Comments on: Is Mormonism a Cult?

By: Kyle H

Kyle H — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:12:46 +0000

Edit: Actually that wasn’t Hassan’s analysis, but a former mormon’s using the model. The analysis seemed pretty fair to me.

By: Kyle H

Kyle H — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:06:07 +0000

Every group of people has a varying level of “cultishness”. I would define cult as a group of people portraying the same traits, behaviors, and going outside that norm is discouraged. The higher the pressure to conform, the more ‘cultish’ that group is. Here is my rough scale from low to high cultishness:
A group of teenage friends, a school, a family, coworkers, political parties, active military, religions, mormonism, scientology, LDS missionaries.
Cultishness might not always be bad, especially in the military case where behavior control is important for survival.
I put missionaries at the top since behavior is severely controlled, as well as thoughts, emotions, and access to information.
Mormon cultishness will vary from family to family, ward to ward, and mission to mission (or companionship to companionship), but I agree that its more cultish than most organizations.

Steven Hassan is a “Cult Expert” who has studied the attributes of cults, and describes it succinctly in the BITE model:
Behavior Control,
Information Control,
Thought Control,
Emotional Control.
he’s done an analysis on mormonism here: pretty interesting stuff
http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/m/mormon/BITE-Mormonism.htm

By: Best toy

Best toy — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 23:11:33 +0000

Yes, I think this is like cult or sect may be

By: kleiner

kleiner — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:55:58 +0000

All of that said, Justin, it would be foolish of me to deny that there are any number of people in the church houses who “just believe there was someone named Jesus and try not be be a jerk for the rest of their lives, no thought necessary”. There are tons of thoughtless Christians, and that is a shame. I am particularly saddened by thoughtless Catholics, since they ignore such a marvelous intellectual tradition. But one cannot help but immediately add that this anti-intellectual tendency is hardly confined to the religious. Being an atheist does not guarantee that one is thoughtful and reflective. Our culture is pretty anti-intellectual and this seems to cut across nearly all segments of society.

That said, since Christianity is essentially about relationship, I don’t think it is first and foremost a “set of beliefs” (though those are implicit and included) and it is not just a metaphysics (though that is implicit too). I don’t think you need to be a philosopher to be a good Christian. I can love my dog without being a zoologist, and I can be a Christian without being a philosopher or theologian. Christianity is about love – love of God and love of neighbor. Part of love includes the desire to know (the lover wishes to know everything he can about the beloved). But more than that love is about presence (what the lover most dearly desires is to be with his beloved).

By: kleiner

kleiner — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:39:10 +0000

Justin – Again, let’s define “blind faith” as ‘believing without understanding (and we might add believing without even seeking to understand)’.
It certainly is the case that some version of the claim ‘If you believe in Jesus you shall be saved’, appears a number of times in the Gospels and Acts. But should we take that to mean: “Have blind faith in Jesus and you shall be saved”? Or, in other words, ‘Believe something that you not only do not understand but do not even seek to understand and you shall be saved”? I sure don’t read it that way. What Jesus wants is for us to know Him (not in some speculative philosophical sense of “know”, but to know Him as persons can know persons). Seek and you shall find. The believing is for the sake of knowing.
I guess my point here is that I don’t see the emphasis on “belief” as being identical with or even including “blind faith”. To think otherwise is to presume that faith cannot know or that ‘belief’ is necessarily “blind”.

Regarding your last suggested measure of religion vs cult (that religions admit religion is man-made while cults do not). Catholics do not believe that the Church is simply “man-made”. Rather Catholics think the Church is both a divine and a human institution (how this gets worked out is one big difference between Catholics and Protestants). Qua the human element of the Church, it is of course fallible and indeed capable of terrible sin. But qua the divine element, it can be preserved from error on matters “essential to the faith”. This is the role of the Pope (though the role is severely constricted and the Pope almost never speaks from this “infallible office of Peter”). But Catholics believe that the Church can be preserved from error not because of man, but because of God. I actually think all Christians should believe this. As Augustine said, “Were it not for the authority of the Catholic Church, I would not believe a single word of the Bible” [for the Church wrote the Bible and decided which books were canonical]. I don’t know if this immunizes Catholicism from “culthood” according to your criteria.

By: Justin

Justin — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:22:49 +0000

Professor Kleiner, if we say blind faith is “belief without understanding”, then I’m inclined to say that the basic tenets of Christianity would lend themselves to encouraging blind faith in it followers. (believe in Christ and hollow his teaching and you’ll go to heaven. otherwise, you may or may not go to some kind of hell), for the average guy in a society where almost everyone believes this, it may seem more prudent for them to just believe there was someone named Jesus and try not be be a jerk for the rest of their lives, no thought necessary.

That being said, not all religions looks kindly on this approach to religiosity. Since taking your into to philosophy class, I’ve been impressed with the Aquinian approach to explaining the existence of God. That alone shows that one’s approach to religious belief, while the assumptions one must make to believe it, can be both thorough and logically consistent, even if they accept the assumptions one must make about the universe to agree with a scientific method. The one thing that most impresses me with the Catholic faith is that they don’t believe the religious institution is perfect, just God. (at least that’s what I’ve heard from Catholics, I’m no expert)

I think that would be my discerning factor for whether a religion is a cult or not. If the doctrine says that the actual institution is perfect (as opposed to man-made), then it’s a cult. If the religion admits that its institution is prone to human mistakes, whereas the God it worships is ultimately infallible, then it’s cool by me. (not a cult)

By: Justin

Justin — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:53:58 +0000

Jon, if we say that a Mormon who blindly accepts the church’s dogma, then I would have to be inclined to call the church itself a cult, since I think it promotes these specific qualities in its member. Back when I was LDS, I was taught that any “unwholesome” thoughts, or any thoughts that aren’t pro-LDS are either from personal, selfish desires, or from the freakin’ son of the dawn himself (Satan). They taught me to primarily date/marry within the church, to convert any non-LDS friends. They taught me to unconditionally follow the words of the prophet (even if the prophet told you to do something awful, God would forgive you, since the prophet told you to). I was taught to be willing to give up my property to the church if they ever needed my home. Not to mention the temple ceremonies, which only increase the level of commitment you’re supposed to have with the church.

The church definitely promotes the cult mentality over the liberal, self-critical sort. It’s awesome if a member is willing to question their authority and challenge the church’s orthodoxy, but that doesn’t make them good mormons.

That being said, I don’t really care whether Mormonism is called a cult or not. I’d be fine just calling it a particularly aggressive religious sect. I *do* hope, however, that in the future, the church will just be considered some old-time cult which managed to get a few million members at its peak popularity.

By: Seth R.

Seth R. — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:40:58 +0000

Cult is a word that people are rarely very careful about. Usually they use it as some vague scary word that raises images of sacrificing virgins and forcing people to drink poison kool-aid. Here’s the actual dictionary definition (Merriam-Webster):

1 : formal religious veneration : worship
2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : the object of such devotion c : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion

Nothing particularly objectionable there except #3.

By: kleiner

kleiner — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:49:12 +0000

Sorry for the litany of posts – I should think of everything I want to say and then post.

We might all agree that an essential property of a “cult” (in the negative sense) is an organization that not only encourages blind faith but that also actively discourages and stymies attempts by members to understand the faith (typically through isolation, threats, or perhaps even abuse). This discouragement and stymying is done because the leadership of cults are either (a) crazy or (b) not interested in truth but interested in power.

If this is right, then not all religions are cults. Is Mormonism? I don’t think so, though Utah Mormonism does appear to have some cultural discouragements to asking too many difficult questions. But, again, I’ve never been Mormon and was not raised in Utah so my remarks here are pretty anecdotal (though I have taught probably 2000 students in my time at USU and seen many of them confront serious questions for the first time. Some of you know, for instance, that I set aside a day in my Intro class where I use Aquinas’ arguments for the existence of God to try to disprove Mormonism).

By: kleiner

kleiner — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:27:29 +0000

A point of clarification:

Let’s define “blind faith” as belief without understanding. Now Neal suggested that all religions ENCOURAGE blind faith. That looks patently false to me. Now it might be the case that there exist persons of blind faith in all religions, but that does not mean that the religion encourages it (in fact, my religious tradition discourages it). But if the existence of people who believe things without seeking to understand them makes religion a “cult”, then cultish behavior abounds in our society across all walks of life and belief. This because there are people of “blind faith” in all walks of life – including atheists, SHAFTers, scientific materialists, Democrats, Republicans, etc etc etc.

By: kleiner

kleiner — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:15:17 +0000

Neal misunderstood me, literally taking me to say the opposite of what I meant to say.
I was trying to get a clarification from Neal – did he mean that ALL religions encourage blind faith or did he just mean that Mormonism does? If he is accusing Mormonism of encouraging blind faith, then I bowed out and wanted to let Mormons and ex-Mormons answer that charge (though my colleague Dr. Sherlock certainly does not seem like a person of blind faith). If Neal meant that all religions encourage blind faith, well then that is just a ridiculous atheist talking point and it is just wrong. Regrettably, Neal’s follow up post suggests that he does think all religions encourage blind faith. Talk about a gross overgeneralization. I wonder, has Neal investigated all faith traditions? What evidence does he have in support of this claim? This is why I refer to such remarks as “talking points” – they do not represent serious or substantives contributions to a dialogue.

Bottom line: I did not say blind faith is present in all religions. My point was precisely the opposite. It might be that some religious traditions encourage this, but I know that some don’t (in fact, I think most don’t).

The word “cult” has several senses, not all of which are negative. All religions are “cults” in the sense that they all have rituals. (Cultus in Latin just means religious practice or worship). But this is not the sense meant by Neal. The negative sense of “cult” refers to groups that engage in brainwashing and often abuse. Now some of the kooks of the new atheist movement might think all religions are cults in this sense, but that is just overheated rhetoric (and it is just stupid to boot). I have not been brainwashed, and my religious tradition encourages reflection, reading, and a robust intellectual engagement with the faith. Would a religion that is interested in brainwashing operate the world’s largest non-governmental system of education (k-12 and higher education)? (Note: these are not kooky ghettos of brainwashing; these are accredited schools and in many cases some of the premier institutions of learning in the world which enable a noteworthy portion of the scientific discoveries made).

By: neal

neal — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:28:04 +0000

dr. kleiner your comment that blind faith is present in all religion helps illustrate my point that religion and cults appear to be the same thing, the only difference between the two appears to be the size of the movement. I focused on mormonism for this post because it along with Jehovah witnesses and scientologist, seem to fit my perception of cult behavior more closely than say Catholics and Anglicans. So i ask you Dr. Kleiner what differences do you perceive between cults and religion.

By: neal

neal — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:19:45 +0000

hahaha that is exactly the song i started singing to myself when they sang the song follow the leader. thanks for your comment Steve, I can see how people see value in the church even if they don’t believe the the supernatural stories. I went through a stage where i felt the same. The final straw came for me during the temple interview when asked if i believe joseph smith was a true prophet, of coarse i said yes because it was my intention to stay in the church even though i didn’t believe in the literalness of supernatural claims. I felt a hypocrite and decided to leave the church.

By: neal

neal — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:10:26 +0000

I am not sure when you served a mission trevor, but during the time a served there was a big push for retention in the church. (part of the PMG missionary guide). One of our main goals was to educate member missionaries for conversion and retention. The missionaries were instructed to teach the members to surround the people in constant attention from the active true believing members. We encouraged members to call their investigator friends everyday (in order to give them a constant reminder of the church to help them avoid doubts and to screen them from anti mormon information on the web. Bishops were strongly encouraged by mission presidents to give new members callings to make them feel wanted and important. The missionaries are taught to search for people going through severe emotional changes by encouraging them to visit hospitals and families of the recently departed in order to “give council ” to these people who can be more easily persuaded to join.
As far as sex goes spencer w kimball and joseph f smith have both released statements (one an official statement from the first precidency )stating that oral and anal sex even in the confines of a wedded couples bedroom, is considered a grave and unnatural sin.
As far as marriage goes you know exactly what i meant when i said they tell you who to marry. I am not suggesting that you didn’t want to marry your wive, i am stating if you get married it should only be to a temple worthy member or else you cannot have the highest level of the celestial kingdom.

By: kleiner

kleiner — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:09:11 +0000

Neal, when you say “The institution of the religion itself encourages blind faith” are you referring to Mormonism or to religion in general? I’ll let Mormons or ex-Mormons comment if it is the former. If it is the latter, you might consider setting aside the talking points.
It has never been my experience, as a religious person, that blind faith has been encouraged. “Blind faith” is belief without understanding. But Augustine says that “faith seeks understanding”. In other words, faith and understanding are not in conflict. Rather “faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth” (JPII, Fides et Ratio).

But I don’t think a cure for “blind faith” is “challenging orthodoxy and questioning authority”. That strikes me as a rather adolescent attitude – that the only way to self-appropriate truth is to rebel. Yawn. ‘Questioning’ is not identical with ‘disputing’. I understand “questioning” to mean investigating and plumbing the depths of something. You always begin somewhere, and it is only the modern idolatry of the self (and its corresponding hatred of tradition and inheritance) that thinks you should “question” (in the sense of dispute) everything, as if this were the only route to authenticity.

By: neal

neal — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:55:24 +0000

I have to disagree with you, The institution of the religion itself encourages blind faith. If you voice up when you disagree with this such as prop 8 you are hissed at by the community, and reprimanded for not “following the prophet” by church leadership. This brings me to my question what do you define a cult as?

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:32:14 +0000

I don’t believe the supernatural stories and claims of the mormon church are literally true, but I think the organization has some value for me and my family. These lyrics, however, sound eerily cultish:

Follow the prophet, follow the prophet,
Follow the prophet; don’t go astray.
Follow the prophet, follow the prophet,
Follow the prophet he knows the way.

But, overall, I would rate the mormon church not very cultish in my experience.

By: Jon Adams

Jon Adams — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:35:05 +0000

As I suggested in my comment, not all of Mormonism is cultish. I do have friends, though, who I do think believe and act like cult members–I’m glad you’re not one of them.

Random fact: People who are attracted to cults tend to be more intelligent than the general population. So when I’m saying some of my Mormon friends have a cultish comportment toward their faith, note that I’m not calling them stupid.

By: Trevor

Trevor — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:26:31 +0000

Um…yeah, OK…what part of this is supposed to remind me of the LDS Church? I served a mission and didn’t use any of those methods on investigators. I’m a liberal democrat, I read what I want, I married the woman I wanted to marry, and no one has ever told me how to have sex with her. I eat meat even when it’s not a time of famine. I do abstain from consuming alcohol and tobacco, but I do so because I believe that is a good thing for me. I make up for that by eating lots of coffee ice cream. Oh yeah, and I’m a member in good standing. If this is a cult, I like it.

By: Jon Adams

Jon Adams — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:08:04 +0000

I’m wary of labeling an entire religion a “cult.” I think what makes a “cult” is not the religion itself, but the relationship between the church organization and its members. I know thoughtful Mormons who don’t belong to a cult, because they are willing to challenge orthodoxy and question church authorities. I know other Mormons, though, who I do think belong to a cult–their faith is totally blind.