Jump to content

Cult: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Vaillant - suggests he was biased? Will need a reliable citation to reference that claim.
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Group controlled by a leader and/or an idea}}
: ''This article does not discuss "cult" in its original meaning of "religious practice"; for that usage see [[Cult (religious practice)]]. See [[Cult (disambiguation)]] for more meanings of the term "cult".
{{Other uses}}
{{Update|part=Entire article needs updating, with attention paid to sources|reason=Some of these sources are over 50 years old, and academic thinking in this area has changed profoundly even in the past twenty-five years|date=September 2024}}
{{Use Oxford spelling|date= July 2020}}
{{Use dmy dates|date= March 2019}}


'''Cult''' is a term often applied to [[new religious movement|new religious movements]] and other [[social group|social groups]] which have unusual, and often extreme, [[Religion|religious]], [[spirituality|spiritual]], or [[Philosophy|philosophical]] beliefs and [[ritual]]s. Extreme devotion to a particular person, object, or [[goal]] is another characteristic often ascribed to cults. The term has different, and sometimes divergent or [[pejorative]], definitions both in [[popular culture]] and academia and has been an ongoing source of contention among scholars across several fields of study.
'''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.
{{TOCleft}}


Beginning in the 1930s, new religious movements became an object of [[sociological]] study within the context of the [[Study of religion|study of religious behavior]]. Since the 1940s, the [[Christian countercult movement]] has opposed some [[sect]]s and new religious movements, labeling them cults because of their [[Heterodoxy|unorthodox beliefs]]. Since the 1970s, the secular [[anti-cult movement]] has opposed certain groups, which they call cults, accusing them of practicing [[brainwashing]].
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.


Groups labelled cults are found around the world and range in size from small localized groups to some international organizations with up to millions of members.
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,<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> concluded that AA is beneficial. Though usually popular with the public, AA has some cult-apostate-style critics of their methodology and history (see [[Cult#External links]]).<ref>The AA brand has community relations problems at some of the totally self-governed local chapters, where questionable sexual contacts and discontinuation of psychiatric medicines have been encouraged during counseling of young female members. [http://blog.washingtonpost.com/rawfisher/2007/07/midtown_group_aa_group_leads_m.html Midtown Group: AA Group Leads Members Away from Traditions]; [http://www.nbc4.com/news/13333860/detail.html?taf=dc More Allegations Arise About Midtown AA: Mom Claims Daughter Was Coerced Into Sex]</ref>


== Definition and usage ==
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.
In the English-speaking world, the term ''cult'' often carries [[Pejorative|derogatory]] connotations.{{sfn|Dubrow-Marshall|2024|p=103}} The word "cult" is derived from the Latin term {{Lang|la|cultus}}, which means worship.{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=321}} An older sense of the word cult, which is not pejorative, indicates [[Cult (religious practice)|a set of religious devotional practices]] that is conventional within its culture, is related to a particular figure, and is frequently associated with a particular place, or generally the collective participation in rites of religion.<ref>{{oed|cult}} – "2.a. A particular form or system of religious worship or veneration, esp. as expressed in ceremonies or rituals which are directed towards a specified figure or object."</ref>{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=321}} References to the [[Roman imperial cult|imperial cult of ancient Rome]], for example, use the word in this sense. A derived sense of "excessive devotion" arose in the 19th century, and usage is not always strictly religious.{{efn|Compare the ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' note for usage in 1875: "cult:...b. A relatively small group of people having (esp. religious) beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister, or as exercising excessive control over members.… 1875 ''Brit. Mail 30'' Jan. 13/1 Buffaloism is, it would seem, a cult, a creed, a secret community, the members of which are bound together by strange and weird vows, and listen in hidden conclave to mysterious lore." {{Cite OED|cult}}}}{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=321}} The term is variously applied to abusive or coercive groups of many categories, including gangs, organized crime, and terrorist organizations.{{sfn|Dubrow-Marshall|2024|p=96}}
" --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>


[[Sociological classifications of religious movements]] may identify a cult as a social group with [[Deviance (sociology)|socially deviant]] or [[Novelty|novel]] beliefs and practices,{{sfn|Stark|Bainbridge|1996|p=124}} although this is often unclear.{{sfn|Stark|Bainbridge|1980|p=1377}}{{sfn|Olson|2006}} Other researchers present a less-organized picture of cults, saying that they arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices.{{sfn|Stark|Bainbridge|1987}} Cults have been compared to miniature [[totalitarian]] political systems.{{sfn|Stein|2016}} Such groups are typically perceived as being led by a [[charismatic]] leader who tightly controls its members.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bell |first=Kenton |date=2013 |title=cult |url=https://sociologydictionary.org/cult/ |access-date=March 17, 2023 |website=Open Education Sociology Dictionary.}}</ref> It is in some contexts a [[pejorative]] term, also used for [[New religious movement|new religious movements]] and other [[Social group|social groups]] which are defined by their unusual [[Religion|religious]], [[Spirituality|spiritual]], or [[Philosophy|philosophical]] beliefs and [[ritual]]s,<ref>{{Cite Merriam-Webster|cult}}</ref> or their [[Followership|common interest]] in a particular person, object, or [[goal]]. This sense of the term is weakly defined{{snd}}having divergent definitions both in [[popular culture]] and academia{{snd}}and has also been an ongoing source of contention among scholars across several fields of study.{{sfn|Rubin|2001|p=473}}{{sfn|Richardson|1993|pp=348–356}}
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.


According to Susannah Crockford, "[t]he word ‘cult’ is a shapeshifter, semantically morphing with the intentions of whoever uses it. As an analytical term, it resists rigorous definition." She argued that the least subjective definition of cult referred to a religion or religion-like group "self-consciously building a new form of society", but that the rest of society rejected as unacceptable.{{sfn|Crockford|2024|p=172}} The term cult has been criticized as lacking "scholarly rigour"; Benjamin E. Zeller stated "[l]abelling any group with which one disagrees and considers deviant as a cult may be a common occurrence, but it is not scholarship".{{sfn|Thomas|Graham-Hyde|2024a|p=4}} However, it has also been viewed as empowering for ex-members of groups that have experienced trauma.{{sfn|Thomas|Graham-Hyde|2024a|p=4}} Religious scholar [[Catherine Wessinger]] argued the term was dehumanizing of the people within the group, as well as their children; following the [[Waco siege]], it was argued by some scholars that the defining of the Branch Davidians as a cult by the media, government and former members is a significant factor as to what lead to the deaths.{{sfn|Olson|2006|p=97}} The term was noted to carry "considerable cultural legitimacy".{{sfn|Bromley|Melton|2002|p=231}}
New religions are typically considered "cults" before they are considered religions,<ref name="StarkRodBain"/> by sociological science, by Christian Evangelical/Fundamentalist religious theology, and by the secular public – yet those three classes are each using different-meaning words, [[homonyms]]<ref>(or in some cases [[Homonym#Related_terms|polysemes]])</ref> that are all spelled c-u-l-t. Most people know only the meaning of "cult" they were raised with, which can result in ''homonymic conflict'', a communicative conflict with people who use a different definition of the same spelling. This results in confusion, misunderstanding, and resentment between members of groups referred to as cults, and members of the public. The simplest ways to avoid homonymic conflict are to learn more meanings of c-u-l-t such as are shown and discussed in this article, and to ask people what they mean when they use the word "cult".<ref>[http://cultfaq.org/cultfaq-perspectives.html#subject1 Cult? What Do You Mean?] - Cultfaq.org</ref>


In the 1970s, with the rise of [[Secularity|secular]] [[anti-cult movement]]s, scholars (though not the general public) began to abandon the use of the term ''cult'', regarding it as pejorative. By the end of the 1970s, the term cult was largely replaced in academia with the term "new religion" or "[[new religious movement]]".{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=322}}{{sfn|Lewis|2004}} Other proposed alternative terms that have seen use were "emergent religion", "alternative religious movement", or "marginal religious movement", though new religious movement is the most popular term.{{sfn|Olson|2006|p=97}} The anti-cult movement mostly regards the term "new religious movement" as a euphemism for cult that hides their harmful nature.{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=322}}
==Definitions==
The literal and traditional meaning of the word ''cult'' is derived from the [[Latin]] ''cultus,'' meaning "care" or "adoration."<ref name = "Webster-cult">[[Merriam-Webster]] Online Dictionary entry for ''cult'' [http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=cult&]</ref> In English, "cult" 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.


== Scholarly studies ==
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.
{{Further information|Academic study of new religious movements}}[[File:Church-sect continuum.svg|right|thumb|400px|[[Howard P. Becker]]'s church–sect typology, based on [[Ernst Troeltsch]]'s original theory and providing the basis for the modern concepts of cults, [[sect]]s, and [[new religious movement]]s]]
Beginning in the 1930s, new religious movements perceived as cults became an object of [[sociological]] study within the context of the [[Study of religion|study of religious behavior]].{{sfn|Fahlbusch|Bromiley|1999|p=897}} The term in this context saw its origins in the work of sociologist [[Max Weber]] (1864–1920). Weber is an important theorist in the academic study of cults, which often draws on his theorizations of [[charismatic authority]], and of the [[Church-sect typology|distinction he drew]] between [[Church (congregation)|churches]] and [[Sect|sects]].{{sfn|Weber|1985}}{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=321}} This concept of church-sect division was further elaborated upon by German theologian [[Ernst Troeltsch]], who added a "mystical" categorization to define more personal religious experiences.{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=321}} American sociologist [[Howard P. Becker]] further bisected Troeltsch's first two categories: ''church'' was split into [[Christian Church|''ecclesia'']] and [[Religious denomination|''denomination'']]; and ''sect'' into ''[[sect]]'' and ''cult''.{{sfn|Swatos|1998a|pp=90–93}}{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=321}} Like Troeltsch's "mystical religion", Becker's ''cult'' refers to small religious groups that lack in organization and emphasize the private nature of personal beliefs.{{sfn|Campbell|1998|pp=122–123}}[[File:Max Weber 1894.jpg|thumb|200px|[[Max Weber]] (1864–1920), an important theorist in the study of cults]]Later sociological formulations built on such characteristics, placing an additional emphasis on cults as [[deviant]] religious groups, "deriving their inspiration from outside of the predominant religious culture."{{sfn|Richardson|1993|p=349}} This is often thought to lead to a high degree of tension between the group and the more mainstream culture surrounding it, a characteristic shared with religious sects.{{sfn|Stark|Bainbridge|1987|p=25}} According to this sociological terminology, ''sects'' are products of religious [[schism (religion)|schism]] and therefore maintain a continuity with traditional beliefs and practices, whereas ''cults'' arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices.{{sfn|Stark|Bainbridge|1987|p=124}}


Scholars [[William Sims Bainbridge]] and [[Rodney Stark]] have argued for a further distinction between three kinds of cults: cult movements, client cults, and audience cults, all of which share a "compensator" or rewards for the things invested into the group. In their typology, a "cult movement" is an actual complete organization, differing from a "sect" in that it is not a splinter of a bigger religion, while "audience cults" are loosely organized, and propagated through media, and "client cults" offer services (i.e. psychic readings or meditation sessions). One type can turn into another, for example the [[Church of Scientology]] changing from audience to client cult.{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=322}} Sociologists who follow their definition tend to continue using the word "cult", unlike most other academics; however Bainbridge later stated he regretted having used the word at all.{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=322}} Stark and Bainbridge, in discussing the process by which individuals join new religious groups, have even questioned the utility of the concept of ''[[Religious conversion|conversion]]'', suggesting that ''[[Religious affiliation|affiliation]]'' is a more useful concept.{{sfn|Bader|Demaris|1996}}
By comparison, the non-English European cognates of "sect" mean what "cult" does in English: ''secte'' (French), ''secta'' (Spanish), ''sekta'' [[Russian language|Russian]], and ''Sekte'' ([[German language|German]]) which also has other definitions.


In the early 1960s, sociologist [[John Lofland (sociologist)|John Lofland]] studied the activities of [[Unification Church]] members in California in trying to promote their beliefs and win new members. Lofland noted that most of their efforts were ineffective and that most of the people who joined did so because of personal relationships with other members, often family relationships.{{sfn|Richardson|1998}}{{sfn|Barker|1998}} Lofland published his findings in 1964 as a [[Thesis|doctoral thesis]] entitled "The World Savers: A Field Study of Cult Processes", and in 1966 in book form by as ''[[Doomsday Cult: A Study of Conversion, Proselytization, and Maintenance of Faith|Doomsday Cult: A Study of Conversion, Proselytization and Maintenance of Faith]]''. It is considered to be one of the most important and widely cited studies of the process of religious conversion.{{sfn|Ashcraft|2006|p=180}}{{sfn|Chryssides|1999|p=1}}
Conservative Christian authors, especially [[Evangelicalism|evangelical]] [[Protestants]], define a cult as a religion which claims to be in conformance with Biblical truth, yet that is believed to deviate from it based upon Evangelical interpretation. [[Walter Martin]], the pioneer of the [[Christian countercult movement]], gave in his 1955 book the following definition:<ref>Martin, Walter. ''The Rise of the Cults'' (1955), 11–12.</ref>


[[J. Gordon Melton]] stated that, in 1970, "one could count the number of active researchers on new religions on one's hands." However, [[James R. Lewis (scholar)|James R. Lewis]] writes that the "meteoric growth" in this field of study can be attributed to the cult controversy of the early 1970s. Because of "a wave of nontraditional religiosity" in the late 1960s and early 1970s, academics perceived new religious movements as different phenomena from previous religious innovations.{{sfn|Lewis|2004}}
<blockquote>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.</blockquote>


== Types ==
Author [[Robert M. Bowman Jr.]] defines a cult as "A religious group originating as a heretical sect and maintaining fervent commitment to heresy," while noting that the adjective "cultic" can be applied to groups approaching this standard to varying degrees.<ref>Bowman, Robert M., ''A Biblical Guide To Orthodoxy And Heresy'', 1994, [http://apologeticsindex.org/d01.html]</ref>
=== Destructive cults ===
''Destructive cult'' is a term frequently used by the [[anti-cult movement]].{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=322}} Members of the anti-cult movement typically define a destructive cult as a group that is unethical, deceptive, and one that uses "strong influence" or mind control techniques to affect critical thinking skills.{{sfn|Shupe|Darnell|2006|p=214}} This term is sometimes presented in contrast to a "benign cult", which implies that not all "cults" would be harmful, though others apply it to all cults.{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=322}} [[Psychologist]] [[Michael Langone]], executive director of the anti-cult group [[International Cultic Studies Association]], defines a destructive cult as "a highly manipulative group which exploits and sometimes physically and/or psychologically damages members and recruits."{{sfn|Turner|Bloch|Shor|1995|p=1146}}


In ''Cults and the Family'', the authors cite Shapiro, who defines a ''destructive cultism'' as a [[Psychopathy|sociopathic]] [[syndrome]], whose distinctive qualities include: "behavioral and [[personality change]]s, loss of [[personal identity]], cessation of scholastic activities, estrangement from family, disinterest in society and pronounced mental control and enslavement by cult leaders."{{sfn|Kaslow|Sussman|1982|p=34}} Writing about [[Bruderhof communities]] in the book ''[[Misunderstanding Cults]]'', Julius H. Rubin said that American religious innovation created an unending diversity of sects. These "new religious movements…gathered new converts and issued challenges to the wider society. Not infrequently, public controversy, contested narratives and litigation result."{{sfn|Rubin|2001|p=473}} In his work ''Cults in Context'' author [[Lorne L. Dawson]] writes that although the [[Unification Church]] "has not been shown to be violent or volatile," it has been described as a destructive cult by "anticult crusaders."{{sfn|Dawson|1998|p=349}} In 2002, the German government was held by the [[Federal Constitutional Court]] to have [[defamation|defamed]] the [[Osho movement]] by referring to it, among other things, as a "destructive cult" with no factual basis.{{sfn|Seiwert|2003}}
In [[Nigeria]], [[gang]]s are referred to as "cults".<ref>[http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/08/africa/nigeria.php Nigerian gangs turn their guns on their own - International Herald Tribune<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>


Some researchers have criticized the term ''destructive cult'', writing that it is used to describe groups which are not necessarily harmful in nature to themselves or others. In his book ''Understanding New Religious Movements'', [[John A. Saliba]] writes that the term is overgeneralized. Saliba sees the [[Peoples Temple]] as the "paradigm of a destructive cult", where those that use the term are implying that other groups will also commit [[mass suicide]].{{sfn|Saliba|2003|p=144}}
===Dictionary definitions of "cult"===
Dictionary definitions of the term "cult" include at least eight different meanings. These include both classic and unorthodox religious practice, extreme political practice, objects or concepts of intense devotion including popular fashion, and systems for the cure of disease based on dogmatic teachings.<ref name = "Webster-cult"/>


=== Doomsday cults ===
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary lists five different definitions of the word "cult."<ref name = "Webster-cult"/>
{{Main|Doomsday cult}}
''Doomsday cult'' is an expression which is used to describe groups that believe in [[apocalypticism]] and [[millenarianism]], and it can also be used to refer both to groups that predict [[disaster]], and groups that attempt to bring it about.{{sfn|Jenkins|2000|pp=216, 222}}{{sfn|Chryssides|Zeller|2014|p=322}} In the 1950s, American [[social psychology|social psychologist]] [[Leon Festinger]] and his colleagues observed members of a small [[UFO religion]] called the Seekers for several months, and recorded their conversations both prior to and after a failed prophecy from their charismatic leader.{{sfn|Stangor|2004|pp=42–43}}{{sfn|Newman|2006|p=86}}{{sfn|Petty|Cacioppo|1996|p=139}} Their work was later published in the book ''[[When Prophecy Fails|When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World]]''.{{sfn|Stangor|2004|pp=42–43}}


In the late 1980s, doomsday cults were a major topic of news reports, with some reporters and commentators considering them a serious threat to society.{{sfn|Jenkins|2000|pp=215–216}} A 1997 psychological study by Festinger, Riecken, and Schachter found that people turned to a cataclysmic [[world view]] after they had repeatedly failed to find meaning in mainstream movements.{{sfn|Pargament|1997|pp=150–153, 340}}
::1. Formal religious veneration
::2. A system of religious beliefs and ritual; also: its body of adherents;
::3. A religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also: its body of adherents;
::4. A system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator;
::5. Great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book).


=== Political cults ===
The Random House Unabridged Dictionary's eight definitions of "cult" are:
A political cult is a cult with a primary interest in [[Politics|political action]] and [[ideology]]. Groups that some have described as "political cults", mostly advocating [[far-left]] or [[far-right]] agendas, have received some attention from journalists and scholars. In their 2000 book ''[[On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left]]'', Dennis Tourish and [[Tim Wohlforth]] discuss about a dozen organizations in the United States and Great Britain that they characterize as cults.{{sfn|Tourish|Wohlforth|2000}}


==Anti-cult movements==
::1. A particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies;
::2. An instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers;
::3. The object of such devotion;
::4. A group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc;
::5. Group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols;
::6. 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;
::7. The members of such a religion or sect;
::8. 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.


===Christian countercult movement===
Webster's New World College Dictionary defines "cult" as:
{{Main|Christian countercult movement}}
In the 1940s, the long-held opposition by some established [[Christian denomination]]s to non-Christian religions and [[heresy|heretical]] or counterfeit Christian sects crystallized into a more organized Christian countercult movement in the United States.{{Citation needed|date=September 2024|reason=what source says it was the 1940s?}} For those belonging to the movement, all religious groups claiming to be Christian, but deemed outside of Christian [[orthodoxy]], were considered cults.{{sfn|Cowan|2003|p=20}} The countercult movement is mostly evangelical protestants.{{sfn|Chryssides|2024|p=41}} The Christian countercult movement asserts that Christian groups whose teachings deviate from the belief that the bible is inerrant,{{sfn|Cowan|2003|p=31}} but also focuses on non-Christian religions like Hinduism.{{sfn|Chryssides|2024|p=41}} Christian countercult activist writers also emphasize the need for Christians to [[evangelism|evangelize]] to followers of cults.{{sfn|Cowan|2003|p=25}}


===Secular anti-cult movement===
::1a. a system of religious worship or ritual
{{Main|Anti-cult movement}}
::1b. a quasi-religious group, often living in a colony, with a charismatic leader who indoctrinates members with unorthodox or extremist views, practices or beliefs
[[File:Anti-Aum Shinrikyo protest.JPG|thumb|An anti-[[Aum Shinrikyo]] protest in Japan, 2009]]Starting in the late 1960s, a different strand of anti-cult groups arose, with the formation of the [[secular]] anti-cult movement (ACM).{{sfn|Chryssides|2024|p=46}} This was in response to the rise of new religions in the 1960s and 1970s, particularly the events at [[Jonestown]] and the deaths of nearly 1000 people.{{sfn|Chryssides|2024|p=47}} The organizations that formed the secular anti-cult movement (ACM) often acted on behalf of relatives of "cult" [[religious conversion|converts]] who did not believe their loved ones could have altered their lives so drastically by their own [[free will]]. A few [[psychologist]]s and [[sociologist]]s working in this field suggested that [[brainwashing]] techniques were used to maintain the loyalty of cult members.{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001}}{{sfn|Chryssides|2024|p=46}}
::2a. devoted attachment to, or extravagant admiration for, a person, principle or lifestyle, especially when regarded as a fad [the cult of nudism]
::2b. the object of such attachment
::3. a group of followers, sect


The belief that cults brainwashed their members became a unifying theme among cult critics and in the more extreme corners of the anti-cult movement techniques like the sometimes forceful "[[deprogramming]]" of cult members was practised.{{sfn|Shupe|Bromley|1998a|p=27}} In the [[mass media]], and among average citizens, "cult" gained an increasingly negative connotation, becoming associated with things like [[kidnapping]], brainwashing, [[psychological abuse]], [[sexual abuse]], and other [[crime|criminal activity]], and [[mass suicide]]. While most of these negative qualities usually have real documented precedents in the activities of a very small minority of new religious groups, mass culture often extends them to any religious group viewed as culturally [[Deviance (sociology)|deviant]], however peaceful or law abiding it may be.{{sfn|Wright|1997}}{{sfn|van Driel|Richardson|1988}}{{sfn|Hill|Hickman|McLendon|2001}}{{sfn|Richardson|1993|pp=348–356}}
For authoritative British usage, the Compact Oxford English Dictionary of Current English definitions of "cult" and "sect" are:


While some psychologists were receptive to these theories, sociologists were for the most part sceptical of their ability to explain conversion to [[New religious movement|NRMs]].{{sfn|Barker|1986}} In the late 1980s, psychologists and sociologists started to abandon theories like brainwashing and mind control. While scholars may believe that various less dramatic [[coercion|coercive]] psychological mechanisms could influence group members, they came to see conversion to new religious movements principally as an act of a [[Rational choice theory|rational choice]].{{sfn|Ayella|1990}}{{sfn|Cowan|2003|p=ix}}
:cult<ref>[http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/cult?view=uk AskOxford: cult<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>
::1 a system of religious worship directed towards a particular figure or object.
::2 a small religious group regarded as strange or as imposing excessive control over members.
::3 something popular or fashionable among a particular section of society.


==Governmental policies and actions==
:sect<ref>[http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/sect?view=uk AskOxford: sect<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>
{{main|Governmental lists of cults and sects}}
::1 a group of people with different religious beliefs (typically regarded as heretical) from those of a larger group to which they belong.
The application of the labels ''cult'' or ''sect'' to religious movements in government documents signifies the popular and negative use of the term ''cult'' in English and a functionally similar use of words translated as 'sect' in several European languages.{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001|pp=143–168}} Sociologists critical to this negative politicized use of the word ''cult'' argue that it may adversely impact the religious freedoms of group members.{{sfn|Davis|1996}} At the height of the counter-cult movement and ritual abuse scare of the 1990s, some governments published lists of cults.{{efn|Or "sects" in German or French-speaking countries, the German term ''sekten'' and the French term ''sectes'' having assumed the same derogatory meaning as English "cult".}} Groups labelled "cults" are found around the world and range in size from local groups with a few members to international organizations with millions.{{sfn|Barker|1999}}
::2 a group with extreme or dangerous philosophical or political ideas.


While these documents utilize similar terminology, they do not necessarily include the same groups nor is their assessment of these groups based on agreed criteria.{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001|pp=143–168}} Other governments and world bodies also report on new religious movements but do not use these terms to describe the groups.{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001|pp=143–168}} Since the 2000s, some governments have again distanced themselves from such classifications of religious movements.{{efn|{{Multiref2
British "sect" formerly included a contextually implied meaning, of what "cult" now means
|1=Austria: Beginning in 2011, the [[Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor]]'s [[International Religious Freedom Report]] no longer distinguishes sects in Austria as a separate group. {{Cite web|title=International Religious Freedom Report for 2012|url=https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/religiousfreedom/index.htm?year=2012&dlid=208288|access-date=3 September 2013|publisher=Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor}}
in both USA and the UK.<ref>Examples of contemporary British "cult" usage: [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/05/18/uslave.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/05/18/ixnews.html Daily Telegraph]; [http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=978262002 Scotsman] Example of contemporary British "sect" usage: ''"Before beginning counselling the counsellor needs to be sure that it was indeed a cult and not a sect in which the person was enmeshed. A sect may be described as a spin-off from an established religion or quite eclectic, but it does not use techniques of mind control on its membership."''[http://www.cultinformation.org.uk/articles2.html Web site, UK-based], [[Cult Information Centre]]</ref> Some other nations still use the foreign equivalents of old British "sect" ("secte," "sekte," or "secta." etc.) to imply "cult."<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sect#Corresponding_words_in_French.2C_Spanish.2C_German.2C_Polish.2C_Dutch.2C_and_Romanian]</ref> Both words, as well as "cult" in its original sense of [[Cult (religious practice)|cultus]] (e.g., Middle Ages ''cult of Mary''), must be understood to correctly interpret 20th century popular cult references in world English.
|2=Belgium: The Justice Commission of the [[Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)|Belgian House of Representatives]] published a report on cults in 1997. A Brussels Appeals Court in 2005 condemned the House of Representatives on the grounds that it had damaged the image of an organization listed.
|3=France: A parliamentary commission of the National Assembly compiled a list of purported cults in 1995. In 2005, the Prime Minister stated that the concerns addressed in the list "had become less pertinent" and that the government needed to balance its concern with cults with respect for public freedoms and [[laїcité]].
|4=Germany: The legitimacy of a [[Governmental lists of cults and sects#Germany|1997 Berlin Senate report]] listing cults (''sekten'') was defended in a court decision of 2003 (Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin [OVG 5 B 26.00] 25 September 2003). The list is still maintained by Berlin city authorities: [http://www.berlin.de/sen/familie/sekten-psychogruppen/ Sekten und Psychogruppen – Leitstelle Berlin].
}}}} While the official response to new religious groups has been mixed across the globe, some governments aligned more with the critics of these groups to the extent of distinguishing between "legitimate" religion and "dangerous", "unwanted" cults in [[public policy]].{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001}}{{sfn|Edelman|Richardson|2003}}


=== China ===
=== Sociological definitions of religion ===
{{Main articles|Heterodox teachings (Chinese law)}}
[[File:Destruction d'ouvrages du Falun Gong lors de la répression de 1999 en Chine.jpg|thumb|right|[[Falun Gong]] books being symbolically destroyed by the [[Chinese government]]]]


For centuries, governments in China have categorized certain religions as ''[[Heterodox teachings (Chinese law)|xiéjiào]]'' ({{Zh|c=[[wikt:邪教|邪教]]|s=|t=|p=|labels=no}}), translated as "evil cults" or "heterodox teachings".{{sfn|Penny|2012}} In [[imperial China]], the classification of a religion as {{Lang|zh-latn|xiejiao}} did not necessarily mean that a religion's teachings were believed to be false or inauthentic; rather, the label was applied to religious groups that were not authorized by the state, or it was applied to religious groups that were believed to challenge the legitimacy of the state.{{sfn|Penny|2012}}{{sfn|Zhu|2010|p=487}} Groups branded ''{{Lang|zh-latn|xiejiao}}'' face suppression and punishment by authorities.{{sfn|Heggie|2020|p=257}}{{sfn|Zhu|2010|p=}}
{{main|sociological classifications of religious movements}}
According to one common typology among sociologists, religious groups are classified as [[ecclesia (sociology of religion)|ecclesia]]s, [[religious denomination|denomination]]s, cults or [[sect]]s.


===Russia===
A very common definition in the sociology of religion for ''cult'' is one of the four terms making up the [[church-sect typology]]. Under this definition, a cult refers to a group with a high degree of tension with the surrounding society combined with novel religious beliefs. This is distinguished from sects, which have a high degree of tension with society but whose beliefs are traditional to that society, and ecclesias and denominations, which are groups with a low degree of tension and traditional beliefs.
In 2008 the [[Russian Interior Ministry]] prepared a list of "extremist groups". At the top of the list were Islamic groups outside of "traditional Islam", which is supervised by the Russian government. Next listed were "[[Neopaganism|Pagan cults]]".{{sfn|Soldatov|Borogan|2010|pp=65–66}} In 2009 the [[Russian Ministry of Justice]] created a council which it named the "Council of Experts Conducting State Religious Studies Expert Analysis." The new council listed 80 large sects which it considered potentially dangerous to Russian society, and it also mentioned that there were thousands of smaller ones. The large sects which were listed included: [[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]], the [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], and other sects which were loosely referred to as "[[neo-Pentecostal]]s".{{sfn|Marshall|2013}}


=== United States ===
According to [[Rodney Stark]]'s ''A Theory of Religion'', most religions start out their lives as cults or sects, i.e. groups in high tension with the surrounding society. Over time, they tend to either die out or become more established, mainstream and in less tension with society. Cults are new groups with a novel theology, while sects are attempts to return mainstream religions to what the group views as their original purity.<ref name="StarkRodBain">Stark, Rodney and Bainbridge, Willia S. ''A Theory of Religion," Rutgers University Press, 1987,1996, ISBN 0-8135-2330-3</ref> As set out by Stark and Bainbridge, the term "cult", is used distinctly among the general definitions, and is closely related to the historically changed definitions of "sect." In this contemporary view, a "sect" is specifically "a deviant religious organization with traditional beliefs and practices," as compared to a "cult" which indicates a "a deviant religious organization with novel beliefs and practices."<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20070820214816/http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/cultsect/concult.htm#key%20concepts Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect"#Key Concepts Defined] Web archive document; Date: 1999-06-25, Document author: Prof. Jeffrey K. Hadden (1937-2003). - "CHURCH: a conventional religious organization." - "SECT: a deviant religious organization with traditional beliefs and practices." - "CULT: a deviant religious organization with novel beliefs and practices." ''[Hadden cites] Stark and Bainbridge, 1987:[p]124; <small>(1987:124 full citation: Stark, Rodney, and William Sims Bainbridge, 1987. A Theory of Religion. New York: Peter Land. [Reprinted, 1996 by Rutgers University Press])</small>''</ref>
In the 1970s, the scientific status of the "[[Brainwashing|brainwashing theory]]" became a central topic in [[List of courts of the United States|U.S. court]] cases where the theory was used to try to justify the use of the forceful [[deprogramming]] of cult members{{sfn|Lewis|2004}}{{sfn|Davis|1996}} Meanwhile, sociologists who were critical of these theories assisted advocates of [[religious freedom]] in defending the legitimacy of new religious movements in court.{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001}}{{sfn|Edelman|Richardson|2003}} In the United States the religious activities of cults are protected under the [[First Amendment of the United States Constitution]], which prohibits governmental [[establishment of religion]] and protects [[freedom of religion]], [[freedom of speech]], [[freedom of the press]], and [[freedom of assembly]]; however, no members of religious groups or cults are granted any special [[Legal immunity|immunity]] from [[Prosecutor|criminal prosecution]].{{sfn|Ogloff|Pfeifer|1992}}


In 1990, the [[Legal case|court case]] of ''United States v. Fishman'' (1990) ended the usage of brainwashing theories by expert witnesses such as [[Margaret Singer]] and [[Richard Ofshe]]. In the case's ruling, the court cited the [[Frye standard]], which states that the [[scientific theory]] which is utilized by expert witnesses must be generally accepted in their respective fields. The court deemed [[brainwashing]] to be inadmissible in expert testimonies, using supporting documents which were published by the [[APA Task Force on Deceptive and Indirect Methods of Persuasion and Control]], literature from previous court cases in which brainwashing theories were used, and expert testimonies which were delivered by scholars such as [[Dick Anthony]].{{sfn|Introvigne|2014|pp=313–316}}
Since this definition of "cult" is defined in part in terms of tension with the surrounding society, the same group may both be and not be a cult at different places or times. For example, Christianity was by this definition a cult in 1st and 2nd century Rome, while in fifth century Rome it became rather an ecclesia (the state religion). Similarly, very conservative Islam could constitute a cult in the West but also the ecclesia in some conservative Muslim countries. Likewise, because novelty of beliefs and tension are elements in the definition: the Hare Krishnas are not a cult but a sect in India (since their beliefs are largely traditional to Hindu culture), while they are by this definition a cult in the Western world (since their beliefs are largely novel to Christian culture).


=== Western Europe ===
The English sociologist [[Roy Wallis]]<ref>[[Eileen Barker|Barker, E]]. ''New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction'' (1990), Bernan Press, ISBN 0-11-340927-3</ref> argues that a cult is characterized "[[epistemology|epistemological]] individualism" by which he means that "the cult has no clear locus of final authority beyond the individual member." Cults, according to Wallis, are generally described as "oriented towards the problems of individuals, loosely structured, tolerant, non-exclusive", making "few demands on members", without possessing a "clear distinction between members and non-members", having "a rapid turnover of membership", and are transient collectives with vague boundaries and fluctuating belief systems Wallis asserts that cults emerge from the "cultic milieu". Wallis contrasts a cult with a [[sect]] that he asserts is characterized by "[[epistemology|epistemological]] authoritarianism": sects possess some authoritative locus for the legitimate attribution of heresy. According to Wallis, "sects lay a claim to possess unique and privileged access to the truth or salvation and their committed adherents typically regard all those outside the confines of the collectivity as 'in error'".<ref>Wallis, Roy ''The Road to Total Freedom A Sociological analysis of Scientology'' (1976) [http://whyaretheydead.net/krasel/books/wallis/wallis1.html available online (bad scan)]</ref><ref>Wallis, Roy ''Scientology: Therapeutic Cult to Religious Sect'' [http://soc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/1/89 abstract only] (1975)</ref>
{{See also|MIVILUDES|Union nationale des associations de défense des familles et de l'individu|Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France}}
The governments of France and Belgium have taken policy positions which accept "brainwashing" theories uncritically, while the governments of other European nations, such as those of Sweden and Italy, are cautious with regard to brainwashing and as a result, they have responded more neutrally with regard to new religions.{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001|pp=144–146}} Scholars have suggested that the outrage which followed the mass murder/suicides perpetuated by the [[Order of the Solar Temple|Solar Temple]], have significantly contributed to European anti-cult positions.{{sfn|Richardson|Introvigne|2001|p=144}}{{sfn|Robbins|2002|p=174}} In the 1980s, clergymen and officials of the French government expressed concern that some [[Religious order|orders]] and other groups within the [[Roman Catholic Church]] would be adversely affected by anti-cult laws which were then being considered.{{sfn|Richardson|2004|p=48}}


== See also ==
===Psychological definition===
* [[Cabal]]
Studies of the psychological aspects of cults focus on the individual person, and factors relating to the choice to become involved as well as the subsequent effects on individuals. Under one view, an important factor is [[coercive persuasion]] which suppresses the ability of people to reason, think critically, and make choices in their own best interest.
* [[Cargo cult]]
* [[Clique]]
* [[Cult of personality]]
* [[Cult following]]
* [[Fanaticism]]
* [[Magical organization]]
* [[New religious movements and cults in popular culture]]
* [[Secret society]]
* [[Sociological classifications of religious movements]]
* [[Western esotericism]]


== References ==
Studies of religious, political, and other cults have identified a number of key steps in this type of coercive persuasion:<ref>Galanter, 1989; Mithers, 1994; Ofshe & Watters, 1994; Singer, Temerlin, & Langone, 1990; Zimbardo & leipper, 1991</ref>
=== Explanatory notes ===
# People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;
{{notelist}}
# Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;
# They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader;
# They get a new identity based on the group;
# They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives, and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.<ref>Psychology 101, Carole Wade et al., 2005</ref>

===B.I.T.E.===
[[Steven_Hassan|Steven Alan Hassan]], former member of the Unification Church, and now an exit counselor and mental health counselor, has developed his own model, the [http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/articles/BITE.htm BITE Model], to determine how destructive mind control can be understood in terms of four basic components, which form the acronym BITE:

:# '''B'''ehavior Control
:# '''I'''nformation Control
:# '''T'''hought Control
:# '''E'''motional Control

It is important to understand that destructive mind control can be determined when the overall effect of these four components promotes dependency and obedience to some leader or cause. It is not necessary for every single item on the list to be present. Mind controlled cult members can live in their own apartments, have nine-to-five jobs, be married with children, and still be unable to think for themselves and act independently.<ref>http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/responsibility/mind.htm</ref>

===Definition of 'cult' according to secular opposition===
Secular cult opponents tend to define a "cult" as a group that tends to manipulate, exploit, and control its members. Specific factors in cult behavior are said to include manipulative and authoritarian [[mind control]] over members, communal and totalistic organization, aggressive proselytizing, systematic programs of indoctrination, and perpetuation in middle-class communities.<ref>T. Robbins and D. Anthony (1982:283, quoted in Richardson 1993:351) ("...certain manipulative and authoritarian groups which allegedly employ mind control and pose a threat to mental health are universally labeled cults. These groups are usually 1) authoritarian in their leadership; 2)communal and totalistic in their organization; 3) aggressive in their proselytizing; 4) systematic in their programs of indoctrination; 5)relatively new and unfamiliar in the United states; 6)middle class in their clientele")</ref>

While acknowledging the issue of multiple definitions of "cult",<ref>[http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_term_cult_definitional_ambiquity.htm The Definitional Ambiguity of "Cult" and ICSA’s Mission]</ref> [[Michael Langone]] states that "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."<ref>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.</ref> A similar definition is given by [[Louis Jolyon West]]:

: ''"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 judgment, 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." ''<ref>[[Louis Jolyon 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]]–11''. Weston, MA: American Family Foundation.</ref>

In each, the focus tends to be on the specific tactics of conversion, the negative impact on individual members, and the difficulty in leaving once indoctrination has occurred.<ref>A discussion and list of ACM (anti-cult movement) groups can be found at [http://www.religioustolerance.org/acm.htm http://www.religioustolerance.org/acm.htm].</ref>

===Christianity and definitions of "cults"===
{{Main|Christian cult}}
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 that were not held by current, mainstream Christianity.<ref>Some examples of sources (with published dates where known) that documented this approach are:

* ''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</ref>

==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 [[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.

==Study of cults==
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.

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 [[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:

===Cults, NRMs, and the sociology and psychology of religion===
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>

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.

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.

===Development of groups characterized as cults===
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:

* The '''psycho-pathological model''' &ndash; 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''' &ndash; 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''' &ndash; 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 &ndash; this emotionally intense situation naturally encourages the formation of a shared belief system and rituals
* The '''normal revelations model''' &ndash; 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===
:''See also [[Development of religion#Role of charismatic figures in the development of religions|Role of charismatic figures in the development of religions'']]

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.

===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.<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>

====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<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;
# 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===
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>

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-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}}

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

==== Documented crimes ====

[[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>]]
Around two hundred or more groups referred to as cults have become notably entangled with the law.<ref>See [[Groups referred to as cults in government reports]]</ref> These entanglements historically include trivial infractions such as those related to mass begging, and civil suits for sexual abuse, but more significantly include serious crimes ranging from tax felonies to murder.

Media reports of cultic-related crimes cause a negative public perception of all groups labeled as cults in the populist sense. Therefore, groups labeled as cults usually deny that they are cults, even though they may fit the definition of a cult in the neutral sociological sense.

The media have referred to [[Aum Shinrikyo]] as a ''doomsday cult'', and to several others as ''suicide cults,'' or [[destructive cult]]s, because they killed, otherwise harmed, or threatened the well-being and lives of their own members, uninvolved persons, and society in general. Fewer than 20 groups, including [[Aum Shinrikyo]], [[Peoples Temple]], [[Heaven's Gate (religious group)|Heaven's Gate]], [[Order of the Solar Temple]], and [[Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God]], have been publicly characterized as examples of destructive cults<ref>(See [[Destructive cult]].)</ref>. A group that is sued or charged with a crime less serious than life-threatening, is generally not called a destructive cult, but is sometimes labeled an "abusive cult," or is just referred to as a cult, since that is sociologically plausible in avoiding a libel case.

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 it cultured and experimented with [[botulin toxin]], [[anthrax]], [[cholera]] and [[Q fever]]. In 1993 members traveled to Africa to learn about and bring back samples of the [[Ebola]] virus.[http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/olson.htm]

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 megalomaniac par excellence is still with us, like most myths, because it has a grain of truth to it. "</ref><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 original 1970's [[cult debate]] in the United States. Its mass suicide of over 900 members, and murders of nonmembers including USA Congressman [[Leo Ryan]] on [[November 18]], [[1978]], led to increased global public concern and scrutiny of cults by governments.

European public pressure following the 1994 infant murder and subsequent mass murder-suicides of the [[Order of the Solar Temple]] colonies in Canada and Switzerland led to the 1995 [[Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France]]. This legislation resulted in uncontroversial human rights standards for judging cultic exploitation and abuse, the controversial remedy of ''cult watching'' with close enforcement against lesser crimes to discourage greater ones, as well as a later-deemphasized list of groups which France determined as cults to be watched.

The [[1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack]], involving [[salmonella]] typhimurium contamination in the salad bars of 10 restaurants in [[The Dalles, Oregon|The Dalles]], [[Oregon]] was traced to certain members of 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 -->}}

The [[Colonia Dignidad]], a German group that settled in Chile, hosted a concentration camp torture center for the Chilean government during the Pinochet dictatorship, circa 1973&ndash;1977.

[[Warren Jeffs]], the polygamist sect leader of the [[Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints]], was charged with several crimes but fled to avoid lawful prosecution until he was apprehended. He was found guilty of two counts of being an accomplice to rape as he had conducted a forced 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 another two underage marriages.<ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/11/20/jeffs.sentence/index.html Polygamist 'prophet' to serve at least 10 years in prison] - CNN.com, 2007-11-20</ref>

In 1979, eleven highly placed leaders of the [[Church of Scientology]] were convicted in United States federal court regarding [[Operation Snow White]], and served time in a USA federal prison. Operation Snow White involved infiltration, wiretapping and theft of documents in government offices, most notably those of the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS)<ref>United States vs. Mary Sue Hubbard et al., 493 F. Supp. 209 ([[D.D.C.]] 1979).</ref>. In 1995, [[Lisa McPherson]], a 36 year old Dallas native line-dancing enthusiast, and a dedicated Scientologist for most of her adult life, died on December 5, after 17 days in the custody of the Church of Scientology in [[Clearwater]]. 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.<ref>[http://www.lisafiles.com/police/4621.html State of Florida vs. Church of Scientology Felony Indictment; 1998-11-13], Retrieved Feb. 1 2008</ref> Although the state chose not to pursue those charges, a wrongful death lawsuit was brought by her estate and subsequently settled on May 28, 2004.

[[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>

==== Prevalence of all NRMs compared to destructive cults ====

The number of destructive cults is less than 20, 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> Destructive cults includes groups that are extremely violent or doomsday-oriented, but the term is not used to refer to groups that are only psychologically destructive.

Of the groups that have been referred to as cults in the United States alone, only a hundred or so<ref>See the sources referenced for each group at [[List of groups referred to as cults]] </ref> have ever become notorious for alleged misdeeds either in the national media or in local media. The disproportionate focus on these roughly 3% of misbehaving NRM groups gives the public an inaccurate perception of new religious groups generally. (See [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Cult&action=edit&oldid=210956599#Prevalence_of_purported_cults #Prevalence of purported cults], Singer, 1995.)

====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 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>

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.

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 name = "Kranenborg-1996">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.

===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 [[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.

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>

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>

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.

==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.<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
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"</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>

[[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.

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 name = "Casino-DefiningReligion">Casino. Bruce J., ''Defining Religion in American Law'', 1999, [http://www.religiousfreedom.com/articles/casino.htm]</ref>

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 name = "Casino-DefiningReligion"/> 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]]).<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 name = "Giambalvo-PostCult">Giambalvo, Carol, ''Post-cult problems'' [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/giambalvo_carol_postcult_problems.htm]</ref>

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 an 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> -->

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 name = "Giambalvo-PostCult"/>

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>

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>

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>

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 name = "Kranenborg-1996"/>

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>

==Criticism by former members of purported cults==
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{{Who|date=May 2008}} conclude that testimonies of former members are at least as accurate as testimonies of current members.{{Fact|date=July 2007}}

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 (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 name = "Carter-Carriers">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 name = "Carter-Carriers"/> 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 name = "Carter-Carriers"/> [[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 name = "Carter-Carriers"/>

[[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</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>

''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]]''.

=== Sexual gratification by leaders ===

Leaders of groups referred to as cults have used their positions to obtain sexual gratification from followers, or engaged in plural marriages that were not traditional to the culture outside of the group. Former group members have stated the reason why some leaders founded cults was so they could use people for sex.<ref name="cultforsex"/>

* [[Jim Jones]] (1931-1978), founder of the [[Peoples Temple]], had sex with several women, and fathered children with some.{{Fact|date=April 2008}}
* [[David Koresh]] (1959-1993), the [[Seven Seals]] leader of [[Branch Davidians]] only in [[Waco, Texas]], greatly restricted the sexual activity of his followers, while marrying wives as young as twelve<ref>USA today, 4 March 1993, p. 3A</ref> because puberty was an accepted age for marriage in Old Testament times. A former member described Koresh as "fixated with sex and with a taste for younger girls." <ref>Koresh preached sex to prepare young girls for intercourse. One follower said "Sexual themes were associated with pleasing Koresh, and procreating [to fill] the earth with his glorious seed".[http://www.time.com/time/daily/newsfiles/waco/051793.html Time, 1993-05-17]</ref> He began to teach that all the women in the world belonged to him, only he had the right to procreate, and he fathered children with his plural wives. <ref>His justification was that "God believed it was necessary to send him (Koresh) down to be a sinful Jesus so that, when he stood in judgement of sinners on Judgement Day, he would have experience of all sin and degradation." Time magazine, 15 March 1993, p. 38</ref>.
* [[Charles Manson]] (1934- ), leader of the informal [[Manson Family]], drugged many of his followers with [[LSD]] and while women were under the influence, he induced them to service him sexually.{{Fact|date=April 2008}}
* [[Raël]] (1946- ), formerly named [[Claude Vorilhon]], founded [[Raelism]] and had sex with hundreds of women, "...a new one every day, all pretty young devotees who thought he was some kind of god." His ex-wife of 15 years continued, "...over the years I began to think the whole Raelian movement was a trick to have more sex..."<ref name="cultforsex"> [http://www.rickross.com/reference/raelians/raelians68.html I was married to clone cult leader Rael 15 years. He wrecked my life and our children's.] Mail on Sunday (UK) - 2003-01-12</ref> Raelism openly teaches a belief in sexual freedom, which is used to recruit new members, who are invited{{Fact|date=May 2008}} to participate in [[Sensual Meditation]] sessions.<ref>[http://www.rickross.com/reference/raelians/raelians82.html Sex used to recruit Raelians] The Edmonton Sun - 2003-10-11. When questioned, Raelian Bishop Rickey Lee said: "There aren't orgies going on all the time."</ref>
* [[Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh]] ([[Osho]]) (1931-1990), founder of [[Rajneeshpuram]], declared himself a "sex guru" and enticed female followers to explore sex with. One woman said all she got was a quickie in the doggy position, and really didn't learn anything from him.{{Fact|date=April 2008}}

===Allegations made by scholars or 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]] 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 name = "Kent-Brainwashing">[[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 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
</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 ==
{{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 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.<ref name = "Kent-Brainwashing"/>

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 name = "Kent-Brainwashing"/>

In recent decades, governmental clashes with groups referred to as cults in the [[United States]] have been the result of real or perceived violations of the law by the groups in question, rather than unconstitutional religious persecution. The 2008 felony conviction of Warren Jeffs, leader of [[FLDS]], is a recent case of the U.S. government prosecuting a group referred to as a cult, based on its religious yet illegal belief in arranged and compulsory underage marriage. But 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>

It has been argued that [[brainwashing]] theory promulgated by scholars in the psychological anti-cult movement has been a key contributing factor to violent events, including the deaths of close to 100 members of the [[Seven Seals]] group of [[Branch Davidians]] in [[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> However, as revealed in the subsequent televised congressional investigations into the Branch-Davidian Waco Siege, simple technical incompetence by U.S. law enforcement contributed greatly to the disastrous outcome. (See [[Waco Siege]]).

A 1995 [[Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France]] issued an [http://www.assemblee-nat.fr/rap-enq/r2468.asp official ''Report'' in French] [http://cftf.com/french/Les_Sectes_en_France/cults.html (unofficial ''French Report'' translation)], in which a list of groups classified as 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.

The "Interministerial Mission in the Fight Against Cults" (MILS) was formed in 1998 to coordinate government monitoring of "sectes" (the word meaning "cults" in French). In February 1998 MILS released its annual report on the monitoring of cults. 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 cults. 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 1995 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>

==Cults in literature==
{{main|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 ==
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* [[Apostasy]]
* [[Atrocity story]]
* [[Classifications of cults and new religious movements]]
* [[Cults and governments]]
* [[Cult of intelligence]]
* [[Cult Awareness Network]]
* [[Cult suicide]]
* [[Development of religion]]
* [[Destructive cult]]
* [[Groupthink]]
* [[Hate group#Hate groups and new religious movements|Hate groups and new religious movements]]
* [[List of groups referred to as cults]]
* [[New religious movement]]
* [[Opposition to cults and new religious movements]]
* [[Pious fraud]]
* [[Religious conversion#Other religions and sects|Religious Conversion]]
* [[Sect]]
* [[Social implosion]]
* [[Sociology of religion|Sociology of religion]]
* [[True-believer syndrome]]
</Div>


==References==
=== Citations ===
{{reflist}}
===Notes===
{{reflist|2}}


;Books
===Bibliography===
* {{Cite book|last=Ashcraft |first=W. Michael |year=2006 |chapter=African Diaspora Traditions and Other American Innovations| title=Introduction to New and Alternative Religions in America|publisher=[[Greenwood Publishing Group]]|isbn=978-0-275-98717-6 |editor-last=Gallagher|editor-first=Eugene V.}}
====Books====
* {{Cite book|editor-last1=Wilson |editor-first1=Bryan |editor-last2=Cresswell |editor-first2=Jamie |last=Barker |first=Eileen|author-link=Eileen Barker |chapter=New Religious Movements: their incidence and significance |year=1999 |title=New Religious Movements: Challenge and Response |publisher=[[Routledge]]|isbn=978-0-415-20050-9|language=en}}
* [[Eileen Barker|Barker, E.]] (1989) ''New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction'', London, HMSO
* {{Cite book |title=Cults, Religion, and Violence |date=2002 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |isbn=978-0-521-66064-8 |editor-last=Bromley |editor-first=David G. |editor-link=David G. Bromley |language=en |editor-last2=Melton |editor-first2=J. Gordon |editor-link2=J. Gordon Melton}}
* Bromley, David et al.: ''Cults, Religion, and Violence'', 2002, ISBN 0-521-66898-0
* {{Cite book |last=Chryssides |first=George D. |author-link=George D. Chryssides |title=Exploring New Religions |publisher=[[Cassell (publisher)|Cassell]] |year=1999 |isbn=978-0-304-33652-4 |series=Issues in Contemporary Religion |location=London; New York |language=en}}
* Enroth, Ronald. (1992) ''[[Churches that Abuse]]'', Zondervan, ISBN 0-310-53290-6
* {{Cite book |title=The Bloomsbury Companion to New Religious Movements |publisher=[[Bloomsbury]] |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-4411-9005-5 |editor-last=Chryssides |editor-first=George D. |editor-link=George D. Chryssides |series=Bloomsbury Companions |location=London |language=en |chapter=Resources: A–Z |editor-last2=Zeller |editor-first2=Benjamin E.}}
* House, Wayne: ''Charts of Cults, Sects, and Religious Movements'', 2000, ISBN 0-310-38551-2
* {{Cite book |last=Cowan |first=Douglas E. |author-link=Douglas E. Cowan |year=2003 |title=Bearing False Witness? An Introduction to the Christian Countercult |location=Westport, CT |publisher=[[Praeger Paperback|Praeger]] |isbn=978-0-275-97459-6}}
* Kramer, Joel and Alstad, Diane: ''The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power'', 1993.
* {{Cite book |last=Dawson |first=Lorne L. |author-link=Lorne L. Dawson |year=1998 |title=Cults in Context: Readings in the Study of New Religious Movements |publisher=[[Transaction Publishers]] |isbn=978-0-7658-0478-5}}
* Lalich, Janja: ''Bounded Choice: True Believers and Charismatic Cults'', 2004, ISBN 0-520-24018-9
* {{Cite encyclopedia|editor-first=Erwin|editor-last=Fahlbusch|editor-link=Erwin Fahlbusch |editor-first2=Geoffrey W. |editor-last2=Bromiley|editor-link2=Geoffrey W. Bromiley|chapter=Sect|volume=4 |encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Christianity|access-date=2013-03-21|page=897 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C5V7oyy69zgC&pg=PA897 |year=1999|isbn=978-90-04-14595-5 |via=[[Google Books]]}}
* Landau Tobias, Madeleine et al. : ''Captive Hearts, Captive Minds'', 1994, ISBN 0-89793-144-0
* {{Cite book |last=Jenkins |first=Phillip |title=Mystics and Messiahs: Cults and New Religions in American History |title-link=Mystics and Messiahs |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]], US |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-19-514596-0}}
* [[James R. Lewis|Lewis, James R.]] ''The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements'' [[Oxford University Press]], 2004
* {{Cite book |last1=Kaslow |first1=Florence Whiteman |last2=Sussman|first2=Marvin B. |title=Cults and the Family |publisher=Haworth Press |year=1982 |isbn=978-0-917724-55-8}}
* [[James R. Lewis|Lewis, James R.]] ''Odd Gods: New Religions and the Cult Controversy'', [[Prometheus Books]], 2001
* {{Cite book |last=Lewis |first=James R. |author-link=James R. Lewis (scholar) |year=2004 |title=The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements |location=US |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-0-19-514986-9}}
* Martin, Walter et al.: ''The Kingdom of the Cults'', 2003, ISBN 0-7642-2821-8
* {{Cite book|last=Marshall |first=Paul |year=2013 |title=Persecuted: The Global Assault on Christians |publisher=[[Thomas Nelson Inc]]}}
* [[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
* {{Cite book |last=Newman |first=Dr. David M. |title=Sociology: Exploring the Architecture of Everyday Life |publisher=Pine Forge Press |year=2006 |isbn=978-1-4129-2814-4}}
* Oakes, Len: ''Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities'', 1997, ISBN 0-8156-0398-3 [http://www.enlightenmentblues.com/chapter2.html Excerpts]
* {{Cite book |last=Pargament |first=Kenneth I. |author-link=Kenneth Pargament |title=The Psychology of Religion and Coping: Theory, Research, Practice |publisher=Guilford Press |year=1997 |isbn=978-1-57230-664-6}}
* [[Lena Phoenix|Phoenix, Lena]]: ''[[The Heart of a Cult]]'', 2006, ISBN 0-9785483-0-2
* {{Cite book |last=Penny |first=Benjamin |title=The Religion of Falun Gong |date=2012 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-65501-7 |language=en}}
* [[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]
* {{Cite book |last=Petty |first=Richard E. |author-last2=Cacioppo|author-first2=John T. |title=Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches |publisher=Westview Press |year=1996 |isbn=0-8133-3005-X}}
* Tourish, Dennis: '''On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left'', 2000, ISBN 0-7656-0639-9
* {{Cite book |last=Saliba |first=John A. |title=Understanding New Religious Movements |publisher=[[Altamira Press]] |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-7591-0356-6 |edition=2nd |location=Walnut Creek |language=en}}
* 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.
* {{Cite book |last1=Stark |first1=Rodney |author-link1=Rodney Stark |last2=Bainbridge |first2=William Sims |author-link2=William Sims Bainbridge |year=1987 |title=The Future of Religion: Secularization, Revival and Cult Formation |location=Berkeley |publisher=University of California Press |isbn=978-0-520-05731-9}}
* [[Colin Wilson|Wilson, Colin]] ''Rogue Messiahs: Tales of Self-Proclaimed Saviors'', 2000, Hampton Roads Publishing Company. ISBN 978-1571741752
* {{Cite book |last1=Stark |first1=Rodney |author-link1=Rodney Stark |last2=Bainbridge |first2=William Sims |author-link2=William Sims Bainbridge |year=1996 |title=A Theory of Religion |publisher=[[Peter Lang Publishing]] |isbn=978-0-8135-2330-9}}
* Zablocki, Benjamin et al.: ''Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field'', 2001, ISBN 0-8020-8188-6
* {{Cite encyclopedia |editor-last=Swatos |editor-first=William H. Jr. |year=1998 |pages=90–93 |title=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society |publisher=AltaMira |location=Walnut Creek, CA |isbn=978-0-7619-8956-1}}
** {{Harvc |last=Shupe |first=Anson |last2=Bromley |first2=David G. |chapter=Anti-Cult Movement |year=1998 |anchor-year=1998a |in=Swatos |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/anticult.htm}}
** {{Harvc |last=Swatos |first=William H. Jr|chapter=Church-Sect Theory|year=1998 |anchor-year=1998a |in=Swatos |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/cstheory.htm}}
** {{Harvc |last=Campbell |first=Colin |chapter=Cult |year=1998 |in=Swatos |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/cult.htm}}
** {{Harvc |last=Barker |first=Eileen |chapter=Conversion |year=1998 |in=Swatos |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/conversion.htm}}
** {{Harvc |last=Richardson |first=James T. |chapter=Unification Church |year=1998 |in=Swatos |url=http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Unification.htm}}
* {{Cite book |title=Regulating Religion: Case Studies from Around the Globe |publisher=[[Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers]] |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-306-47887-1 |editor-last=Richardson |editor-first=James T. |editor-link=James T. Richardson |series=Critical Issues in Social Justice |location=New York |language=en}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Shupe |first1=Anson |title=Agents of Discord: Deprogramming, Pseudo-science, and the American Anti-cult Movement |last2=Darnell |first2=Susan |date=2006 |publisher=Transaction Publishers |isbn=978-0-7658-0323-8}}
* {{Cite book|author-link=Andrei Soldatov|last1=Soldatov |first1=Andreĭ|first2=I. |last2=Borogan |year=2010|title=The new nobility : the restoration of Russia's security state and the enduring legacy of the KGB| location=New York|publisher=[[PublicAffairs]] |isbn=978-1-61039-055-2}}
* {{Cite book |last=Stangor |first=Charles |title=Social Groups in Action and Interaction |publisher=Psychology Press |year=2004 |isbn=978-1-84169-407-8}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Stein |first1=Alexandra |title=Terror, Love and Brainwashing: Attachment in Cults and Totalitarian Systems |publisher=Taylor and Francis |year=2016 |isbn=9781138677951}}
* {{Cite book |title='Cult' Rhetoric in the 21st Century: Deconstructing the Study of New Religious Movements |publisher=[[Bloomsbury Academic]] |year=2024 |isbn=978-1-350-33323-9 |editor-last=Thomas |editor-first=Aled |series=Religion at the boundaries |location=London |language=en |editor-last2=Graham-Hyde |editor-first2=Edward}}
** {{Harvc |last=Thomas |first=Aled |last2=Graham-Hyde |first2=Edward. |author-link=George D. Chryssides |chapter='Cult' rhetoric in the twenty-first century: The disconnect between popular discourse and the ivory tower |year=2024 |in=Thomas |in2=Graham-Hyde |anchor-year=2024a}}
** {{Harvc |last=Chryssides |first=George D. |author-link=George D. Chryssides |chapter=A history of anticult rhetoric |year=2024 |in=Thomas |in2=Graham-Hyde}}
** {{Harvc |last=Dubrow-Marshall |first=Roderick P. |chapter=The recognition of cults |year=2024 |in=Thomas |in2=Graham-Hyde}}
** {{Harvc |last=Crockford |first=Susannah |chapter='There is no QAnon': Cult accusations in contemporary American political and online discourse |year=2024 |in=Thomas |in2=Graham-Hyde}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Tourish |first1=Dennis |last2=Wohlforth |first2=Tim |author-link2=Tim Wohlforth |year=2000 |title=On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left |title-link=On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left |location=Armonk |publisher=[[M. E. Sharpe]] |isbn=978-0-7656-0639-6}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Turner |first1=Francis J. |first2=Arnold Shanon |last2=Bloch |last3=Shor |first3=Ron |title=Differential Diagnosis & Treatment in Social Work |edition=4th |publisher=Free Press |year=1995 |page=1146 |chapter=105: From Consultation to Therapy in Group Work With Parents of Cultists |isbn=978-0-02-874007-2}}
* {{Cite book |title=Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field |title-link=Misunderstanding Cults |publisher=[[University of Toronto Press]] |year=2001 |isbn=978-0-8020-8188-9 |editor-last=Zablocki |editor-first=Benjamin |editor-link=Benjamin Zablocki |language=en |editor-last2=Robbins |editor-first2=Thomas |editor-link2=Thomas Robbins (sociologist)}}
** {{Harvc |first=Julius H. |last=Rubin |chapter=Contested Narratives: A Case Study of the Conflict between a New Religious Movement and Its Critics |year=2001 |in=Zablocki |in2=Robbins}}


====Articles====
;Articles
* {{Cite journal |doi=10.1177/0002764290033005005 |last=Ayella |first=Marybeth |year=1990 |title=They Must Be Crazy: Some of the Difficulties in Researching 'Cults' |journal=American Behavioral Scientist |volume=33 |issue=5 |pages=562–577 |s2cid=144181163}}
* 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/]
* {{Cite journal| doi = 10.2307/1386560| issn = 0021-8294| volume = 35| issue = 3| pages = 285–303| last1 = Bader| first1 = Chris| last2 = Demaris| first2 = Alfred| title = A Test of the Stark-Bainbridge Theory of Affiliation with Religious Cults and Sects| journal = Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion| date = 1996 |jstor = 1386560}}
* Langone, Michael: Cults: Questions and Answers [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_cultsqa.htm]
* {{Cite journal |last=Barker |first=Eileen |year=1986 |title=Religious Movements: Cult and Anti-Cult Since Jonestown |journal=Annual Review of Sociology |volume=12 |pages=329–346 |doi=10.1146/annurev.so.12.080186.001553}}
* [[Robert Jay Lifton|Lifton, Robert Jay]]: ''Cult Formation'', ''The Harvard Mental Health Letter'', February 1991 [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/lifton_robert.htm]
* {{Cite journal| volume = 11| issue = 1| pages = 145–172| last = Davis| first = Dena S| title = Joining a Cult: Religious Choice or Psychological Aberration| journal = Journal of Law and Health| date = 1996}}
* Moyers. Jim: ''Psychological Issues of Former Members of Restrictive Religious Groups'' [http://home.earthlink.net/%7Ejcmmsm/article/index.html]
* {{Cite journal| doi = 10.2307/3711011| issn = 0038-0210| volume = 49| issue = 2| pages = 171–183| last1 = van Driel| first1 = Barend| last2 = Richardson| first2 = James T.| title = Categorization of New Religious Movements in American Print Media| journal = Sociological Analysis| date = 1988| jstor = 3711011}}
* 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]
* {{Cite journal |doi=10.1525/nr.2003.6.2.312 |last1=Edelman |first1=Bryan |last2=Richardson |first2=James T. |year=2003 |title=Falun Gong and the Law: Development of Legal Social Control in China |journal=Nova Religio |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=312–331}}
* Robbins, T. and D. Anthony, 1982. "Deprogramming, brainwashing and the medicalization of deviant religious groups" ''Social Problems'' '''29''' pp 283-97.
* {{Cite journal |last=Heggie |first=Rachel |date=2020 |title=When Violence Happens: The McDonald's Murder and Religious Violence in the Hands of the Chinese Communist Party |journal=Journal of Religion and Violence |volume=8 |issue=3 |pages=253–280 |doi=10.5840/jrv202131682 |issn=2159-6808 |jstor=27212326}}
* Shaw, Daniel: ''Traumatic abuse in cults'' [http://members.aol.com/shawdan/essay.htm]
* {{Cite journal| doi = 10.2307/3512241| issn = 0034-673X| volume = 43| issue = 1| pages = 24–38| last1 = Hill| first1 = Harvey| last2 = Hickman| first2 = John| last3 = McLendon| first3 = Joel| title = Cults and Sects and Doomsday Groups, Oh My: Media Treatment of Religion on the Eve of the Millennium| journal = Review of Religious Research| date = 2001| jstor = 3512241}}
* [[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.
* {{Cite journal |last1=Introvigne |first1=Massimo |title=Advocacy, brainwashing theories, and new religious movements |journal=Religion |volume=44 |issue=2 |pages=303–319 |doi=10.1080/0048721X.2014.888021 |year=2014 |s2cid=144440076}}
* Rosedale, Herbert et al.: ''On Using the Term "Cult"'' [http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_term_cult.htm]
* {{Cite journal|last1=Ogloff|first1= J. R.|last2=Pfeifer|first2=J. E.|title= Cults and the law: A discussion of the legality of alleged cult activities.|journal= Behavioral Sciences & the Law|year= 1992|volume= 10|issue= 1|pages= 117–140|doi= 10.1002/bsl.2370100111}}
* 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]
* {{Cite journal| issn = 0021-8294| volume = 45| issue = 1| pages = 97–106| last = Olson| first = Paul J.| title = The Public Perception of "Cults" and "New Religious Movements"| journal = Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion| date = 2006| doi = 10.1111/j.1468-5906.2006.00008.x| jstor = 3590620}}
* [[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]
* {{Cite journal |last1=Richardson |first1=James T. |last2=Introvigne |first2=Massimo |author-link2=Massimo Introvigne |year=2001 |title='Brainwashing' Theories in European Parliamentary and Administrative Reports on 'Cults' and 'Sects'. |journal=[[Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion]] |volume=40 |number=2 |pages=143–168 |doi=10.1111/0021-8294.00046}}
* Aronoff, Jodi; Lynn, Steven Jay; Malinosky, Peter. ''Are cultic environments psychologically harmful?'', ''Clinical Psychology Review'', 2000, Vol. 20 #1 pp. 91-111
* {{Cite journal |last=Richardson |first=James T. |author-link=James T. Richardson |year=1993 |title=Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-Negative. |journal=[[Review of Religious Research]] |volume=34 |pages=348–356 |doi=10.2307/3511972 |jstor=3511972 |number=4}}
* 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
* {{Cite journal |last=Seiwert |first=Hubert |date=2003 |title=Freedom and Control in the Unified Germany: Governmental Approaches to Alternative Religions Since 1989 |journal=Sociology of Religion |volume=64 |issue=3 |pages=367–375 |doi=10.2307/3712490 |issn=1069-4404 |jstor=3712490}}
* [[Lena Phoenix|Phoenix, Lena]]: "Thoughts on the Word Cult" [http://theheartofacult.com/essay.htm?]
* {{Cite journal |doi=10.1111/0021-8294.00047 |last=Robbins |first=Thomas |year=2002 |title=Combating 'Cults' and 'Brainwashing' in the United States and Europe: A Comment on Richardson and Introvigne's Report |journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion |volume=40 |issue=2 |pages=169–176}}
* {{Cite journal |last1=Stark |first1=Rodney |last2=Bainbridge |first2=William Sims |date=1980 |title=Networks of Faith: Interpersonal Bonds and Recruitment to Cults and Sects |journal=[[American Journal of Sociology]] |language=en |volume=85 |issue=6 |pages=1376–1395 |doi=10.1086/227169 |issn=0002-9602 |jstor=2778383}}
* {{Cite journal |last1=Weber |first1=Max |title="Churches" and "Sects" in North America: An Ecclesiastical Socio-Political Sketch |journal=Sociological Theory |date=Spring 1985 |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=7–13 |doi=10.2307/202166 |jstor=202166 |language=en}}
* {{Cite journal| doi = 10.2307/3512176| issn = 0034-673X| volume = 39| issue = 2| pages = 101–115| last = Wright| first = Stuart A.| title = Media Coverage of Unconventional Religion: Any "Good News" for Minority Faiths?| journal = Review of Religious Research| date = 1997| jstor = 3512176}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Zhu |first=Guobin |date=2010 |title=Prosecuting "Evil Cults:" A Critical Examination of Law Regarding Freedom of Religious Belief in Mainland China |journal=Human Rights Quarterly |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=471–501 |doi=10.1353/hrq.2010.0004 |issn=0275-0392 |jstor=40784053}}


==External links==
== External links ==
* {{Wiktionary inline}}
{{wikiquote}}
* {{Wikiquote inline|Cult}}
{{wikisource|Category:Cults}}
{{commons|Cults}}
* [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.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.orange-papers.org The Orange Papers] Massive referenced site keynoted with angry cultic criticism of Alcoholics Anonymous by ex-member "Agent Orange". Some of Orange's conclusions may distort the referenced AA-effectiveness studies.
* [http://www.geocities.com/agent.green/ The Effectiveness of Alcoholics Anonymous] - "Agent Green's" referenced site strongly disputes Orange Papers' "obsessive anti-AA" conclusions, and that only some members are "abusive cult extremists, like Agent Orange says".
* [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 (consultant)|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


{{New Religious Movements}}
{{cults}}
{{Opposition_to_NRMs}}


[[Category:Cults| ]]
{{Cleanup|date=January 2008}}
[[Category:Cults]]
[[Category:Pejorative terms]]

Latest revision as of 07:05, 21 December 2024

Cult is a term often applied to new religious movements and other social groups which have unusual, and often extreme, religious, spiritual, or philosophical beliefs and rituals. Extreme devotion to a particular person, object, or goal is another characteristic often ascribed to cults. The term has different, and sometimes divergent or pejorative, definitions both in popular culture and academia and has been an ongoing source of contention among scholars across several fields of study.

Beginning in the 1930s, new religious movements became an object of sociological study within the context of the study of religious behavior. Since the 1940s, the Christian countercult movement has opposed some sects and new religious movements, labeling them cults because of their unorthodox beliefs. Since the 1970s, the secular anti-cult movement has opposed certain groups, which they call cults, accusing them of practicing brainwashing.

Groups labelled cults are found around the world and range in size from small localized groups to some international organizations with up to millions of members.

Definition and usage

[edit]

In the English-speaking world, the term cult often carries derogatory connotations.[1] The word "cult" is derived from the Latin term cultus, which means worship.[2] An older sense of the word cult, which is not pejorative, indicates a set of religious devotional practices that is conventional within its culture, is related to a particular figure, and is frequently associated with a particular place, or generally the collective participation in rites of religion.[3][2] References to the imperial cult of ancient Rome, for example, use the word in this sense. A derived sense of "excessive devotion" arose in the 19th century, and usage is not always strictly religious.[a][2] The term is variously applied to abusive or coercive groups of many categories, including gangs, organized crime, and terrorist organizations.[4]

Sociological classifications of religious movements may identify a cult as a social group with socially deviant or novel beliefs and practices,[5] although this is often unclear.[6][7] Other researchers present a less-organized picture of cults, saying that they arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices.[8] Cults have been compared to miniature totalitarian political systems.[9] Such groups are typically perceived as being led by a charismatic leader who tightly controls its members.[10] It is in some contexts a pejorative term, also used for new religious movements and other social groups which are defined by their unusual religious, spiritual, or philosophical beliefs and rituals,[11] or their common interest in a particular person, object, or goal. This sense of the term is weakly defined – having divergent definitions both in popular culture and academia – and has also been an ongoing source of contention among scholars across several fields of study.[12][13]

According to Susannah Crockford, "[t]he word ‘cult’ is a shapeshifter, semantically morphing with the intentions of whoever uses it. As an analytical term, it resists rigorous definition." She argued that the least subjective definition of cult referred to a religion or religion-like group "self-consciously building a new form of society", but that the rest of society rejected as unacceptable.[14] The term cult has been criticized as lacking "scholarly rigour"; Benjamin E. Zeller stated "[l]abelling any group with which one disagrees and considers deviant as a cult may be a common occurrence, but it is not scholarship".[15] However, it has also been viewed as empowering for ex-members of groups that have experienced trauma.[15] Religious scholar Catherine Wessinger argued the term was dehumanizing of the people within the group, as well as their children; following the Waco siege, it was argued by some scholars that the defining of the Branch Davidians as a cult by the media, government and former members is a significant factor as to what lead to the deaths.[16] The term was noted to carry "considerable cultural legitimacy".[17]

In the 1970s, with the rise of secular anti-cult movements, scholars (though not the general public) began to abandon the use of the term cult, regarding it as pejorative. By the end of the 1970s, the term cult was largely replaced in academia with the term "new religion" or "new religious movement".[18][19] Other proposed alternative terms that have seen use were "emergent religion", "alternative religious movement", or "marginal religious movement", though new religious movement is the most popular term.[16] The anti-cult movement mostly regards the term "new religious movement" as a euphemism for cult that hides their harmful nature.[18]

Scholarly studies

[edit]
Howard P. Becker's church–sect typology, based on Ernst Troeltsch's original theory and providing the basis for the modern concepts of cults, sects, and new religious movements

Beginning in the 1930s, new religious movements perceived as cults became an object of sociological study within the context of the study of religious behavior.[20] The term in this context saw its origins in the work of sociologist Max Weber (1864–1920). Weber is an important theorist in the academic study of cults, which often draws on his theorizations of charismatic authority, and of the distinction he drew between churches and sects.[21][2] This concept of church-sect division was further elaborated upon by German theologian Ernst Troeltsch, who added a "mystical" categorization to define more personal religious experiences.[2] American sociologist Howard P. Becker further bisected Troeltsch's first two categories: church was split into ecclesia and denomination; and sect into sect and cult.[22][2] Like Troeltsch's "mystical religion", Becker's cult refers to small religious groups that lack in organization and emphasize the private nature of personal beliefs.[23]

Max Weber (1864–1920), an important theorist in the study of cults

Later sociological formulations built on such characteristics, placing an additional emphasis on cults as deviant religious groups, "deriving their inspiration from outside of the predominant religious culture."[24] This is often thought to lead to a high degree of tension between the group and the more mainstream culture surrounding it, a characteristic shared with religious sects.[25] According to this sociological terminology, sects are products of religious schism and therefore maintain a continuity with traditional beliefs and practices, whereas cults arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices.[26]

Scholars William Sims Bainbridge and Rodney Stark have argued for a further distinction between three kinds of cults: cult movements, client cults, and audience cults, all of which share a "compensator" or rewards for the things invested into the group. In their typology, a "cult movement" is an actual complete organization, differing from a "sect" in that it is not a splinter of a bigger religion, while "audience cults" are loosely organized, and propagated through media, and "client cults" offer services (i.e. psychic readings or meditation sessions). One type can turn into another, for example the Church of Scientology changing from audience to client cult.[18] Sociologists who follow their definition tend to continue using the word "cult", unlike most other academics; however Bainbridge later stated he regretted having used the word at all.[18] Stark and Bainbridge, in discussing the process by which individuals join new religious groups, have even questioned the utility of the concept of conversion, suggesting that affiliation is a more useful concept.[27]

In the early 1960s, sociologist John Lofland studied the activities of Unification Church members in California in trying to promote their beliefs and win new members. Lofland noted that most of their efforts were ineffective and that most of the people who joined did so because of personal relationships with other members, often family relationships.[28][29] Lofland published his findings in 1964 as a doctoral thesis entitled "The World Savers: A Field Study of Cult Processes", and in 1966 in book form by as Doomsday Cult: A Study of Conversion, Proselytization and Maintenance of Faith. It is considered to be one of the most important and widely cited studies of the process of religious conversion.[30][31]

J. Gordon Melton stated that, in 1970, "one could count the number of active researchers on new religions on one's hands." However, James R. Lewis writes that the "meteoric growth" in this field of study can be attributed to the cult controversy of the early 1970s. Because of "a wave of nontraditional religiosity" in the late 1960s and early 1970s, academics perceived new religious movements as different phenomena from previous religious innovations.[19]

Types

[edit]

Destructive cults

[edit]

Destructive cult is a term frequently used by the anti-cult movement.[18] Members of the anti-cult movement typically define a destructive cult as a group that is unethical, deceptive, and one that uses "strong influence" or mind control techniques to affect critical thinking skills.[32] This term is sometimes presented in contrast to a "benign cult", which implies that not all "cults" would be harmful, though others apply it to all cults.[18] Psychologist Michael Langone, executive director of the anti-cult group International Cultic Studies Association, defines a destructive cult as "a highly manipulative group which exploits and sometimes physically and/or psychologically damages members and recruits."[33]

In Cults and the Family, the authors cite Shapiro, who defines a destructive cultism as a sociopathic syndrome, whose distinctive qualities include: "behavioral and personality changes, loss of personal identity, cessation of scholastic activities, estrangement from family, disinterest in society and pronounced mental control and enslavement by cult leaders."[34] Writing about Bruderhof communities in the book Misunderstanding Cults, Julius H. Rubin said that American religious innovation created an unending diversity of sects. These "new religious movements…gathered new converts and issued challenges to the wider society. Not infrequently, public controversy, contested narratives and litigation result."[12] In his work Cults in Context author Lorne L. Dawson writes that although the Unification Church "has not been shown to be violent or volatile," it has been described as a destructive cult by "anticult crusaders."[35] In 2002, the German government was held by the Federal Constitutional Court to have defamed the Osho movement by referring to it, among other things, as a "destructive cult" with no factual basis.[36]

Some researchers have criticized the term destructive cult, writing that it is used to describe groups which are not necessarily harmful in nature to themselves or others. In his book Understanding New Religious Movements, John A. Saliba writes that the term is overgeneralized. Saliba sees the Peoples Temple as the "paradigm of a destructive cult", where those that use the term are implying that other groups will also commit mass suicide.[37]

Doomsday cults

[edit]

Doomsday cult is an expression which is used to describe groups that believe in apocalypticism and millenarianism, and it can also be used to refer both to groups that predict disaster, and groups that attempt to bring it about.[38][18] In the 1950s, American social psychologist Leon Festinger and his colleagues observed members of a small UFO religion called the Seekers for several months, and recorded their conversations both prior to and after a failed prophecy from their charismatic leader.[39][40][41] Their work was later published in the book When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World.[39]

In the late 1980s, doomsday cults were a major topic of news reports, with some reporters and commentators considering them a serious threat to society.[42] A 1997 psychological study by Festinger, Riecken, and Schachter found that people turned to a cataclysmic world view after they had repeatedly failed to find meaning in mainstream movements.[43]

Political cults

[edit]

A political cult is a cult with a primary interest in political action and ideology. Groups that some have described as "political cults", mostly advocating far-left or far-right agendas, have received some attention from journalists and scholars. In their 2000 book On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left, Dennis Tourish and Tim Wohlforth discuss about a dozen organizations in the United States and Great Britain that they characterize as cults.[44]

Anti-cult movements

[edit]

Christian countercult movement

[edit]

In the 1940s, the long-held opposition by some established Christian denominations to non-Christian religions and heretical or counterfeit Christian sects crystallized into a more organized Christian countercult movement in the United States.[citation needed] For those belonging to the movement, all religious groups claiming to be Christian, but deemed outside of Christian orthodoxy, were considered cults.[45] The countercult movement is mostly evangelical protestants.[46] The Christian countercult movement asserts that Christian groups whose teachings deviate from the belief that the bible is inerrant,[47] but also focuses on non-Christian religions like Hinduism.[46] Christian countercult activist writers also emphasize the need for Christians to evangelize to followers of cults.[48]

Secular anti-cult movement

[edit]
An anti-Aum Shinrikyo protest in Japan, 2009

Starting in the late 1960s, a different strand of anti-cult groups arose, with the formation of the secular anti-cult movement (ACM).[49] This was in response to the rise of new religions in the 1960s and 1970s, particularly the events at Jonestown and the deaths of nearly 1000 people.[50] The organizations that formed the secular anti-cult movement (ACM) often acted on behalf of relatives of "cult" converts who did not believe their loved ones could have altered their lives so drastically by their own free will. A few psychologists and sociologists working in this field suggested that brainwashing techniques were used to maintain the loyalty of cult members.[51][49]

The belief that cults brainwashed their members became a unifying theme among cult critics and in the more extreme corners of the anti-cult movement techniques like the sometimes forceful "deprogramming" of cult members was practised.[52] In the mass media, and among average citizens, "cult" gained an increasingly negative connotation, becoming associated with things like kidnapping, brainwashing, psychological abuse, sexual abuse, and other criminal activity, and mass suicide. While most of these negative qualities usually have real documented precedents in the activities of a very small minority of new religious groups, mass culture often extends them to any religious group viewed as culturally deviant, however peaceful or law abiding it may be.[53][54][55][13]

While some psychologists were receptive to these theories, sociologists were for the most part sceptical of their ability to explain conversion to NRMs.[56] In the late 1980s, psychologists and sociologists started to abandon theories like brainwashing and mind control. While scholars may believe that various less dramatic coercive psychological mechanisms could influence group members, they came to see conversion to new religious movements principally as an act of a rational choice.[57][58]

Governmental policies and actions

[edit]

The application of the labels cult or sect to religious movements in government documents signifies the popular and negative use of the term cult in English and a functionally similar use of words translated as 'sect' in several European languages.[59] Sociologists critical to this negative politicized use of the word cult argue that it may adversely impact the religious freedoms of group members.[60] At the height of the counter-cult movement and ritual abuse scare of the 1990s, some governments published lists of cults.[b] Groups labelled "cults" are found around the world and range in size from local groups with a few members to international organizations with millions.[61]

While these documents utilize similar terminology, they do not necessarily include the same groups nor is their assessment of these groups based on agreed criteria.[59] Other governments and world bodies also report on new religious movements but do not use these terms to describe the groups.[59] Since the 2000s, some governments have again distanced themselves from such classifications of religious movements.[c] While the official response to new religious groups has been mixed across the globe, some governments aligned more with the critics of these groups to the extent of distinguishing between "legitimate" religion and "dangerous", "unwanted" cults in public policy.[51][62]

China

[edit]
Falun Gong books being symbolically destroyed by the Chinese government

For centuries, governments in China have categorized certain religions as xiéjiào (邪教), translated as "evil cults" or "heterodox teachings".[63] In imperial China, the classification of a religion as xiejiao did not necessarily mean that a religion's teachings were believed to be false or inauthentic; rather, the label was applied to religious groups that were not authorized by the state, or it was applied to religious groups that were believed to challenge the legitimacy of the state.[63][64] Groups branded xiejiao face suppression and punishment by authorities.[65][66]

Russia

[edit]

In 2008 the Russian Interior Ministry prepared a list of "extremist groups". At the top of the list were Islamic groups outside of "traditional Islam", which is supervised by the Russian government. Next listed were "Pagan cults".[67] In 2009 the Russian Ministry of Justice created a council which it named the "Council of Experts Conducting State Religious Studies Expert Analysis." The new council listed 80 large sects which it considered potentially dangerous to Russian society, and it also mentioned that there were thousands of smaller ones. The large sects which were listed included: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Jehovah's Witnesses, and other sects which were loosely referred to as "neo-Pentecostals".[68]

United States

[edit]

In the 1970s, the scientific status of the "brainwashing theory" became a central topic in U.S. court cases where the theory was used to try to justify the use of the forceful deprogramming of cult members[19][60] Meanwhile, sociologists who were critical of these theories assisted advocates of religious freedom in defending the legitimacy of new religious movements in court.[51][62] In the United States the religious activities of cults are protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits governmental establishment of religion and protects freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly; however, no members of religious groups or cults are granted any special immunity from criminal prosecution.[69]

In 1990, the court case of United States v. Fishman (1990) ended the usage of brainwashing theories by expert witnesses such as Margaret Singer and Richard Ofshe. In the case's ruling, the court cited the Frye standard, which states that the scientific theory which is utilized by expert witnesses must be generally accepted in their respective fields. The court deemed brainwashing to be inadmissible in expert testimonies, using supporting documents which were published by the APA Task Force on Deceptive and Indirect Methods of Persuasion and Control, literature from previous court cases in which brainwashing theories were used, and expert testimonies which were delivered by scholars such as Dick Anthony.[70]

Western Europe

[edit]

The governments of France and Belgium have taken policy positions which accept "brainwashing" theories uncritically, while the governments of other European nations, such as those of Sweden and Italy, are cautious with regard to brainwashing and as a result, they have responded more neutrally with regard to new religions.[71] Scholars have suggested that the outrage which followed the mass murder/suicides perpetuated by the Solar Temple, have significantly contributed to European anti-cult positions.[72][73] In the 1980s, clergymen and officials of the French government expressed concern that some orders and other groups within the Roman Catholic Church would be adversely affected by anti-cult laws which were then being considered.[74]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Explanatory notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Compare the Oxford English Dictionary note for usage in 1875: "cult:...b. A relatively small group of people having (esp. religious) beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister, or as exercising excessive control over members.… 1875 Brit. Mail 30 Jan. 13/1 Buffaloism is, it would seem, a cult, a creed, a secret community, the members of which are bound together by strange and weird vows, and listen in hidden conclave to mysterious lore." "cult". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
  2. ^ Or "sects" in German or French-speaking countries, the German term sekten and the French term sectes having assumed the same derogatory meaning as English "cult".
  3. ^

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ Dubrow-Marshall 2024, p. 103.
  2. ^ a b c d e f Chryssides & Zeller 2014, p. 321.
  3. ^ "cult". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.) – "2.a. A particular form or system of religious worship or veneration, esp. as expressed in ceremonies or rituals which are directed towards a specified figure or object."
  4. ^ Dubrow-Marshall 2024, p. 96.
  5. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1996, p. 124.
  6. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1980, p. 1377.
  7. ^ Olson 2006.
  8. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1987.
  9. ^ Stein 2016.
  10. ^ Bell, Kenton (2013). "cult". Open Education Sociology Dictionary. Retrieved 17 March 2023.
  11. ^ "cult". Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Merriam-Webster.
  12. ^ a b Rubin 2001, p. 473.
  13. ^ a b Richardson 1993, pp. 348–356.
  14. ^ Crockford 2024, p. 172.
  15. ^ a b Thomas & Graham-Hyde 2024a, p. 4.
  16. ^ a b Olson 2006, p. 97.
  17. ^ Bromley & Melton 2002, p. 231.
  18. ^ a b c d e f g Chryssides & Zeller 2014, p. 322.
  19. ^ a b c Lewis 2004.
  20. ^ Fahlbusch & Bromiley 1999, p. 897.
  21. ^ Weber 1985.
  22. ^ Swatos 1998a, pp. 90–93.
  23. ^ Campbell 1998, pp. 122–123.
  24. ^ Richardson 1993, p. 349.
  25. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1987, p. 25.
  26. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1987, p. 124.
  27. ^ Bader & Demaris 1996.
  28. ^ Richardson 1998.
  29. ^ Barker 1998.
  30. ^ Ashcraft 2006, p. 180.
  31. ^ Chryssides 1999, p. 1.
  32. ^ Shupe & Darnell 2006, p. 214.
  33. ^ Turner, Bloch & Shor 1995, p. 1146.
  34. ^ Kaslow & Sussman 1982, p. 34.
  35. ^ Dawson 1998, p. 349.
  36. ^ Seiwert 2003.
  37. ^ Saliba 2003, p. 144.
  38. ^ Jenkins 2000, pp. 216, 222.
  39. ^ a b Stangor 2004, pp. 42–43.
  40. ^ Newman 2006, p. 86.
  41. ^ Petty & Cacioppo 1996, p. 139.
  42. ^ Jenkins 2000, pp. 215–216.
  43. ^ Pargament 1997, pp. 150–153, 340.
  44. ^ Tourish & Wohlforth 2000.
  45. ^ Cowan 2003, p. 20.
  46. ^ a b Chryssides 2024, p. 41.
  47. ^ Cowan 2003, p. 31.
  48. ^ Cowan 2003, p. 25.
  49. ^ a b Chryssides 2024, p. 46.
  50. ^ Chryssides 2024, p. 47.
  51. ^ a b c Richardson & Introvigne 2001.
  52. ^ Shupe & Bromley 1998a, p. 27.
  53. ^ Wright 1997.
  54. ^ van Driel & Richardson 1988.
  55. ^ Hill, Hickman & McLendon 2001.
  56. ^ Barker 1986.
  57. ^ Ayella 1990.
  58. ^ Cowan 2003, p. ix.
  59. ^ a b c Richardson & Introvigne 2001, pp. 143–168.
  60. ^ a b Davis 1996.
  61. ^ Barker 1999.
  62. ^ a b Edelman & Richardson 2003.
  63. ^ a b Penny 2012.
  64. ^ Zhu 2010, p. 487.
  65. ^ Heggie 2020, p. 257.
  66. ^ Zhu 2010.
  67. ^ Soldatov & Borogan 2010, pp. 65–66.
  68. ^ Marshall 2013.
  69. ^ Ogloff & Pfeifer 1992.
  70. ^ Introvigne 2014, pp. 313–316.
  71. ^ Richardson & Introvigne 2001, pp. 144–146.
  72. ^ Richardson & Introvigne 2001, p. 144.
  73. ^ Robbins 2002, p. 174.
  74. ^ Richardson 2004, p. 48.
Books
Articles
[edit]
  • The dictionary definition of cult at Wiktionary
  • Quotations related to Cult at Wikiquote