What do you consider to be a cult? (priest, beliefs)

[Dream Angel]

Question says it all really. In your own opinion, what do you consider to be a cult? Does your religion teach about "cults"? I am tempted to ask for examples, but I am not sure whether that would get sticky between members???

[Green Gaia]

To me "cult" has negative connotations and is a group that is potentially dangerous to the well-being of its members and others who are controlled by a dominant, authoritarian leader. Think Jonestown.

[Dream Angel]

Originally Posted by Green Gaia

To me "cult" has negative connotations and is a group that is potentially dangerous to the well-being of its members and others who are controlled by a dominant, authoritarian leader. Think Jonestown.

That was horrific! I think some people connected with that went on the Jeremy Kyle Show once. Do you think their are milder forms of "cult like behaviour" within religions that are maybe not considered a cult?

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by Dream Angel

That was horrific! I think some people connected with that went on the Jeremy Kyle Show once. Do you think their are milder forms of "cult like behaviour" within religions that are maybe not considered a cult?

Sure. There are several definitions of what a cult is, some rather benign. I just answered with what first came to mind for me with that word.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I recognize two uses of the term "cult". First is the historic use, which didn't carry a negative connotation. I think I've mentioned this before, but when I got married, because I was unbaptized, the priest had to apply to the bishop for a "petition of difference of cult", implying that both the Catholic Church and whatever I believed in are both "cults". I consider this to be more in the historical use of the term.

I think this definition has been largely supplanted by something else. In more modern usage, I'd define a "cult" as an unsafe or harmful group, usually based on religious beliefs (I say "usually" because I've encountered one organization that I personally consider to be a borderline cult that masqueraded as a sort of self-help group rather than a religion).

As for whether I consider any particular religious organization to be a cult, I usually go by one of the readily available lists of warning signs (for example, this one). The more warning signs a group has, the more likely I am to regard them as a cult.

[doppelgänger]

I don't think there's a workable definition. Practically speaking, a "cult" tends to be every social institution representing itself as an authoritative source for values and beliefs for its members, to which values and beliefs the person using the word "cult" does not ascribe.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Something just occurred to me: I think that to a certain extent, a group can be a cult for one person but not for another.

To me, the key aspect of a cult that differentiates it from something else is harm. If a group causes harm to some members but not to others, I suppose that we could consider it to be a cult for some people but not for others.

Does that make sense? Or is the important thing the intent of the group leader(s)?

[DallasApple]

When I think of a cult I think of a leader or leaders that use brain washing techniques and intimidation to get the people to follow..I also think of a cult as a group that isolates itself from the rest of society...

David Karesh is one that comes to mind..

Love

Dallas

[tomspug]

Originally Posted by 9-10ths_Penguin

Something just occurred to me: I think that to a certain extent, a group can be a cult for one person but not for another.

To me, the key aspect of a cult that differentiates it from something else is harm. If a group causes harm to some members but not to others, I suppose that we could consider it to be a cult for some people but not for others.

Does that make sense? Or is the important thing the intent of the group leader(s)?

It seems to be more to do with the leader and the religion itself. If you are causing no harm to anyone but are taking away their rights and money, isn't that still pretty awful?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by tomspug

It seems to be more to do with the leader and the religion itself. If you are causing no harm to anyone but are taking away their rights and money, isn't that still pretty awful?

Yes, but I consider that to be harm.