Mormons, JWs and Christians
Christians love referring to Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and several other break-away sects as "cults". Labeling them as such separates them from mainstream Christianity and orthodoxy (lest anyone confuse them with one another) and signifies to all would-be seekers that these are NOT acceptable organizations to involve oneself with. Needless to say, members of these religious groups do not appreciate being referred to as cults.
Whether or not they fit the above criteria isn't actually what I'm interested in. If pressed, I'd say they do. I'd also say so does Christianity. To the same extent Christians call Mormonism a cult, I could call Christianity a cult. Before going around labeling extremely large, well-organized religious groups "cults", Christians might want to pull the plank out of their own eyes first.
I'll use Mormonism, or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, as my parallel example, since I know a lot more about them than I do JWs. As a damn good Christian once, I spent a lot of time researching the LDS so I could argue intelligently with them anytime they knocked on my door. I never once had a Jehovah's Witness at my doorstep, or I'd probably have researched them too.
Alongside Mormonism, I'm going to use two examples from my own Christian church experiences to compare and contrast with. I could upset a lot of people with my examples though, so out of sensitivity for people I know and love, I'll use the generic denominational descriptions - the New Apostolic Movement and the Closed Brethren. Then to be even fairer to "normal" Western Christianity, I'll pull examples from my childhood churches, which were technically non-denominational but conservative and very mainstream.
My intention here is really not to say all religion is bad (though sometimes I feel that way). It's to examine, from the outside, how there is cultish facets to all religion. While thankfully, one's life is not normally in danger after leaving the Judeo-Christian religion, and in general, physical and sexual abuse are not the "norm" in mainstream religion (as they can be in some of the smaller, more sinister cults one often thinks of when they hear the word), one still finds after leaving religion that indeed they had been brainwashed, had been controlled, and had been oppressed. I will try to show this by going through Robert J. Lifton, MD's 8 Criteria for Thought Reform. I will never be able to go into all the depth I could for each bullet point without writing a novel, so I will briefly give examples for each. If it appears I have been too generic or hand-wavey, it's for the sake of brevity. If it seems my Christian examples are weak, compare them to my Mormon examples, to determine if they are "weak" too. Perhaps a novel one day isn't a crazy notion, but for now, I'll just give enough basic examples to illustrate why I feel that in many ways, I too have escaped a cult.
I will use the following initials for each: LDS (Mormon), NAM (New Apostolic Movement), CB (Closed Brethren) and MC (mainstream Christianity.)
1. Milieu Control.This involves the control of information and communication both within the environment and, ultimately, within the individual, resulting in a significant degree of isolation from society at large.
This can be said to some degree of all my four examples, though on this point alone none would be considered cultish. On the most basic level, they are all expected to learn from their own scriptures, which is declared God's Word. Other non-sacred writings from within the group are encouraged, while outside material is viewed with suspicion.
MC, along with all the following, advocates "being in the world but not of the world", not being "unequally yoked with unbelievers" and "not forsaking the gathering together of believers", creating a sense of isolation (more on this in Point 5).
As far as I know, the same goes for LDS. They are not encouraged to shun non-believers, as far as I understand. But again, see Point 5 later.
The same goes for NAM. Though they were a little more leary of getting too involved in this world. While getting out into the world to share the Gospel was a must, there was also to be a strong separation intimately. Both MC, NAM and CB are against "being unequally yoked with unbelievers", whether in romantic relationships, close friendships or even business.
Not too long ago, CB were discouraged from going to movies or watching TV. Today, the CB believe that the Leading Brethren are infallible on matters of faith, and therefore their publications are to be read as absolute truth (the name of their newsletter is "Needed Truth" incidentally). They were very much supposed to stick together and shun the outside. Nowadays they don't do that so much, but they still refuse to work with other churches in community projects or allow their leaders to preach at other churches. Members are not to take communion at any other church but theirs. Really, they aren't technically supposed to even attend a different church.
Is this different from being completely isolated from the world, from outside communication, and unbelieving family members like the cults we imagine? Yes. Is it still a degree of isolation from outside influences? Yes.
2. Mystical Manipulation.There is manipulation of experiences that appear spontaneous but in fact were planned and orchestrated by the group or its leaders in order to demonstrate divine authority or spiritual advancement or some special gift or talent that will then allow the leader to reinterpret events, scripture and experiences as he or she wishes.
This is less true for all four examples, at least overtly. Is there proof of this in most churches, LDS or otherwise? Christians love to point out the Temple rituals of the LDS as mystical manipulation, and having never experienced the Temple Endowment, I can't speak authoritatively on it. From the outside, yes, a lot of it looks manipulative and staged. Hours of trance-like prayers, bizarre group reenactments, practicing secret handshakes and passwords to bypass the angel guards in the Celestial Kingdom, ceremonial washings and anointings. The environment is very psychological. (However, keep in mind that not every Mormon is a Temple Mormon.)
What, then, of MC? In most churches, including NAM churches, the lights are turned down low, the music swells, the songs repeat the same line over and over again until the congregation is in a trance-like spiritual state, emotions are played upon, requiring attendees to search their souls and root out all sin, bringing many to tears. There is emotional and psychological manipulation going on in most MC churches. (Not to mention some of their outreach programs.) Depictions of the cross with an emaciated Jesus hanging, oral descriptions of the pain he suffered for us, admonishments for the sins in our own hearts that nailed him to the cross. Sermons that remind congregants of their inherent wickedness as the piano starts to softly play and the altar call is made.
In the NAM and other charismatic churches, people begin speaking in strange tongues, shake, fall out, wail, prophesy, and dance. In some, demons appear to be cast out of people. People claim to have visions from heaven. (I've even heard personal testimonies of having been teleported or of having a glowing aura while prophesying.) Is this mystical manipulation too? Once the congregation is in this repentant, submissive, broken state, the preacher then tells them what to do - be saved, be baptized, give money, join the church, repent, come forward.
The CB to its credit is not into mystical anything. There are never any charismatic acts of healing, tongues or prophecy. They do not use instruments in official church meetings. They do not set any moods. The only manipulation of this sense was intellectual. You believe what they said because the leaders are infallible on matters of faith. They don't use tricks to make you believe that. They just tell you what to think. (And don't like it much when you disagreed.) Still, there's not really any "mystical manipulation" in the CB.
Is this different from cults staging wild spiritual phenomena, like visions, exorcisms, and demon-casting, like we imagine? Only a little. Does the lesser degree of staging spiritually enhancing environments make it less intentional and manipulative? No. Do wild stagings happen in mainstream churches? Yes. See TV preachers such as Benny Hinn for obvious examples, but they happen in the NAM all the time too, whether they are patently false and acted out, or simply psychological delusions.
3. Demand for Purity.The world is viewed as black and white and the members are constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection. The induction of guilt and/or shame is a powerful control device used here.
I really shouldn't have to convince anyone of this. This is very obvious. MC view the world as black and white, saved and unsaved, and those who are Christian are the right ones while everyone else are the wrong ones. Christianity is considered (by themselves) as the One True Religion. Jesus is the only way to heaven. We as human beings are to strive to become holy and blameless, just like Christ. Most Christians will admit that this is impossible this side of heaven, but we are to strive for it regardless. Guilt and shame (disguised as "conviction" and "admonishment") are major forces. While they would claim that in Christ we are free from all condemnation, guilt and shaming devices are used every Sunday to remind us of our shortcomings in relation to God and to repent and strive harder.
In the CB, certain sins are treated as extremely guilt-inducing and will get you kicked out of the church, such as sexual immorality and divorce. While you can be re-admitted into the church, it is after a time and alongside public confession (see the next section).
In the NAM, sin is still just as terrible, but there is a lot more leniency and "grace" towards sinners. However, this is no license for slacking. Purity is the goal. Those within the movement, whose hearts are right with God and totally for God, forsaking all else, are the truly saved ones. The rest of the world are just nominal Christians. If those lackadaisical people are even truly saved, they are only barely saved. You are either one hundred and ten percent living for God, or you are not living pure enough. This can be said of many churches and many denominations within MC too. There is a strong us vs them mentality all throughout MC.
As for the LDS, this is taken to a different level. While Christianity claims that none are perfect and we can do no good of our own, and salvation is completely a gift of God and not anything to do with our own works (though good works should follow salvation), the LDS believe "it is by grace we are saved, after all we can do." Purity is very important to Mormons too, but perhaps even more so, since salvation somewhat depends on it. The consequences are more nuanced though. less black and white. Rather than the choice of Heaven or Hell, there are levels of heavenly homes, the Celestial Kingdom reserved for good Mormons, and lesser heavens for the good people, Mormon or other. Only the really nasty level (which still isn't "hell" per se) is reserved for the really nasty people. As for guilt and shame, most ex-Mormons I know will admit that these are very powerful tools within the community to coerce obedience. Most ex-Christians I know (including myself) will admit that guilt and shame are powerful tools the Christian community also use to coerce obedience. Not necessarily explicitly, but most certainly implicitly.
Is this different from the purity demanded of cult members and the guilt and shame used to keep them in line? I don't think so at all.
4. Confession.Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members' "sins", "attitudes" and "faults" are discussed and exploited by the leaders.
I'll start here with the CB. As I mentioned a moment ago, certain sins will get you excommunicated. These sins are read out in a letter to the entire membership of one's particular assembly. If the excommunicated public repents of his sin and stops the act, they can be re-admitted into the assembly. The best examples are sexual immorality and divorce. If one has pre-marital or extra-marital sex, it is to be confessed to the church leadership and excommunication will follow, regardless of the repentant nature. If the sexual misconduct has ended, one can be later re-instated. As for divorce, the initiating spouse will be excommunicated. Neither spouse is allowed to remarry. If the spouse does remarry, he or she will be excommunicated, though if he or she later "repents" of the second marriage (though the second marriage does not need to be dissolved), the remarried spouse may be re-admitted to the assembly. In CB churches, these sins are definitely discussed publicly and in many ways exploited by the leaders.
In the NAM, while there are no concrete rules like this, public confession is strongly encouraged for accountability and purity. In my own experience, I was encouraged to confess any sins or bad attitudes I'd committed during my weekly home group meetings and with my mentor. I was encouraged to confess my sins to anyone who was considered in any kind of authority to me, all for the purpose of purifying my heart and in some cases, casting out the spirits of this or that. I wouldn't say these things were ever exploited by the leaders in my own church, but they have been in other NAM (and MC) churches. "Confessing your faults one to another and praying for one another that you may be healed" is a Christian concept. In Roman Catholicism, Confession to a priest is a well known sacrament, as well as a command. In all churches I've attended confession is encouraged to greater or lesser degrees.
The LDS are to confess sins to their Bishop, as taught in the Doctrines & Covenants. He then determines the consequences, as far as revoked sacrament-taking and other church-participation privileges, all for the sake of bringing one back into good standing with the ward and God. A guilty conscience will determine if confession is necessary. As with Christians, the purpose is to absolve one of personal guilt by confessing to someone else, often a superior.
Is this the different from confessing sins publicly in front of the entire group and having it used against you? Maybe, but maybe not. Depending on the group we are talking about, faults can be either very publicly used against you or only privately exploited. Punishments and consequences of your faults, sins or attitudes are determined by third party.
5. Sacred Science.The group's doctrine or ideology is considered to be the ultimate Truth, beyond all questioning or dispute. Truth is not to be found outside the group. The leader, as the spokesperson for God or for all humanity, is likewise above criticism.
There is a lot of overlap here with Point 1. Within MC, members can sometimes be "encouraged" to study outside their religion to bolster their faith (and churches who encourage this ought to be given credit for their confidence and bravery), but at the same time, they are warned that the Devil is tricksy and can lead them astray if they study these things without being properly spiritually prepared. Which is the same as saying, "Unless you are super Christian, best not get into that just yet." They also, of course, believe the Bible to be the absolute truth (though there are progressive churches that accept the Bible as metaphorical) and all information outside the Bible, including science, is to be regarded with caution at best. At worst, they are tools of Satan to confuse you and lead you astray.
Reading anti-Mormon (LDS) literature is actively and pretty explicitly discouraged. You won't get in trouble for reading it or anything, but you'll be counselled not to. The above MC stance again applies to LDS.
The NAM, as far I know, don't push any particular written materials but to a lesser extent accept as reliable evidence the testimonies of other members, regardless of how fantastic their stories or preachings are, because they are perceived as from God. The Bible is not so much a closed canon for them; God can reveal new information to anyone at anytime. They took it a step further sometimes, though, that outside information and influence might actually sometimes be a way of allowing demonic spirits into you or into your home. So basically, be on alert at all time (but accept our testimonies as true because they happened to us so it's definitely true).
For the CB, since the leaders are considered infallible in matters of faith, their publications are to be taken freely as absolute truth. They follow the Bible as the sole source of truth, and their leaders' interpretations of it are considered correct. Other interpretations, even those of other Christian churches, are wrong or misguided. Again, members and leaders are to remain separate from even other Christian churches. If the Body of Christ includes all Christians, they at least consider themselves the Head. (Yes, this is an example they have used.)
6. Loading the Language.The group interprets or uses words and phrases in new ways so that often the outside world does not understand. This jargon consists of thought-terminating cliches, which serve to alter members' thought processes to conform to the group's way of thinking.
I'll admit this is a hard one, though I feel it should be obvious. I guess I just don't think of it as "cultish" really. I mean, all groups have their jargon; hang out on Reddit or in a sailing club and you'll be utterly confused about what anyone is talking about. I guess the point is that this can separate people further from outsiders, that they can load meaning into words that the Average Joe would use more simply. Words like "righteousness" and "holiness" are perhaps harder to come by than you might think. I don't know. We all know that all Christian groups have their "language". Maybe this is the one where we all get let off the hook. Maybe stereotypical cults do this to an extent I don't understand?
7. Doctrine over person.Members' personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.
This one is different for all the groups.
So within MC, usually doctrine always takes precedent over personal experiences. In general this is means in a situation where a member says they have felt God telling them that X is okay but X is condemned in the Bible, then the Bible is right. Or if someone has had some kind of religious experience that is contrary to Christianity, their experience was a delusion. Or if someone (like me) does NOT feel any experience that the Bible claims I should, then the Bible is still right and the problem is within the person's own heart. Basically cognitive dissonance always wins. In evangelical churches were charismatic behavior is not the norm, any supernatural experience such as speaking in tongues is also considered faulty and the person's sincerity does not trump what the Bible says (according to them). I think it was Martin Luther who said, “I wouldn’t believe you if you had swallowed the Holy Ghost, feathers and all!” Scripture and doctrine trump what you've experienced.
I'm not sure how the LDS approach this. I do know that individuals' experiences are confirmed by "the burning in the bosom" which comes when truth is revealed. (Before MC scoff, this is no different than the feeling you get when God "speaks" to you.) I am going to assume, however, that if the burning in the bosom occurs over something contrary to their belief system, this will be considered deception.
The CB are very strict about this. No one's personal experience is more believable than the Bible or church doctrine. End of story.
The NAM, however, are very, very different on this one. Personal experiences actually CAN overrule doctrine at times. As long as it confirms God and Christ. If it deviates from the accepted truth too far, then it will likely be ruled out. But a person can claim all kinds of fantastic things, as long as it continues to uphold a general belief in Christ.
In all situations, when personal experiences fail to prove God, the situation is reinterpreted to fit their ideology. A person who prays to God for faith and gets nothing did not get denied faith by God but is still too sinful or too proud or too something (anything), which is getting in the way of actually knowing God.
So, Points 6 and 7 - pretty weak evidence that Christianity is a cult, right? Would you admit the evidence is weak for Mormonism too then on these two points?
8. Dispensing of existence. The group has the prerogative to decide who has the right to exist and who does not. This is usually not literal but means that those in the outside world are not saved, unenlightened, unconscious and they must be converted to the group's ideology. If they do not join the group or are critical of the group, then they must be rejected by the members. Thus, the outside world loses all credibility. In conjunction, should any member leave the group, he or she must be rejected also.
Absolutely. Absolutely true of each of these religious groups. Obviously MC believe they are saved, they have received the truth, they have been chosen in some cases, and the rest of the world are in darkness, have rejected the truth, are lost, unsaved and must be converted to avoid eternal punishment. They also conclude that those who have it close to right, but not right enough (like say, Mormons, JWs, etc) are also lost, unenlightened, deceived. And going to hell.
The LDS believe this too, minus the eternal punishment (unless you're a REALLY nasty person). Mormons believe that MC have it close to right, but not right enough, therefore they are unenlightened and need to be converted to the absolute complete truth.
The NAM believe they are the ones who have it really right and all the other Christians are not quite Christian enough. They won't be lost, but they aren't as enlightened as they are, or as serious about their faith, or are missing out on some really great things God is doing. Those outside Christianity (including Mormons, JWs, etc) are lost and in darkness and deceived. And going to hell.
The CB believe they have it totally right and all other Christians are not totally right enough. They won't be lost, but they don't have it all exactly right. And anyone outside the Christian faith (including Mormons, JWs, etc) are deceived and lost and not saved. And are going to hell.
And for all these groups, the more adamantly against their religion you are, the deeper into darkness you are. If you are actively anti-Christian or anti-Mormon, you are even more deceived and pitiable. Christians (mainstream, ultra-conservative or not) really don't like atheists and Muslims who they perceive as actively anti-Christian (sometimes this is true, sometimes not) and consider them to be the most lost. Depending on your particular congregation, these people are to be either totally rejected or even more reached out to to get them saved. However, should someone actually LEAVE any of these groups, shit gets REAL. There are exceptions, sure, but in general, MC, LDS, NAM and CB all to some extent turn their backs on those who first turned their backs on them. They can lose family members, friends, jobs, everything. Having personally experienced this after leaving the CB and Christianity as a whole, I can attest to the fact that you will be rejected (though individuals may still keep some slight form of contact). Having friends who have left the LDS, I know this also happens there too, often.
Signs you left a cult? When everyone turns against you and rejects you (in our case, we were labeled as tools of Satan, in almost as many words), or when you friends and family turn away from you because you left their religion or church, does that sound like leaving a cult? Does the Sailing Club turn away from you in anger when you lose interest in sailing? Does anyone even notice when you stop posting on Reddit?
If you think none of this is solid evidence that Christianity is a cult, then that's fine. Just ask yourself then, is Mormonism anymore or less of a cult than Christianity? Is the Closed Brethern or the New Apostolic Movement? Are Seventh Day Adventists or Jehovah's Witnesses any more or less cultish than Christianity?
But of course Christianity isn't a cult because it's the truth and all the rest of these are false!
Right?
