Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2009, Page 59
were cut off for whatever reason during the cult experience. Rejecting cult affiliation,
however, is only the start of a longer adjustment process of integrating the exit experience
with a life thereafter. The ex-member does not ―rejoice in a new identity.‖ The cult identity
never wholly leaves one no more than having once been married, incarcerated, or part of a
military campaign ever disappear from one‘s history.
I wish Price had been more specific about cults that utilize New Thought ideas. He never
actually accuses any of his main targets in Top Secret of running such a cult. If he had, his
appendixes would make more sense. For example, A Course in Miracles has attained ―cult‖
status as a book, but I say this with no intent to demean its tens of thousands of scattered
devotees, most of whom, I daresay, are no more ―in‖ a cult (as self-sealing, manipulative
system) than the average Lutheran! If we mean ―cult‖ in the sense of a controversial group
with a charismatic leader and highly manipulative behaviors, then Price could have pointed
to Church of the Full Endeavor (a.k.a. Endeavor Academy).viii This ―Academy‖ is based on
ACIM and has had a series of ex-members who accuse it of cult behaviors.ix I have exit
counseled people out of Endeavor, and it does conform to the model of harmful group
behaviors that would attract my services. Without clear examples, the reader will find it
hard to apply just what Price means by cult.
And what does he mean? He titled his first appendix ―What Is a Cult?‖ (291). He starts out
well by dismissing the practically useless ―new religious movement‖ used by that same
group of social scientists I mentioned above. Price states that cult is a perfectly fine word
when we use it as defined in the dictionary, despite its often pejorative intent by ignorant
people. ―Cult‖ has layers of meaning. Good for Price. But then he goes off into sociologese
by citing Max Weber‘s classifications of church, sect, and cult. A sect in Weber‘s typology is
a breakaway or reformation movement within an established church. A cult, Price surmises
within Weber‘s view, has two defining traits: 1. ―A small group of zealous believers all
completely devoted to a single charismatic leader..‖ 2. ―…a foreign transplant from an alien
religion.‖ Personally, I find Weber‘s typology wanting because cult formation can occur
within or without a sect or church.
There are layers of nuance about cult experience that Price does not ignore. For example,
Price discusses ―plausibility structure‖ within a ―cognitive universe,‖ citing research by
Berger and Luckman (The Social Construction of Reality):
The believer is like a submarine sailor surrounded by thousands of tons of
water pressure. He had better have thick walls between him and that water!
The plausibility structure provides them, and he must do his best to
internalize the cognitive universe before he departs for the outer world of
everyday society. (303)
Nowhere does Price mention that Eckhart Tolle devotees (if not Tolle himself) maintain
plausibility structures to sustain belief in Tolle-ism. Of course, they have to, if one takes
seriously what Price says about Tolle or any of the other pop gurus examined in Top Secret.
What Price misses completely is that maintaining a plausibility structure is tantamount to
what deprogrammers call mind control (self-policing one‘s thoughts to comply with a belief
system) or brainwashing (thoughts and behaviors as manipulated by another‘s ideas,
suggestions, and directives). A thicket by any other name is still a thicket. So there you
have it from a deprogrammer.
Endnotes
[i] http://www.jctseminary.org/portaljcts/Catalog/History/tabid/71/Default.aspx
[ii] http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/bio.htm
[iii] http://www.centerforinquiry.net/cser/index.html
were cut off for whatever reason during the cult experience. Rejecting cult affiliation,
however, is only the start of a longer adjustment process of integrating the exit experience
with a life thereafter. The ex-member does not ―rejoice in a new identity.‖ The cult identity
never wholly leaves one no more than having once been married, incarcerated, or part of a
military campaign ever disappear from one‘s history.
I wish Price had been more specific about cults that utilize New Thought ideas. He never
actually accuses any of his main targets in Top Secret of running such a cult. If he had, his
appendixes would make more sense. For example, A Course in Miracles has attained ―cult‖
status as a book, but I say this with no intent to demean its tens of thousands of scattered
devotees, most of whom, I daresay, are no more ―in‖ a cult (as self-sealing, manipulative
system) than the average Lutheran! If we mean ―cult‖ in the sense of a controversial group
with a charismatic leader and highly manipulative behaviors, then Price could have pointed
to Church of the Full Endeavor (a.k.a. Endeavor Academy).viii This ―Academy‖ is based on
ACIM and has had a series of ex-members who accuse it of cult behaviors.ix I have exit
counseled people out of Endeavor, and it does conform to the model of harmful group
behaviors that would attract my services. Without clear examples, the reader will find it
hard to apply just what Price means by cult.
And what does he mean? He titled his first appendix ―What Is a Cult?‖ (291). He starts out
well by dismissing the practically useless ―new religious movement‖ used by that same
group of social scientists I mentioned above. Price states that cult is a perfectly fine word
when we use it as defined in the dictionary, despite its often pejorative intent by ignorant
people. ―Cult‖ has layers of meaning. Good for Price. But then he goes off into sociologese
by citing Max Weber‘s classifications of church, sect, and cult. A sect in Weber‘s typology is
a breakaway or reformation movement within an established church. A cult, Price surmises
within Weber‘s view, has two defining traits: 1. ―A small group of zealous believers all
completely devoted to a single charismatic leader..‖ 2. ―…a foreign transplant from an alien
religion.‖ Personally, I find Weber‘s typology wanting because cult formation can occur
within or without a sect or church.
There are layers of nuance about cult experience that Price does not ignore. For example,
Price discusses ―plausibility structure‖ within a ―cognitive universe,‖ citing research by
Berger and Luckman (The Social Construction of Reality):
The believer is like a submarine sailor surrounded by thousands of tons of
water pressure. He had better have thick walls between him and that water!
The plausibility structure provides them, and he must do his best to
internalize the cognitive universe before he departs for the outer world of
everyday society. (303)
Nowhere does Price mention that Eckhart Tolle devotees (if not Tolle himself) maintain
plausibility structures to sustain belief in Tolle-ism. Of course, they have to, if one takes
seriously what Price says about Tolle or any of the other pop gurus examined in Top Secret.
What Price misses completely is that maintaining a plausibility structure is tantamount to
what deprogrammers call mind control (self-policing one‘s thoughts to comply with a belief
system) or brainwashing (thoughts and behaviors as manipulated by another‘s ideas,
suggestions, and directives). A thicket by any other name is still a thicket. So there you
have it from a deprogrammer.
Endnotes
[i] http://www.jctseminary.org/portaljcts/Catalog/History/tabid/71/Default.aspx
[ii] http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/bio.htm
[iii] http://www.centerforinquiry.net/cser/index.html
