Jump to content

Cult

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Destructive cult)

Cult is a lay term for a group perceived as requiring unwavering devotion to a set of beliefs and practices which are considered deviant outside the norms of society. Such groups are typically percieved as being led by a charismatic and self-appointed leader who tightly controls its members. 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, 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.

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. 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 and, as a reaction to acts of violence, frequently charged those cults with practicing brainwashing. Groups labelled "cults" are found around the world and range in size from local groups with a few members to international organizations with millions.

Definition and usage

[edit]

In the English-speaking world, the term cult often carries derogatory connotations.[1] In this sense, it has been considered a subjective term used as an ad hominem attack against groups with differing doctrines or practices.[2] 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. According to The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements, "by the end of the decade, the term 'new religions' would virtually replace the term 'cult' to describe all of those leftover groups that did not fit easily under the label of church or sect."[3][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 founded or led by a charismatic and self-appointed 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]

An older sense of the word, which is not pejorative, involves 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.[14] 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.[a]

New religious movements

[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

A new religious movement (NRM) is a religious community or spiritual group of modern origins since the mid-19th century, which has a peripheral place within its society's dominant religious culture. NRMs can be novel in origin or part of a wider religion, in which case they are distinct from pre-existing denominations.[15][16] In 1999, Eileen Barker estimated that NRMs, of which some but not all have been labelled as cults, number in the tens of thousands worldwide; and that the great majority of which have only a few members, some have thousands and only very few have more than a million.[17]

In 2007, religious scholar Elijah Siegler commented that, although no NRM had become the dominant faith in any country, many of the concepts which they had first introduced, often referred to as "New Age" ideas, have become part of worldwide mainstream culture.[18]

High-control groups may encourage their believers to disengage from so-called 'world affairs', shun or limit interaction with nonbelievers, and maintain a distinct identity separate from mainstream culture, reinforcing group cohesion and control. The emphasis on isolation and exclusivity can likewise contribute to the group's sense of identity and reinforce adherence to its beliefs and practices.[19]

Scholarly studies

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

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] Sociologist Max Weber (1864–1920) is an important theorist in the academic study of cults, which often draws on his theorizations of charismatic authority, and of the distinction between churches and sects.[21] Weber theorizes that charismatic leadership often follow the routinization of charisma.[22] These ideas have been used to theorize the dynamics of groups that have been labelled cults, including the People's Temple,[23] and the Rajneesh movement.[24]

The concept of a cult as a sociological classification was introduced in 1932 by American sociologist Howard P. Becker as an expansion of German theologian Ernst Troeltsch's own church–sect typology. Troeltsch's aim was to distinguish between three main types of religious behaviour: churchly, sectarian, and mystical. Becker further bisected Troeltsch's first two categories: church was split into ecclesia and denomination; and sect into sect and cult.[25] 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.[26] 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."[27] 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.[28] 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.[29]

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.[30][31] 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 Prentice-Hall 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.[32][33]

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.[3] Dick Anthony, a forensic psychologist known for his criticism of brainwashing theory of conversion,[34][35][36] has defended some so-called cults, and in 1988 argued that involvement in such movements may often have beneficial, rather than harmful effects, saying that "[t]here's a large research literature published in mainstream journals on the mental health effects of new religions. For the most part, the effects seem to be positive in any way that's measurable."[37]

In their 1996 book Theory of Religion, American sociologists Rodney Stark and William Sims Bainbridge propose that the formation of cults can be explained through the rational choice theory.[38] In The Future of Religion they comment that, "in the beginning, all religions are obscure, tiny, deviant cult movements."[39] According to Marc Galanter, Professor of Psychiatry at NYU, typical reasons why people join cults include a search for community and a spiritual quest.[40] 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.[41]

Types

[edit]

Destructive cults

[edit]
Jim Jones, the leader of the Peoples Temple

Destructive cult generally refers to groups whose members have, through deliberate action, physically injured or killed other members of their own group or other people. The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance specifically limits the use of the term to religious groups that "have caused or are liable to cause loss of life among their membership or the general public."[42] 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."[43]

John Gordon Clark argued that totalitarian systems of governance and an emphasis on money making are characteristics of a destructive cult.[44] 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."[45]

In the opinion of sociology professor Benjamin Zablocki of Rutgers University, destructive cults are at high risk of becoming abusive to members, stating that such is in part due to members' adulation of charismatic leaders contributing to the leaders becoming corrupted by power.[46] According to Barrett, the most common accusation made against destructive cults is sexual abuse. According to Kranenborg, some groups are risky when they advise their members not to use regular medical care.[47]

Writing about Bruderhof communities in the book Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field, 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."[48] 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.[49]

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.[50]

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.[51] 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.[52][53][54] 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.[52]

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.[55] 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.[56] People also strive to find meaning in global events such as the turn of the millennium when many predicted it prophetically marked the end of an age and thus the end of the world.[57]

LaRouche Movement members in Stockholm protesting against the Treaty of Lisbon

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.[58]

Anti-cult movements and reaction

[edit]

Christian countercult movement

[edit]

In the 1940s, the long-held opposition by some established Christian denominations to non-Christian religions and supposedly 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.[59] According to the countercult movement, cults are distortions of Christianity and deemed theologically deviant by members of other Christian churches.[60] The Christian countercult movement asserts that Christian groups whose teachings deviate from the belief that the bible is inerrant.[61] Countercult literature usually expresses doctrinal or theological concerns and a missionary or apologetic purpose.[62] Christian countercult activist writers also emphasize the need for Christians to evangelize to followers of cults.[63]

Secular anti-cult movement

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

In the early 1970s, a secular opposition movement to groups considered cults had taken shape. 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.[64] 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.[65]

Secular cult opponents belonging to the anti-cult movement usually define a cult as a group that tends to manipulate, exploit, and control its members. Specific factors in cult behaviour 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.[66][67][68][69][70] 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.[71][72][57][13]

While some psychologists were receptive to these theories, sociologists were for the most part sceptical of their ability to explain conversion to NRMs.[73] 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.[74][75]

Reactions to the anti-cult movements

[edit]

Because of the increasingly pejorative use of the word cult since the 1970s, some academics argue that its use is prejudicial and should be avoided, particularly, according to Richardson, in scholarly literature and legal proceedings involving an issue related to an unconventional religious movement.[13] Catherine Wessinger has stated that the word cult represents just as much prejudice and antagonism as racial slurs or derogatory words for women and homosexuals.[76] She argued that it is important for people to become aware of the bigotry conveyed by the word, drawing attention to the way it dehumanizes the group's members and their children.[76] Labelling a group as subhuman, she says, becomes a justification for violence against it.[76] She also says that labelling a group a "cult" makes people feel safe, because the "violence associated with religion is split off from conventional religions, projected onto others, and imagined to involve only aberrant groups."[76] According to her, this fails to take into account that child abuse, sexual abuse, financial extortion and warfare have also been committed by believers of mainstream religions, but the pejorative "cult" stereotype makes it easier to avoid confronting this uncomfortable fact.[76]

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.[77] Sociologists critical to this negative politicized use of the word cult argue that it may adversely impact the religious freedoms of group members.[78] 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.[17][79]

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.[77] Other governments and world bodies also report on new religious movements but do not use these terms to describe the groups.[77] 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.[64][80]

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), sometimes translated as "evil cults" or "heterodox teachings".[81] 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.[81] In modern China, the term xiejiao continues to be used to denote teachings that the government disapproves of, and these groups face suppression and punishment by authorities. Fourteen different groups in China have been listed by the ministry of public security as xiejiao.[82]

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".[83] 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".[84]

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[3][78] Meanwhile, sociologists who were critical of these theories assisted advocates of religious freedom in defending the legitimacy of new religious movements in court.[64][80] 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.[85]

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.[86]

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.[87] Scholars have suggested that the outrage which followed the mass murder/suicides, which were perpetuated by the Solar Temple,[64][88] have significantly contributed to European anti-cult positions as well as more latent xenophobic and anti-American attitudes which are widespread on the continent.[89] 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.[90]

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. ^ Thomas & Graham-Hyde 2024, p. 103.
  2. ^ Bromley & Melton 2002.
  3. ^ a b c Lewis 2004.
  4. ^ Rubinstein, Murray, new religious movement at the Encyclopædia Britannica
  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 c Richardson 1993, pp. 348–356.
  14. ^ "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."
  15. ^ Clarke 2006.
  16. ^ Siegler 2007.
  17. ^ a b Barker 1999.
  18. ^ Siegler 2007, p. 51.
  19. ^ Luther 2023.
  20. ^ Fahlbusch, Erwin, and Geoffrey William Bromiley. The Encyclopedia of Christianity 4. p. 897. Retrieved 21 March 2013.
  21. ^ Weber 1985.
  22. ^ Weber, Max. [1922] 1949. "The Nature of Charismatic Authority and its Routinization." Ch. 4§10 in Theory of Social and Economic Organization, translated by A. R. Anderson and T. Parsons. Available in its original German.
  23. ^ Johnson 1978.
  24. ^ Lindholm 2002.
  25. ^ Swatos 1998a, pp. 90–93.
  26. ^ Campbell 1998, pp. 122–123.
  27. ^ Richardson 1993, p. 349.
  28. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1987, p. 25.
  29. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1987, p. 124.
  30. ^ Richardson 1998.
  31. ^ Barker 1998.
  32. ^ Ashcraft, W. Michael. 2006. African Diaspora Traditions and Other American Innovations, (Introduction to New and Alternative Religions in America 5). Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0275987176. p. 180.
  33. ^ Chryssides 1999, p. 1.
  34. ^ Oldenburg, Don. [2003] 2003. "Stressed to Kill: The Defense of Brainwashing; Sniper Suspect's Claim Triggers More Debate." Defence Brief 269. Toronto: Steven Skurka & Associates. Archived from the original on 1 May 2011.
  35. ^ Dawson 1998, p. 340.
  36. ^ Robbins, Thomas. 1996. In Gods We Trust: New Patterns of Religious Pluralism in America. Transaction Publishers. p. 537. ISBN 978-0887388002.
  37. ^ Sipchen, Bob (17 November 1988). "Ten Years After Jonestown, the Battle Intensifies Over the Influence of 'Alternative' Religions". Los Angeles Times.
  38. ^ Stark & Bainbridge 1996.
  39. ^ Gallagher, Eugene V. 2004. The New Religious Movement Experience in America. Greenwood Press, ISBN 0313328072. p. xv.
  40. ^ Galanter, Marc, ed. 1989. Cults and New Religious Movements: A Report of the Committee on Psychiatry and Religion of the American Psychiatric Association. American Psychiatric Association. ISBN 0890422125.
  41. ^ Bader, Chris, and A. Demaris. 1996. "A test of the Stark-Bainbridge theory of affiliation with religious cults and sects." Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 35:285–303.
  42. ^ Robinson, B.A. (25 July 2007). "Doomsday, destructive religious cults". Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. Retrieved 18 November 2007.
  43. ^ Turner, Francis J.; Arnold Shanon Bloch, Ron Shor (1 September 1995). "105: From Consultation to Therapy in Group Work With Parents of Cultists". Differential Diagnosis & Treatment in Social Work (4th ed.). Free Press. p. 1146. ISBN 0028740076.
  44. ^ Clark, M.D., John Gordon (4 November 1977). "The Effects of Religious Cults on the Health and Welfare of Their Converts". Congressional Record. 123 (181). United States Congress: Extensions of Remarks 37401–03. Archived from the original on 16 December 2005. Retrieved 18 November 2007.
  45. ^ Kaslow, Florence Whiteman; Marvin B. Sussman (1982). Cults and the Family. Haworth Press. p. 34. ISBN 0917724550.
  46. ^ Zablocki, Benjamin. 31 May 1997. "A Sociological Theory of Cults" (paper). Annual meeting of the American Family Foundation. Philadelphia. "Ben Zablocki's Homepage". Archived from the original on 8 March 2005. Retrieved 29 March 2005.
  47. ^ Kranenborg, Reender. 1996. "Sekten... gevaarlijk of niet? [Cults... dangerous or not?]" (in Dutch). Religieuze bewegingen in Nederland 31. Free University Amsterdam. ISSN 0169-7374. ISBN 9053834265.
  48. ^ Dawson 1998, p. 349.
  49. ^ Seiwert 2003.
  50. ^ Saliba 2003, p. 144.
  51. ^ Jenkins 2000, pp. 216, 222.
  52. ^ a b Stangor, Charles (2004). Social Groups in Action and Interaction. Psychology Press. pp. 42–43: "When Prophecy Fails". ISBN 184169407X.
  53. ^ Newman, Dr. David M. (2006). Sociology: Exploring the Architecture of Everyday Life. Pine Forge Press. p. 86. ISBN 1412928141.
  54. ^ Petty, Richard E.; John T. Cacioppo (1996). Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches. Westview Press. p. 139: "Effect of Disconfirming an Important Belief". ISBN 081333005X.
  55. ^ Jenkins 2000, pp. 215–216.
  56. ^ Pargament 1997, pp. 150–153, 340.
  57. ^ a b Hill, Hickman & McLendon 2001.
  58. ^ Tourish & Wohlforth 2000.
  59. ^ Cowan 2003, p. 20.
  60. ^ Melton 1992, p. 5.
  61. ^ Cowan 2003, p. 31.
  62. ^ Trompf, Garry W. (1987). "Missiology, Methodology and the Study of New Religious". Religious Traditions. 10 (1): 95–106. ISSN 0156-1650.
  63. ^ Cowan 2003, p. 25.
  64. ^ a b c d Richardson & Introvigne 2001.
  65. ^ Shupe & Bromley 1998a, p. 27.
  66. ^ "[C]ertain 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" (Robbins and Anthony (1982:283), as qtd. in Richardson 1993:351).
  67. ^ Shupe & Bromley 1998b, pp. 61–62.
  68. ^ Barker, Eileen. 1989. New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
  69. ^ Janja, Lalich; Langone, Michael. "Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups – Revised". International_Cultic_Studies_Association. International Cultic Studies Association. Archived from the original on 30 April 2007. Retrieved 23 May 2014.
  70. ^ O'Reilly, Charles A., and Jennifer A. Chatman. 1996. "Culture as Social Control: Corporations, Cults and Commitment." Research in Organizational Behavior 18:157–200. ISBN 1559389389. Retrieved 6 June 2020.
  71. ^ Wright, Stewart A. 1997. "Media Coverage of Unconventional Religion: Any 'Good News' for Minority Faiths?" Review of Religious Research 39(2):101–115. doi:10.2307/3512176. JSTOR 3512176.
  72. ^ van Driel, Barend, and J. Richardson. 1988. "Cult versus sect: Categorization of new religions in American print media." Sociological Analysis 49(2):171–183. doi:10.2307/3711011. JSTOR 3711011.
  73. ^ Barker 1986.
  74. ^ Ayella 1990.
  75. ^ Cowan 2003, p. ix.
  76. ^ a b c d e Wessinger 2000, p. 4.
  77. ^ a b c Richardson & Introvigne 2001, pp. 143–168.
  78. ^ a b Davis 1996.
  79. ^ "Why do people join cults and why is it often hard to leave?". Al Jazeera. 23 June 2023.
  80. ^ a b Edelman & Richardson 2003.
  81. ^ a b Penny 2012.
  82. ^ Center for Religious Freedom. February 2002. "Report Analyzing Seven Secret Chinese Government Documents." Washington: Freedom House.
  83. ^ Soldatov, Andreĭ, and I. Borogan. 2010. The new nobility : the restoration of Russia's security state and the enduring legacy of the KGB. New York: PublicAffairs. pp. 65–66.
  84. ^ Marshall 2013.
  85. ^ Ogloff & Pfeifer 1992.
  86. ^ Introvigne 2014.
  87. ^ Richardson & Introvigne 2001, pp. 144–146.
  88. ^ Robbins 2002.
  89. ^ Beckford, James A. (1998). "'Cult' Controversies in Three European Countries". Journal of Oriental Studies. 8: 174–184.
  90. ^ Richardson 2004.

Sources

[edit]
[edit]
  • The dictionary definition of cult at Wiktionary
  • Quotations related to Cult at Wikiquote