Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 17
cults were generally ignored by dominant groups and regarded as aberrations, such as Father
Divine‟s group or the Peyote cults. They did not challenge society either in their doctrines or
by excessive proselytization. If, however, cults emphasized ideals that offended the mores of
the prevalent political state or if they stressed group conflict, opposition arose to curtail, limit,
and even suppress such movements24. More often the belligerent, aggressive cult did not
prosper and as it became more acculturated and less bellicose, it faded away to be replaced
by newer and even more strident groups25.
Western Europe
Although the United States proved a more fertile environment for the spread of dissenting and
different religious or secular movements, western Europe, which also underwent a process of
rapid change caused by industrialization, was not immune to the growth of cults and sects.
Changes created by new production, transportation, and communication unraveled and
challenged existing precepts, while the generational gap became more divisive. Prosperity
and education accelerated technological progress increased urbanization created new classes
and sharper antagonisms, stimulating worldliness. These factors also created anomie,
alienation, apprehension, and often nostalgia for traditional values. Responses to these
changes led to a variety of choices. Established churches, the voice of the status quo and the
propertied classes, did not always meet the aspirations of the new classes or the displaced
young. Responses were sometimes secular, with an avowed interest in revolutionary activity,
or in adherence to the new spirit preached by Karl Marx, culminating in the twentieth century
in allegiance to new totalitarian ideologies.
However, not everyone reflected alienation by retreating to secularism. Religion is too potent
a force and too significant in the binding of family and community. People did not abandon
the church but rather sought a more communicative, emotionally satisfying variant: It was
expressed in Catholic France, Italy, and Portugal by the growth of innumerable miracle
devotions and prophetic movements, Lourdes being the most illustrious example26.
The expression of religiosity was acknowledged by widespread devotion to the Sacred Heart of
Jesus and even more intensely to the cult of Mary27. Almost spontaneously a number of
visions of Mary were widely reported. These apparitions were accompanied by prophecies
and warnings28. Churches were dedicated to Mary, and confraternities such as the Association
of the Living Rosary, the Children of Mary, and Our Lady of Victories were dedicated to her
service. Visions were most commonplace in Italy and although the church avoided
delineating them as genuine miracles, it acquiesced in the folk respect given to the young
witnesses29. These visions did not cease in fact, world crises increased apprehensions and
their occurrences accelerated (e.g., Fatimah in Portugal, current experiences in Yugoslavia, in
Ireland, and in Philadelphia).
Protestants in France and England, in response to their alienation, also underwent a
movement similar to the Great Awakening in America. A new religiosity appeared that was
marked by an increased piety and emotional expressions of belief by the faithful --a more
vibrant rebirth of a spiritual relationship between Jesus and his followers. These Protestants
did not reject Christian dogma, but they possessed no doctrinal unity, and often loyalty was
given to individual preachers. Heavy emphasis was placed on homiletic and especially
missionary activity30.
The greatest difference between the United States and Europe did not rest on a lack of
religious activity but rather on the fact that most of the leaders preaching in European
societies relied on variants of the mainstream faiths, and for very good reasons. The Catholic
church and the Anglican and Lutheran churches enjoyed much real support from the political
authorities, even in regions that practiced religious freedom. To the contrary, in the United
States, the absence of a firmly established state church, along with a weak, newly emerging

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 18
Catholic church, prevented significant opposition to the development of new sects and the
cults.
In the twentieth century the industrialization of Europe, which led to greater national
homogeneity and the subsequent threat of "de-Christianization," encouraged the movement
toward either more traditional Catholicism or the growth of fundamentalist Pentecostal
sects31. Furthermore, the gradual separation of church and state, completed in western
Europe by the beginning of the twentieth century, weakened a traditional bulwark against the
growth of new sects and cults. The groundwork was prepared for the transatlantic transfer of
sects and cults, and then throughout the world, especially as the technology of communi-
cation and transportation made ideas and missionaries so accessible.
The millenarian movements in particular flourished. Some, such as the Mormons, the Seventh
Day Adventists, and the Jehovah‟s Witnesses, gradually became a part of mainstream
American religions and then spread to the European continent as the forces of secularism
eroded the strength of the dominant churches. The Watchtower movement, indeed,
penetrated throughout Europe32.
Comparison of Past and Present Cults and Sects
Just as in the past cults drew upon the religious principles and attitudes of the time, so do the
present ones. Contemporary cults promise salvation, often preaching anti-materialistic
principles to appeal to members of the counterculture. They incorporate Eastern themes of
meditation and peace. Some psychotherapeutic ones promise new self-esteem and worldly
success. They feed not only upon common beliefs but also upon the hopes and fears of the
times. Leaders compile a syncretic vision, drawing upon existing theological and social
doctrines which are reordered and redefined to adapt to prevailing frustrations33.
The contemporary cults, as did their predecessors, engender popular and legal opposition
within their communities. Past opposition rested upon legal quarrels and policies of the cults,
especially those that threatened prevailing traditions. Jehovah‟s Witnesses were engaged in
courtroom actions over their refusal to salute the flag or take loyalty oaths. They were bitterly
persecuted by the Nazis. Like the Christian Scientists34, they were and are subjected to legal
action because of their refusal to accept scientific medical care.
There is no doubt that many of the groups that we regard as eccentric, sometimes quaint or
odd, were perceived in the context of their own time as cults. They were considered
dangerous and antisocial their leaders were thought to be self-serving. Mostly, as is
sometimes the case today, these cults passed quickly into oblivion. If their membership was
small, largely poor or lower middle class, and their resources meager, they presented little or
no threat to the established society. This, of course, did not apply to groups like the Mormons
or Seventh Day Adventists.
Proselytization by Mormons was zealous. Their financial profits from the growth of their
membership became prodigious and led to resentment. Moreover, practices such as polygamy
and the separation of families when joining the commune produced even more distaste. (It is
interesting to note that today a sect of the Mormon church is still in conflict over the issue of
polygamy.) Instances of openly hostile persecution and ugly violence pervaded the
relationship between the community and the Mormons. Only when the Mormons moved into
the unpopulated West, abandoned polygamy, reduced their proselytization to more
reasonable levels, and institutionalized their religious teachings did the cult become
acceptable as a sect or church.
Many contemporary cults have aroused the same antipathy because of proselytization
techniques that often smack of deception and brainwashing, fund-raising that is fraudulent,
and behavior of members that sometimes constitutes a public nuisance35.