Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 7
the devotees were fanatical --beyond fanatical. I mean, they would give us a bowl
of hot milk at night, so I would, of course, pee in my bed. Then as punishment they
would spank me very hard and make me wear the contaminated panties on my
head. In general, at that time, because I was so young, I was so spaced out and
confused. I would cry … for my mom, but that wasn‘t allowed, so I would say I was
crying in devotional ecstasy‖ (Rochford &Heinlein, p. 47).
Is this quote from Cultic Studies Journal? No. Is it from the Cult Observer? No. Is it even
from the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion? No. It is from ISKCON Communications
Journal, and the article from which the quotes come was written by E. Burke Rochford, Jr.,
with Jennifer Heinlein. Rochford is often identified with the ―pro-cult‖ camp of sociologists.
When the lawyers get their teeth into this issue, ISKCON may pay a great price for the
forthrightness demonstrated in its own journal. However, if genuine reform is to occur, then
the price must be paid for past abuses and the ground laid for future accountability. The
organization may pay a financial price. Many of the adult members whose children were
abused are undoubtedly already paying a heavy price emotionally as they confront the
terrible consequences of their loyalty and obedience to the movement.
We who are cult critics should not gloat and say, ―I told you years ago that children were
being abused in ISKCON.‖ It would have been much better had we been wrong and innocent
children not been abused. We should take no satisfaction from their suffering.
If we, as cult critics, can offer constructive advice and commentary to the reform element
within ISKCON, we can do much more to help the children (and adults) within ISKCON than
we could do standing on the sidelines shouting ―I see nothing but evil!‖ Even if the reform
movement is not fully confronting the organization‘s problems, its capacity to bring about
constructive change is much greater than that of its critics. How many cults have changed
their practices in a substantial way because of the criticisms of outsiders? Reform that
grows from within an organization has a much greater chance of success than reform that
outsiders try to impose.
This is not to say that criticism from outside isn‘t important. It may stimulate persons within
the organization to reevaluate their group and press for change. However, except in rare
cases where legal authorities exercise power, change will usually occur only when enough
persons within the organization support it.
Social Concerns
I think it is important to distinguish social concerns that reflect offenses against
fundamental societal values from those that reflect concerns against the idiosyncratic values
of individuals. Society‘s valuing of social order demands accountability when a group
commits the first offense. But society‘s valuing of individual freedom demands that critics
strive for tolerance when confronted by a group that elicits idiosyncratic disapproval in
them.
Examples of the latter category of concern include antagonism resulting from an observer‘s
disapproval of:
unconventional dress or lifestyle choices
religious beliefs different from his/her own
groups with a foreign origin
groups with a particular racial or ethnic makeup
Examples of the former category include concerns resulting from a group‘s violation of
commonly held ethical and/or legal standards, such as:
criminal laws, including those related to immigration, commerce, and finances
the devotees were fanatical --beyond fanatical. I mean, they would give us a bowl
of hot milk at night, so I would, of course, pee in my bed. Then as punishment they
would spank me very hard and make me wear the contaminated panties on my
head. In general, at that time, because I was so young, I was so spaced out and
confused. I would cry … for my mom, but that wasn‘t allowed, so I would say I was
crying in devotional ecstasy‖ (Rochford &Heinlein, p. 47).
Is this quote from Cultic Studies Journal? No. Is it from the Cult Observer? No. Is it even
from the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion? No. It is from ISKCON Communications
Journal, and the article from which the quotes come was written by E. Burke Rochford, Jr.,
with Jennifer Heinlein. Rochford is often identified with the ―pro-cult‖ camp of sociologists.
When the lawyers get their teeth into this issue, ISKCON may pay a great price for the
forthrightness demonstrated in its own journal. However, if genuine reform is to occur, then
the price must be paid for past abuses and the ground laid for future accountability. The
organization may pay a financial price. Many of the adult members whose children were
abused are undoubtedly already paying a heavy price emotionally as they confront the
terrible consequences of their loyalty and obedience to the movement.
We who are cult critics should not gloat and say, ―I told you years ago that children were
being abused in ISKCON.‖ It would have been much better had we been wrong and innocent
children not been abused. We should take no satisfaction from their suffering.
If we, as cult critics, can offer constructive advice and commentary to the reform element
within ISKCON, we can do much more to help the children (and adults) within ISKCON than
we could do standing on the sidelines shouting ―I see nothing but evil!‖ Even if the reform
movement is not fully confronting the organization‘s problems, its capacity to bring about
constructive change is much greater than that of its critics. How many cults have changed
their practices in a substantial way because of the criticisms of outsiders? Reform that
grows from within an organization has a much greater chance of success than reform that
outsiders try to impose.
This is not to say that criticism from outside isn‘t important. It may stimulate persons within
the organization to reevaluate their group and press for change. However, except in rare
cases where legal authorities exercise power, change will usually occur only when enough
persons within the organization support it.
Social Concerns
I think it is important to distinguish social concerns that reflect offenses against
fundamental societal values from those that reflect concerns against the idiosyncratic values
of individuals. Society‘s valuing of social order demands accountability when a group
commits the first offense. But society‘s valuing of individual freedom demands that critics
strive for tolerance when confronted by a group that elicits idiosyncratic disapproval in
them.
Examples of the latter category of concern include antagonism resulting from an observer‘s
disapproval of:
unconventional dress or lifestyle choices
religious beliefs different from his/her own
groups with a foreign origin
groups with a particular racial or ethnic makeup
Examples of the former category include concerns resulting from a group‘s violation of
commonly held ethical and/or legal standards, such as:
criminal laws, including those related to immigration, commerce, and finances
