Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 3, Nos. 2 &3, 2004, Page 8
patterns were ―just like some of the psychotic patients I spoke with when I was on
psychiatry rotation during my medical course‖ (Hamilton-Byrne 1995:111).
B. Drugs and Alcohol
Similar associations between some leaders of groups involved in forms of violence also exist
with drugs (including alcohol). David Berg remained a group leader during periods of
alcoholism (Berg 1982), and the volatile founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, reputedly
abused a wide variety of drugs and alcohol (Atack 1990:119, 131, 171, 274 Corydon and
Hubbard 1987:300, 303 Hubbard 1980:123-124 Miller 1987:266). The leader of Love
Israel became a cocaine addict (Balch 1988:207-208, 212). So, too, did the heavy drinker,
Hyo Jin Moon, thought to have been in line to assume his father‘s leadership position in the
Unification Church (Hong 1998:169, 175, 177). In the latter case, his substance abuse
contributed to extremely violent behaviour toward his wife, who finally had to flee at night
for fear of losing her life. Trungpa Rinpoche‘s drunkenness facilitated violence among his
followers and associates (Investigative Poetry Group 1977 Marin 1979), and Canada‘s Roch
Theriault operated on his followers when he was roaring drunk, castrating one follower,
disemboweling another, and amputating the arm of a third (Kaihla and Laver 1993:18-19,
39, 44-45, 112, 155-156, 209, 211, 220, 221, 225, 263, 265, 276, 290, 294). In Guyana,
Jim Jones created a surreal, abusive (and ultimately deadly) world as his mental health
deteriorated amidst his consumption of ―injectable Valium, Quaaludes, uppers, [and]
barbiturates‖ (Reiterman with Jacobs, 1982:446). Aum Shinrikyo‘s founder, Shoko Asahara,
―sampled the initial batches of his group‘s production of LSD‖ (Brackett 1996:98).
C. Religious Irrationality
Beyond, however, instances of personality dysfunction among some leaders of violent
groups, secularists may argue that the central culprit in so many cases of violence is religion
itself (See van Uden and Pieper 1996:50). Like people, sometimes the gods are crazy, and
in a divinely (mis)attributed craziness, people can, and do, hurt and sometimes kill
themselves and others. Religiously driven suicide is the most sombre example, which we all
know about in groups such as People‘s Temple, Order of the Solar Temple, Heaven‘s Gate,
and (at least in some cases) the Branch Davidians. We must not forget, however, less-well-
known examples of much the same thing—anorexic starvation among the Breatharians
(Walker and O‘Reilly 1999) self-immolations among Buddhist, Catholic, and Quaker
dissidents during the Vietnam War (Zaroulis and Sullivan 1984:1-5) and several protesting
Falun Gong members in China (Chang, 2004:16-19, 21, 104 Page 2002 – although some
claim these were staged by the government [Xie &Zhu, 2004]) and extreme Jain monks
who view ―the ideal mode of death as being a form of highly controlled wasting away
through fasting [sallekhana]‖ (Dundas 1992:155). All of these forms of violence against the
self bear some resemblance to contemporary suicide bombers, yet the latter‘s goals include
the infliction of death and destruction upon others as well as themselves (Juergensmeyer
2000:69-78).
Less dramatic, but oftentimes no less deadly, are people who deny themselves (and often
their loved ones) medical treatments on religious grounds. Ordinarily, one would not think
of groups such as the Christian Scientists (Fraser 1999:416-435) or Jehovah‘s Witnesses
(Williams 1987:116-209) as fostering violence, but the denial of appropriate medical
treatment can kill just as easily as can a weapon or a fist. Sometimes researchers are able
to trace these medical denials to the peculiar psychologies of groups‘ leaders for example,
the founder of Christian Science, Mary Baker Eddy, probably was paranoid and literally
afraid of medical treatment (Fraser 1999:26, 103, 107-108). Regardless, however, of the
cause or religious rationale behind such denials, often the consequences are dire. In its
worst manifestations, religion itself can foster violence to the extent that it subverts ―higher
reasoning to help offset the more primitive focus on sex and aggression‖ (Roy 2000:394-

Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 3, Nos. 2 &3, 2004, Page 9
395) or, I would add, self-preservation. It does so, in many instances, by substituting faith
for reason and obedience for questioning. To support this claim, one need not rely only
upon Karl Marx‘s quip about religion being ―the opium of the people‖ (Marx 1964:42 see
van Uden and Pieper 1996:44), since the less offensive observations of Max Weber will do.
In his 1915 essay on ―Religious Rejections of the World and Their Directions,‖ Weber
observed, ―[t]here is absolutely no ‗unbroken‘ religion working as a vital force which is not
compelled at some point to demand the credo non quod sed quia absurdum—the sacrifice of
the intellect‖ (Weber 1915:352). Now one should object immediately by pointing out that
billions of people believe in faiths, and most of them never show violent tendencies. But for
people whose cognitive capacities are dulled or compromised by biogenetic imbalances,
social-psychological stressors, chemical alterations, or aggressive theologies, violence may
(and often does) flare up. When it flares up in religious contexts, the results can be
especially severe.
II. Interpersonal Contributors to Religious Dangers
A. Mental Illnesses
Biopsychosocial debilitations likely will hinder interpersonal relationships. Roy emphasizes
that (what he calls) ―a pool of anger‖ within some individuals can poison their ability to
socially interact (Roy 2000:394-395), but mental and personality disorders also inhibit
people‘s ability to enter into social exchanges. Psychopaths or sociopaths (probably like
Charles Manson) have no consciences and lack the ability to feel empathy (American
Psychiatric Association 1994:645-650 Emmons 1986:202 Sanders 1989:12), while
narcissists demand asymmetrical, constant adulation (American Psychiatric Association
1994:658-662). Schizophrenics distort social and personal reality, and interact according to
delusional notions about themselves and others‘ relationships to them (see American
Psychiatric Association 1994:287). Manic depression (now called bipolar disorder) involves
―a chronic pattern of unpredictable mood episodes and fluctuating, unreliable interpersonal
or occupational functioning‖ (American Psychiatric Association 1994:359). Paranoids, of
course, demonstrate ―a pattern of pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others such that
their motives are interpreted as malevolent.... [They] assume that other people will exploit,
harm, or deceive them, even if no evidence exists to support their expectation‖ (American
Psychiatric Association 1994:634).
Even among groups whose leaders lack demonstrations of diagnosable mental-health
problems, the social distance between leaders and followers facilitates violence by
diminishing leader accountability. Moreover, groups sanctify that social distance through
divine claims. Gurus, reputedly enlightened masters, and religious virtuosi of all types claim
special spiritual gifts that set them apart from others (at least when others accept their
claims). Removed from the flock, these charismatic leaders can direct, facilitate, or justify
violence, making divine or transcendent assertions that few can challenge but all must
accept. If leaders become deified, then followers get diminished, and it is easier to strike
out at one‘s underlings than it is against one‘s peers or superiors. Said succinctly about
family violence but also applicable to religion, ―abuse tends to gravitate toward the
relationships of greatest power differential‖ (Finkelhor 1983:18, italics in original).
B. Shared Drug Experiences
If mental illnesses and social distances distort the ways in which some leaders relate to
followers, then shared drug experiences create even more complex interpersonal dynamics
that often contribute to violence. Drugs alter (among other things) judgment, cognition, and
sensation, so people under their influence may engage in actions that they otherwise would
avoid. Likewise, they also may adopt the interpretations about their altered consciences that
their leaders provide about them, thereby relinquishing considerable autonomy to persons