Attending conferences abroad has become an increasingly difficult undertaking for me as I get older. I have doubts that I will want to face the challenges of Manchester airport during the holiday period in the future. However, this year the International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) chose the vibrant and attractive city of Barcelona in which to hold their annual three-day event. I attended and presented a paper on the issue of exorcism and the way it is sometimes used inappropriately as a way of ‘caring’ for members of the LGBTQ+ community. This theme has become topical through some recent events in the Diocese of Sheffield.
The blog is not going to be a rehash of my words at the conference as most of this material has been shared with my blog readers over the years. I want, rather, to try and share a few of the main insights of some key contributors. These are those whose professional life has been dedicated to supporting and rebuilding those whose lives have been devastated through their membership of malign and controlling political or religious groups.
One topical idea circulating in the conversations and papers was the notion that a large sector of the population in the States is being recruited to join a massive societal cult under its leader, Donald Trump. The mechanisms that bind so many people to such a human leader, so eminently unsuitable for this leadership role, are not easy to explain. It seems we have to explore the ideas that come from attachment theory. All human beings, as children, pass through the stage of making strong attachments before they eventually become secure independent adults who know who they are and what they stand for. Another way of expressing this idea is to say that we aim to develop a strong core personality. This normal process may be disturbed in one of two ways. Some individuals never grow up in the sense that they continue to need their early attachment relationships for psychological survival. Others have made it through to the adult stage but then some serious experience of stress pushes them back to a childhood stage of vulnerability and an immature dependence on others. This vulnerability of immature dependence is found in many people. A failed marriage or the loss of a job may place the individual in a place where he or she is now ripe for recruitment to a cause or a person at the heart of a cultic group. Instead of having a strong mature personality at the centre, the vulnerable dependent person reaches out to find a strength in attaching him/herself to another. This may be a person or an idea/movement. From this attachment comes a ready-made instant cluster of ideas and opinions. No longer does one have to think or make decisions; the cult/ideology/cause/strong man does it for you. The individual personality, as far as it can be said to exist, has become largely an extension of the movement and of the leader at its head. The MAGA types in America have allowed Trumpism to be their mode of awareness. This way of thinking has the immediate advantage of relieving any stress involved in thought and reflection. To be able to say ‘this is what we think’ also gives the individual a reliable and gratifying sense of personal power and agency, a power mediated by the membership of the movement or the cult.
In the academic circles where the issue of cults is studied, the notion of ‘brainwashing’ has largely gone out of fashion. Rather than having something removed from the mind, the cult member has had something added on. The cult member is thought to have acquired a cult personality which may have successfully overlaid the true or core personality. This core is never in fact destroyed and it is the task of the therapist to excavate the buried core personality, a complex task. The fact is that there are precious few therapists in the UK who understand the dynamics of cultic groups. It requires a particular kind of insight to help extract this core personality which needs bringing to the surface and allowed once again to be the salient expression of who I or you are.
This model of thinking that presents the personality as possessing several layers is quite a challenging one to all our thinking about ourselves. How much of our presented personality is an extra defensive screen to keep others from knowing us too well? No one is likely to arrive at the perfect balance between living out the core self and the opposite extreme of hiding behind a variety of masks or defensive personae. Somewhere we try to achieve a ‘good-enough’ position which allows us to give and receive love in a way that nourishes us and at same time transforms and supports the people around us.
The conference in Barcelona was largely using the discourse of secular therapy in its efforts to provide support for cult victims. These victims had suffered because of the toxic and harmful ideas emanating from extreme political or religious groups. What was not brought up was, of course, any theological or biblical teaching that would help stop us falling into this trap of putting on a personality that betrayed or buried our true core identities. One of my favourite passages from Paul is the one where he expresses his joy at the thought that one day he ‘shall know even as I also am known’. This suggests to me that the Christian task is to have a great deal of concern for finding out our true identity and cutting through self-deceit. Such acquired fake personalities are at the heart of the cult problem. The Church of course also has a problem in this area. For example, how many of us have been to services where we feel caught up in an imposed but inappropriate jollity which is completely out of sync with the actual mood of the congregation. It is also vitally important for pastors dealing with individuals to discern what their clients are really feeling as opposed to coming to the ‘correct’ solution to their problem. Joy and sorrow are both part of human experience and thus being alongside another person may involve sharing their happiness or sitting with them in their pain. Once again, we have a passage that shows how Paul is able to reach and affirm the full reality of another human when he says, ‘rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep’. The capacity in this way to give of ourselves to others in need is one of the greatest gifts we have to offer.
The ICSA conference has left me with insight as to the way human beings are all somewhere on a journey towards authenticity or what we describe as wholeness or integrity. My Christian faith, together with my understanding of cult exploitation, has given me insight into the many ways this process can be disrupted when someone with an narcissistic appetite for power and gratification is allowed to corrupt and interfere with another person’s journey. The ways that we can hurt or be damaged by others, not least by being made to become something we are not in ways to benefit them, are examples of the power of evil at work. Somewhere in the middle of all the horror of human exploitation and abuse, whether in the cults or churches, there are biblical images that show what true relationships look like. Although some Christians seem very adept at extracting from scripture those texts and passages that assist them in nefarious activities of abuse, we can also find models that show us decisively how to love in a way that does what it is meant to do. It should ideally be all that strives to build up, transform and help others to find life in all its fullness. Although the world of relationships is seemingly hard to engage with, without ever causing any harm to another, we do have the possibility of evaluating our motives. This allows us to enable true transformative goodness to flow through us. Sometimes the apparent good and generous act turns out not to be so, but merely to bring benefit to the doer. Christian discernment and the traditions of ethical goodness should help us to know fairly accurately when things are genuinely altruistic and Christ-like. Christians cannot always be counted on to provide shining examples of human goodness but, at the very least, we should expect Christians to recognise goodness when they see it. Sadly, the safeguarding catastrophes of the past two or three decades have borne witness to a blunted and impoverished awareness of the nature of goodness, even among those who should be our esteemed leaders.
Are there universally agreed definitions of ‘cult’ by ICSA? Might be helpful to pop in a definition, or outline the main 2-3.
The word ‘cult’ is avoided but the adjective is often used, including in the title of the organisation. The normal thing is to talk about harmful or toxic groups. The discussion about what is a cult is a fairly barren one; I prefer to speak about membership of groups where individuals can come to harm. That could apply to some Christian groups!
It’s like-‘personality disorder’-possibly. Words are ‘precious cups of meaning’ and definitions do matter. It’s surely helpful to attempt to define cult or cultist/cultism.
The word ‘cult’ is at best a convenient shorthand rather than a technical expression with a meaning agreed by all. Most people involved in the support of cult victims are happy to speak about toxic or harmful groups to say what they mean. People do agree on the meaning of harm, abuse and trauma for the most part. It is better to keep to using agreed words even if the occasional use of a less precise word like cult creeps in. Like ‘evangelical’ the word cult has to be used very sparingly if we are to avoid endless rabbit holes of political definitions. My interest does not extend to this aspect of the topic. Believe me it can take you to places that are very political and unpleasant.
The word cultic has more use than the word cult. In her book “Walking Free from the trauma of coercive, cultic and spiritual abuse”, Gillie Jenkinson looks at what goes on in families, employment, churches etc and how this can damage us. Few of us would say that any of these places we were part of were named cults but may have had characteristics of such that were damaging. She has a work program to go through which is illuminating and constructive.
For example, as children we were only allowed to be a certain way. Strong emotions were disallowed: ‘snap out of it’, whereas unregulated anger and violence was perfectly acceptable from the parent.
In church circles, only very narrow views were allowed to be voiced, but these were granted an intellectualism that was held in high esteem. Deviate, and you were sidelined. Carry on and you were shunned.
I recall working for one well known worldwide business services firm where they had their own “language”. It was very difficult acclimatising and remaining to fit in. You had to say you loved it, that it was a great place to work, even if the experience was dispiriting. I met some extremely bright and good people there, but on reflection, after leaving I gradually realised we were being coerced into working excessive hours, replacing our biological families with a new business family. Why would we do this? But we did.
The National Safeguarding Team declared that Mike Pilavachi had engaged, amongst other things, in coercive control, across 4 decades. In the inner circle of Soul Survivor in particular, I would argue this was cultic. So many young people were damaged in pursuit of something they thought was of inestimable value.
Cultic studies are really valuable, not to give organisations binary labels, but to understand how we can be cajoled into almost changing our identity to fit in. And then it’s very helpful to find skilled help to extricate ourselves and others from this mess, and then rebuild a more authentic life.
Gillie’s workbook is quite straightforward to read, and if what we went through at home, work, or church for example, wasn’t cultic, this would quickly be apparent, but we could improve our knowledge for others. For me, it was a bit of both.
Indeed, that all sounds very familiar – just about any professional group of any size will have something of that nature about it – my old firm, the civil service being a good example of various practices and attitudes which, in the hands of a dominant or abusive manager could be very damaging. And some of the ones I knew could be very unpleasant bullies – but the brass above them chose to look the other way.)
And the same thing applies to churches – either when with genuine good intentions or for purposes of group ‘solidarity’, pressure is applied to toe a particular outlook’s line on a behaviour or doctrine. The usual warning bell is lack of respect for someone else’s right to their own opinion. I know – I can only too easily be like that as well.
Yes! Funny-it’s always easy in retrospect to see it now-but is denying the right to ask questions a red flag in a Church or associated para-Church group?
Thanks, Steve, that’s really helpful. I guess we now have lots of alerts on various health topics, which call people to watch for X3-4 symptoms or signs, markers of a specific condition which needs urgent attention.
Whether we say ‘cultic-toxic-abusive-damaging-hurtful’ (or use a different word) is immaterial in some regards. Is it more important, maybe, to recognise innate alarm bells?
I do not like a lot of Church-‘brand labels’-but probably connect with Bebbington’s four point evangelicalism. But one of my best recent reads is a Blog post essay: “Smoother than oil” 24.3.21 on ‘From the Quire’ Blog.
Jeremy Pemberton’s 24.3.21 reflection notes what we could call ‘intuitive earlier alarm bells’ on Rev Jonathan Fletcher and elements of Iwerne. That’s where there may be a legacy to the next Church generation in defining or partially delineating ‘cultism’.
What are ‘the red flags’ or ‘alarm bells’, and what reaction is required when they are beginning to get spotted? ICSA (referred to above) has a helpful website reference to defining a cult (see next paragraph).
‘Although there is no agreed-upon definition of “cult,” one proposed by Rutgers sociologist Benjamin Zablocki seems to highlight key elements of high-influence group situations:An ideological organization held together by charismatic relationships and demanding total commitment.’
This definition certainly helps me understand cultism and to reflect on ‘red flags’ (some painfully missed in the past). Also, ‘Spiritual abuse’, is a highly meaningful term. Definitions do matter and guide what happens in the real world.
Jonathan Fletcher is entering a sphere where definitions matter hugely: The Law. This will probably contrast starkly and dramatically with the ‘wishy-washy-wolly’ world of the Anglican Church or ‘Lessons Learnt Reviews’.
RTE have this excellent new 80 mins documentary-‘Bishop Casey’s Buried Secrets’-
Mon 22 July 2024 (‘Reporter Anne Sheridan examines the Catholic Church’s handling of allegations against the former Bishop of Galway, Eamonn Casey.’) Fascinating viewing for anyone getting to grips with the ‘cultic’.