When does a religion become a cult? (In WSJ)

By MITCH HOROWITZ

America has probably supplied the world with more new religions than any other nation. Since the first half of the 19th century, the country's atmosphere of religious experimentation has produced dozens of movements, from Mormonism to a wide range of nature-based practices grouped under the name Wicca.

By 1970 the religious scholar Jacob Needleman popularized the term "New Religious Movements" (NRM) to classify the new faiths, or variants of old ones, that were being embraced by the Woodstock generation. But how do we tell when a religious movement ceases to be novel or unusual and becomes a cult?

It's a question with a long history in this country. The controversy involving Hollywood writer-director Paul Haggis is only its most recent occurrence. Mr. Haggis left the Church of Scientology and has accused it of abusive practices, including demands that members disconnect from their families, which the church vigorously denies.

To use the term cult too casually risks tarring the merely unconventional, for which America has long been a safe harbor. In the early 19th century, the "Burned-over District" of central New York state—so named for the religious passions of those who settled there following the Revolutionary War—gave rise to a wave of new movements, including Mormonism, Seventh-Day Adventism and Spiritualism (or talking to the dead). It was an era, as historian Sydney E. Ahlstrom wrote, when "Farmers became theologians, offbeat village youths became bishops, odd girls became prophets."

When the California Gold Rush of 1849 enticed settlers westward, the nation's passion for religious novelty moved with them. By the early 20th century, sunny California had replaced New York as America's laboratory for avant-garde spirituality. Without the weight of tradition and the ecclesiastical structures that bring some predictability to congregational life, some movements were characterized by a make-it-up-as-you-go approach that ultimately came to redefine people, money and propriety as movable parts intended to benefit the organization.

Many academics and observers of cult phenomena, such as psychologist Philip G. Zimbardo of Stanford, agree on four criteria to define a cult. The first is behavior control, i.e., monitoring of where you go and what you do. The second is information control, such as discouraging members from reading criticism of the group. The third is thought control, placing sharp limits on doctrinal questioning. The fourth is emotional control—using humiliation or guilt. [This has beend highlighted here as the BITE mechanism.] Yet at times these traits can also be detected within mainstream faiths. So I would add two more categories: financial control and extreme leadership. [So, we're still firmly on Legion territory, n'est-ce  pas?]                                                                                                         

Financial control translates into levying ruinous dues or fees, or effectively hiring members and placing them on stipends or sales quotas. Consider the once-familiar image of Hare Krishna devotees selling books in airports. Or a friend of mine—today a respected officer with a nonprofit organization—who recalls how his departure from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church was complicated by the problem of a massive hole in his résumé, reflecting the years he had financially committed himself to the church.

Problems with extremist leadership can be more difficult to spot. The most tragic cult of the last century was the Rev. Jim Jones's Peoples Temple, which ended with mass murder and suicide in the jungles of Guyana in 1978. Only a few early observers understood Jones as dangerously erratic. Known for his racially diverse San Francisco congregation, Jones was widely feted on the local political scene in the 1970s. He was not some West Coast New Ager gone bad. He emerged instead from the mainstream Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) pulpit, which sometimes lent a reassuringly Middle-American tone to his sermons.

Yet every coercive religious group harbors one telltale trait: untoward secrecy. As opposed to a cult, a religious culture ought to be as simple to enter or exit, for members or observers, as any free nation. Members should experience no impediment to relationships, ideas or travel, and the group's finances should be reasonably transparent. Its doctrine need not be conventional—but it should be knowable to outsiders. Absent those qualities, an unorthodox religion can descend into something darker.[Bold in this paragraph mine. Obviously, clergy will always have their own canonical hoops to jump through, but the RC laity can easily recognise these all of these problems in the Movement.]

Mr. Horowitz, the editor in chief of Tarcher/Penguin in New York and the author of "Occult America" (Bantam), is writing a history of the positive-thinking movement.

_________________________

Aaron adds a very helpful list of elements from this source:

If you have a family member in a cult, understanding the restriction of their critical thought can be very useful:

1.     All-or-nothing thinking. Cults teach black-and-white thinking, such as “Everyone outside the group is controlled by Satan or is evil," "The leader is God and cannot make mistakes," and "You must always strive for perfection in order to reach the group's goal." Such thinking stifles personal growth and keeps a person pitted against the rest of the world.

2.     Overgeneralization. Simply making one mistake can cause a former member to leap to the conclusion that her leader's predictions that dire consequences will befall those who leave are indeed coming true. Former members often have difficulty allowing themselves to make mistakes without hearing harsh criticisms in their heads. Reviewing actions at the end of the day, no matter how simple, can help counterbalance this internal cult chatter. 

3.    Mental Filter. Cults teach people to dwell on their mistakes and weaknesses. In many cults, each day’s activities are reviewed, with concentration on alleged sins, errors, slippages, or wrongdoings. All thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are cause for criticism and repentance. After such training, a person may obsess about a smallmistake and lose sight ofpositive things that are happening. Anything negative becomes a lens that filters out everything else.

4.    Disqualifying the positive. One means of cult control is to not allow members to take pride in their achievements. All that is good comes from the Master, while members are made to feel stupid and inadequate. Making lists of personal strengths and accomplishments may counteract this reaction.

5.    Jumping to conclusions. There are two forms of jumping to negative conclusions, which are probably familiar to former members:

·         Mind reading. Those who were in New Age or Eastern cults may have been led to believe that mind reading is real. This belief is used to make assumptions about others. Doing the same now may be counterproduc­tive. Don't jump to conclusions about another person's actions or attitudes. Don't substitute assumptions for real communication.

·         Fortune telling. Cults predict the failure of their critics, dissenters, and defectors. Former members sometimes believe that depression, worry, or illness is sure to hound them (and their family) forever. Remember that such phobias and distortions have nothing to do with reality, but rather have been instilled by the cult.

6.     Magnification (catastrophizing) and minimization. Magnifying members' faults and weaknesses while minimizing strengths, assets, and talents is common in cults. The opposite holds true for the leader. This trend has to be reversed in former members in order for them to rebuild self-esteem, although reaching a balanced perspective may take time. Feedback from trustworthy, nonjudgmental friends may be helpful here.

7.    Emotional reasoning. In groups that place emphasis on feeling over thinking, members learn to make choices and judge reality based solely on what they feel. This is true of all New Age groups and many transfor­mational and psychotherapy cults. Interpreting reality through feeling is a form of wishful thinking. If it truly worked, we would all be wealthy and the world would be a safe and happy place. When such thinking turns negative, it is a shortcut to depression and withdrawal – “I feel bad and worthless: therefore I am bad and worthless.” 

8.    “Should” statements. Cult beliefs and standards often continue to influence behavior in the form of “should,” “must,” “have to” and “ought to.” These words may be directed at others or at yourself; for example, if you think “I should be more perfect.” The result is feeling pressured and resentful. Try to identify the source of those internal commands. Do they come from the former cult leader? Do you truly obey him anymore?  

9.     Labeling and mislabeling. Ex-members put all kinds of negative labels on themselves for having been involved in a cult: stupid, jerk, sinner, crazy, bad, whore, no good, fool. Labeling oneself a failure for making a mistake (in this case, joining the cult) is mental horsewhipping. It is over-generalizing, cruel, and, like the other cognitive distortions, untrue and self-defeating. Labeling others in this way is equally inaccurate and judgmental. If there must be labels, how about some positive ones? For instance, you could see yourself as trusting, idealistic, imaginative, dedicated, or loyal. 

10.  Personalization. A primary weapon of cult indoctrination is to train members to believe that everything bad is their fault. The guilt that accompanies this sort of personalizing is crippling and controlling. You are out of the cult now, so it is important to take responsibility only for what is yours.

Comments

[Anon2020]

The financial control and the weird leader(s) -- in addition to all the other "marks" -- are certainly hallmarks of reglegcorp.

But of course that's because the whole purpose of the "reglegcorp" cult is financial gain -- and power -- for the "leaders" -- some of whom we can't even identify, apparently.

Would be unbelievable and almost funny if it were not so true, and had not lasted so long -- and if it had not taken place within the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Satan grows bolder.

[Dilbert]

The Legion is considered a cult by the cult experts and reading Mitch Horowitz's summary makes it quite obvious why. The leg-reg environment is extremely secretive and matches up closely with the BITE model.
If you accept that as a fact and then look at how other cult groups have reacted in an unpredictable manner when things go off the rails it is disturbing to think about for family members of those inside. I am not suggesting that leg-reg might start holding Kool Ade parties but it is difficult to know how the leaders could respond now that the wheels are falling off.
The p.t.b. seem to be holding onto power in a manner similar to Gadhaffi in Libya.
I have no idea what a worst case scenario could be but I don't expect anyone expected the Jim Jones or the Waco situations to be as bad as they were either.
I hope that the Vatican is consulting some psychological experts to advise them how to avoid anything that might have been prevented from happening.

[hauler]

Has anyone ever shared the criteria of a cult with an LC religious to see if they can recognize themselves?

[Anon2020]

Dilbert,

Very good point.

Prayers for prudence of officials charged with overseeing demise of reglegcorp -- to ensure safety of victims still trapped inside.

[****]

http://books.google.ca/books?id=-VCadpLauQQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Church+Movements+and+their+Place+in+Theology,+Ratzinger&source=bl&ots=xY5-C2PV7M&sig=LVtMc5bPGov2ZFbiEM-XxX5MKjM&hl=en&ei=hFhoTf2XO8bTgQfavYXPCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAg

[KG]

**** what's your point?

[Fr John]

Q. Has anyone ever shared the criteria of a cult with an LC religious to see if they can recognize themselves?
A. Let me ask my superiors what I should answer, and I'll get back to you.

[KG]

I love your insights, the way you call it like it is, Fr. John, thx.

[Aaron]

I would encourage people to look at information about cults and recovery on http://www.icsahome.com/ and especially on http://www.refocus.org/index.html

I have met some of the people behind these websites and was at two ICSA conferences where they gave time for exLC members to talk about their experiences - the theme being cults in the catholic church.

I met Pete Vere at the conference in Atlanta and some other exRC and exLC, it was a truly great experience for me.

Thinking of the Legion as a cult and learning how it affected me was crucial in my recovery.

I had been at counselling for five years more or less but addressing the legion as a cult really made a difference.

Sometimes people shy away from the term cult - that term is not important, there are similarities for people who have been in a controlling relationship would also find the information about cults of use - that does not mean their relationship was a cult.

[Aaron]

Please look at this description of post-cult trauma syndrome and see if it affects you or your family member:

http://www.refocus.org/post-cult-trauma-syndrome.html

And this is very useful - about critical thought as being important to recovery - its like it was written for exLC/RCs:

http://www.refocus.org/critical-thinking.html

[Aaron]

From that last webpage:

Once the blocks to critical thinking in a group are uncovered, the majority of recovery has occurred. There are several suggestions that other former members have used to aid in regaining those particular skills.

1. Reminiscing. Many former members have reported memory loss as a result of being in a destructive group. One of the best ways to recover some of those memories is talking to old friends and family. Recovering those experiences that have been quashed in a group can help tremendously in regaining the real self-identity and re-establish the experiences that helped shape one’s decision making. Old photo albums, home movies, scrapbooks and other such items are of use here as well.

2. Journals. By keeping a journal through the recovery stage, one can measure feelings, measure progress and discuss decisions that have to be made. This is a way to gauge your progress and do this in a very personal way.

3. Hobbies/fun. This is where I tell people they have to re-learn how to have fun! Not only is it necessary to be able to have fun, but hobbies and such can aid in the thinking skills. Hobbies such as reading, chess and arts and crafts can re-establish those skills and it is all on your terms, not a destructive group leader’s terms.

4. Humor. Related to the above is humor. In most of the groups, humor was taboo. Most of one’s time was spent in grim types of settings. Any humor was seen as useless except when the leader used humor to degrade a member for something they did or did not do. In Psychology Today, an excellent discussion on humor was the major theme. The discussion outlines the types of humor out there as well as its importance and role in everyday life.

5. Give yourself a break. Simply put, you don’t have to do all this recovery work in one day. In fact, it won’t work! The idea that this is on a concrete timetable is the sort of thing that a destructive group would insist on. The time frame depends on the individual and the circumstances as well as the group that the person left. There is no one formula that works. While you are at it, give others a break too. You shouldn’t expect perfection from yourself or others around you.

[Frank I]

I would strongly suggest that folks here save this article (and/or print copies) for future reference. It is very concise, and may be very useful in helping others to understand the legion's cult-like nature.

According to the WSJ webiste, this article will be available to non-subscribers for only 7 days.

Aaron -- thanks for sharing the cult-recovery information.

[Anon out of RC]

One thing I think everyone can and should agree on is that Maciel met most if not all the qualities of a cult leader. See the list here:

http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/cprofile.htm

I think it depends how close you were to him and his web as to how impacted you were by the cultish parts of his methodology. In the cult book I just read called Cult, A Love Story, I was amazed at the power the cult leader had over those closest to her. Made me realize the hold on Fr Alvaro and company and why Fr A dealt with the scandal the way he did.

For those of us who were leaders, formators and second degree, I think we interacted with and taught Maciels methodology so we had to make it our own. Success for me even in Gods eyes was helping those I led and was responsible for to become integrated in the methodology (even though I always felt uncomfortable with the integration and recruiting part of the AFIRE team). The way I was supposed to do that is immerse myself in Envoy, the manuals at the center and anything to do with methodology.

Those who were newer or farther removed from the methodology maybe cannot see some of these cultic attributes of the methodology. But I would think most everyone could agree that Maciel meets the attached characteristics of cult leader to a tee!

I would also say, if you agree he meets the cult leader traits, it sorta makes sense that his methodology was cultish. The hard part is he used the Truth of the Church and our Lord to mask it. The true work for me when I left was separating out the good and the Truth from the cultish methodology.

[Mary Ann]

I sent a link to this site (life-after-rc) website to an RC associate and was immediately rewarded with paragraphs of the typical reaction. amazing. paragraphs of "the pope loves us" and "don't slander" and spiritual recommendations. Good grief, Infear for this man's children, even if he weren't RC. which brings up the question of what kind of men would fall into it.

[Mary Ann]

I don't mean as young people, or as seminarians, but full-grown adult men seeking out and liking Regnum Christi...

[AnonObserv]

Mary Ann:

The numbers of RC men have always been small in the US compared to the women and now obviously are even more reduced.

As an aside:
In some ways I think we are approaching a more critical juncture in the coming months with the whole operation, given that a second wave of departures in the RC is bubbling in this moment underneath the surface.

I am hearing of a number of RC who were a little more diehard some months ago now going on the fence, especially after seeing the witness of the LC priests who have left, they are more encouraged to eventually make the shift. Some are just building their spiritual lives in other directions and keeping the RC around for friendships. Once the moment is right they will just cut the strings.

Similarly there are I am sure a new circle of LCs incubating for departure given the slow/prolonged nature and everyday less-promising signs of authentic reform. Fr. Gill's news piece highlights the sticking points.

If the numbers take another dip in the next year it will mean the crisis will not have hit bottom yet in the view of those on the inside. It means the existential awareness of "no end in sight" will be upon them and that the faithful have not been fooled by the shell games and feigned notions of charism.

Finally, there will come some sort of answer in the next year or two regarding the consecrated branch of RC, ie. if it will be made totally independent of the LC, at least as far as governance. Whether or not this would include 1st and 2nd degree members is hard to say- its just that the whole setup of the statutes is a complete mess from a canonical point of view. My personal opinion is that in the effort to straighten it out- from that alone- a significant part of membership will fall by the wayside in the process.

[Mary ann]

well, that's interesting and hopeful, but as someone who was not a member and with no personal emotional ties to the movement, I am amazed at how you who have left it can bear the amazing judgement, underhanded accusation, whiplashing remarks and snakelike attacks from people you thought were your friends. This experience from someone I barely know was unpleasant enough. and you ex-members are subjected to it while you are still confused and vulnerable. Sr. Briege, have some guts and go public.

[Jeannette]

Mary Ann,
We found it easier to bear those things here (like you, never joined; we were just trying to protect parish children from Challenge and K4J) once exlegionnaries.com led us to realize that this is an LC/RC M.O. and it wasn't just us. We've just gotten to where we can roll our eyes and call it "Regnum Christi's special brand of charity". Since there are very few people in RC here, it's actually kind of useful when Catholic parishioners see exactly how they treat us, what kind of rumors they start, etc. Actually, I usually spread the rumors further once I hear about them. "LTP is part of Regnum Christi/Mission Network so please research this group further and make an informed decision about getting involved. We have serious concerns about LTP's parent organization, the Legion of Christ. The founder has been called a 'false prophet' (Pope Benedict XVI) and the congregation is currently undergoing a reformation to see if it is salvageable.

When Challenge was recruiting and we sent out a similar email, there was some false innuendo about me soon afterward, similar to the stuff that went around about Fr JR after he banned RC from the parish, back when he was pastor. I did not have an affair with Fr Inresidence, despite what you may have heard, and please confirm any nasty rumors with me if any go around again this time. Thanks! Jeannette"

[Done with the Pompous Catholic Hierarchy.]

Mary Ann,I believe that was Benedicts job. He had ALL the information at hand when he appointed DePaolis and now these two men have failed miserably. They've failed the Catholic Church and her members AND managed to protect the priests yet again. NOTHING has changed in Church history. It's not Sr. Briege's job to fix what the POPE was supposed to do all along.

[Mary Ann]

Dear Done, it was his job, and they appear to be failing. But I think that there is always a role for such as Catherine of Siena... come to think of it, she was not wholly successful at all. I look at it as the watchman on the wall. The one who sees must say, or he bears the fault of the one who errs.

[Theresa]

"Dear Done, it was his job, and they appear to be failing. "

Not if Anonobserve is correct. The strategy is working if people are leaving. IT sounds like slowly but sureely many on the inside are realizing the truth . DEprograming does not happen overnight, I would wager each of us stayed much longer then we should have it was a slow process of revelation. Plus bear tactics usually cause people to entrench themselves further. I am basing this opinion on the postive statements from anonobserve. It sounds like mnay are at the point of no return.

[Mary Ann]

Hope so. That's why I said "appear" - the successes are sub rosa at this point.

Why DO bear tactics cause people to entrench themselves? I mean, if your house was on fire, with your kids inside, you would want people to WAKE YOU UP!

I do understand, humanly, but I am not built that way. Smack me in the face anyday, as in the old movies, and I'll say, "Thanks, I needed that." Silk filter fade out....

[Aaron]

Mary Ann - denial is the reason why bear tactics cause people to entrench.

They don't want to beleive that the house is on fire, because it will hurt them a lot.

We all experience denial at some point, I think of it as emotional anaesthetic - an attempt to prevent pain by denying the truth.

Acceptance is needed, but it is most effective when embraced freely and not forced.

I imagine denial is still foremost for most LCs. The lonest distance can be from the head to the heart, so I am told.

[Aaron]

*longest

[Theresa]

Maryanne wrote:

"Why DO bear tactics cause people to entrench themselves? I mean, if your house was on fire, with your kids inside, you would want people to WAKE YOU UP! "

Depends on my hormone levels that day. :-) (humor)

Sorry for the poor editing in my prior post.