Ways of Distinguishing Healthy and Unhealthy Cults –© Copyright 1997 and
2002 by Timothy Conway, Ph.D.


 Given the suspicion in many quarters about new or exotic religious
movements, we need to discuss the nature of cults.
 The history of religion has seen the rise of hundreds of thousands of
religious cults, both benign and destructive. A useful and non-pejorative
definition of “cult”—after all, the word originally comes from the Latin
cultus, or “worship”—is any group of persons devoted to a charismatic
leader(s) who changes their outlook and behavior by transmitting his/her
values and views. 
 The word “cult” has quite negative connotations in our society, especially
among conservative Christians. For this reason, some scholars of religion
want to drop the term from our vocabulary and replace it with sect or New
Religious Movement/NRM. Yet the majority of religious cults are quite
benign. Indeed, some can be profoundly transformative in an entirely
positive way, promoting deep God-realization.
 All the traditional major religions either started as cults or involved
cultic circles at diverse times and places in their history. Early
Christianity was a cult, evidently a benign one—that is, until it became
aligned with the Roman State early in the 4th century, after which it grew
oppressive and destructive in some important respects. Over subsequent
centuries Christianity would include both positive and negative cult
tendencies. The Crusades and Inquisition, for example, manifested insidious
and hugely destructive cult behavior, whereas the cults around thousands of
saintly persons were, for the most part, extraordinarily beautiful affairs.
 Many present-day Christian denominations and sects display unwholesome
cultic elements, as do certain circles within other major religions.
Unhealthy cult behavior can, for that matter, be found within political
parties, business corporations, professional societies (e.g., medicine,
psychiatry, academia), and other social groups. Hitler’s Third Reich
entailed nightmarish cult behavior on political, social and quasi-religious
levels. 
 By contrast, some religious cults, while ap­pearing strange, eccentric or
evil to our general populace, may actually be exceedingly beneficial and
uplifting for the cult members and surrounding society. Scores of examples
abound over the last few hundred years, from the Society of Friends
(Quakers) and Methodism to Japan’s Seicho No Ie and India’s huge movements
devoted to God through adepts like Ramakrishna, Ammachi, et al.
 Yet numerous religious cults have achieved terrible notoriety in recent
decades. Consider the People’s Temple (Jim Jones’ mass murder/suicide of 913
followers in Jonestown, Guyana, 1978), Scientology (featuring the greed,
mania, lust and sinister strategems of cruel swindler L. Ron Hubbard), the
Unification Church (led by paranoid right-wing “Christ” Rev. Sun Myung
Moon), the Branch Davidians (80 of whom died with their self-appointed
messiah, serial child molester David Koresh, in battle with federal agents
in Waco, Texas, 1993), Luc Jouret’s Order of the Solar Temple (over 50
members killed by him in Switzerland, Canada and France in 1994 and 1995),
the Children of God (the “Family” of sex-crazed, depraved David Brandt
Berg), the Temple of Love (led by murderous, sex-mongering “Brother Love”
Hulon Mitchell “Yahweh Ben Yahweh” in Miami), Aum Shinri Kyo (led by
sex-and-blood obsessed Shoko Asahara, instigator of the 1995 sarin nerve-gas
attacks on innocent people in Tokyo’s subway system, killing 18 and
poisoning over 5,500), Heaven’s Gate (38 UFO-obsessed members dead from
suicide during Easter week, 1997, following demented leader Marshall “Do”
Applewhite), Uganda’s Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments
of God (over 900 members killed by Joseph Kibwetere and cronies in March,
2000), and the violent al-Qaeda terrorist network with its militant brand of
Wahhabi Islam (a fringe form of the religion, centered in Saudi Arabia, that
has killed countless progressive Muslims and non-Muslims over the last 250
years). 

 Because of the uproar over such groups, and the widespread alarm over the
thousands of “strange cults” now pervading our society, and the general
suspicion toward any form of charismatic leadership (except, of course, when
it occurs within one’s own church, political party or intellectual circle!),
it will be worth­while here to explore the characteristics of unhealthy,
destructive cults in contrast to healthy, benevolent spiritual groups.
 I sincerely hope that, as more people come to appreciate the qualities of
authentic spirituality, destructive cults will no longer be able to take
root and encroach upon and degrade so many lives. Thus, widespread
spir­itual education can usher in the real “truth that shall set us free.”
 Dr. Arthur Deikman, a spiritually minded psychiatrist and cult-expert in
northern California, has identified...
 
four basic behaviors found in extreme form in [destructive] cults:
compliance with the group, dependence on a leader, devaluing the outsider,
and avoiding dissent. These behaviors are not distinct and independent but
interrelated. In my view, they arise in part from what I refer to as the
dependency dream, the regressive wish for security that uses the family as a
model, creating an authoritarian leadership structure (the parent) and a
close-knit, exclusive group (the children)....

 A continuum of [cultic] behavior exists, from the People’s Temple ... to
rigid religious groups, corporate cultures, professional societies, [we can
add political parties and nations] and ordinary us/them categories.[i]
<#_edn1> 

 

 Based on the insightful work of Deikman and other researchers,[ii] <#_edn2>
as well as my own longtime investigation of spiritual movements old and new,
here is a lengthy list of warning signs about cults, interspersed with
remarks about signs of healthy spiritual groups. An absence of these warning
signs char­acterizes healthy spiritual groups.
 It’s hard to keep this list of warning signs short; all points covered are
crucial. They constitute a useful set of criteria as our traditional
religions and new religions unfold in this new millennium. Unbelievably,
some cults (like Scientology) have violated almost all these warning signs!
 
à     Craving for followers; seductive recruiting strategies or heavy-handed
tactics of proselytizing or conversion (including “love bombing,” that is,
showering prospective recruits with friendly, but strategic, attention). If
the spir­it­ual movement is pure and its members are radiant with virtuous
qualities and deep spiritual realization, new people will be attracted to
the movement intuitively, spontaneously, and naturally. The movement won’t
need to pursue anyone with a hyped sales pitch that exploits people’s
desires, fears, or insecurities in their quest for meaning and fulfillment.
à     Intimidating indoctrination procedures that psychologically break a
person down (suppressing old behaviors, attitudes, and relationships) so
that s/he can be rebuilt according to the group’s ideal of a docile,
unquestioning, compliant member.[iii] <#_edn3>
à     Expensive entry fees or initiations. In fact, the less the group has
to do with money, the better. The greatest spiritual masters charge no money
whatsoever for sharing their love and guidance. Their work is supported via
voluntary donations from those who can easily afford it or are inspired to
give without asking. Beware groups that demand from members most or all of
their assets. (Present­ly some 500 cults in the United States, most of them
Christian, demand all assets from members.) A small tithe is not necessarily
exploitative if all monies serve a reasonable purpose and can be accounted
for upon request.
à     A hidden agenda that becomes known to a group member only after s/he
is heavily invested in the cult membership. In a healthy spiritual group,
completely informed consent is standard policy. Hence, there should be no
use of front names masking the group’s real affiliation.
à     Excessive demands on the time and energy of the group members. Slave
labor, overwork, or sleep/food deprivation demanded on behalf of the group
as proof of loyalty. Obsessive scheduling, such that every moment of one’s
waking life is controlled by the group. Members’ donation of their time and
energy should be a voluntary gift.
à     Trapping or holding onto members. People should be able to leave the
group at any time for any reason without fear of eternal damnation,
reprisal, scorn, or being pursued or shunned by cult members.
à     Theological thought control. Members should be free to worship
Divinity under whatever Name and Form they so choose (God the Father,
Goddess Mother, formless YHVH/Allah/Godhead, Christ, Krishna, Siva, Brahman,
Amida, Tao, Buddhata), short of grossly offending or harming others.
à     Cultivation in members any attitude of childish dependency upon
exploitative, authoritarian leaders who require absolute, exclusive
devotion. Jesus enjoined us to be “child-like,” not childish. Surrender to
God is fine, and even some forms of hierarchical relationship are healthy
and empowering (e.g., student-teacher, apprentice-master, and
dis­ciple-guru). But let us beware any disempowerment strategies that leave
members feeling inadequate, without auto­n­omy or inner locus of control,
and no real hope of ever reaching the same (or nearly the same) spiritual
level as the leader. A leader may teach that we need to lose egocentricity
and selfish desires, but s/he will always articulate an empowering view that
Divine Spirit is as much within our hearts as within the leader. This
immanent Divinity is accessible via our own direct, interior connection with
the God-Self, without mediation by the leader and any delegates or cronies.
à     Flat affect (zombie-like absence of emotions). Excessively
auto­­matic, robot-like behavior. Radically de-automatized behavior
(produced via sleep deprivation or sensory overload) that breaks down
normal, responsible functioning.
à     Chronic group feeling of righteous anger, revenge, turmoil, anxiety,
shame, guilt, self-pity, fear, despair, mindless euphoria, ego-excitement,
adrenaline rushes, self-inflated fervor or futuristic anticipation.
Authentic spiritual movements are permeated by a deep feeling of genuine
love, kindness, peace, freedom, bliss, ease of being, spontaneity, focus on
the present situation and trust in Spirit or God.
à     Crusading agenda to save the world or convert all souls to “the true
way.” A healthy spirituality emphasizes becoming individually transformed so
that one is better aligned with the God-Self and involved in a simple,
non-grandiose form of service to one’s fellow beings. Serv­ice and giving
are defined primarily as charitable assist­ance and gener­­osity toward
one’s community, family, friends, and the world at large, not slavish
service toward the narrow, voracious cult-group.
à     Proud feeling of being the chosen people, of possessing the exclusive
truth or means of salvation, or being superior to those outside the group.
Heavily polarized us-them, adversarial thinking, projection of one’s own
shadow qualities onto others, seeing outsiders as homogeneously neg­a­tive,
devoid of positive qualities (“they” are “bad” and “we” are “good”). Rigid
boundaries and isolation between insiders and outsiders. Petty criticism,
stereo­typing or devaluing of outsiders. (Deik­man: “De­­valu­­ing the
outsider is... preliminary to harming others.... Whether the conflict is
between nations or individuals, the attacker devalues the victim prior to
the violent act.... The person you devalue becomes easier to kill.”[iv]
<#_edn4> ) Chronic emphasis on the differ­ences between group mem­bers and
outsiders at the expense of seeing the essential oneness we all share on
both human and spiritual levels.
à     A chronic need to find and persistently maintain enemies inside or
outside the group. Targeting or isolating of anyone inside or outside the
group as a source of evil or contamination or “bad energy.” Negative
thought-forms aimed at others. In healthy spirituality, the leader and group
promote empathy, compassion, respect, and see­ing the Divine in all beings:
“Love thy neighbor” and “love thy enemy” (who is no longer “the enemy”).
à     Paranoia—either delusions of grandeur by the leader or group, or
self-pitying feelings of being persecuted and mis­under­stood by outsiders.
Healthy, continuing contact and discussion with people and institutions
outside the group will usu­ally obviate any persecution and misunderstanding
that might arise.
à     Turning cult members into watched objects who have no privacy in their
solitary behavior or relationships with others. Manipulative system of
rewards and punishments. Totalitarian structure of per­mission and
non-permission regarding basic behaviors including personal hygiene,
interpersonal communication, etc. Orwellian system of in­­formers who convey
information to leaders about persons behind their back. Machiavellian
techniques of setting members against each other or against outsiders.
Ganging up on individual members to criticize or humiliate or coerce them;
“working on them” to violate their own sense of conscience or autonomy.
Brainwashing or mind-control techniques or high-pressure group dynamics
coercing members to conform to a worldview, agenda, or code of conduct.
Physical or psychological violence. Giving and with­holding of love or
praise as a manipulation technique. Frequent testing of members for loyalty,
commitment, or obedience.
à     Preventing contact with outsiders or ex-members. Breaking up couples
and families to gain power over individuals and prevent coalitions that
could more effectively criticize unsound, corrupt leadership. Rigid
isolating of cult members in an exclusive family away from their relatives
and friends outside the cult so that it becomes the sole source for support,
self-esteem and interpersonal connection. Isolating cult members from other
members, even for short periods, in solitary confinement or quarantine to
break them down and man­i­pulate their views/behaviors.
à     Blind obedience to harmful or unsound directives from on high.
Abusive, domineering top-dog leadership. In healthy groups, the leader(s)
functions more as an advisor and inspirer rather than as “con­trol freak”
dictating how members should think and act. Mem­bers are never threatened or
subordinated in ruthless, bullying, non-empathic manner. There may be a
period of time where an authentic spiritual director/guru needs to test the
disciple, but this is done within the overall context of genuine love,
trust, and emotional safety, not as a power-trip by the leader. Any tests
must be for the sole purpose of strengthening the student’s own skills and
virtues, not demanding obedience and loyalty.
à     Hoarding of money, power or prestige by anyone; otherwise corruption
and intrigue are not far behind. Beware lavish accommo­da­tions and
lifestyle for leader and close assistants, while everyone else is reduced to
inferior-quality living standards. Beware presence of sycophantic
subordinates who inauthentically emulate and slavishly propitiate the leader
and act as the leader’s agents of control and punishment of cult members.
à     Double standard of behavior for leader(s) and members. Spiritual
leaders should main­tain high moral standards and exemplary virtuous
behavior. Beware rationalizations given to excuse the leader’s unvirtuous
behavior as well as self-aggrand­­izing, vanity and excessive
self-referencing by the leader (e.g., “I am the World Teacher,” “I am the
greatest incarnation of God to appear on this planet,” “think always and
only of me,” etc.).  A genuine spiritual leader is humble, giving,
self-sacrificing, loving, blissful and serene—consistent with an authentic,
trans-egoic realization of Divine Spirit (God, Tao, Buddhata, Brahman). Any
claims by the leader of being divine should be balanced with declarations
that the followers have divinity within them as well, as part of an overall
theology of immanence (best balanced with a teaching of divine
transcendence—see below). Important, too, is how the leader came to be the
leader. Grandiose promotional claims (either by the teacher or by his/her
followers) or one­-ups­man­ship and huckster tech­niques are not acceptable.
Beware fallen yogis and their flashy charisma and psychic powers, which can
seem quite impressive. If other respected spiritual masters recognize the
leader as a spiritual master, this is a promising sign, but still does not
insure anything. Bottom-line criterion: “By their fruits you shall know
them.” If the leader doesn’t have an inspiring, positively transforming
effect on students, promoting qualities of true spirituality, the students
would do best to leave.
à     Reinforcing or excusing unethical behaviors (killing, injuring, lying,
stealing, plagiarism, bribing, gossiping, sexual misconduct). Inflexible
ethical rules that keep people stuck on lower levels of moral
development—for instance, moral codes based on “an eye-for-an-eye” or “the
ends justify the means” mentality.
à     Suppression of dissent, doubt, critical thinking, sincere questions,
discussion or independent judgment. Regarding of leader’s or sacred text’s
teachings as infallible. Attachment to doctrinal certainty. Members should
be free to follow their own informed reason and moral conscience in
preference to the directives of the leader, group or text. Yet healthy
spirituality emphasizes developing the conscience to its utmost through
ongoing learning.
à     Irrational thinking or magical thinking. Supra-rational thinking and
use of paradox is fine, in accordance with the mature mystical traditions as
found within circles of Christianity, Judaism (Hasidism), Islam (Sufism),
Vedanta, Buddhism and Taoism.
à     Anti-scientific thinking. Yet criticism of reductionist scientism and
limitations in the current scientific paradigm can be constructively
expressed. The danger here is mythical thinking and bizarre, unverifiable
claims that can’t be consensually validated.
à     A “uni-level” obsession with health and wealth on the material plane
(R. Anthony). Healthy groups promote authentic (“multi-level”) spiritual
growth[v] <#_edn5> and “adaptation to transpersonal structural stages” (K.
Wilber).
à     Emphasis on quirky, flaky, untested ideas. Obsession with fantasy or
mythic thinking. Obsession with “the Evil One” (though an understanding of
evil and the psyche’s shadow side is important). Scary apocalypse-thinking,
battleground mentality, or con­struing of events or souls in excessively
dualistic cate­gories of “Good” vs. “Evil.” In a healthy spiritual group,
the human being is viewed neither as totally evil nor tot­al­ly perfect but
seen realistically as a fallible human whose source is Spirit, and whose
potential is profound peace, bliss, freedom and love in authentic
realization of God/Tao/Buddha/Brahman. Beware excessive talk of heaven and
hell, which promotes egocentric think­ing about reward and punishment. A
healthy group adheres to a time-tested world­view with a balanced theology,
emphasizing complete transcendence of the Divine as well as the complete
immanence of the Divine: God is beyond all yet within all. That is to say,
there is neither imbalance toward an otherworldly, biophobic “ascender”
orientation, nor a this-worldly, non-mystical, “descended” position.[vi]
<#_edn6> 
à     Intellectual parochialism or isolation from other worldviews;
censorship or control of what people read; prevention of studying sacred
texts from other traditions or visiting other genuine spiritual masters. A
healthy spiritual group is open to spiritual truth from whatever source, and
knows how to distinguish wise from unwise teachings (for example, see my
criteria for genuine spiritual realization in another handout).
à     Orwellian double-speak (Deikman: “manipulating language to suggest a
meaning and value opposite to the real situation”). Code­words or buzzwords.
Excessive use of slogans to obviate critical thinking. Manipulative rhetoric
based on cunning or emotional­ism. Reinvention of language—e.g., excessive
amount of jargon—to widen gulf between insiders and out­siders and exert
mind-control. Adopting new names and titles for members can also be suspect,
especially when it is done to create insider group-dynamics. However, we
must be aware that, in a positive vein, changing members’ names can
facilitate a new sense of identity, less conditioned by former ego
tendencies; monastics in major religions, for instance, undergo name changes
to help effect a psychological “death” to the old ego-persona.
à     Beware enforcement of conformity in apparel and ex­ternal behavior.
These are not, in themselves, negative things, but, like new names for
members, can be part of an overall unhealthy cult strategy to amplify
insider/outsider dichotomies, destroy autonomy and insure compliance.
à     Fascination with secrets or occult teachings and practices that
promote an insider-outsider split. Beware any series of initiations that
create intrigue and stratify group into levels with higher, elite superiors
outranking inferior, lower members. Beware obsessions with magical rituals
for empowering egoic aims.
à     Excessive fascination with altered states of consciousness.
Chronically being in a mindless trance state (“navel-gaz­ing”) can preclude
deeper levels of spiritual realization as well as community service and
justice-advocacy on behalf of fellow beings.
à     Over-use of junk food or adherence to unhealthy diets. Beware any use
of mind-altering drugs (unless they are part of one’s ancient tradition, as
among the Huichol and other tribal people).
à     Beware exploitation of sex in any form. Sometimes this may be
rationalized as “good” for the group member. But every person has the right
to refrain from sexual activity as s/he sees fit, without any kind of
pressure. 
à     Legalistic obsession with myriad rules. Enslavement to
authori­tar­ian, military-style organization and procedure. Every group
needs guidelines and rules, but when the form of the religion becomes more
important than authentic spiritual experience, the group is in trouble and
idolatry is a danger. The group needs to be flexible, adaptable, and open to
new developments that would involve changes in guidelines and policies to
better serve the members and society.
à     Obsession with invisible or other-worldly entities or forces other
than God. The issue is not whether these entities/forces exist—the subtle
planes of energy and hyper-dimensional realms are evidently filled with all
sorts of unusual beings and processes (including the souls of ancestors,
saints and spirit guides, troubled souls, et al.). The relevant issue here
is that obsession with demons, angels, aliens, ascended masters, ghosts,
etc., undermines authentic realization of the transcendent/immanent Spirit.
 
 All our religious groups, old and new, large and small, need to be
subjected to the above list of warning signs. My own explorations and
experiences in spiritual movements indicate that many groups can pass with
flying colors an evaluation based on these criteria. Other groups, including
some very large religious denominations, cannot.
 Therefore, if you (or anyone you know) are presently participating in a
group that does not fare well according to these standards, then you might
want to get out as soon as possible and look for a healthier, more genuinely
supportive, egalitarian and empowering spiritual community.
 By boycotting unhealthy cults, they will eventually whither and fade away.
 As a society, we would do well to implement ways of countering destructive
cult behavior, primarily through public education and classes in school,
starting at the high school level or earlier—for, as we know, young people
are often targeted by predatory cults. This education can include lesson
plans fostering knowledge of authentic spiritual development, based on
guidelines from the well-known Perennial Wisdom of our sacred traditions.
Such education can promote empathy; anti-authoritarian behavior; autonomy;
divergent thinking; multiple viewpoints; and what Deikman terms the “eye
level view”—adult to adult relationships, instead of situations wherein
parent-figures intimidate submissive, disempowered “children.”
 Hopefully our new millennium can be a time for outgrowing the sundry
unhealthy and insipid activities that usurp the name of religion, so that we
discover a mature, abundantly fruitful spirituality. It’s time for all of us
to grow up, to genuinely lead lives of integrity, goodness, kindness and the
other virtues of excellence.

 No more excuses.

 
 


 <#_ednref1>  [i] Arthur Deikman, The Wrong Way Home: Uncovering the
Patterns of Cult Behavior in American Society, Beacon, 1990/1994, p. 48.

 <#_ednref2>  [ii] My thinking on healthy and destructive cults has come not
only through my own extensive observations of various religious and
psychological groups, but also through the work of some fine
transpersonalist thinkers/scholars who have written on cult behavior such as
the previously cited Arthur Deikman, The Wrong Way Home, the best work I
have thus far found on cults; Richard Anthony, Bruce Ecker, & Ken Wilber
(Eds.), Spiritual Choices: The Problem of Recognizing Authentic Paths to
Inner Transformation, Paragon, 1987; Jack Kornfield, A Path with Heart: A
Guide through the Perils and Promises of Spiritual Life, Bantam, 1993
(chapter 18, pp. 254-71); Jack Kornfield, After the Ecstasy, the Laundry,
2000; and works by Prof. David Christopher Lane on corrupt cults and leaders
such as Eckankar (Paul Twitchell, et al), Thakar Singh, and M.S.I.A.
(John-Roger Hinkins’ Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness); see David C.
Lane, Exposing Cults: When the Skeptical Mind Confronts the Mystical,
Garland Publishing, 1994; The Making of a Spiritual Movement: The Untold
Story of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, Del Mar Press, 1983; D.C. Lane (Ed.),
Understanding Cults and Spiritual Movements, Del Mar Press, 1989; and
various articles. Other useful works on cults include Steven Hassan,
Combating Cult Mind Control, Inner Traditions, 1990; Margaret Singer, Cults
in Our Midst: The Hidden Menace in Our Everyday Lives, SF: Jossey-Bass,
1996; I.M. Lewis, Religion in Context: Cults and Charisma, Cambridge Univ.
Press, 1996; Andrew Pavlos, The Cult Experience, Green­wood, 1982; and
various works by Prof. J. Gordon Melton (all published by Garland), The Cult
Controversy: A Guide to Sources, 1992; Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in
America, rev. ed., 1992; and Melton (Ed.), Cults and New Religions: Sources
for the Study of Nonconventional Religious Groups in Nineteenth & Twentieth
Century America, 22 volumes, 1992.

 There are specific books on individual cults, such as the People’s Temple,
the Unification Church, the Hare Krishna (I.S.K.CON) cult, the Branch
Davidians, and the Rajneesh movement. Bent Corydon’s L. Ron Hubbard, Messiah
or Madman? and John Atack’s A Piece of Blue Sky, cited earlier, are classic
studies of the founder of Scientology, probably the most dangerous religious
cult of the 20th century (next to the quasi-religious Nazi Third Reich).

 An extensive list of general and specific works on cults can be found at
the website of cult expert Rick Ross, www.rickross.com.

 See also Anson Shupe & David Bromley (Eds.), Anti-Cult Movements in
Cross-Cultural Perspective, Garland, 1994. Along this line, I cannot
recommend the works of certain anti-cultists and de-programmers who operate
either from a context of anti-spiritual secularism on the one hand, or from
xenophobic, conservative, cultic Christianity on the other. Works from
publishers such as Prometheus Books would be representative of the former,
while the many anti-cult works from publishers such as Harvest House,
InterVarsity Press, Zondervan, Thomas Nelson, et al., represent the latter.
For such groups, anything outside their own materialistic or Christian
thinking is to be ridiculed and rejected. They have no inkling of the
Perennial Wisdom or the validity of religious pluralism. More importantly,
these groups fail to see the cultic thinking in their own circles. For them,
Deikman’s work is highly recommended reading.

 <#_ednref3>  [iii] Margaret Singer and L.J. West have identified ten
“indoctrination elements” that characterize destructive cults: “1. Isolation
of the recruit and manipulation of his/her environment. 2. Control over
channels of communication and infor­mation. 3. Debilitation through
inadequate diet and fatigue. 4. Degradation or diminution of the self. 5.
Induction of uncertainty, fear and confusion, with joy and certainty through
surrender to the group as a goal. 6. Alternation of harshness or leniency in
a context of discipline. 7. Peer pressure, often applied through ritualized
struggle sessions, generating guilt and requiring open confessions. 8.
Insistence by seemingly all-powerful hosts that the recruit’s
survival—physical or spiritual—depends on identifying with the group. 9.
Assignment of monotonous tasks or repetitive tasks... 10. Acts of symbolic
betrayal or renunciation of self, family, and previously held values,
designed to increase the psychological distance between the recruit and his
previous way of life.” Quoted in Rachel Andres & James Lane, Cults and
Consequences: The Definitive Handbook, L.A.: Commission on Cults and
Missionaries (Community Relations Committee, Jewish Federated Council of
Greater Los Angeles), 1988, section 3, p. 4.

 <#_ednref4>  [iv] Deikman, The Wrong Way Home, p. 102.

 <#_ednref5>  [v] The distinction between “unilevel” and “multilevel” comes
from Richard Anthony, “The Anthony Typology: A Framework for Assessing
Spiritual and Consciousness Groups,” in Richard Anthony, Bruce Ecker, & Ken
Wilber (Eds.), Spiritual Choices, op. cit., pp. 35-105.

 <#_ednref6>  [vi] This last point is frequently made by Zen masters and
has, in modern times, been strongly emphasized by the aforementioned Adi Da
and Ken Wilber.



on 9/26/05 10:50 AM, shempmcgurk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Does the TMO fall under the parameters of the following definition
> of a cult?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: http://www.spiritwatch.org/cultdef.htm
> 
> 
> 7 ELEMENTS OF A CULTIC GROUP
> 
> 1) A centralized form of  leadership that rules with unquestioned
> authority
> 
> 2) A body of convictions, beliefs, and practices set forth boldly
> as "the truth"
> 
> 3) A compelling presentation of the group vision to prospects that
> is inviting and challenging
> 
> 4) A series of manipulative socializing sessions to instill
> psychological dependence on the group
> 
> 5) A definable process of group dynamics used to unethically control
> and manipulate members
> 
> 6) A history of abuses of authority by group leaders freely using
> deception and fear tactics
> 
> 7) A history of psychological and spiritual abuses of group members
> that destroy lives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 

--
 
Rick Archer
SearchSummit
1108 South B Street
Fairfield, IA 52556
Phone: 641-472-9336
Fax: 815-572-5842

http://searchsummit.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to