Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 22
30. Isser, "Protestants and Proselytization," 51-70.
31. Ralph Gibson, A Social History of French Catholicism, 1789-1914 (London: Routledge,
1989) c.f. Robert Ellwood, Religious and Spiritual Groups in Modern America
(Englewood: Prentice-Hall, 1973).
32. W.J. Schnell, Thirty Years a Watch Tower Slave (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1956)
Barbara Grizzuti Harrison, Visions of Glory, A History and Memory of Jehovah’s
Witnesses (New York: Simon &Schuster, 1976) describes missionary efforts in England
and other European countries J.A. Beckford, "Organization, Ideology, and Recruitment:
The Structure of the Watch Tower Movement," Sociological Review 23 (1976): 893-909
Eileen Barker, The Making of a Moonie, Choice or Brainwashing? (New York: Basil
Blackwell, 1984) though questioning whether Moonies are brainwashed discusses
increasing numbers of the Unification Church in England.
33. S.M. Tipton, "The Moral Logic of Alternative Religion," Daedalus 1 (1982): 185-214.
34. Robert Peel, Mary Baker Eddy, The Years of Discovery (New York: Holt, Rinehart, &
Winston, 1966).
35. Paul W. Pruyser, "The Seamy Side of Current Religious Beliefs," Bulletin of the Menninger
Clinic 41 (no. 4, 1977): 329-48 Maria I. Pereira de Queiroz, "Messianic Myth and
Movements," Diogenes 90 (1975): 78-99 Harriet S. Mostatche, Searching: Practices
and Beliefs of the Religious Cults and Human Potential Groups (New York: Stravon
Educational, 1984).
36. Conn, 225-334.
37. Isser &Schwartz, Hist of Conversion, 107-37.
38. Ibid.
39. Barker, 1-5. This resolution was directed especially to the activities of the Reverend Moon
and the Unification Church.
40. Isser &Schwartz, Hist of Conversion, 171.
41. New York Times, 21 July 1991, 14.
42. The Rastafarians are one of the fastest growing cults since 1983. Leonard E. Barrett, The
Rastafarians, Sounds of Cultural Dissonance (Boston: Beacon, 1988) 235-46.
43. Gaustad, Dissent, 152.
**************
Natalie Isser, Ph.D. is Professor of History at the Ogontz Campus of Pennsylvania State
University. She has written numerous books and articles on cults and conversion. This paper
was originally presented at the American Family Foundation annual meeting at Stony Point,
NY, in September 1990.
This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8,
Number 2, pages 104-121. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the
bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 23
Ritual Child Abuse: Understanding the
Controversies
David W. Lloyd, Esq.
National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect
Abstract
The phenomenon of “ritual child abuse” has created a major national controversy.
The general public is confused by media reports of notorious cases with different
outcomes in California, Florida, and Massachusetts, and other states. Professionals
in the fields of child welfare, mental health, law enforcement, and law disagree
about the definition of “ritual child abuse,” how frequently it occurs, and what we
know about the individuals and groups who commit it. Positions have thus become
polarized within the same field. This paper is intended to explore that controversy
and some of the myriad issues involved.
Currently there is no consensus definition of “ritual child abuse.” The term has been applied
by both the media and professionals to such different situations as
 any bizarre or especially sadistic act(s) of physical, sexual and psychological abuse
committed on one or more children,
 group acts of religious worship to demonic powers in the course of committing physical,
sexual, and emotional abuse of children,
 psychological intimidation of children, including attempts to make them perform acts of
religious belief in demonic powers or to abuse other children or animals, accompanying
physical, sexual, and emotional abuse of children.
However, the term has been applied inconsistently to the physical, sexual, and emotional
abuse of children that may result from religious beliefs. In general, it has been applied only to
those practices of comparatively obscure and secretive sects and cults.
This lack of a clear definition contributes to the controversy in several ways:
1. It hinders our understanding of the variety of phenomena that are occurring. We may
need different approaches to address different problems. Sadistic child abuse of numerous
children by a group requires a different approach to investigation and intervention from
that for sadistic child abuse of one child performed by one individual.
2. It hinders our assessment of the harms to the child. Children who are physically abused,
sexually abused, and neglected also suffer some psychological harm. However, children
subjected to repetitive acts of sadistic psychological intimidation reveal symptoms of
severe psychological harm.
3. It hinders our understanding of the motivation of the abuser(s). For example, the
perpetrator(s) may have performed such acts in order to achieve completion of the crime
(“modus operandi” or “M.O.” in law enforcement parlance), namely to intimidate the
child(ren) into obedience and secrecy, or in order to gratify sexual and other
psychological needs of the abuser(s) and not as part of any belief system. For example,
some individuals practice such deviant sexual behavior as eating feces and drinking urine,
and may be seeking group legitimacy of their own needs by pressuring children to do the
same. Others may be mentally ill and acting under the influence of religious delusions,
while others may be deliberately attempting to convert children to religious sects.