Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1986 Page 77
understanding of the word ―religion.‖
If, for the sake of argument, one accepted the view of Allport that religion is the audacious
attempt to bind oneself to creation and to the Creator and thus to find one‘s place in the
scheme of things, then one would have to admit that there is nothing audacious about
surrendering one‘s mind to another who is willing to become ―the dispenser of existence.‖
One may feel a certain security in escaping the responsibility to make decisions, but it is the
security of a child and not that of a mature person. The mass suicide that Jim Jones
orchestrated in the jungles of Guyana was not an act of religion. The surrender of the
individual‘s critical faculties is not a matter to merit heavenly reward. As the bishops of the
Second Vatican Council said in their address to Men of Thought and Science: ―Thinking is
not an option, it is a responsibility.‖
For the Christian, a ―religious consciousness‖ might imply an awareness colored by the
Sermon on the Mount or by such writings of Saint Paul as the thirteenth chapter of First
Corinthians, or by the Prologue to John‘s gospel. For the Jew, a religious consciousness will
be shaped by Genesis, by Exodus, by Isaiah and the Wisdom books as well as by the
interpretations of so many holy rabbis down through the centuries. But to place alongside
these such items as The Divine Principle, Dianetics, or the initiation ceremony of
Transcendental Meditation is simply inane.
It is Enroth who says that the cults offer ―commitment, and ―involvement‖ However dubious
the commitment and however misdirected the involvement, one must agree with him on
that point The cults do demand a complete, firm unwavering commitment to the Leader and
his Idea. Invariably, this Faith must be productive of Works: some of the cults send their
missionaries great distances to labor at the salvation of the world. For example, one girl was
sent to Alaska by Moonies to sell plastic jewelry. (She reports that she brought in as much
as $700 a day.) One young man was returned in very poor health from Japan where he was
sent by the Children of God. A Jersey girl discovered Colorado under the auspices of the
Hare Krishnas. The commitment of some college girls to the Circle of Friends enabled them
to work two shifts of a security job in order to bring back to their guru the money which
they were led to believe would benefit handicapped children around the world. Each of these
examples demonstrates the generous commitment which can be elicited by a cult One could
only wish that the cause were more worthy of such devotion.
Again, Enroth insists that the cults meet real human needs by providing a sense of family,
of community, and a sense of purpose. True. And the local churches may make some effort
in this direction, but too often it is a rather feeble gesture. However contrived it may be, the
cults do create a sense of community. (Let it be noted here that they do not hesitate to
abandon members who become seriously ill and require extended medical care. Some have
been cruelly unscrupulous in this regard.) The strongest tie that a young man or woman has
to the cult is the awareness that one has met there some of the finest, most idealistic
people that one has encountered anywhere. It is not surprising, then, that if a person is
retrieved from such a group, there is always a deeply felt regret at leaving friends. (The
temptation to call them up on the telephone will invariably trigger a desperate effort on the
pan of the cult to recover the fish that got away!)
It would seem that Why Cults Succeed Where the Church Fails --like this review --assumes
that everyone understands the meaning of ―success.‖ Is there no need to define it? Is it to
be judged quantitatively? If the cults recruit more young people than the mainline churches,
is that to be seen as success for the one and failure for the other? Or, if the cults seem to
have a higher rate of attrition, with clients dropping out quickly after they have joined, is
that to be judged a failure? If the churches refuse to use high pressure recruiting methods,
is that a deficiency on their part?
Perhaps success ought to be calculated in light of the goals which each has. The churches
understanding of the word ―religion.‖
If, for the sake of argument, one accepted the view of Allport that religion is the audacious
attempt to bind oneself to creation and to the Creator and thus to find one‘s place in the
scheme of things, then one would have to admit that there is nothing audacious about
surrendering one‘s mind to another who is willing to become ―the dispenser of existence.‖
One may feel a certain security in escaping the responsibility to make decisions, but it is the
security of a child and not that of a mature person. The mass suicide that Jim Jones
orchestrated in the jungles of Guyana was not an act of religion. The surrender of the
individual‘s critical faculties is not a matter to merit heavenly reward. As the bishops of the
Second Vatican Council said in their address to Men of Thought and Science: ―Thinking is
not an option, it is a responsibility.‖
For the Christian, a ―religious consciousness‖ might imply an awareness colored by the
Sermon on the Mount or by such writings of Saint Paul as the thirteenth chapter of First
Corinthians, or by the Prologue to John‘s gospel. For the Jew, a religious consciousness will
be shaped by Genesis, by Exodus, by Isaiah and the Wisdom books as well as by the
interpretations of so many holy rabbis down through the centuries. But to place alongside
these such items as The Divine Principle, Dianetics, or the initiation ceremony of
Transcendental Meditation is simply inane.
It is Enroth who says that the cults offer ―commitment, and ―involvement‖ However dubious
the commitment and however misdirected the involvement, one must agree with him on
that point The cults do demand a complete, firm unwavering commitment to the Leader and
his Idea. Invariably, this Faith must be productive of Works: some of the cults send their
missionaries great distances to labor at the salvation of the world. For example, one girl was
sent to Alaska by Moonies to sell plastic jewelry. (She reports that she brought in as much
as $700 a day.) One young man was returned in very poor health from Japan where he was
sent by the Children of God. A Jersey girl discovered Colorado under the auspices of the
Hare Krishnas. The commitment of some college girls to the Circle of Friends enabled them
to work two shifts of a security job in order to bring back to their guru the money which
they were led to believe would benefit handicapped children around the world. Each of these
examples demonstrates the generous commitment which can be elicited by a cult One could
only wish that the cause were more worthy of such devotion.
Again, Enroth insists that the cults meet real human needs by providing a sense of family,
of community, and a sense of purpose. True. And the local churches may make some effort
in this direction, but too often it is a rather feeble gesture. However contrived it may be, the
cults do create a sense of community. (Let it be noted here that they do not hesitate to
abandon members who become seriously ill and require extended medical care. Some have
been cruelly unscrupulous in this regard.) The strongest tie that a young man or woman has
to the cult is the awareness that one has met there some of the finest, most idealistic
people that one has encountered anywhere. It is not surprising, then, that if a person is
retrieved from such a group, there is always a deeply felt regret at leaving friends. (The
temptation to call them up on the telephone will invariably trigger a desperate effort on the
pan of the cult to recover the fish that got away!)
It would seem that Why Cults Succeed Where the Church Fails --like this review --assumes
that everyone understands the meaning of ―success.‖ Is there no need to define it? Is it to
be judged quantitatively? If the cults recruit more young people than the mainline churches,
is that to be seen as success for the one and failure for the other? Or, if the cults seem to
have a higher rate of attrition, with clients dropping out quickly after they have joined, is
that to be judged a failure? If the churches refuse to use high pressure recruiting methods,
is that a deficiency on their part?
Perhaps success ought to be calculated in light of the goals which each has. The churches
