Hey, Who Are You Calling a Cult?

He wrote to me in all innocence, a reader from a Catholic country where Mormon missionaries had only recently begun to gather congregations of believers.

"I asked my priest," he said, "and he told me that Mormons are a cult."

Setting aside the obvious riposte ("What did you think your priest would tell you, that Mormonism was true Christianity as restored by God to living prophets?"), I think it's worth considering just what we mean by "cult" and seeing whether it applies to the Mormon Church.

Cult as Bad Word

Anti-Mormons use "cult" the way gay activists use "homophobe"--as an ad hominem epithet hurled to try to silence any persuasive opponent whose ideas can't be countered on their merits.

When used this way, "cult" just means "religion I want you to fear so much you won't listen to them." Or even, "religion I want you to hate so much that you will remove it from the list of churches that deserve constitutional protection."

But just as "homophobe" has a core meaning (someone with a pathological fear of homosexuality to the degree that it interferes with his life), so also with "cult." The only reason it works as name-calling is because there really are religious groups that do--and should--scare us.

There are real examples of what we mean by cults: Jim Jones' group that destroyed itself in mass murder and suicide in Guyana, or those sneaker-wearing folks who killed themselves to join aliens approaching behind a comet. And even though the Branch Davidians may not have been as monstrous as they were depicted in the media, they still clearly fall within what we mean by that word.

What do they have in common?

Charismatic Founder. Cults gather around charismatic individuals who are the sole source of truth to their followers.

Exploitation. The leader enriches himself through the financial contributions of the members, or gathers personal power that he uses to exploit members in other ways to benefit himself. If the group survives the leader's death, it remains a cult if his successors continue that exploitation.

Automatons. The members are discouraged from thinking for themselves, and, insofar as possible, are turned into unquestioning "obedience machines."

Withdrawal and Isolation. Perhaps because exploitation and obedience are easiest to maintain when the ordinary world can't offer its distractions and attractions, cults tend to withdraw physically, seeking ever greater isolation. This is often used as part of the conversion process, to keep the prospective member from hearing counterarguments.

Are All Religions Cults?

It's worth pointing out that there are very few religions of any size or influence that did not begin with a charismatic founder and whose members did not seem, to outsiders, to behave in much the way I've just described. A humble, wise teacher can always be charged with "setting himself up as the sole source of truth" merely because he offers any unusual idea.

The gathering of money to help the poor or pay for meetinghouses or publications can be called "exploitation." The natural desire of converts to live according to the teachings of their leader can look like lockstep blind obedience to those who live a different way. And if outsiders persecute the new religion, it is only natural that adherents will want to band together and get away, if only for a few hours at a time, to be able to practice their religion in peace.

All religions have a body of teachings that becomes a lens through which the believers see the world around them. To those who don't believe, the lens seems to be a distortion of reality--though of course, those unbelievers are merely distorting reality their own way, through their own lens. No one sees reality without passing the data through the lens of their own preconceptions.

All religions also form a community, however loosely organized, of like-minded believers who set the standard of correctness. Whether that standard is rigid or relaxed, those who cross it are expelled from the community and are treated as heretics, apostates, or infidels. Severe treatment of heretics can be found from the lowliest cult to the largest church, from the most rigid sect to "open"-minded, post-religious academia.

You have to get fairly close to a new religion in order to see whether it is acting like a cult or like a religion. Most of those who hurl the word "cult," however, do not bother to get close. And those who do are often so grimly determined to attack that they distort all evidence in order to support the charge.

How Does Mormonism Measure Up?

Joseph Smith was a charismatic leader, but he was murdered 156 years ago. Nowadays, we have leaders who, while sometimes gifted at communication, are rarely of the dramatic, movement-founding type. Indeed, I feel safe in saying that the majority in my lifetime have been rather dull and gray, and they are followed far more because of their office than because of any personal charisma.

Exploitation? As for exploitative leadership, this charge is absolutely false and always has been. Joseph Smith passed the money test with flying colors: He died poor and in debt, not because of profligate spending, but because any money that flowed into his hands flowed right back out again in attempts to benefit the saints and build the church.

In the years since, a handful of church offices have become salaried, but the salaries are merely enough to sustain normal family life. The perks of wealth are shunned even by those church leaders who were rich before being called to one of those rare salaried offices. And church leaders constantly struggle to eliminate the sycophancy, the cult of personality, and the general "sucking up" that are bound to arise in any hierarchical organization.

By any honest measure, Mormon church leaders, from Joseph Smith on, have a remarkable record of genuine humility. They really do try to be the servants rather than the masters of the saints.

Automatons? Those who have actually lived in a Mormon ward--and especially those who have tried to lead a group of Mormons in any kind of activity--can all affirm one truth: Mormons may well be the most stubborn, independent-minded group of people ever assembled as a religious community.

Joseph Smith received a revelation that established the only style of leadership that actually works in the Mormon church (or, in the long run, anywhere): You can only lead by persuasion, by love, by patience, by your own willingness to learn from those you lead. Every now and then, some local Mormon leader will try to give orders or attempt to manipulate people into doing things his way. But he very quickly learns that the more he does that, the less obedient we Mormons become.

Far from being robots, most of us Mormons are, by inclination and by doctrine, determined to make up our own minds about everything. It's a core doctrine of Mormonism that each member of the church is personally and individually responsible for their own relationship with God.

Isolation? As for the cultish trait of isolating converts from any other influence, or brainwashing them till they can't think for themselves, our method of teaching would-be proselytes is the opposite. We usually teach them in their own homes. Our missionaries come for a little while and then leave them to themselves to read, ponder, and pray. We counter the attacks of anti-Mormons by telling the truth about our beliefs and practices, not by trying to cut off contact with our opponents.

Far from becoming isolated, a new convert to Mormonism is taught to be more respectful and loving to parents, spouse, children, and other family members and friends. They usually do better at their careers and education, and if withdrawal takes place it is because their new Mormon lifestyle and beliefs are rejected by their family or friends.

Kettles and Pots

On all these points, I daresay that the Mormon church is less cult-like than many of the religions that delight in calling us one.

Indeed, calling Mormonism a cult is usually an attempt to get people to behave like robots, blindly obeying the command that they reject Mormonism without any independent thought. Kettles, as they say, calling the pot black.

Here's the simplest statement I can make: If Mormonism were a cult, I would know it, and I would not be in it.

As for LDS being two-faced about what you hold sacred for 180 years. I understand that you feel/think that way. I believe Mormons might have been rather less that gracious, to say the least...I have on occasion felt that some attitudes were in appropriate. I have ALWAYS, in no uncertain terms, pointed out that that attitude is WRONG. I’ve more than once called someone on the carpet, not caring WHO it was, and reminded them that though our understanding of doctrine may be different, there is no call to be disrespectful...I taught in 2 Tim 3:1-3 today in Relief Society ( our women’s organization) that we are surrounded by choices, we can be distracted, degraded, downhearted or depressed by what we see around us.

In 2001 at the BYU Women’s Conference, James A. Toronto, a BYU associate professor, was invited to speak. His title: “No More Strangers and Foreigners” This was published by BYU the following year under the title “Ye Shall Bear Record of Me.”

BTW, did I "get this" info from some "anti-Mormon" site? (No. I own the book)

Now, indeed, what does Dr. Toronto say that tends to reinforce your comments above?

p. 35 of No More Strangers and Foreigners: ”As adviser to several non-LDS student groups on BYU campus and a teacher of world religions, I have had many opportunities to interact with those whose ethnicity, religion, politics or lifestyle places them outside the BYU mainstream…Unfortunately…those of divergent backgrounds among us hae felt excluded, demeaned, or diminished…I have wondered what leads us to exhibit sometimes intolerant, unkind attitudes toward others. Why does society at large perceive us as a community characterized by insular attitudes toward outsiders?”

Toronto then adds some are “mistreated” and “have difficulty being accepted.”

p. 36 of book: ”I have also observed that doctrinal misunderstandings often lie at the root of intolerant behavior and attitudes sometimes exhibited by Church members. Three prominent examples will illustrate. First, sometimes Church members…refer…only to the seemingly exclusivist language of certain scriptural passages…we unwittingly portray a sanctimonious, holier-than-thou stance that…is offensive to nonmembers. In my comparative world religions course, I deal with this problem in the first minute of the first class period each semester. I begin the discussion by reading some scriptures familiar to all Latter-day Saints: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is ‘the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth’ (D&C 1:30); the leaders of other faiths ‘draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me’ and all their creeds are an ‘abomination’ in God’s sight (Joseph Smith-History 1:19)…”

p. 37 of book: ”We reinforce the erroneous idea that all other religious are completely false and dead and that our community does not value the spiritual experience of others.”

On p. 39 of book, Dr. Toronto also mentions ”how a skewed understanding of doctrine can lead to unkind attitudes and behavior…”

So, to sum up Dr. Toronto, a BYU prof:

(1) He said: ”…doctrinal misunderstandings often lie at the root of intolerant behavior and attitudes…” (p. 36)
(2) Lds communicate to the Christian world that we “are completely false and dead” (p. 37) and are creedally valueless as Lds “scripture” teaches that Christians don’t have a single creed that honors God.
(3) He also blamed ”…a skewed understanding of doctrine” as what was behind …”lead[ing] to unkind attitudes and behavior…”

It's these last two points I want to close my comment upon. You see, YR, it's not simply, I believe, lack of Mormon graciousness...lack of Mormon charity...etc. that has resulted in what Mormons and especially Mormon leaders have said about Christians for 180 years.

I think Dr. Toronto is on to something when he says: "...a skewed understanding of doctrine" has overwhelmingly contributed to fueling "unkind attitudes and behaviors..."!!!

exercise faith in the hope that His Grace is sufficient to wash away my sins, though they be as scarlet.
____________________________________________________

Kid this is so misquoted in so many ways...

It was the blood that the LORD Jesus shed on the Cross that washes away sin...

1. His Grace is sufficient

The actual verse on Grace from the Christian Bible goes...

But He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.

Paul had asked the LORD Jesus Christ weho is god to remove a hinderance from him...

Paul said “To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me.” 2 Corinthians 12:7, 8

2. Wash away my sins

He stood beside me and said, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight!’ And at that very moment I was able to see him. Then he said: ‘The God of our fathers has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. You will be his witness to all men of what you have seen and heard. And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on
Hhis name.’ Acts 22:13-16

3. though they be as scarlet.

“Come now, let us reason together,” says the LORD. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool. Isaiah 1:19

and so on...

It is the Blood of Jesus that was shed on the Cross that cleanses us from sin...

Paul said “How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, Who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!” Hebrews 9:14

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Hey, Who Are You Calling a Cult?

The LDS Church is less of a cult than many of the religions that accuse it of being one.