main article{{#if:{{{2|}}}|s}}: [[cults in literature and popular culture|{{{l1|cults in literature and popular culture}}}]]{{#if:{{{2| }}}
  +
|{{#if:{{{3|}}}|,&#32;|&#32;and&#32;}}[[{{{2}}}|{{{l2|{{{2}}}}}}]]}}{{#if:{{{3|}}}
  +
|{{#if:{{{4|}}}|,&#32;|,&#32;and&#32;}}[[{{{3}}}|{{{l3|{{{3}}}}}}]]}}{{#if:{{{4|}}}
  +
|{{#if:{{{5|}}}|,&#32;|,&#32;and&#32;}}[[{{{4}}}|{{{l4|{{{4}}}}}}]]}}{{#if:{{{5|}}}
  +
|, and [[{{{5}}}|{{{l5|{{{5}}}}}}]]}}''{{#if:{{{6| }}}|&#32; (too many parameters in &#123;&#123;[[Template:main|main]]&#125;&#125;)}}</div>
   
  +
Cults have been a subject or theme in [[literature]] and [[popular culture]] since ancient times. There are many references to it in the 20th century.
According to Barret, in many cases the problems do not happen while in a movement, but when leaving a movement which can be difficult for some members and may include a lot of [[psychological trauma|trauma]]. Reasons for this trauma may include: [[conditioning]] by the religious movement; avoidance of uncertainties about life and its meaning; having had powerful religious experiences; love for the founder of the religion; emotional investment; fear of losing [[salvation]]; bonding with other members; anticipation of the realization that time, money, and efforts donated to the group were a waste; and the new freedom with its corresponding responsibilities, especially for people who lived in a community. Those reasons may prevent a member from leaving even if the member realizes that some things in the NRM are wrong. According to Kranenborg, in some religious groups, like the [[Jehovah's Witness]]es, members have all their social contacts within the group, which makes disaffection and disaffiliation very traumatic.{{fn|15}} According to F. Derks and J. van der Lans, there is no uniform [[post-cult trauma]]. While psychological and social problems upon resignation are not rare, their character and intensity are greatly dependent on the personal history and on the traits of the ex-member, and on the reasons for and way of resignation.{{fn|16}}
 
   
See also [[Shunning]]
+
== See also ==
   
=== Criticism by former members of purported cults===
 
The public generally hears criticism of an alleged cult from the mass media, which often quotes law enforcement sources, public interest researchers, lawyers involved in civil litigation involving the group in question, and anti-cult spokespersons as well as persons with spontaneous direct experience. Those with direct experience provide the foundation for most criticisms of the quality of life within the alleged cult and for much of the description of controversial types of member behavior.
 
 
Such primary sources of criticism may include: parents, relatives, and close friends of cult members (who often have carefully observed personality changes in their loved one which they rightly or wrongly interpret as changes for the worse); victims of scams perpetrated by some cults; people who go to meetings and then back away out of fear; persons raised in cults who left after coming of age; and former adult members.
 
 
Usually, the most dramatic allegations, as well as the most systematic and detailed ones, will come from adult former members and to a lesser extent from persons who were raised in the cult, although a fair percentage of former members in these categories are ''not'' strongly critical of their former spiritual or ideological home. The former members who voice strong criticisms are termed "[[apostate]]s" by some scholars. But this term is regarded as pejorative by other scholars--and also as misleading because the term's religious connotation doesn't apply readily to non-religious cults. One scholar who uses the term "apostate" frequently is [[Gordon Melton]], who in turn has been labelled a [[cult apologist]] by scholars strongly critical of cults.
 
 
The allegations of former members include: sexual abuse by the leader; failed promises and failed [[prophecy]]; causing suicides through neglect or abuse; leaders who neither admit nor apologize for mistakes; false, irrational, or even contradictory teachings; [[exclusivism]]; [[deception]] in recruitment (by using "front groups"); demands of total immersion in religion at the expense of career, education, family, and friends; and more.
 
 
The role of former members in the controversy surrounding cults has been widely studied by social scientists. Former members in this context are those individuals who become public opponents against their former movement. The former members' motivations, the roles they play in the anti-cult movement, the validity of their testimony, and the kinds of narratives they construct, are controversial with some scholars who suspect that at least some of the narratives are strongly influenced by the exit-counseling (or formerly of the deprogramming) process, while other scholars conclude that testimonies of former members are at least as accurate as testimonies of current members.
 
 
See also [[Apostasy#In new religious movements .28NRMs.29|Apostasy in new religious movements]].
 
 
=== Allegations made by scholars and skeptics===
 
*False, irrational or even contradictory teaching, made by [[David C. Lane]] with regards to [[Paul Twitchell]];
 
*False [[miracle]]s performed or endorsed by the leadership, made by the [[scientific skepticism|skeptic]]s [[Abraham Kovoor]], [[H. Narasimhaiah]], and [[Basava Premanand]] for a variety of [[guru]]s and [[fakir]]s;
 
*Discouraging regular medical care but instead relying on [[faith healing]], made by the magazine [[salon.com]] with regards to [[Christian Science]];
 
*[[Plagiarism]], allegations made by David C. Lane;
 
*Incitement to [[anti-Semitism]] and other forms of hate, as documented in the writings of [[Dennis King]];
 
*Child abuse, for example subjecting blindfolded children to many hours of meditation, as documented by Dr. [[David C. Lane]] with regards to [[Thakar Singh]]{{fn|29}}; and
 
*Forced labour and confinement of members, made by [[Stephen A. Kent]] regarding [[Scientology]] {{fn|40}}.
 
 
===Other allegations===
 
*Harassment and [[ad hominem]] attacks on critics. Allegations regarding the use of such tactics have been made against [[Scientology]], the [[Lyndon LaRouche]] organization, and the now defunct [[Synanon]] drug-treatment cult.
 
 
==Prevalence of purported cults==
 
By one measure, between 3,000 and 5,000 purported cults existed in the [[United States]] in [[1995]].{{fn|6}} Some of the more well-known and influential of these groups are frequently labelled as cults in the mass media. Most of these well-known groups vigorously [[protest]] the label and refuse to be classified as such, and often expend great efforts in [[public relations]] campaigns to rid themselves of the stigma associated with the term ''cult''. But most of the thousands of purported cults live below the media's radar and are rarely or ever the subject of significant public scrutiny. Such groups rarely need to speak up in their own defense, and some of them just ignore the occasional fleeting attention they may get from the media.
 
 
In order to maintain a neutral point of view, a [[list of purported cults]] presents a listing of groups labeled as cults by various non-related, reasonably unbiased sources.
 
 
==Cults and governments==
 
''For the main article, see [[Cults and governments]]''
 
 
In many countries there exists a [[separation of church and state]] and [[freedom of religion]]. Governments of some of these countries, concerned with possible abuses by [[cult]]s, have taken restrictive measures against some of their activities. Those measures were generally motivated by various crimes committed by a string of murderous incidents involving [[doomsday cult]]s circa 1995. Critics of such measures claim that the counter-cult movement and the anti-cult movement have succeeded in influencing governments in transferring the public's abhorrence of doomsday cults and make the generalization that it is directed against all small or new religious movements without discrimination. The critique is countered by stressing that the measures are directed not against any religious beliefs, but specifically against groups whom they see as inimical to the public order due to their totalitarianism, violations of fundamental liberties, inordinate emphasis on finances, and/or disregard for appropriate medical care. {{fn|40}}
 
 
There exists a controversy regarding religious tolerance between the [[United States]] and several European countries, especially [[France]] and [[Germany]], that have taken legal measures directed against cultic groups that violate human rights. The 2004 annual report by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom states that these initiatives have "...fueled an atmosphere of intolerance toward members of minority religions in France". On the other hand, the countries confronted with such allegations see the United States' attitude towards NMRs as failing to take into account the responsibility of the state for the wellbeing of its citizens, especially concerning children and incapacitated persons. They further claim that the interference of the United States in their internal affairs is at least partially due to the domestic lobbying of cults and cult apologists. {{fn|40}}
 
 
==See also==
 
 
{{wikiquote}}
 
{{wikiquote}}
  +
{{wikisource|Category:Cults}}
*[[Apostasy]]
 
  +
{{commons|Cults}}
*[[Atrocity story]]
 
  +
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
*[[Bigotry]]
 
  +
* [[Apostasy]]
*[[Cognitive dissonance]]
 
*[[Cult Awareness Network]]
+
* [[Atrocity story]]
  +
* [[Classifications of cults and new religious movements]]
*[[Cult suicide]]
 
*[[Cults and governments]]
+
* [[Cult Awareness Network]]
*[[Defamation]]
+
* [[Cult suicide]]
*[[Development of religion]]
+
* [[Cults and governments]]
*[[Destructive cult]]
+
* [[Development of religion]]
*[[Freedom of religion]]
+
* [[Destructive cult]]
*[[Groupthink]]
+
* [[Groupthink]]
*[[Hate group#Hate groups and new religious movements|Hate groups and new religious movements]]
+
* [[Hate group#Hate groups and new religious movements|Hate groups and new religious movements]]
  +
* [[LGAT|Large Group Awareness Training (LGAT)]]
*[[Human rights]]
 
  +
* [[Legalism (theology)]]
*[[LGAT|Large Group Awareness Training (LGAT)]]
 
  +
* [[List of groups referred to as cults]]
*[[Legalism (theology)]]
 
  +
* [[New religious movement]]
*[[List of groups referred to as cults]]
 
*[[New religious movement]]
+
* [[Opposition to cults and new religious movements]]
  +
* [[Pious fraud]]
*[[Opposition to cults and new religious movements]]
 
  +
* [[Religious conversion#Other religions and sects|Religious Conversion]]
*[[Pious fraud]]
 
  +
* [[Sect]]
*[[Religious conversion#Conversion to new religious movements and cults|Religious conversion to new religious movements and cults]]
 
*[[Religious intolerance]]
+
* [[Social implosion]]
  +
* [[Sociology of religion|Sociology of religion (currently treating only one theory)]]
*[[Religious pluralism]]
 
  +
* [[True-believer syndrome]]
*[[Sect]]
 
*[[Sectarianism]]
 
*[[Self-deception]]
 
*[[Social implosion]]
 
*[[Sociology of religion|Sociology of religion (currently treating only one theory)]]
 
*[[True-believer syndrome]]
 
*[[Wikipedia:Bad_jokes_and_other_deleted_nonsense:_The_Return_of_the_Nonsense#Is_wikipedia_a_cult?|Wikipedia as a cult (from BJAODN)]]
 
*[[Witch hunt]]
 
*[[Young Life]]
 
   
  +
</Div>
==External links==
 
* [http://www.apologeticsindex.org/ Apologetics Index: research resources on cults, sects, and related issues] Large website published by [[Anton Hein]], who operates from an evangelical Christian point of view, but offers a variety of viewpoints.
 
*[http://www.cesnur.org/ Homepage of CESNUR] See [[CESNUR]] (a network of scholars working in the field of NRMs)
 
*[http://www.cultawarenessnetwork.org/ Cult Awareness Network] website of the [[Cult Awareness Network]] affiliated with [[Scientology]]
 
* [http://www.csj.org/ Cultic Studies: Information about Cults and Psychological Manipulation] Scholarly articles, group descriptions and news by the [[International Cultic Studies Association]]
 
* [http://www.math.mcgill.ca/triples/infocult/ic-e1.html Info cult]
 
* [http://www.religioustolerance.org/ Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance] - an extensive library of articles and essays promoting religious understanding, tolerance and freedom.
 
* [http://www.rickross.com/ The Rick A. Ross Institute for the study of Destructive Cults, controversial groups and movements] [[Rick Ross]]' extensive website, contains groups database with media articles
 
* [http://www.rrexposed.u2k.biz/ Exposing the cult buster himself]
 
*[http://www.skepsis.nl/onlinetexts.html Dutch Skeptics Society: Online papers, articles and books about Cults, New Religious Movements, and the Social Scientific Study of Religion]
 
* [http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu University of Virginia Religious Movements Homepage] Extensive website with entries on definitions, controversies and many religious groups, by the late sociologist [[Jeffrey Hadden]] now edited by [[Douglas E. Cowan]] (some entries on individual religious groups have not been updated since 2001 and sometimes contain factual mistakes)
 
*[http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Cult "Cult"] Defense of the term "cult" to describe the [[Children of God]]
 
*[http://www.addbible.com/search.php?version=tbl_bib_srv&books=45&keyword=12%3A1&rbtn=4] Romans 12:1 explains "cult".
 
   
 
==Bibliography==
 
==Bibliography==
=== Books ===
+
===Books===
  +
* [[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] (1989) ''New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction'', London, HMSO
* Bromley, David et al.: ''Cults, Religion, and Violence'', 2002, ISBN 0521668980
 
* [[J. Gordon Melton|Melton, Gordon]]: ''Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America'', 1992, ISBN 0815311400
+
* Bromley, David et al.: ''Cults, Religion, and Violence'', 2002, ISBN 0-521-66898-0
  +
* Enroth, Ronald. (1992) ''[[Churches that Abuse]]'', Zondervan, ISBN 0-310-53290-6
* House, Wayne: ''Charts of Cults, Sects, and Religious Movements'', 2000, ISBN 0310385512
 
  +
* House, Wayne: ''Charts of Cults, Sects, and Religious Movements'', 2000, ISBN 0-310-38551-2
 
* Kramer, Joel and Alstad, Diane: ''The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power'', 1993.
 
* Kramer, Joel and Alstad, Diane: ''The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power'', 1993.
* Lalich, Janja: ''Bounded Choice: True Believers and Charismatic Cults'', 2004, ISBN 0520240189
+
* Lalich, Janja: ''Bounded Choice: True Believers and Charismatic Cults'', 2004, ISBN 0-520-24018-9
* Landau Tobias, Madeleine et al. : ''Captive Hearts, Captive Minds'', 1994, ISBN 0897931440
+
* Landau Tobias, Madeleine et al. : ''Captive Hearts, Captive Minds'', 1994, ISBN 0-89793-144-0
  +
* [[James R. Lewis|Lewis, James R.]] ''The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements'' [[Oxford University Press]], 2004
* Martin, Walter et al.: ''The Kingdom of the Cults'', 2003, ISBN 0764228218
 
  +
* [[James R. Lewis|Lewis, James R.]] ''Odd Gods: New Religions and the Cult Controversy'', [[Prometheus Books]], 2001
* Oakes, Len: ''Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities'', 1997, ISBN 0815603983 [http://www.enlightenmentblues.com/chapter2.html Excerpts]
 
  +
* Martin, Walter et al.: ''The Kingdom of the Cults'', 2003, ISBN 0-7642-2821-8
* [[Margaret Singer|Singer, Margaret Thaler]]: ''Cults in Our Midst : The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace'', 1992, ISBN 0787967416 [http://www.forum8.org/forum8/singer/singer_cults.htm Excerpts]
 
  +
* [[J. Gordon Melton|Melton, Gordon]]: ''Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America'', 1992 [http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0815311400 (Search inside]), ISBN 0-8153-1140-0
* Tourish, Dennis: '''On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left'', 2000, ISBN 0765606399
 
  +
* Oakes, Len: ''Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities'', 1997, ISBN 0-8156-0398-3 [http://www.enlightenmentblues.com/chapter2.html Excerpts]
* Zablocki, Benjamin et al.: ''Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field'', 2001, ISBN 0802081886
 
  +
* [[Lena Phoenix|Phoenix, Lena]]: ''[[The Heart of a Cult]]'', 2006, ISBN 0-9785483-0-2
* [[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] (1989) ''New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction'', London, HMSO
 
  +
* [[Margaret Singer|Singer, Margaret Thaler]]: ''Cults in Our Midst: The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace'', 1992, ISBN 0-7879-6741-6 [http://www.forum8.org/forum8/singer/singer_cults.htm Excerpts]
* Enroth, Ronald. (1992) ''Churches that Abuse'', Zondervan, ISBN 0310532906
 
  +
* Tourish, Dennis: '''On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left'', 2000, ISBN 0-7656-0639-9
  +
* Williams, Miriam: (1998) ''Heaven's Harlots: My Fifteen Years As a Sacred Prostitute in the Children of God Cult ''. William Morrow & Co. ISBN 978-0688155049.
  +
* [[Colin Wilson|Wilson, Colin]] ''Rogue Messiahs: Tales of Self-Proclaimed Saviors'', 2000, Hampton Roads Publishing Company. ISBN 978-1571741752
  +
* Zablocki, Benjamin et al.: ''Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field'', 2001, ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
   
=== Articles ===
+
===Articles===
  +
* Hardin, John W.: Defining a Cult - The Borderline Between Christian and Counterfeit: Article defining a cult by its attributes from a Biblical Christian perspective.[http://www.gideonsword.net/WordPress/]
* Langone, Michael: Cults: Questions and Answers [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_cultsqa.htm ]
 
  +
* Langone, Michael: Cults: Questions and Answers [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_cultsqa.htm]
 
* [[Robert Jay Lifton|Lifton, Robert Jay]]: ''Cult Formation'', ''The Harvard Mental Health Letter'', February 1991 [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/lifton_robert.htm]
 
* [[Robert Jay Lifton|Lifton, Robert Jay]]: ''Cult Formation'', ''The Harvard Mental Health Letter'', February 1991 [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/lifton_robert.htm]
* Moyers. Jim: ''Psychological Issues of Former Members of Restrictive Religious Groups'' [http://home.earthlink.net/%7Ejcmmsm/article/index.html]
+
* Moyers. Jim: ''Psychological Issues of Former Members of Restrictive Religious Groups'' [http://home.earthlink.net/%7Ejcmmsm/article/index.html]
 
* Richmond, Lee J. :''When Spirituality Goes Awry: Students in Cults'', Professional School Counseling, June 2004 [http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KOC/is_5_7/ai_n6121244]
 
* Richmond, Lee J. :''When Spirituality Goes Awry: Students in Cults'', Professional School Counseling, June 2004 [http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KOC/is_5_7/ai_n6121244]
  +
* Robbins, T. and D. Anthony, 1982. "Deprogramming, brainwashing and the medicalization of deviant religious groups" ''Social Problems'' '''29''' pp 283-97.
* Rogge. Michael: ''On the psychology of spiritual movements''[http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/psymove.html ]
 
* Shaw, Daniel: ''Traumatic abuse in cults'' [http://members.aol.com/shawdan/essay.htm ]
+
* Shaw, Daniel: ''Traumatic abuse in cults'' [http://web.archive.org/20000819061704/members.aol.com/shawdan/essay.htm]
  +
* [[James Richardson (sociologist)|James T. Richardson]]: "Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-Negative" ''Review of Religious Research'' '''34'''.4 (June 1993), pp. 348-356.
 
* Rosedale, Herbert et al.: ''On Using the Term "Cult"'' [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_term_cult.htm]
 
* Rosedale, Herbert et al.: ''On Using the Term "Cult"'' [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_term_cult.htm]
 
* Van Hoey, Sara: ''Cults in Court'' The Los Angeles Lawyer, February 1991 [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/van_hoey_sara_cults_in_court.htm]
 
* Van Hoey, Sara: ''Cults in Court'' The Los Angeles Lawyer, February 1991 [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/van_hoey_sara_cults_in_court.htm]
 
* [[Philip Zimbardo|Zimbardo, Philip]]: ''What messages are behind today's cults?'', American Psychological Association Monitor, May 1997 [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/zimbardo_philip_messeges.htm]
 
* [[Philip Zimbardo|Zimbardo, Philip]]: ''What messages are behind today's cults?'', American Psychological Association Monitor, May 1997 [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/zimbardo_philip_messeges.htm]
 
* Aronoff, Jodi; Lynn, Steven Jay; Malinosky, Peter. ''Are cultic environments psychologically harmful?'', ''Clinical Psychology Review'', 2000, Vol. 20 #1 pp. 91-111
 
* Aronoff, Jodi; Lynn, Steven Jay; Malinosky, Peter. ''Are cultic environments psychologically harmful?'', ''Clinical Psychology Review'', 2000, Vol. 20 #1 pp. 91-111
*Rothstein, Mikael, ''[[Hagiography]] and Text in the [[Aetherius Society]]: Aspects of the Social Construction of a Religious Leader'', an article which appeared in the book ''New Religions in a Postmodern World'' edited by Mikael Rothstein and Reender Kranenborg, RENNER Studies in New religions, [[Aarhus University]] press, ISBN 8-772887-48-6
+
* Rothstein, Mikael, ''[[Hagiography]] and Text in the [[Aetherius Society]]: Aspects of the Social Construction of a Religious Leader'', an article which appeared in the book ''New Religions in a Postmodern World'' edited by Mikael Rothstein and Reender Kranenborg, RENNER Studies in New religions, [[Aarhus University]] press, ISBN 87-7288-748-6
  +
* [[Lena Phoenix|Phoenix, Lena]]: "Thoughts on the Word Cult" [http://theheartofacult.com/essay.htm?]
   
 
==References==
 
==References==
  +
{{reflist|2}}
*{{fnb|1}} William Chambers, Michael Langone, Arthur Dole & James Grice, ''The Group Psychological Abuse Scale: A Measure of the Varieties of Cultic Abuse'', ''Cultic Studies Journal'', 11(1), 1994. The definition of a cult given above is based on a study of 308 former members of 101 groups.
 
*{{fnb|2}} [[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] ''The Ones Who Got Away: People Who Attend Unification Church Workshops and Do Not Become Moonies''. In: Barker E, ed. ''Of Gods and Men: New Religious Movements in the West'''. Macon, Ga. : Mercer University Press; 1983. ISBN 0865540950
 
*{{fnb|4}} Galanter M. ''[[Unification Church]] ('Moonie') dropouts: psychological readjustment after leaving a charismatic religious group'', ''American Journal of Psychiatry''. 1983;140(8):984-989.
 
*{{fnb|6}} [[Margaret Singer|Singer, M]] with Lalich, J (1995). ''Cults in Our Midst'', San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0787900516
 
*{{fnb|8}} [[Louis Joylon West|West, L. J.]], & Langone, M. D. (1985). ''Cultism: A conference for scholars and policy makers. Summary of proceedings of the Wingspread conference on cultism, September 9&ndash;11''. Weston, MA: American Family Foundation.
 
*{{fnb|9}} Barrett, D. V. ''The New Believers - A survey of sects, cults and alternative religions'' 2001 UK, Cassell & Co. ISBN 0304355925
 
*{{fnb|10}} [[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] (1984), ''The Making of a Moonie'', p.147, Oxford: Basil Blackwell. ISBN 0631132465
 
*{{fnb|11}} Galanter, Marc [[M.D.]](Editor), (1989), ''Cults and new religious movements: a report of the committee on psychiatry and religion of the [[American Psychiatric Association]]'', ISBN 0-89042-212-5
 
*{{fnb|12}} Hadden, Jeffrey K. ''SOC 257: New Religious Movements Lectures'', University of Virginia, Department of Sociology.
 
*{{fnb|13}} Bader, Chris & A. Demaris, ''A test of the Stark-Bainbridge theory of affiliation with religious cults and sects.'' Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 35, 285-303. (1996)
 
*{{fnb|14}} Hadden, J and Bromley, D eds. (1993), ''The Handbook of Cults and Sects in America.'' Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc., pp. 75-97.
 
*{{fnb|15}} Kranenborg, Reender Dr. (Dutch language) ''Sekten ... gevaarlijk of niet?/Cults... dangerous or not?'' published in the magazine ''Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands'' nr. 31 ''Sekten II'' by the [[Vrije Universiteit|Free university Amsterdam]] (1996) ISSN 0169-7374 ISBN 90-5383-426
 
*{{fnb|16}} F. Derks and the professor of [[psychology of religion]] [[Jan van der Lans]] ''The post-cult syndrome: Fact or Fiction?'', paper presented at conference of Psychologists of Religion, [[Radboud University Nijmegen|Catholic University Nijmegen]], 1981, also appeared in Dutch language as ''Post-cult-syndroom; feit of fictie?'', published in the magazine ''Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands'' nr. 6 pages 58-75 published by the [[Vrije Universiteit|Free university Amsterdam]] (1983)
 
*{{fnb|17}} Dr. Zablocki, Benjamin [http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~zablocki/] Paper presented to a conference, ''Cults: Theory and Treatment Issues'', May 31, 1997 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
 
*{{fnb|18}} Duhaime, Jean ([[Université de Montréal]]), ''Les Témoigagnes de Convertis et d'ex-Adeptes'' (English: ''The testimonies of converts and former followers'', an article which appeared in the book ''New Religions in a Postmodern World'' edited by Mikael Rothstein and Reender Kranenborg, RENNER Studies in New religions, [[Aarhus University]] press, [[2003]], ISBN 8772887486
 
*{{fnb|20}} [[Amy Ryan]]: ''New Religions and the Anti-Cult Movement: Online Resource Guide in Social Sciences'' (2000) [http://rand.pratt.edu/~giannini/newreligions.html#Definitions]
 
*{{fnb|21}} Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, ''Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices'' published in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
 
*{{fnb|22}} Johnson, Daniel Carson (1998) ''Apostates Who Never were: the Social Construction of Absque Facto Apostate Narratives'', published in the book ''The ''Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
 
*{{fnb|23}} [[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] (2001), ''Watching for Violence: A Comparative Analysis of the Roles of Five Types of Cult-Watching Groups'', [http://www.cesnur.org/2001/london2001/barker.htm available online]
 
*{{fnb|24}} Richardson, James T. (1989) ''The Psychology of Induction: A Review and Interpretation'', article that appeared in the book edited by Marc Galanter M.D. (1989) ''Cults and new religious movements: a report of the committee on psychiatry and religion of the [[American Psychiatric Association]]'' ISBN 0-89042-212-5
 
*{{fnb|25}} Hall, John R. and Philip Schuyler (1998), ''Apostasy, Apocalypse, and religious violence: An Exploratory comparison of Peoples Temple, the Branch Davidians, and the Solar Temple'', in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7, page 145 "The tendency to treat Peoples Temple as the ''cultus classicus'' headed by Jim Jones, psychotic megaliomanic par excellence is still with us, like most myths, because it has a grain of truth to it. "
 
*{{fnb|26}} McLemee, Scott ''Rethinking Jonestown '' on the [[salon.com]] website "If Jones' People's Temple wasn't a cult, then the term has no meaning." [http://archive.salon.com/books/feature/1998/06/cov_17feature.html]
 
*{{fnb|27}} [[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]], ''Standing at the Cross-Roads: Politics of Marginality in "Subversive Organizations"'' article in the book ''The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements'' edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
 
*{{fnb|28}} Edby, Lloyd (1999), ''Testimony presented to the Task Force to Investigate Cult Activity on the Campuses of Maryland Public Higher-Education Institutions'' [http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/cultsect/mdtaskforce/eby_testimony.htm]
 
*{{fnb|29}} [[David C. Lane|Lane, David C.]], ''The Guru Has No Turban: Part 2'' [http://members.tripod.com/~dlane5/thakar.html]
 
*{{fnb|30}} [[Michael Langone|Langone, Michael]], ''"Clinical Update on Cults"'', Psychiatric Times July 1996 Vol. XIII Issue 7 [http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p960714.html]
 
*{{fnb|31}} [[Timothy Miller|Miller, Timothy]], ''Religious Movements in the United States: An Informal Introduction'' (2003) [http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/essays/miller2003.htm]
 
*{{fnb|32}} [[Merriam-Webster]] Online Dictionary entry for ''cult'' [http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=cult&]
 
*{{fnb|33}} Bowman, Robert M., ''A Biblical Guide To Orthodoxy And Heresy'', 1994, [http://apologeticsindex.org/d01.html]
 
*{{fnb|34}} Casino. Bruce J., ''Defining Religion in American Law'', 1999, [http://www.religiousfreedom.com/articles/casino.htm]
 
*{{fnb|35}} [[Michael Langone|Langone, Michael]], ''On Using the Term "Cult"'', [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_term_cult.htm]
 
*{{fnb|36}} BBC News 20 May, 2000: Sect leavers have mental problems [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/755588.stm]
 
*{{fnb|37}} Giambalvo, Carol, ''Post-cult problems'' [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/giambalvo_carol_postcult_problems.htm]
 
*{{fnb|38}} Ross, Rick, ''Ethical standards'' [http://www.rickross.com/ethics.html]
 
*{{fnb|39}} Burks, Ronald, ''Cognitive Impairment in Thought Reform Environments'' [http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~rb267689/#_Toc2952976]
 
*{{fnb|40}} [[Stephen A. Kent|Kent, Stephen A.]] ''Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF)'', 1997 [http://www.lermanet2.com/scientology/gulags/BrainwashinginScientology'sRehabilitationProjectForce.htm]
 
*[http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~reli238/Completed%20Final%20Paper.htm Full Text of the Paper [[Gavin Parks]]. "The Death Cults": Media Treatment of “Failed” New Religious Movements." April 23, 2002. ]
 
   
  +
==External links==
  +
* [http://www.apologeticsindex.org/ Apologetics Index:] cults, sects, and related issues - Website of [[Anton Hein]], essentially an evangelical Christian point of view.
  +
* [http://www.cesnur.org/ CESNUR] See [[CESNUR]] (the works of some scholars in the area of new religious movements [[New religious movement|NRMs]])
  +
* [http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Cult "Cult"] Defense of the term "cult" to describe the [[Children of God]]
  +
* [http://www.caic.org.au/ Cult Awareness and Information Centre] Australian site.
  +
* [http://www.cultawarenessnetwork.org Cult Awareness Network] - Website of the [[Cult Awareness Network]] now affiliated with [[Scientology]]
  +
* [http://www.csj.org/ Cultic Studies: Information about Cults and Psychological Manipulation] - Scholarly articles, group descriptions and news by the [[International Cultic Studies Association]]
  +
* [http://www.skepsis.nl/onlinetexts.html Dutch Skeptics Society:] Online papers, articles and books about Cults, New Religious Movements, and the Social Scientific Study of Religion
  +
* [http://www.factnet.org/ FactNet:] research on cults, sects and related issues, with an emphasis on [[Scientology]]
  +
*[http://www.cults.co.nz/index.php] New Zealand listing of organizations
  +
* [http://www.math.mcgill.ca/triples/infocult/ic-e1.html Info cult] Canadian site.
  +
* [http://www.religioustolerance.org/ Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance] - articles and essays about religious groups and related subjects.
  +
* [http://www.rickross.org/ Rick A. Ross Institute of New Jersey,] a collection of news articles and information about cults, destructive cults, controversial groups and movements" by [[Rick Ross]].
  +
* [http://www.ugpulse.com/articles/daily/People.asp?ID=586 Seven Years Since the Kanungu Massacre] Cults in Africa
  +
* [http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu University of Virginia Religious Movements Homepage] - Website featuring the opinions and collected papers of the late sociologist [[Jeffrey Hadden]], regarding new religious movements, now edited by [[Douglas E. Cowan]]
  +
* [http://www.cultexit.org/deep/page/1/latest Cult Exit] A mutual support forum for people affected by cults.
  +
* [http://cystinuriaclearinghouse.com/SundayMorningSellOut.html Sunday Morning Sell Out] Cult Stories Submission Site
  +
* [http://www.arcane-archive.org/religion/traumatic-abuse-in-cults-an-exploration-of-an-unfamiliar-social-problem-1.php Traumatic Abuse in Cults]: An Explanation Of An Unfamiliar Social Problem
 
{{cults}}
 
{{cults}}
   
 
[[Category:Cults| ]]
 
[[Category:Cults| ]]
[[Category:New religious movements]]
 
[[Category:Pejoratives]]
 
   
  +
<!--
  +
[[ar:طائفة]]
  +
[[be:Сэкта]]
  +
[[bg:Секта]]
  +
[[cs:Sekta]]
  +
[[da:Sekt]]
  +
[[de:Sekte]]
  +
[[es:Secta]]
  +
[[fr:Secte]]
  +
[[ko:컬트]]
  +
[[ia:Culto]]
  +
[[is:Sértrúarsöfnuður]]
  +
[[it:Setta religiosa]]
  +
[[he:כת]]
  +
[[lb:Sekten]]
  +
[[lt:Kultas]]
  +
[[ms:Organisasi Ajaran Sesat]]
  +
[[nl:Sekte]]
  +
[[ja:カルト]]
  +
[[pl:Sekta]]
  +
[[th:ลัทธินิยม]]
  +
[[zh:邪教]]
  +
-->
 
{{enWP|Cult}}
 
{{enWP|Cult}}

Revision as of 06:19, 3 November 2013

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Social psychology: Altruism · Attribution · Attitudes · Conformity · Discrimination · Groups · Interpersonal relations · Obedience · Prejudice · Norms · Perception · Index · Outline


This article is in need of attention from a psychologist/academic expert on the subject.
Please help recruit one, or improve this page yourself if you are qualified.
This banner appears on articles that are weak and whose contents should be approached with academic caution.
This article does not discuss "cult" in its original meaning of "religious practice;" for that usage see Cult (religious practice).
Main article: Cultism


Cult typically refers to a cohesive social group devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture considers outside the mainstream, with a notably positive or negative popular perception. In common or populist usage, "cult" has a positive connotation for groups of art, music, writing, fiction, and fashion devotees,[1] but a negative connotation for new religious, extreme political, questionable therapeutic, and pyramidal business groups.[2] For this reason, most, if not all, non-fan groups that are called cults reject this label.

A group's populist cult status begins as rumors of its novel belief system, its great devotions, its idiosyncratic practices, its perceived harmful or beneficial effects on members, or its perceived opposition to the interests of mainstream cultures and governments. Cult rumors most often refer to artistic and fashion movements of passing interest, but persistent rumors may escalate popular concern about relatively small and recently founded religious movements, or non-religious groups, perceived to engage in excessive member control or exploitation.

Some anthropologists and sociologists studying cults have argued that no one has yet been able to define “cult” in a way that enables the term to identify only groups that have been identified as problematic. However, without the "problematic" concern, scientific criteria of characteristics attributed to cults do exist.[3] A little-known example is the Alexander and Rollins, 1984, scientific study concluding that the socially well-received group Alcoholics Anonymous is a cult by using the model of Lifton's thought reform techniques and applying those to AA group’s indoctrination methodology.[4] Even though the elements exist, several researchers pointed out the benefit of the organization. Vaillant, 2005, concluded that AA is beneficial.[5]

Laypersons participate in cultic studies to a degree not found in other academic disciplines, making it difficult to demarcate the boundaries of science from theology, politics, news reporting, fashion, and family cultural values. From about 1920 onward,[6] the populist negative connotation progressively interfered with scientific study using the neutral historical meaning of "cult" in the sociology of religion.[7] A 20th century attempt by sociologists to replace "cult" with the term New Religious Movement (NRM), was rejected by the public [8] and only partly accepted by the scientific community. [9]

During the 20th century groups referred to as cults by governments and media became globally controversial. The televised rise and fall of less than 20 Destructive cults known for mass suicide and murder tarred hundreds of NRM groups having less serious government and civil legal entanglements, against a background of thousands of unremarkable NRM groups known only to their neighbors. Following the Solar Temple destructive cult incidents on two continents, France authorized the 1995 Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France. This commission set a mostly non-controversial standard for human rights objections to exploitative group practices, and mandated a controversial remedy for cultic abuse, known in English as cult watching, which was quietly adopted by other countries. The United States responded with human rights challenges to French cult control policies, and France charged the U.S. with interfering in French internal affairs. The United States does not have a classification for cults in its legal system.[10] In recent years, France's troublesome public cult watching lists appear to have been retired in favor of confidential police intelligence gathering.


Differing opinions of the various definitions

According to professor Timothy Miller from the University of Kansas in his 2003 Religious Movements in the United States, during the controversies over the new religious groups in the 1960s, the term "cult" came to mean something sinister, generally used to describe a movement at least potentially destructive to its members or to society. But he argues that no one yet has been able to define a "cult" in a way that enables the term to identify only problematic groups. Miller asserts that the attributes of groups often referred to as cults (see cult checklist), as defined by cult opponents, can be found in groups that few would consider cultist, such as Catholic religious orders or many evangelical Protestant churches. Miller argues:

If the term does not enable us to distinguish between a pathological group and a legitimate one, then it has no real value. It is the religious equivalent of the racial term for African Americans—it conveys disdain and prejudice without having any valuable content.[11]

Due to the usually pejorative connotation of the word "cult," new religious movements (NRMs) and other purported cults often find the word highly offensive.[How to reference and link to summary or text] Some purported cults have been known to insist that other similar groups are cults but that they themselves are not. On the other hand, some skeptics have questioned the distinction between a cult and a mainstream religion, saying that cults only differ from recognized religions in their history and the societal familiarity with recognized religions which makes them seem less controversial.

Study of cults

Stop hand
This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

Among the experts studying cults and new religious movements are sociologists, religion scholars, psychologists, and psychiatrists. To an unusual extent for an academic/quasi-scientific field, however, nonacademics are involved in the study of and/or debates concerning cults, especially from the "anti-cult" point of view.[How to reference and link to summary or text] These include investigative journalists and nonacademic book authors who have sometimes examined court records and studied the finances of groups, writers who once were members of purported cults, and professionals such as therapists who work with ex-members of groups referred to cults. Less widely known are the writings by members of organizations that have been labeled cults, defending their organizations and replying to critics.

Nonacademics are sometimes published, or their writings cited, in the Cultic Studies Journal (CSJ), the journal of the International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA), a group which criticizes perceived cultic behavior. Sociologist Janja Lalich began her work and conceptualized many of her ideas while an "anti-cult" activist writing for the "CSJ" years before obtaining academic standing, and incorporated her own experiences in a leftwing political group into her later work as a sociological theorist.

The hundreds of books on specific groups by nonacademic comprise a large portion of the currently available published record on cults. The books by "anti-cult" critics run from memoirs by ex-members to detailed accounts of the history and alleged misdeeds of a given group written from either a tabloid journalist, investigative journalist, or popular historian perspective.

Journalists Flo Conway and Jim Siegelman together wrote the book Snapping, which set forth speculations on the nature of mind control that have received mixed reviews from psychologists. Others mentioned in this article include Tim Wohlforth (co-author of On the Edge and a former follower of British Trotskyist Gerry Healy); Carol Giambalvo, a former est member; activist and consultant Rick Ross; and mental health counselor Steven Hassan, a former Unification Church member and author of the book Combatting Cult Mind Control, who, like Ross, runs a business specializing in servicing people involved with cults or their family members.[18][19] Another example is the work of journalist/activist Chip Berlet, responsible for much of the work on "political cults" which exists today. Current members of the Hare Krishna movement as well as several former leaders of the Worldwide Church of God also have written with critical insight on "cult" issues, using terminologies and framings somewhat different from those of secular experts. Members of the Unification Church have produced books and articles that argue the case against excessive reactions to new religious movements, including their own.

Within this larger community of discourse, the debates about "cultism" and specific groups are generally more polarized than among scholars who study new religious movements, although there are heated disagreements among scholars as well. What follows is a summary of that portion of the intellectual debate conducted primarily from inside the universities:

Cults, NRMs, and the sociology and psychology of religion

Stop hand
This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

Due to popular connotations of the term "cult," many academic researchers of religion and sociology prefer to use the term new religious movement (NRM) in their research. However, some researchers have criticized the newer phrase on the ground that some religious movements are "new" without being cults, and have expanded the definition of cult to non-religious groups. Furthermore, some religious groups who have been seen as cults by some are no longer "new"; for instance, Scientology and the Unification Church are both over 50 years old, while the Hare Krishna came out of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, a religious tradition that is approximately 500 years old with roots going back much further.

Some mental health professionals use the term cult generally for groups that practice physical or mental abuse. Others prefer more descriptive terminology such as abusive cult or destructive cult, while noting that many groups meet the other criteria without such abuse. A related issue is determining what is abuse, when few members (as opposed to some ex-members) would agree that they have suffered abuse. Other researchers like David V. Barrett hold the view that classifying a religious movement as a cult is generally used as a subjective and negative label and has no added value; instead, he argues that one should investigate the beliefs and practices of the religious movement.[12]

According to the Dutch religious scholar Wouter Hanegraaff, another problem with writing about cults comes about because they generally hold belief systems that give answers to questions about the meaning of life and morality. This makes it difficult not to write in biased terms about a certain group, because writers are rarely neutral about these questions. Some admit this, and try to diffuse the problem by stating their personal sympathies openly.

In the sociology of religion, the term cult is part of the subdivision of religious groups: sects, cults, denominations, and ecclesias. The sociologists Rodney Stark and William S. Bainbridge define cults in their book, "Theory of Religion" and subsequent works, as a "deviant religious organization with novel beliefs and practices", that is, as new religious movements that (unlike sects) have not separated from another religious organization. Cults, in this sense, may or may not be dangerous, abusive, etc. By this broad definition, most of the groups which have been popularly labeled cults fit this value-neutral definition.

Development of groups characterized as cults

Cults based on charismatic leadership often follow the routinization of charisma, as described by the German sociologist Max Weber. In their book Theory of Religion, Rodney Stark and William Sims Bainbridge propose that the formation of cults can be explained through a combination of four models:

  • The psycho-pathological model - the cult founder suffers from psychological problems; they develop the cult in order to resolve these problems for themselves, as a form of self-therapy
  • The entrepreneurial model - the cult founder acts like an entrepreneur, trying to develop a religion which they think will be most attractive to potential recruits, often based on their experiences from previous cults or other religious groups they have belonged to
  • The social model - the cult is formed through a social implosion, in which cult members dramatically reduce the intensity of their emotional bonds with non-cult members, and dramatically increase the intensity of those bonds with fellow cult members - this emotionally intense situation naturally encourages the formation of a shared belief system and rituals
  • The normal revelations model - the cult is formed when the founder chooses to interpret ordinary natural phenomena as supernatural, such as by ascribing his or her own creativity in inventing the cult to that of the deity.

This section is a stub. You can help by adding to it.

Leadership

See also Role of charismatic figures in the development of religions

According to Dr. Eileen Barker, new religions are in most cases started by charismatic but unpredictable leaders. According to Mikael Rothstein, there is often little access to plain facts about either historical or contemporary religious leaders to compare with the abundance of legends, myths, and theological elaborations. According to Rothstein, most members of new religious movements have little chance to meet the Master (leader) except as a member of a larger audience.

Theories about joining

Theories about joining cults

Michael Langone gives three different models regarding joining a cult. Under the "deliberative model," people are said to join cults primarily because of how they view a particular group. Langone notes that this view is most favored among sociologists and religious scholars. Under the "psychodynamic model," popular with some mental health professionals, individuals choose to join for fulfillment of subconscious psychological needs. Finally, the "thought reform model" posits that people join not because of their own psychological needs, but because of the group's influence through forms of psychological manipulation. Langone states that those mental health experts who have more direct experience with large number of cultists tend to favor this latter view.[13]

Some scholars favor one particular view, or combine elements of each. According to Gallanter,[14] typical reasons why people join cults include a search for community and a spiritual quest. Stark and Bainbridge, in discussing the process by which individuals join new religious groups, have questioned the utility of the concept of conversion, suggesting that affiliation is a more useful concept.[15]

Theories about joining NRMs

Jeffrey Hadden summarizes a lecture entitled "Why Do People Join NRMs?" (a lecture in a series related to the sociology of new religious movements, a term Hadden uses to include both cults and sects[16])[17] as follows:

  1. Belonging to groups is a natural human activity;
  2. People belong to religious groups for essentially the same reasons they belong to other groups;
  3. Conversion is generally understood as an emotionally charged experience that leads to a dramatic reorganization of the convert's life;
  4. Conversion varies enormously in terms of the intensity of the experience and the degree to which it actually alters the life of the convert;
  5. Conversion is one, but not the only reason people join religious groups;
  6. Social scientists have offered a number of theories to explain why people join religious groups;
  7. Most of these explanations could apply equally well to explain why people join lots of other kinds of groups;
  8. No one theory can explain all joinings or conversions;
  9. What all of these theories have in common (deprivation theory excluded) is the view that joining or converting is a natural process.

Reactions to social out-groups

One issue in the study of cults relates to people's reactions to groups identified as some other form of social outcast or opposition group. A new study by Princeton University psychology researchers Lasana Harris and Susan Fiske shows that when viewing photographs of social out-groups, people respond to them with disgust, not a feeling of fellow humanity. The findings are reported in the article "Dehumanizing the Lowest of the Low: Neuro-imaging responses to Extreme Outgroups" in a forthcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science (previously the American Psychological Society).[18]

According to this research, social out-groups are perceived as unable to experience complex human emotions, share in-group beliefs, or act according to societal norms, moral rules, and values. The authors describe this as "extreme discrimination revealing the worst kind of prejudice: excluding out-groups from full humanity." Their study provides evidence that while individuals may consciously see members of social out-groups as people, the brain processes social out-groups as something less than human, whether we are aware of it or not. According to the authors, brain imaging provides a more accurate depiction of this prejudice than the verbal reporting usually used in research studies.

Genuine concerns and exaggerations about "cults"

Some critics of media sensationalism argue that the stigma surrounding the classification of a group as a cult results largely from exaggerated portrayals of weirdness in media stories. The narratives of ill effects include perceived threats presented by a cult to its members, and risks to the physical safety of its members and to their mental and spiritual growth.

Anti-cultists in the 1970s and 1980s made heavy accusations regarding the harm and danger of cults for members, their families, and societies. The debate at that time was intense and was sometimes called the cult debate or cult wars.[How to reference and link to summary or text]

Much of the action taken against cults has been in reaction to the real or perceived harm experienced by some members.

Documented crimes

Jim Jones brochure of Peoples Temple

Brochure of the Peoples Temple, portraying its founder Jim Jones as the loving father of the "Rainbow Family".

Certain groups that have been characterized as cults, such as Heaven's Gate, Ordre du Temple Solaire, Aum Shinrikyo, the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God in Uganda, the Church of the Lamb of God of Ervil LeBaron, and the Peoples Temple have posed or are seen as potentially posing a threat to the well-being and lives of their own members and to society in general. The media has referred to Aum Shinrikyo as a doomsday cult and to several others as suicide cults. According to John R. Hall, a professor in sociology at the University of California-Davis and Philip Schuyler, the Peoples Temple is still seen by some as the cultus classicus[19],,[20] though it did not belong to the set of groups that triggered the cult controversy in United States in the 1970s. Its mass suicide of over 900 members on November 18, 1978 led to increased concern about cults. Other groups include the Colonia Dignidad cult (a German group settled in Chile) that served as a torture center for the Chilean government during the Pinochet dictatorship.

In 1984, a bioterrorist attack involving salmonella typhimurium contamination in the salad bars of 10 restaurants in The Dalles, Oregon was traced to the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh/Osho group.[21][22] The attack sickened about 751 people and hospitalized forty-five, although none died. It was the first known bio-terrorist attack of the 20th century in the United States, and is still known as the largest germ warfare attack in U.S. history. Eventually Ma Anand Sheela and Ma Anand Puja, one of Sheela's close associates, confessed to the attack as well as to attempted poisonings of county officials. The BW incident is used by the Homeland Defense Business Unit in Biological Incidents Operations training for Law Enforcement agencies.[20]PDF (934 KiB)

The Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway in 1995 was carried out by members of Aum Shinrikyo, a religious group founded in 1984 by Shoko Asahara. Aum Shinrikyo had a laboratory in 1990 where they cultured and experimented with botulin toxin, anthrax, cholera and Q fever. In 1993 they traveled to Africa to learn about and bring back samples of the Ebola virus.[21]

Warren Jeffs, of Hildale, Utah, the polygamist sect leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, is currently charged with two counts of rape as an accomplice in the spiritual marriage of a 14-year-old girl to her 19-year-old cousin in 2001. Jeffs also faces felony sex charges in Arizona for his alleged role in two underage marriages, and was under federal indictment for unlawful flight to avoid prosecution as of March 2007.[22]

Edward Morrissey, husband of Rev. Mary Manin Morrissey, in 2005 pled guilty to money laundering and using Living Enrichment Center church money for the personal expenses of himself and his wife. Edward Morrissey spent two years in federal prison.[23][24][25]

Lisa McPherson, a Dallas native, a line dancing enthusiast, and a dedicated Scientologist for most of her adult life, died on December 5, 1995, after 17 days in the custody of the Church of Scientology. She was 36 years old.

The Clearwater Police Department investigated her death. The State of Florida ultimately charged the Church of Scientology with two felonies: abuse/neglect of a disabled adult and the illegal practice of medicine. Although the state later chose not to pursue those charges, a wrongful death case has been brought by her estate. The suit was settled on May 28, 2004. [26][27]

Prevalence of doomsday or destructive cults

It has been noted that despite the emphasis on "doomsday cults" by the media, the number of groups in this category is approximately ten, compared with the tens of thousands of new religious movements which are estimated to exist.[28] (including groups that are psychologically destructive but not extremely violent or doomsday-oriented).

Of the groups that have been characterized as cults in the United States alone, only a hundred or so have ever become notorious for alleged misdeeds either in the national media or in local media. Some writers have argued that the disproportionate focus on these groups gives the public an inaccurate perception of new religious groups generally.[How to reference and link to summary or text]

Potential harm to members

In the opinion of Benjamin Zablocki, a professor of Sociology at Rutgers University, groups that have been characterized as cults are at high risk of becoming abusive to members. He states that this is in part due to members' adulation of charismatic leaders contributing to the leaders becoming corrupted by power. Zablocki defines a cult here as an ideological organization held together by charismatic relationships and that demands total commitment.[29]

There is no reliable, generally accepted way to determine which groups will harm their members. In an attempt to predict the probability of harm, cult checklists have been created, primarily by anti-cultists, for this purpose.[How to reference and link to summary or text] According to critics of these checklists, they are popular but not scientific.

According to Barrett, the most common accusation made against groups referred to as cults is sexual abuse. See some allegations made by former members. According to Kranenborg, some groups are risky when they advise their members not to use regular medical care.[30] Barker, Barrett, and Steven Hassan all advise seeking information from various sources about a certain group before getting deeply involved, though these three differ in the urgency they suggest.

Non-religious groups characterized as cults

According to the views of what some scholars call the "Anti-Cult Movement," although the majority of groups described as "cults" are religious in nature, a significant number are non-religious. These may include political, psychotherapeutic or marketing oriented cults organized in manners similar to the traditional religious cult. The term has also been applied to certain channeling, human-potential and self-improvement organizations, some of which do not define themselves as religious but are considered to have significant religious influences.

Groups that have been labeled as "political cults," mostly far-left or far-right in their ideologies, have received some attention from journalists and scholars, though this usage is less common. Claims of cult-like practices exists for only about a dozen ideological cadre or racial combat organizations, though the allegation is sometimes made more freely.[31] Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth are two prominent former members of Trotskyist sects who now attack their former organizations and the Trotskyist movement in general.[32]

The concept of the "cult" is applied by analogy to refer to adulation of non-political leaders, and sometimes in the context of certain businessmen, management styles, and company work environments. Multi-level marketing has often been described as a cult due to the fact that a large part of the operation of a typical multi-level marketing consists of hiring and recruiting other people, selling motivational material, to the point that people involved in the business spend most of their time for the benefit of the organization. Consequently, some MLM companies like Amway have felt the need to specifically state that they are not cult-like in nature.[33]

Another related term in politics is that of the personality cult. Although most groups labeled as political cults involve a "cult of personality," the latter concept is a broader one, having its origins in the excessive adulation said to have surrounded Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. It has also been applied to several other despotic heads of state.

Stigmatization and discrimination

Because of the increasingly pejorative use of the terms "cult" and "cult leader" over recent decades, many argue that these terms are to be avoided.[34][35] A website affiliated with Adi Da Samraj sees the activities of cult opponents as the exercise of prejudice and discrimination against them, and regards the use of the words "cult" and "cult leader" as similar to political or racial epithets.[36]

Amy Ryan has argued for the need to differentiate those groups that may be dangerous from groups that are more benign.[37] Ryan notes the sharp differences between definition from cult opponents, who tend to focus on negative characteristics, and those of sociologists, who aim to create definitions that are value-free. The movements themselves may have different definitions of religion as well. George Chryssides also cites a need to develop better definitions to allow for common ground in the debate.

These definitions have political and ethical impact beyond just scholarly debate. In Defining Religion in American Law, Bruce J. Casino presents the issue as crucial to international human rights laws. Limiting the definition of religion may interfere with freedom of religion, while too broad a definition may give some dangerous or abusive groups "a limitless excuse for avoiding all unwanted legal obligations."[38]

Some authors in the cult opposition dislike the word cult to the extent it implies that there is a continuum with a large gray area separating "cult" from "noncult" which they do not see.[39] Others authors, e.g. Steven Hassan, differentiate by using terms like "Destructive cult", or "Cult" (totalitarian type) vs. "benign cult".

Leaving a "cult"

There are at least three ways people leave a cult. These are 1.) On their own decision (walkaways); 2.) Through expulsion (castaways); and 3.) By intervention (Exit counseling, deprogramming).[40],[41]

In Bounded Choice (2004), Lalich describes a fourth way of leaving — rebelling against the group's majority or leader. This was based on her own experience in the Marxist-Leninist Democratic Workers Party, where the entire membership quit. However, rebellion is more often a combination of the walkaway and castaway patterns in that the rebellion may trigger the expulsion — essentially, the rebels provoke the leadership into being the agency of their break with an over-committed lifestyle. Tourish and Wohlforth (2000) and Dennis King (1989) provide what they consider several examples in the history of political groups that have been characterized as cults. The 'rebellion' response in such groups appears to follow a longstanding behavior pattern among left wing political sects which began long before the emergence of the contemporary political cult.

Most authors agree that some people experience problems after leaving a cult. These include negative reactions in the individual leaving the group as well as negative responses from the group such as shunning. There are disagreements regarding the frequency of such problems, however, and regarding the cause.

According to Barker (1989), the greatest worry about potential harm concerns the central and most dedicated followers of a new religious movement (NRM). Barker mentions that some former members may not take new initiatives for quite a long time after disaffiliation from the NRM. This generally does not concern the many superficial, short-lived, or peripheral supporters of a NRM.

Exit Counselor Carol Giambalvo believes most people leaving a cult have associated psychological problems, such as feelings of guilt or shame, depression, feeling of inadequacy, or fear, that are independent of their manner of leaving the cult. Feelings of guilt, shame, or anger are by her observation worst with castaways, but walkaways can also have similar problems. She says people who had interventions or a rehabilitation therapy do have similar problems but are usually better prepared to deal with them.[42]

Sociologists Bromley and Hadden note a lack of empirical support for alleged consequences of having been a member of a cult or sect, and substantial empirical evidence against it. These include the fact that the overwhelming proportion of people who get involved in NRMs leave, most short of two years; the overwhelming proportion of people who leave of their own volition; and that two-thirds (67%) felt "wiser for the experience."[43]

Popular authors Conway and Siegelman conducted a survey and published it in the book Snapping regarding after-cult effects and deprogramming and concluded that people deprogrammed had fewer problems than people not deprogrammed. The BBC writes that in a survey done by Jill Mytton on 200 former cult members most of them reported problems adjusting to society and about a third would benefit from some counseling.[44]

Burks (2002), in a study comparing Group Psychological Abuse Scale (GPA) and Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) scores in 132 former members of cults and cultic relationships, found a positive correlation between intensity of thought reform environment as measured by the GPA and cognitive impairment as measured by the NIS. Additional findings were a reduced earning potential in view of the education level that corroborates earlier studies of cult critics (Martin 1993; Singer & Ofshe, 1990; West & Martin, 1994) and significant levels of depression and dissociation agreeing with Conway & Siegelman, (1982), Lewis & Bromley, (1987) and Martin, et al. (1992).[45]

According to Barret, in many cases the problems do not happen while in a movement, but when leaving, which can be difficult for some members and may include psychological trauma. Reasons for this trauma may include: conditioning by the religious movement; avoidance of uncertainties about life and its meaning; having had powerful religious experiences; love for the founder of the religion; emotional investment; fear of losing salvation; bonding with other members; anticipation of the realization that time, money, and efforts donated to the group were a waste; and the new freedom with its corresponding responsibilities, especially for people who lived in a community. Those reasons may prevent a member from leaving even if the member realizes that some things in the NRM are wrong. According to Kranenborg, in some religious groups, members have all their social contacts within the group, which makes disaffection and disaffiliation very traumatic.[46]

According to F. Derks and J. van der Lans, there is no uniform post-cult trauma. While psychological and social problems upon resignation are not uncommon, their character and intensity are greatly dependent on the personal history and on the traits of the ex-member, and on the reasons for and way of resignation.[47]

Criticism by former members of purported cults

The role of former members, sometimes called "apostates". in the controversy surrounding cults has been widely studied by social scientists. Former members in some cases become public opponents against their former group. The former members' motivations, the roles they play in the anti-cult movement, the validity of their testimony, and the kinds of narratives they construct, are controversial with some scholars who suspect that at least some of the narratives are colored by a need of self-justification, seeking to reconstruct their own past and to excuse their former affiliations, while blaming those who were formerly their closest associates,[48] and that hostile ex-members would invariably shade the truth and blow out of proportion minor incidents, turning them into major incidents.[49] Other scholars conclude that testimonies of former members are at least as accurate as testimonies of current members.[How to reference and link to summary or text]

Scholars that challenge the validity of critical former members testimonies as the basis for studying a religious group include David G. Bromley, Anson Shupe, Brian R. Wilson, and Lonnie Kliever. Bromley and Shupe, who studied the social influences on such testimonies, assert that the apostate in his current role is likely to present a caricature of his former group and that the stories of critical ex-members who defect from groups that are subversive (defined as groups with few allies and many opponents) tend to have the form of "captivity narratives" (i.e. the narratives depict the stay in the group as involuntary). Wilson introduces the atrocity story that is rehearsed by the apostate to explain how, by manipulation, coercion, or deceit, he was recruited to a group that he now condemns. Introvigne found in his study of the New Acropolis in France, that public negative testimonies and attitudes were only voiced by a minority of the ex-members, who he describes as becoming "professional enemies" of the group they leave. Kliever, when asked by the Church of Scientology to give his opinion on the reliability of apostate accounts of their former religious beliefs and practices, writes that these dedicated opponents present a distorted view of the new religions, and cannot be regarded as reliable informants by responsible journalists, scholars, or jurists. He claims that the reason for the lack of reliability of apostates is due to the traumatic nature of disaffiliation that he compares to a divorce and also due the influence of the anti-cult movement even on those apostates who were not deprogrammed or received exit counseling. Scholars and psychologists who tend to side more with critical former members include David C. Lane, Louis Jolyon West, Margaret Singer, Stephen A. Kent, Benjamin Beith-Hallahmi and Benjamin Zablocki. Zablocki performed an empirical study that showed that the reliability of former members is equal to that of stayers in one particular group. Philip Lucas found the same empirical results.

According to Lewis F. Carter, the reliability and validity of the testimonies of believers are influenced by the tendency to justify affiliation with the group, whereas the testimonies of former members and apostates are influenced by a variety of factors.[50] Besides, the interpretative frame of members tends to change strongly upon conversion and disaffection and hence may strongly influence their narratives. Carter affirms that the degree of knowledge of different (ex-)members about their (former) group is highly diverse, especially in hierarchically organized groups. Using his experience at Rajneeshpuram (the intentional community of the followers of Rajneesh) as an example, he claims that the social influence exerted by the group may influence the accounts of ethnographers and of participant observers.[51] He proposes a method he calls triangulation as the best method to study groups, by utilizing three accounts: those of believers, apostates, and ethnographers. Carter asserts that such methodology is difficult to put into practice.[52] Daniel Carson Johnson[53] writes that even the triangulation method rarely succeeds in making assertions with certitude.[54]

James T. Richardson contends that there are a large number of cults, and a tendency among scholars to make unjustified generalizations about them based on a select sample of observations of life in such groups or the testimonies of (ex-)members. According to Richardson, this tendency is responsible for the widely divergent opinions about cults among scholars and social scientists.[55]

Eileen Barker (2001) wrote that critical former members of cults complain that academic observers only notice what the leadership wants them to see.[56]

See also Apostasy in new religious movements, and Apostates and Apologists.

Allegations made by scholars or skeptics

  • False, irrational or even contradictory teaching, made by David C. Lane with regards to Paul Twitchell;
  • False miracles performed or endorsed by the leadership, made by the skeptics Abraham Kovoor, H. Narasimhaiah, and Basava Premanand for a variety of gurus and fakirs;
  • Discouraging regular medical care but instead relying on faith healing, made by the magazine salon.com with regards to Christian Science;
  • Plagiarism, allegations made by David C. Lane;
  • Incitement to anti-Semitism and other forms of hate, as documented in the writings of Dennis King and Chip Berlet;
  • Child abuse, for example subjecting blindfolded children to many hours of meditation, as documented by Dr. David C. Lane with regards to Thakar Singh;[57] and
  • Forced labor and confinement of members, made by Stephen A. Kent regarding Scientology.[58]
  • Threats, harassment, excessive lawsuits and ad hominem attacks against critics. Allegations regarding the use of such tactics have been made against Scientology, the Lyndon LaRouche organization, and the now defunct Synanon drug-treatment cult.

Prevalence of purported cults

By one measure, between 3,000 and 5,000 purported cults existed in the United States in 1995.[59] Some of the more well-known and influential of these groups are frequently labelled as cults in the mass media. Most of these well-known groups vigorously protest the label and refuse to be classified as such, and often expend great efforts in public relations campaigns to rid themselves of the stigma associated with the term cult. But most of the thousands of purported cults live below the media's radar and are rarely or ever the subject of significant public scrutiny. Such groups rarely need to speak up in their own defense, and some of them just ignore the occasional fleeting attention they may get from the media.

Cults and governments

Main article: Cults and governments

In many countries there exists a separation of church and state and freedom of religion. Governments of some of these countries, concerned with possible abuses by groups they deem cults, have taken restrictive measures against some of their activities. Critics of such measures claim that the counter-cult movement and the anti-cult movement have succeeded in influencing governments in transferring the publics abhorrence of doomsday cults and make the generalization that it is directed against all small or new religious movements without discrimination. The critique is countered by stressing that the measures are directed not against any religious beliefs, but specifically against groups whom they see as inimical to the public order due to their totalitarianism, violations of fundamental liberties, inordinate emphasis on finances, and/or disregard for appropriate medical care.[60]

There exists a controversy regarding religious tolerance between the United States and several European countries, especially France and Germany, that have taken legal measures directed against "cultic" groups that they believe violate human rights. The 2004 annual report by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom states that these initiatives have "...fueled an atmosphere of intolerance toward members of minority religions in France". On the other hand, the countries confronted with such allegations see the United States' attitude towards NRMs as failing to take into account the responsibility of the state for the wellbeing of its citizens, especially concerning children and incapacitated persons. They further claim that the interference of the United States in their internal affairs is at least partially due to the domestic lobbying of cults and cult apologists.[61]

Most governmental clashes with groups alleged to have cult-like characteristics in the United States in recent years have been the result of real or perceived violations of the law by the groups in question.[How to reference and link to summary or text] There have been no well documented recent cases of the U.S. government persecuting a supposedly cult-like group based solely on its religious beliefs. It has been argued that the "brainwashing" ideology promulgated by theorists in the anti-cult movement has been a key contributing factor in recent violent events, including the deaths of close to 100 members of the Branch Davidian group in Waco, Texas.[62] Revelations in the 1970s by the U.S. Senate's Church Committee investigating the FBI's COINTELPRO program revealed extensive evidence that the Agency had engaged in an illegal, large-scale covert program which included portraying various political dissident organizations as violent criminals and extremists as a prelude to and justification for crackdowns on these groups.[63] It is also possible that negative perceptions of a group by prosecutors could make them more quick to prosecute than they might otherwise be; the income tax case against Reverend Moon is sometimes cited as such an incident.)[64]

A 1996 French Parliamentary Commission issued a report unofficial translations, in which a list of purported cults compiled by the general information division of the French National Police (Renseignements généraux) was reprinted. In it were listed 173 groups. Members of some of the groups included in the list have alleged instances of intolerance due to the ensuing negative publicity. Although this list has no statutory or regulatory value, it is at the background of the criticism directed at France with respect to freedom of religion.

The "Interministerial Mission in the Fight Against Sects/Cults" (MILS) was formed in 1998 to coordinate government monitoring of sect (name given to cults in France). In February 1998 MILS released its annual report on the monitoring of "sectes". The president of MILS resigned in June under criticism and an interministerial working group was formed to determine the future parameters of the Government's monitoring of "sectes". In November the Government announced the formation of the Interministerial Monitoring Mission Against Sectarian Abuses (MIVILUDES), which is charged with observing and analyzing movements that constitute a threat to public order or that violate French law, coordinating the appropriate response, informing the public about potential risks, and helping victims to receive aid. In its announcement of the formation of MIVILUDES, the Government acknowledged that its predecessor, MILS, had been criticized for certain actions abroad that could have been perceived as contrary to religious freedom. On May 2005, former prime minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin issued a circular indicating that the list of cults published on the parliamentary report of 1966 should no longer be used to identify groups.[65]

Cults in literature

Main article: cults in literature and popular culture

Cults have been a subject or theme in literature and popular culture since ancient times. There are many references to it in the 20th century.

See also

Wikiquote-logo-en
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:
Wikisource-logo
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Commons-logo
Wikimedia Commons has media related to:

Bibliography

Books

  • Barker, E. (1989) New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction, London, HMSO
  • Bromley, David et al.: Cults, Religion, and Violence, 2002, ISBN 0-521-66898-0
  • Enroth, Ronald. (1992) Churches that Abuse, Zondervan, ISBN 0-310-53290-6
  • House, Wayne: Charts of Cults, Sects, and Religious Movements, 2000, ISBN 0-310-38551-2
  • Kramer, Joel and Alstad, Diane: The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power, 1993.
  • Lalich, Janja: Bounded Choice: True Believers and Charismatic Cults, 2004, ISBN 0-520-24018-9
  • Landau Tobias, Madeleine et al. : Captive Hearts, Captive Minds, 1994, ISBN 0-89793-144-0
  • Lewis, James R. The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements Oxford University Press, 2004
  • Lewis, James R. Odd Gods: New Religions and the Cult Controversy, Prometheus Books, 2001
  • Martin, Walter et al.: The Kingdom of the Cults, 2003, ISBN 0-7642-2821-8
  • Melton, Gordon: Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America, 1992 (Search inside), ISBN 0-8153-1140-0
  • Oakes, Len: Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities, 1997, ISBN 0-8156-0398-3 Excerpts
  • Phoenix, Lena: The Heart of a Cult, 2006, ISBN 0-9785483-0-2
  • Singer, Margaret Thaler: Cults in Our Midst: The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace, 1992, ISBN 0-7879-6741-6 Excerpts
  • Tourish, Dennis: 'On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left, 2000, ISBN 0-7656-0639-9
  • Williams, Miriam: (1998) Heaven's Harlots: My Fifteen Years As a Sacred Prostitute in the Children of God Cult . William Morrow & Co. ISBN 978-0688155049.
  • Wilson, Colin Rogue Messiahs: Tales of Self-Proclaimed Saviors, 2000, Hampton Roads Publishing Company. ISBN 978-1571741752
  • Zablocki, Benjamin et al.: Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field, 2001, ISBN 0-8020-8188-6

Articles

  • Hardin, John W.: Defining a Cult - The Borderline Between Christian and Counterfeit: Article defining a cult by its attributes from a Biblical Christian perspective.[23]
  • Langone, Michael: Cults: Questions and Answers [24]
  • Lifton, Robert Jay: Cult Formation, The Harvard Mental Health Letter, February 1991 [25]
  • Moyers. Jim: Psychological Issues of Former Members of Restrictive Religious Groups [26]
  • Richmond, Lee J. :When Spirituality Goes Awry: Students in Cults, Professional School Counseling, June 2004 [27]
  • Robbins, T. and D. Anthony, 1982. "Deprogramming, brainwashing and the medicalization of deviant religious groups" Social Problems 29 pp 283-97.
  • Shaw, Daniel: Traumatic abuse in cults [28]
  • James T. Richardson: "Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-Negative" Review of Religious Research 34.4 (June 1993), pp. 348-356.
  • Rosedale, Herbert et al.: On Using the Term "Cult" [29]
  • Van Hoey, Sara: Cults in Court The Los Angeles Lawyer, February 1991 [30]
  • Zimbardo, Philip: What messages are behind today's cults?, American Psychological Association Monitor, May 1997 [31]
  • Aronoff, Jodi; Lynn, Steven Jay; Malinosky, Peter. Are cultic environments psychologically harmful?, Clinical Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 20 #1 pp. 91-111
  • Rothstein, Mikael, Hagiography and Text in the Aetherius Society: Aspects of the Social Construction of a Religious Leader, an article which appeared in the book New Religions in a Postmodern World edited by Mikael Rothstein and Reender Kranenborg, RENNER Studies in New religions, Aarhus University press, ISBN 87-7288-748-6
  • Phoenix, Lena: "Thoughts on the Word Cult" [32]

References

  1. Star Trek has an extremely large following but can still be considered 'cult' due to the intense loyalty the franchise inspires; see Cult following
  2. Cult Concerns: An Overview of Cults and their Harmful Methods in the UK. http://www.cultinformation.org.uk/articles.html
  3. Robert J. Lifton, 1961, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism (cited by freedomofmind.com)
  4. Alexander, F., Rollins, R. (1984). “Alcoholics Anonymous: The Unseen Cult,” California Sociologist, Vol. 7, No. 1, Winter, page 32 as cited in Ragels, L. Allen "Is Alcoholics Anonymous a Cult? An Old Question Revisited" “AA uses all the methods of brain washing, which are also the methods employed by cults ... It is our contention that AA is a cult.” transcribed to Freedom of Mind, website and retrieved on August 23, 2006.
  5. Vaillant, 2005, concluded that AA "..appears equal to or superior to conventional treatments for alcoholism,..." and "...is probably without serious side-effects." Vaillant GE. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2005 Jun;39(6):431-6. Pubmed abstract PMID: 15943643
  6. "During the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists who were studying religion started to use it to refer to those faith groups that were not full denominations or sects." —Ontario Consultants On Religious Tolerance: Cults, Sects and Denominations. OCRT references Superior Court of California, 1985: "It began as a sociological term in the twenties and thirties."; testimony of Dr. J. Gordon Melton, UCSB (author of the Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America; see #Bibliography#Books).
  7. "This popular use of the term has gained such credence and momentum that it has virtually swallowed up the more neutral historical meaning of the term from the sociology of religion" James T. Richardson wrote in 1993.
  8. "The use of the concept "new religious movements" in public discourse is problematic for the simple reason that it has not gained currency. Speaking bluntly from personal experience, when I use the concept "new religious movements," the large majority of people I encounter don't know what I'm talking about. I am invariably queried as to what I mean. And, at some point in the course of my explanation, the inquirer unfailing responds, "oh, you mean you study cults!" " --Prof. Jeffrey K. Hadden quoted from Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect" (cited by cultfaq.org)
  9. "...use of the term 'cult' by academics, the public and the mass media, from its early academic use in the sociology of religion to recent calls for the term to be abandoned by scholars of religion because it is now so overladen with negative connotations. But scholars of religion have a duty not to capitulate to popular opinion, media and governments in the arena of the 'politics of representation'. The author argues that we should continue using the term 'cult' as a descriptive technical term. It has considerable educational value in the study of religions. " --Michael York quoted from [http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/diskus/york.html Defending the Cult in the Politics of Representation] DISKUS Vol.4 No.2 (1996) (cited by cultfaq.org)
  10. Flinn, Frank K. Scientology. Live discussion. Washington Post. URL accessed on 2008-02-04.
  11. Miller, Timothy, Religious Movements in the United States: An Informal Introduction (2003) [1]
  12. Barrett, D. V. The New Believers - A survey of sects, cults and alternative religions 2001 UK, Cassell & Co. ISBN 0-304-35592-5
  13. Langone, Michael, "Clinical Update on Cults", Psychiatric Times July 1996 Vol. XIII Issue 7 [2]
  14. Galanter, Marc M.D.(Editor), (1989), Cults and new religious movements: a report of the committee on psychiatry and religion of the American Psychiatric Association, ISBN 0-89042-212-5
  15. Bader, Chris & A. Demaris, A test of the Stark-Bainbridge theory of affiliation with religious cults and sects. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 35, 285-303. (1996)
  16. http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/cultsect/concult.htm#scholar_v_public
  17. Hadden, Jeffrey K. SOC 257: New Religious Movements Lectures, University of Virginia, Department of Sociology.
  18. Detecting prejudice in the brain
  19. Hall, John R. and Philip Schuyler (1998), Apostasy, Apocalypse, and religious violence: An Exploratory comparison of Peoples Temple, the Branch Davidians, and the Solar Temple, in the book The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7, page 145 "The tendency to treat Peoples Temple as the cultus classicus headed by Jim Jones, psychotic megaliomanic par excellence is still with us, like most myths, because it has a grain of truth to it. "
  20. McLemee, Scott Rethinking Jonestown on the salon.com website "If Jones' People's Temple wasn't a cult, then the term has no meaning."
  21. Bioterrorism in History - 1984: Rajneesh Cult Attacks Local Salad Bar, WBUR
  22. [http://www.rickross.org/reference/rajneesh/rajneesh8.html AP The Associated Press/October 19 2001
  23. KOIN 6 News Retrieved June 7, 2007
  24. http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian/stories/index.ssf?/base/news/1181267788141050.xml&coll=7
  25. Wilsonville Spokesman: Morrissey to meet with LEC 'refugees' Retrieved June 9, 2007
  26. State of Florida vs. Church of Scientology Felony Indictment
  27. [3]Retrieved Feb. 1 2008
  28. Barker, E. (1984), The Making of a Moonie, p.147, Oxford: Basil Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-13246-5
  29. Dr. Zablocki, Benjamin [4] Paper presented to a conference, Cults: Theory and Treatment Issues, May 31 1997 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  30. Kranenborg, Reender Dr. (Dutch language) Sekten... gevaarlijk of niet?/Cults... dangerous or not? published in the magazine Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands nr. 31 Sekten II by the Free university Amsterdam (1996) ISSN 0169-7374 ISBN 90-5383-426-5
  31. See Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth, On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left, Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2000. [5]
  32. Bob Pitt, Review of Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth, On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left. What Next Journal (online), No. 17, 2000 [6]
  33. Amway/Quixtar. Apologetics Index. URL accessed on 2007-06-11.
  34. Pilgrims of Love: The Anthropology of a Global Sufi Cult. By Pnina Werbner. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003. xvi, 348 pp "...the excessive use of “cult” is also potentially misleading. With its pejorative connotations"
  35. Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-Negative James T. Richardson Review of Religious Research, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Jun., 1993), pp. 348-356 "the term cult is useless, and should be avoided because of the confusion between the historic meaning of the term and current pejorative use"
  36. FIRM: The Foundation against Intolerance of Religious Minorities
  37. Amy Ryan: New Religions and the Anti-Cult Movement: Online Resource Guide in Social Sciences (2000) [7]
  38. Casino. Bruce J., Defining Religion in American Law, 1999, [8]
  39. Casino. Bruce J., Defining Religion in American Law, 1999, [9]
  40. Duhaime, Jean (Université de Montréal), Les Témoigagnes de Convertis et d'ex-Adeptes (English: The testimonies of converts and former followers, an article which appeared in the book New Religions in a Postmodern World edited by Mikael Rothstein and Reender Kranenborg, RENNER Studies in New religions, Aarhus University press, 2003, ISBN 87-7288-748-6
  41. Giambalvo, Carol, Post-cult problems [10]
  42. Giambalvo, Carol, Post-cult problems [11]
  43. Hadden, J and Bromley, D eds. (1993), The Handbook of Cults and Sects in America. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc., pp. 75-97.
  44. BBC News 20 May 2000: Sect leavers have mental problems [12]
  45. Burks, Ronald, Cognitive Impairment in Thought Reform Environments [13]
  46. Kranenborg, Reender Dr. (Dutch language) Sekten... gevaarlijk of niet?/Cults... dangerous or not? published in the magazine Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands nr. 31 Sekten II by the Free university Amsterdam (1996) ISSN 0169-7374 ISBN 90-5383-426-5
  47. F. Derks and the professor of psychology of religion Jan van der Lans The post-cult syndrome: Fact or Fiction?, paper presented at conference of Psychologists of Religion, Catholic University Nijmegen, 1981, also appeared in Dutch language as Post-cult-syndroom; feit of fictie?, published in the magazine Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland/Religious movements in the Netherlands nr. 6 pages 58-75 published by the Free university Amsterdam (1983)
  48. Wilson, Bryan R. Apostates and New Religious Movements, Oxford, England, 1994
  49. Melton, Gordon J., Brainwashing and the Cults: The Rise and Fall of a Theory, 1999
  50. Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices published in the book The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
  51. Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices published in the book The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
  52. Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices published in the book The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
  53. Johnson, Daniel Carson (1998) Apostates Who Never were: the Social Construction of Absque Facto Apostate Narratives, published in the book The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
  54. Carter, Lewis, F. Lewis, Carriers of Tales: On Assessing Credibility of Apostate and Other Outsider Accounts of Religious Practices published in the book The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements edited by David G. Bromley Westport, CT, Praeger Publishers, (1998). ISBN 0-275-95508-7
  55. Richardson, James T. (1989) The Psychology of Induction: A Review and Interpretation, article that appeared in the book edited by Marc Galanter M.D. (1989) Cults and new religious movements: a report of the committee on psychiatry and religion of the American Psychiatric Association ISBN 0-89042-212-5
  56. Barker, E. (2001), Watching for Violence: A Comparative Analysis of the Roles of Five Types of Cult-Watching Groups, available online
  57. Lane, David C., The Guru Has No Turban: Part 2 [14]
  58. Kent, Stephen A. Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF), 1997 [15]
  59. Singer, M with Lalich, J (1995). Cults in Our Midst, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0-7879-0051-6
  60. Kent, Stephen A. Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF), 1997 [16]
  61. Kent, Stephen A. Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF), 1997 [17]
  62. Anthony D, Robbins T, Barrie-Anthony S. Cult and Anticult Totalism: Reciprocal Escalation and Violence. Terrorism and Political Violence, Volume 14, Special Issue 1, Spring 2002, pp. 211-240.
  63. Bibliography compiled by www.cointelpro.org
  64. Sherwood, Carlton (1991) Inquisition: The Persecution and Prosecution of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon. Washington, D.C.: Regnery (ISBN 0-89526-532-X)
  65. Circulaire du 27 mai 2005 relative à la lutte contre les dérives sectaires

External links

This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).