International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 3, 2012 49
Religious Justifications for Child Sexual Abuse in Cults and Alternative
Religions
Stephen A. Kent
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Abstract1
This article identifies eight religiously colored
justifications that pedophiles have used to
excuse child sexual abuse in cults and
alternative religions operating in the West.
These ideologies are a) Western scriptural
patriarchalism b) Western patriarchal incest c)
patriarchalism and polygamous child brides d)
millenarianism e) antinomianism f) sex as the
means to salvation g) sex as salvation and h)
levelling all forms of sex as equally fallen. By
anchoring abuse within theologically based
justifications that are readily available in one or
more cultic or alternative religious groups, we
gain insight into how sexual exploitation
becomes legitimized within societal subgroups.
Under leaders’ directions, these subgroups
receive theologies that enable forms of child
sexual abuse to seem normative because they
appear to have divine justification or support.
Among the earliest warnings directed to social
scientists about the potential for abuse that lies
within religions was that which came in 1991
from the President of the Society for the
Scientific Study of Religion, Dr. Donald Capps.
A professor of pastoral theology at Princeton
Theological Seminary, Capps entitled his
presidential address to the society “Religion and
Child Abuse: Perfect Together,” and the Society
published it the following year in its journal
(Capps, 1992). He limited his comments to
Christianity, and then discussed only physical
abuse and several religious ideas that he felt
were “inherently tormenting” to children. Even
though the presentation reads more like a
1 I express my thanks to Jonathan Simmons and Matthew Trodden
for their editorial comments. I also thank the editors of IJCS for
publishing this long manuscript in one issue, instead of spreading it
across two.
minister’s sermon than it does an academic
tome, the reaction among academics in the
audience when he delivered it deeply moved
him:
When I completed my address, I looked
over at the person who had introduced
me, ...and there were tears in her eyes.
Then as I came down off the podium,
some fifteen or twenty persons came up
to me, and, one by one, began giving me
brief accounts of how religious practices
and ideas had caused them great
suffering and anguish as children.
Several thanked me for speaking that
evening about a subject that touched
them in a very personal way. As I had
to remind myself later, they were
established professors and scholars at a
meeting of the society for ‘the scientific
study of religion.’ There was nothing
objective—coolly scientific—about
their response to what I had said. They
spoke from the heart, and I felt their
pain as I listened. (Capps, 1995, p. x)
Although criticisms—including a charge of
blasphemy—came later, Capps knew that he had
hit a nerve. He may not have realized, however,
how extensive such abuse may be.
By the time that he wrote a book on “the
religious abuse of children” in 1995, many
accounts of Catholic clergy abuse had gone
public. Capps offered a summation of the
explanations for the abuse that he read about in
most of the media articles, but then stated
forcefully,
Yet in none of these articles on the
priests’ sexual abuse of children is there
any discussion of the powerful
association of religion itself and child
Religious Justifications for Child Sexual Abuse in Cults and Alternative
Religions
Stephen A. Kent
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Abstract1
This article identifies eight religiously colored
justifications that pedophiles have used to
excuse child sexual abuse in cults and
alternative religions operating in the West.
These ideologies are a) Western scriptural
patriarchalism b) Western patriarchal incest c)
patriarchalism and polygamous child brides d)
millenarianism e) antinomianism f) sex as the
means to salvation g) sex as salvation and h)
levelling all forms of sex as equally fallen. By
anchoring abuse within theologically based
justifications that are readily available in one or
more cultic or alternative religious groups, we
gain insight into how sexual exploitation
becomes legitimized within societal subgroups.
Under leaders’ directions, these subgroups
receive theologies that enable forms of child
sexual abuse to seem normative because they
appear to have divine justification or support.
Among the earliest warnings directed to social
scientists about the potential for abuse that lies
within religions was that which came in 1991
from the President of the Society for the
Scientific Study of Religion, Dr. Donald Capps.
A professor of pastoral theology at Princeton
Theological Seminary, Capps entitled his
presidential address to the society “Religion and
Child Abuse: Perfect Together,” and the Society
published it the following year in its journal
(Capps, 1992). He limited his comments to
Christianity, and then discussed only physical
abuse and several religious ideas that he felt
were “inherently tormenting” to children. Even
though the presentation reads more like a
1 I express my thanks to Jonathan Simmons and Matthew Trodden
for their editorial comments. I also thank the editors of IJCS for
publishing this long manuscript in one issue, instead of spreading it
across two.
minister’s sermon than it does an academic
tome, the reaction among academics in the
audience when he delivered it deeply moved
him:
When I completed my address, I looked
over at the person who had introduced
me, ...and there were tears in her eyes.
Then as I came down off the podium,
some fifteen or twenty persons came up
to me, and, one by one, began giving me
brief accounts of how religious practices
and ideas had caused them great
suffering and anguish as children.
Several thanked me for speaking that
evening about a subject that touched
them in a very personal way. As I had
to remind myself later, they were
established professors and scholars at a
meeting of the society for ‘the scientific
study of religion.’ There was nothing
objective—coolly scientific—about
their response to what I had said. They
spoke from the heart, and I felt their
pain as I listened. (Capps, 1995, p. x)
Although criticisms—including a charge of
blasphemy—came later, Capps knew that he had
hit a nerve. He may not have realized, however,
how extensive such abuse may be.
By the time that he wrote a book on “the
religious abuse of children” in 1995, many
accounts of Catholic clergy abuse had gone
public. Capps offered a summation of the
explanations for the abuse that he read about in
most of the media articles, but then stated
forcefully,
Yet in none of these articles on the
priests’ sexual abuse of children is there
any discussion of the powerful
association of religion itself and child
