Scott is back from holidays and making up for lost time. One of his posts today addresses the question ‘what is a cult?’ because it was suggested to him that his group may be a cult.
We have also had that suggestion made of us, (but I asked my wives and they don’t think its accurate…)
Here is the list Scott put up drawn from work by Adrian Van Leen, a West Aussie cult watcher.
1. The Preaching of Fundamentalist Revival
2. The Leader’s/Pastor’s Domination
3. Arrogant Authoritanism
4. Regular Calls to Submission and Obedience
5. Strong Emphasis on Tithing
6. Narrow Outlook and Perspective
7. Poor Theological Training
8. Distorted Theological Emphasis
9. Insensitive Simplistic Solutions
10. Agressive Recruiting/Proselytising
11. Intense Confession
12. Promotion of Guilt
13. Alienation
14. Exclusiveness
When you look at it from that angle we don’t fit many of the categories even slightly. The ironic thing is that some ‘churches’ may actually be more cult-like than ‘cults’!
How does your church rate?
Is Mark Edwards a cult leader – after all he has only obtained a degree from the Baptist Theological College in WA?
Ok, i jest (no really Mark 🙂 ) but is it not disturbing how that list doesn’t just fit Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses, but does fit at times quite neatly in some strands of the contemporary western church?…
I think Adrian may say that the intent of the book was not so much to identify cults (he would class JW’s and Mormons in that category) as much as it is a list of characteristics of groups in the “not quite cult” status. Which is probably why a few of these things on the list do actually ring true for some churches we may know.
I think that one of the dominant features of a cult is a claim to exclusive truth…everyone else has got it all wrong! Coupled with a highly manipulative leadership this makes for a toxic environment. Some churches can be pretty insular in their thinking but that doesn’t stretch to cult status – unhealthy though it may be!!
Since I’ve been named and shamed, let me play devils advocate.
The problem with this list is that, in moderation, most of those things are needed.
Surely the definition of a cult is taking something good, but taking it to the extreme?
1. The Preaching of Fundamentalist Revival
we all need to be revived
2. The Leader’s/Pastor’s Domination
leaders should lead, with servant hearts
3. Arrogant Authoritanism
Someone has to lead, and back themself
4. Regular Calls to Submission and Obedience
Someone has to lead, and challenge
5. Strong Emphasis on Tithing
We should all give to Gods work
6. Narrow Outlook and Perspective
compared to who?
7. Poor Theological Training
like Paul and Peter
8. Distorted Theological Emphasis
like Paul, no! like Peter no! like James!
(they at times seem to have different emphasis)
9. Insensitive Simplistic Solutions
Sometimes simple is best and we spend too much time drinking lattes and discussing the ills of the church, instead of sharing our faith.
10. Agressive Recruiting/Proselytising
Matt 28.19-20
11. Intense Confession
Confess your sins to one another
12. Promotion of Guilt
Hard to find anything I like about that, but it is true we should challenge people
13. Alienation
14. Exclusiveness
Nothing good about that
And if I can play devil-devil’s advocate – there seems to be 3 lots of leadership in that list. Anything that requires that much leadership has too little thinking going on inside it.
Which is the point, there is too much of everything going on in that list.
my brain hurts, I am going to get a coffee,
fresh new guinea beans okay ? 🙂
Amen – Mark E.
As I posted on Vaws blog, it would be interesting to see what Mr Van Leen thinks now – 18 years on from this reference regarding churches today and cults???
Good comment Mark and I agree with Barry that the ‘we are the only true church line’ is a real key feature.
however all that said I still think many have us have seen or experienced cultic practices in what are seen as mainstream churches.
Its good to be aware…
Another issue and maybe needs to be talked about on its own is a term I am becoming familiar with called “Spiritual Abuse”.
Definition from the book “The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse” is;
“Spiritual abuse is the mistreatment of a person who is in need of help, support or greater spiritual empowerment, with the result of weakening, undermining or decreasing that person’s spiritaul empowerment”
Johnson, D., Vasn Vonderan., The Subtle Power Of Spiritual Abuse (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1991 )p.20
Maybe that is a subheading for the promotion of guilt!
oops..
Johnson, David., Van Vonderen, Jeff
Was never good at bibiographies…sorry
Yeah good outlook Mark, good stuff.
The funny thing I’ve found is that people think that if a small housey type church isn’t attached to, or part of a bigger ‘mainstream’ church then its gonna end off in a cult>
But I actually reckon small ones are less likely to get cultish, cos there’s less oppurtunity for leaders to preach crap with no feedback n questions, less power to wield over people, less money to corrupt them etc. Generalisations I know, but still, I’ll go with them 4 now!