Cults

[coadie]

What is a cult
Please share some examples.

In the last 2 days, I have seen some churches associated with the cult label.

[missourimary]

Warning signs of a cult:
Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.
No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.
Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
Followers feel they can never be "good enough".
The group/leader is always right.
The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

http://www.rickross.com/warningsigns.html

This is just one of several lists. For the last point, I would mention that there are churches (and I don't just mean OP) that believe their local church is the best or only way to heaven, not just that their belief system is correct. A church that doesn't point the way to Jesus but to themselves, could be considered as having this warning sign. It would be like having two churches in town that believed the same doctrine, but having one stand up and say that everyone in the other church was going to Hell for not going to their church, or calling themselves the only real church in town.

Not every warning sign on a list needs to be present for a church to be considered a cult, and not every church that meets all the criteria is probably actually a cult. However, churches that exhibit these symptoms often can become unhealthy, abusive or cult-like.

[Maximilian]

There has been a lot of difficulty on this forum on this topic (in the past) because of the difficulty in nailing down a conclusive definition for the word. It seems the word has picked up unique meaning by certain groups or people.

So I would add some symptoms of what some may loosely define as cult-like or cultic:

1) Uniform adherence to strict and rigid rules
2) Religious in nature
3) Extremely charismatic leader, praised w/out balance, given special authority to be a final voice of authority on spiritual matters. Criticism against this person is frowned on. He is addressed with accolades are special titles. Authoritarian and w/out any accountability in his/her life.
4) Separation from family and other individuals who aren't part of this religious group.
5) Difficulty to leave. Pressure, manipulation, loss of friendships/relationships. Threats of divorce in marital situations, job pressures if applicable, etc. - There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
6) Members kept together by guilt. It keeps them from wandering too far.
7) No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
8) Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
9) The group/leader is always right.
10) The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

And sometimes, there is no meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, few to no diversity among decision-makers regarding church budget. Sometimes family-operated instead of overseen by a church-board -- and when there is a church board, it's usually only for looks - a weak board, not really functioning in that role.

Then there are symptoms of people:

1) Extreme obsessiveness regarding the leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.
2) Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group continues and deepens.
3) Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.
4) Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.
5) Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.

(like above, with some help by Rick Ross -- and as I typed this I thought about situations I was aware of as well)

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

There has been a lot of difficulty on this forum on this topic (in the past) because of the difficulty in nailing down a conclusive definition for the word. It seems the word has picked up unique meaning by certain groups or people.

So I would add some symptoms of what some may loosely define as cult-like or cultic:

1) Uniform adherence to strict and rigid rules
2) Religious in nature
3) Extremely charismatic leader, praised w/out balance, given special authority to be a final voice of authority on spiritual matters. Criticism against this person is frowned on. He is addressed with accolades are special titles. Authoritarian and w/out any accountability in his/her life.
4) Separation from family and other individuals who aren't part of this religious group.
5) Difficulty to leave. Pressure, manipulation, loss of friendships/relationships. Threats of divorce in marital situations, job pressures if applicable, etc. - There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
6) Members kept together by guilt. It keeps them from wandering too far.
7) No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
8) Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
9) The group/leader is always right.
10) The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

And sometimes, there is no meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, few to no diversity among decision-makers regarding church budget. Sometimes family-operated instead of overseen by a church-board -- and when there is a church board, it's usually only for looks - a weak board, not really functioning in that role.

Then there are symptoms of people:

1) Extreme obsessiveness regarding the leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.
2) Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group continues and deepens.
3) Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.
4) Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.
5) Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.

(like above, with some help by Rick Ross -- and as I typed this I thought about situations I was aware of as well)

R Ross is somewhat of a self declared expert. I see the use of the word cult when people don't like a group. I also suspect many UPC members if asked can't name the General secretary of the UPC.

[missourimary]

Originally Posted by coadie

R Ross is somewhat of a self declared expert.

Here is another list that you could use that was founded by ICSA in 1979:

The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
The group is preoccupied with making money.
Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.

http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by coadie

R Ross is somewhat of a self declared expert. I see the use of the word cult when people don't like a group. I also suspect many UPC members if asked can't name the General secretary of the UPC.

Rick Ross is among many like us helping articulate these definitions. My list would have been similar.

BTW, the UPCI is an organization. The local church is where we are talking. The pastor of that local church is the "leader" we talk about, not some General Superintendent.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

Rick Ross is among many like us helping articulate these definitions. My list would have been similar.

BTW, the UPCI is an organization. The local church is where we are talking. The pastor of that local church is the "leader" we talk about, not some General Superintendent.

I would not say that the UPC as an organization is a cult although it does display some cultish characteristics. Some believe that the UPC as an organization is a cult.

Some local UPC churches are, in my opinion, cults, but there are other local churches (UPC or other OP types and many non OP) that are cults. This is my opinion.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Sam

I would not say that the UPC as an organization is a cult although it does display some cultish characteristics. Some believe that the UPC as an organization is a cult.

Some local UPC churches are, in my opinion, cults, but there are other local churches (UPC or other OP types and many non OP) that are cults. This is my opinion.

Many NFL teams operate under irrational and controlling methods. many do not.

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by Sam

I would not say that the UPC as an organization is a cult although it does display some cultish characteristics. Some believe that the UPC as an organization is a cult.

Some local UPC churches are, in my opinion, cults, but there are other local churches (UPC or other OP types and many non OP) that are cults. This is my opinion.

The organization is just not involved enough in the day-to-day functioning and operations of the local church to be called a "cult" itself.

[missourimary]

Some instances I've seen personally:
A pastor tells people they should date or cannot.
Pastoral permission required for marriage. Those who marry without permission are considered backslid.
People who leave are shunned completely-members are told not to talk to them, not even to say hi in the store.
Leadership spies (or has others spy) on members.
Leadership discusses individuals and their shortcomings-by name-from the pulpit
Leadership insinuates things that aren't true or labels members and former members in intentionally detrimental ways (backslider, homosexual, Jezebel, adulterer) without any solid evidence of these things.
Members are commanded to give much more than 10% and are told they are greedy, carnal, and evil, and that they don't really love God, if they don't or can't.
The response to questions is "don't you believe me? I'm your pastor! If you don't believe me, get out and go find someone you can believe!"

Again these things don't mean a church is a cult. But a church that allows these things is often unhealthy and does exhibit cult like tendencies.