Common Signs of destructive cults

 

The word "cult" is used in so many different ways that it is almost devoid of meaning. Some ways in which the term is used are:

Some people use the term in a very narrow sense, only to refer to destructive, doomsday groups that are dangerous to their membership. The Peoples' Temple, Heaven's Gate, and Branch Davidians were three destructive cults.

Others use "cult" as a universal religious "snarl" world (like "heathen," "Pagan" and "Witch"). It is frequently used intentionally to generate hatred and fear of a faith group.

The counter-cult movement (CCM) describes some benign groups as cults because of the latter's untraditional religious beliefs. e.g. the CCM has targeted the Mormon church because of the Latter-day Saints' unique beliefs about Jesus Christ and heaven. These deviate from historical Christian dogma.

The anti-cult movement describes many high-intensity/high demand faith groups as cults, because the of the high level of dedication that they expect from their membership. The Jehovah's Witnesses and Hare Krishna are often targeted. 

Factors commonly found in destructive, doomsday Groups

There is no objective, precise checklist of danger signs to watch for in religious and other groups. It is impossible to rate a group's danger level on a numerical scale and to give it a passing or failing grade. However, some individuals and  organizations have written guidelines that give a general idea of the degree of manipulation and danger found in religious and other groups.

Developing objective early warning signs:

If one wishes to develop objective criteria for distinguishing harmful or potentially harmful religious organizations from harmless religions, one needs to place oneself in the position of a public policy maker. From this perspective, religions that raise the most concern are those groups that tangibly, physically harm members and/or non-members, or engage in other anti-social/illegal acts. However, a public policy maker might well respond that this post facto criterion is too little too late, and that what is needed are criteria that could act as early warning signs--criteria indicating that a previously innocuous group is potentially "going bad." The following discussion will make a stab at developing such criteria, with the caveat that the presence of the less serious factors listed below in any given group does not automatically mean they are on the verge of becoming the next Heaven's Gate.

A list of danger signs:

A study of a number of organizations that have lost membership through suicide or killing. They have exhibited most or all of the following ten factors, to an intense degree:

Apocalyptic Beliefs: 

The leader's preaching concentrates heavily on the impending end of the world, often at a great battle (e.g. War of Armageddon). In addition (as in the case of the Solar Temple and Heaven's Gate groups) the leader preaches that through group suicide at a particular instant, they will all be transported to a wonderful place and escape the devastation that is about to come to the earth.

The group is expected to play a major, elite role at the end time. 

Charismatic Leadership 

They are led by a single male charismatic leader. 

The leader dominates the membership, closely controlling them physically, sexually and emotionally.

Social Encapsulation

They are a small religious group, not an established denomination. 

The group (or at least the core members) lives together in an intentional community which is isolated from the rest of society.

There is often extreme paranoia within the group; they believe that they are in danger and that they are being closely monitored and heavily persecuted by governments or people outside the group. People on "the outside" are demonized.

Information and contacts from outside the cult are severely curtailed. 

Divine Authority  A leader usually makes some sort of claim to special insight or to special revelation that legitimates both the new religion and the leader's right to lead. The founder may even claim to be prophet, messiah or avatar. While many critics of alternative religions have asserted that the assumption of such authority is in itself a danger sign, too many objectively harmless groups have come into being with the leader asserting divine authority for such claims to be meaningful danger signs.

Use of Authority   Far more important than one's claim to authority is what one does with the authority once he or she attracts followers who choose to recognize it. A minister or guru who focuses her or his pronouncements on the interpretation of scripture or on other matters having to do with religion proper is far less problematic than a leader who takes it upon her- or himself to make decisions in the personal lives of individual parishioners, such as dictating (as opposed to suggesting) who and when one will marry. The line between advising and ordering others with respect to their personal lives can, however, be quite thin. A useful criterion for determining whether or not this line has been crossed is to examine what happens when one acts against the guru's advice: If one can respectfully disagree about a particular item of personal--as opposed to religious--advice without suffering negative consequences as a result, then the leadership dynamics within the group are healthy with respect to authority issues.

One of the clearest signs that leaders are overstepping their proper sphere of authority is when they articulate certain ethical guidelines that everyone must follow except for the guru or minister. This is especially the case with a differential sexual ethic that restricts the sexual activity of followers but allows leaders to initiate liaisons with whomever they choose.

Above the Law   Perhaps the most serious danger sign is when a religious group places itself above the law, although there are some nuances that make this point trickier than it might first appear. All of us, in some sphere of life, place ourselves above the law, if only when we go a few miles per hour over the speed limit or fudge a few figures on our income tax returns. Also, when push comes to shove, almost every religion in the world would be willing to assert that divine law takes precedence over human law--should they ever come into conflict. Hence a group that, for example, solicits donations in an area where soliciting is forbidden should not, on that basis alone, be viewed as danger to society. Exceptions should also be made for groups or individuals who make a very public protest against certain laws judged as immoral, as when a contentious objector goes to jail rather than be drafted into the military.

On the other hand, it should be clear that a group leader who consistently violates serious laws has developed a rationale that could easily be used to legitimate more serious anti-social acts. Examples that come readily to mind are Marshall Hertiff, founder/leader of Heaven's Gate, who regularly ducked out on motel bills and who was once even arrested for stealing a rental car, and Swami Kirtananda, founder of the New Vrindavan community, who was caught authorizing the stealing of computer software before being arrested for ordering the murder of a community critic. Documentable child abuse and other illegalities committed within the organization are also covered by this criterion.

Other Factors

The group leadership assembles an impressive array of guns, rifles, other murder weapons, poison, or weapons of mass destruction. They may prepare defensive structures.

They follow a form of Christian theology (or a blend of Christianity with another religion), with major and unique deviations from traditional beliefs in the area of end-time prophecy.

Many intentional communities and most religious groups exhibit a few of the above factors. They are probably not dangerous, because:

  • Some of the factors are absent and/or  

  • Because the factors are not practiced to an intense degree.

 For example, some fundamentalist Christian groups are led by a single male charismatic leader, concentrate on end-of-the-world scenarios in the near future, predict oppression by the government or the New World Order, and recommend that their members do not socialize with "non-believers." However, they are not a danger to their members' lives.

If you are involved with a group in which many of the above factors are present to a high degree, we would urge you to consider leaving the organization for your own safety.

Other dangerous faith groups

Some religious groups are destructive, but are a hazard more to the public than their own membership. They disseminate hatred against minorities, typically non-whites, communists, homosexuals, and Jews. They do not usually call for direct and immediate violence against these minorities. However, they often inspire some of their less mentally-stable members to target minorities randomly. The Christian Identity movement and The Creativity Movement (formerly called the World Church of the Creator are typical. Their members have been responsible for dozens of assaults and random murders in the U.S.

Some religious groups recommend that their membership withhold medical treatment from their children, or themselves. The Jehovah's Witnesses suggest that their membership refuse blood transfusions. The Christian Science church suggests that their membership avoid medical help, and seek healing through prayer -- perhaps with the help of a Christian Science Practitioner. Although no hard data is available, it is likely that the avoidance of standard medical practices will cause some deaths among the membership. There is no reliable data on the disability and loss of life that is directly or indirectly caused by these and other anti-medical groups. However it seem obvious that the total is much greater for these groups than it is for doomsday, destructive cults. 

 

DISCLAIMER: PLEASE READ

I make no claim to be an expert pertaining to the knowledge and information of God and religion and all that which relates to God and religion.

I make no claims, promises or guarantees about the completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this website and its associated sites. Nothing on this site constitutes legal or medical advice.

This website is an unofficial source of news and information continually updated from thousands of sources around the net.

This website is the composition of many hours of research. Information contained within this site has come from numerous sources such as websites, newspapers, books, and magazines.

 By printing, downloading, or using  any info from this site, you agree to our full terms. Review the full terms by clicking here. Below is a summary of some of the terms. If you do not agree to the full terms, do not use the information. All information on this web site is provided as a free service. Under no conditions does it constitute professional advice. No representations are made as to the completeness, accuracy, comprehensiveness or otherwise of the information provided. This site is considered publishers of this material, not authors. Information may have errors or be outdated. Some information is from historical sources or represents opinions of the author. It is for research purposes only. The information is "AS  IS", "WITH ALL FAULTS". User assumes all risk of use, damage, or injury. You agree that we have no liability for any damages. We are not liable for any consequential, incidental, indirect, or special damages. You indemnify us for claims caused by you.

This site is maintained for research purposes only.
Contact us
Please direct website  comments
or questions to webmaster

Copyright © 2004 Jon's

Images, Inc. All rights reserved

 

 

.