Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2003, Page 82
Branch Davidian debacle came to a tragic head in a holocaust. All of these cases had
political implications that deeply affected CUT at the time. Whitsel mentions only the Branch
Davidian event. After a failed attempt arranged by her family to deprogram a CUT member
in late 1991, the three accused deprogrammers were arrested and later brought to trial in
State of Idaho vs Szimhart, et al (yes, this writer was involved). A jury acquitted two us of
all charges, while charges were later dismissed against the third defendant. In its long-
standing battle against ―anticultists‖ CUT sent many operatives, including the current
guardian of the disabled Elizabeth Prophet to closely advise the prosecutors with whom he
sat throughout trial. The acquittals were another blow to the group‘s struggle to improve its
post doomsday image. Whitsel does document other significant image improvement efforts
and setbacks in detail, especially in Chapter Six. For example, Whitsel reports that Elizabeth
Prophet‘s last major stump to recruit new members was a thirty three-day tour of South
America in 1996. Prophet emphasized CUT teachings about reincarnation, not survival
shelters.
Unfortunately, as Whitsel surmises in Chapter Six, CUT may never reincarnate as the vital,
thriving group it once was. He offers a host of factors, including the leader‘s decline in
mental health—she was diagnosed with dementia by 1998 and stepped down officially as
the group‘s spiritual leader in 1999. Whitsel reports that Prophet suffered from epileptic
seizures from a young age, a fact not known to the general membership. During the 1990s
after the failed prophecy, CUT began selling off assets and radically downsizing staff to
curtail the shortfall in donations from the declining membership.
Earlier in the book on page 157 Whitsel frames CUT as a ―totalist‖ sect whose ―[d]octrinal
impenetrability allows the group to turn increasingly inward and further lock itself into its
own belief structure.‖ He is absolutely correct as CUT‘s teachings are rarely understood well
or completely even by long-term members who have had a difficult time keeping up with
the stream of subtle changes in ―progressive revelations‖ from the leaders. A major reason I
rejected it in 1980 was the long list of CUT‘s internal contradictions I encountered after
getting past the ―impenetrable‖ language of the doctrine. Whitsel acknowledges that any
group like CUT that defines the outside world as inherently evil tends to live in a paranoid
state. Such groups necessarily attract suspicion and criticism, thereby bolstering their
beliefs about outsiders.
Whitsel loses me, however, when he appears to lay much of the blame for the group‘s
negative image on something he and previous writers call the ―anticult movement‖ (pp. 48,
123, 133) as if the group‘s behavior was not responsible for its public image. Whitsel follows
the opinion of a small group of scholars who have dominated sociological circles with a
characterization of cult critics as monolithically naïve. For example, on page 48 the author
states: ―Observing no distinctions among new religious groups, the anticultists pursued a
policy of discrediting all organizations that deviated from the religious mainstream. For this
reason, the Church Universal and Triumphant became a tempting target for their attacks.
Anticultists subscribed to anachronistic theories of mind control and psychological coercion.‖
Whitsel never defines what or who constitutes the anticult milieu, but I suspect he is
referring to elements of the old Cult Awareness Network and to paranoid evangelicals who
regard everything other than fundamentalist Christianity as a ―cult.‖ Ironically, his overall
analysis of CUT would satisfy those same ―anachronistic theories‖ that more sophisticated
cult critics might use to characterize CUT as totalist and to explain how the group managed
to keep such a tight bond around so many devotees for any time at all. For example, on
pp.52-53 Whitsel discusses ―boundary control‖ citing a ―widely used‘ concept in social
studies about groups: ―Just as the self-contained group raises its defenses against the
perceived encroachments of the outside, the surrounding society forms a reciprocal set of
attitudes that is hostile to the insulated social system.‖
Branch Davidian debacle came to a tragic head in a holocaust. All of these cases had
political implications that deeply affected CUT at the time. Whitsel mentions only the Branch
Davidian event. After a failed attempt arranged by her family to deprogram a CUT member
in late 1991, the three accused deprogrammers were arrested and later brought to trial in
State of Idaho vs Szimhart, et al (yes, this writer was involved). A jury acquitted two us of
all charges, while charges were later dismissed against the third defendant. In its long-
standing battle against ―anticultists‖ CUT sent many operatives, including the current
guardian of the disabled Elizabeth Prophet to closely advise the prosecutors with whom he
sat throughout trial. The acquittals were another blow to the group‘s struggle to improve its
post doomsday image. Whitsel does document other significant image improvement efforts
and setbacks in detail, especially in Chapter Six. For example, Whitsel reports that Elizabeth
Prophet‘s last major stump to recruit new members was a thirty three-day tour of South
America in 1996. Prophet emphasized CUT teachings about reincarnation, not survival
shelters.
Unfortunately, as Whitsel surmises in Chapter Six, CUT may never reincarnate as the vital,
thriving group it once was. He offers a host of factors, including the leader‘s decline in
mental health—she was diagnosed with dementia by 1998 and stepped down officially as
the group‘s spiritual leader in 1999. Whitsel reports that Prophet suffered from epileptic
seizures from a young age, a fact not known to the general membership. During the 1990s
after the failed prophecy, CUT began selling off assets and radically downsizing staff to
curtail the shortfall in donations from the declining membership.
Earlier in the book on page 157 Whitsel frames CUT as a ―totalist‖ sect whose ―[d]octrinal
impenetrability allows the group to turn increasingly inward and further lock itself into its
own belief structure.‖ He is absolutely correct as CUT‘s teachings are rarely understood well
or completely even by long-term members who have had a difficult time keeping up with
the stream of subtle changes in ―progressive revelations‖ from the leaders. A major reason I
rejected it in 1980 was the long list of CUT‘s internal contradictions I encountered after
getting past the ―impenetrable‖ language of the doctrine. Whitsel acknowledges that any
group like CUT that defines the outside world as inherently evil tends to live in a paranoid
state. Such groups necessarily attract suspicion and criticism, thereby bolstering their
beliefs about outsiders.
Whitsel loses me, however, when he appears to lay much of the blame for the group‘s
negative image on something he and previous writers call the ―anticult movement‖ (pp. 48,
123, 133) as if the group‘s behavior was not responsible for its public image. Whitsel follows
the opinion of a small group of scholars who have dominated sociological circles with a
characterization of cult critics as monolithically naïve. For example, on page 48 the author
states: ―Observing no distinctions among new religious groups, the anticultists pursued a
policy of discrediting all organizations that deviated from the religious mainstream. For this
reason, the Church Universal and Triumphant became a tempting target for their attacks.
Anticultists subscribed to anachronistic theories of mind control and psychological coercion.‖
Whitsel never defines what or who constitutes the anticult milieu, but I suspect he is
referring to elements of the old Cult Awareness Network and to paranoid evangelicals who
regard everything other than fundamentalist Christianity as a ―cult.‖ Ironically, his overall
analysis of CUT would satisfy those same ―anachronistic theories‖ that more sophisticated
cult critics might use to characterize CUT as totalist and to explain how the group managed
to keep such a tight bond around so many devotees for any time at all. For example, on
pp.52-53 Whitsel discusses ―boundary control‖ citing a ―widely used‘ concept in social
studies about groups: ―Just as the self-contained group raises its defenses against the
perceived encroachments of the outside, the surrounding society forms a reciprocal set of
attitudes that is hostile to the insulated social system.‖
