Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 17, 2000, Page 97
Membership
One of the major tasks of members is to ensure group cohesion by maintaining the constant
separation between us and them. Often, this will lead members to see themselves as
soldiers who share a common and constant taskkeeping all signs of them at bay. Bonding
among members is hence achieved through a shared determination to keep us well
differentiated from them. Although members bear the common responsibility for maintaining
cohesion through orthodoxy, much can separate them one from another. Since a complex,
and mostly unofficial, power structure often exists in such groups, many members feel
jealousy and envy toward the elite as well as toward those who appear especially close to
the leaders. Because social status within a philosophy of separation group is gained by
proximity to the leaders, being close to them or to their entourage is greatly valued. Such
proximity is often sought by adhering in the strictest fashion to all written and unwritten
rules.
All members continuously judge who is acting in an orthodox fashion (us) and who isn‘t
(them), and even though final judgement is passed by the elite, every member feels
vulnerable to peer judgment. Hence, all members are expected to maintain group cohesion
by continuously screening out us conduct from them conduct in themselves, their children,
their families, their neighbors, and their friends. This continuous vigilance, however,
engenders a great deal of jealousy, envy, and feelings of injustice for a group that
paradoxically places such importance on being united. Consequently, conflicts between
individuals are judged harshly. But since members are expected to be constantly
preoccupied with making sure that no one appears to be acting like them, the way is paved
for much hidden conflict and feelings of guilt.
Children
Children are often prized in philosophy of separation groups as important conservators of
tradition. In groups that do not recruit new members, children are seen as the main means
of transmitting the faith. Procreation is hence highly valued, so women‘s role, destiny, and
prestige are most often limited to their child bearing and rearing capacities. But since
orthodoxy is also highly valued, being a child in such a group can be quite demanding.
Childlike behavior and immaturity, especially if it makes one akin to them, is unacceptable.
Children who deviate, even slightly in some groups, are not only shamed publicly by being
compared to them, but may also suffer harsh physical punishment. Strong social pressure is
thus put on children to behave in strictly prescribed ways. Shame is often used as a
disciplinary tool, and scolding a child for not being a proper representative of the group, one
of us, is quite common. Unfortunately, the social pressure toward conformity may cause
some children to be physically abused, according to the standards of most children‘s aid
agencies, although, according to the group's norms, such discipline is justified.
In addition, since children are seen as the group‘s future, they are expected to become very
knowledgeable about doctrine. This may lead in some communities to a highly charged
curriculum in cult specific knowledge at the expense of education in other subjects. In some
communities, grown children may then have little choice but to stay in the community, for
they lack the skills and basic knowledge necessary to function outside the group. Even if
some of these children may be scholarly in their knowledge of the group‘s belief system,
rules, rituals, and tradition, they may be functionally illiterate.
Rituals
Rituals are used to evaluate members‘ faith and orthodoxy in philosophy of separation
groups. As the group‘s cohesion is sought by demarcating rigorously those who are with us
from those who act as them, rituals play an important role because they offer a good
vantage point from which to judge conformity. Thus, rituals become a means of social

Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 17, 2000, Page 98
control. No member can refuse to practice a ritual, nor even change the slightest aspect of
participation. Often the slightest deviance singles out the offending member, who may in
some circumstances be judged heretic and even expelled from the group. This stigmatizing
situation is usually a personal crisis for individuals who value being part of a cohesive group
above all. During such inner crises strict observance of rituals becomes crucial to
maintaining not only the group‘s unity but also each member‘s social identity.
Doctrine
Absolute fidelity to doctrine represents the most fundamental virtue in these groups because
it marks the difference between us and them. Often the wording of sacred texts exemplifies
the dichotomy between us and them. Since these groups fear any loosening of this
categorization, they show a strong tendency towards conservatism and usually shun
evolution of doctrinal matters. Scholars in doctrinal knowledge are thus expected to
maintain doctrine unchanged, neither introducing modifications of rituals, nor proposing new
interpretations of sacred texts or holy books. Hence, keeping group beliefs and traditions
intact, unaltered, and timeless is emphasized. When however, some doctrinal change is
made, the whole group is expected to adhere to the new elements of doctrine as if no
novelty existed.
Spatial Organization
Members of groups that share a philosophy of separation may tolerate geographical
promiscuity with non-members, often living in urban settings or close to small towns in rural
environments, for example. Although social immersion is not the rule, minimal contact with
non-members is accepted. This social promiscuity is tolerated because the separation
between us and them is guaranteed in everyday life through the many overt signs of group
identity. To the group members, these overt signs are interpreted as identifying an us as
contrasted to the them of the environment. The corollary is that the citizens of the shared
social environment are also likely to refer to the cult members as them. The group
welcomes such an occurrence because it signifies that their efforts to distinguish themselves
are effective. Indeed, it can be said that such groups thrive on discrimination.
Social Organization
The power structure is usually shared by a small group of elite members who exercise their
power a bit in the manner of an executive committee. Nonetheless, a vertical structure in
which power rests in the hands of a sole individual, who commands moral leadership and
often dominates his co-leaders, is usually simultaneously present. However, although
enjoying the highest prestige and exercising the most power, such a leader is not permitted
to reign in an absolute manner.
Many other members, while not belonging to the elite, may hold positions of high
responsibility. Political struggles are consequently an omnipresent reality of the social
organization in these groups. Conflicts surrounding power issues may erupt between
members, leading to major crises within the group. Internal scapegoating is often resorted
to in the context of such power struggles. When this happens, individual members are often
identified as the unorthodox, or heretical ones responsible for the crisis. Such social
stigmatization reduces that person‘s importance within the group and all but stops his
chances of ever being recognized as a valuable member. In certain groups and
circumstances, such stigmatization can lead to expulsion of the offending member. This is
often felt as the equivalent of a psychological death penalty. Members close to the
―offender‖ through family ties or friendship are also quite often the objects of social
stigmatization.
A strong patriarchal social organization is the norm in many of these groups. Males are
identified as the strongest gender, and a strict discrimination between the roles and