What is the difference between a "religion" and a "cult"?

[Exposer]

According to dictionary.com...


CULT:

A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.

The followers of such a religion or sect.


RELIGION:

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.


By this definition, are there any major, modern "religions" that would actually be better described as "cults"?

[Graham]

We discussed this in a thread recently, which you can find here (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38528)

My position is that the difference is usually only a matter of popularity.

A popular cult = a religion, an unpopular religion = a cult.

Graham

[Exposer]

Thanks. Boy, these threads really get long here.

[Abdul Alhazred]

I would add that size counts.

A small annoying religion is a cult.

A large annoying religion is still a religion.

[DangerousBeliefs]

Same for the difference between a religion and ancient mythological religions.

Religion = modern myth. Myth = ancient religion.

[shemp]

Religion: A cult that got lucky.

[Marc]

In modern useage cult usually refers to nutty, usually dangerous or abusive, controlling organizations. A group can be a cult without being a religion (amway).

There is no clear cut distinction between a cult and an open religion. A group should be judged on the degree they display certain cult traits. These traits include:


Secrecy - some of their beliefs/teachings are kept from even their own members until they have reached certain points

Insular nature - group seeks to limit or eliminate contact with outside influences. This could be physical such as retreating to a compound, or simply intellectual by avoiding any news sources, ignoring any criticism of the group

Controlling - have strong influence on the members lives. possibly choosing where they work/live, diet restrictions, entertainment restrictions, sexual restrictions/requirements, attendence requirements.

disconnection - kind of a mix of the last two. Limits put on who one can associate with. Usually ex-members are outright shunned, even if family members. Marriages can be forced to be ended if one spouse leaves the group. More extreme is limiting members to only associate with other members except when necessary, or when recruiting.

Charismatic/infallible leader - A leader/originator who's teaching is taken as absolute truth. Questioning is unthinkable.


There are other possible characteristics. Any religious group can display all these to some degree, the question is how strongly they are represented. Take the Catholic Church, it can rate high in the infalliable leader section, but it's doctrines are pretty much well known, not very insular, and despite their efforts at times don't have much control over the lives of members. On the other end of the spectrum Scientology scores very high. Groups like JW and Mormons fall a bit inbetween. Are they cults? They might display some characteristics, but it becomes a question of where to draw the line.

[Graham]

Originally posted by Marc
In modern useage cult usually refers to nutty, usually dangerous or abusive, controlling organizations. A group can be a cult without being a religion (amway).

There is no clear cut distinction between a cult and an open religion. A group should be judged on the degree they display certain cult traits. These traits include:


Secrecy - some of their beliefs/teachings are kept from even their own members until they have reached certain points

Insular nature - group seeks to limit or eliminate contact with outside influences. This could be physical such as retreating to a compound, or simply intellectual by avoiding any news sources, ignoring any criticism of the group

Controlling - have strong influence on the members lives. possibly choosing where they work/live, diet restrictions, entertainment restrictions, sexual restrictions/requirements, attendence requirements.

disconnection - kind of a mix of the last two. Limits put on who one can associate with. Usually ex-members are outright shunned, even if family members. Marriages can be forced to be ended if one spouse leaves the group. More extreme is limiting members to only associate with other members except when necessary, or when recruiting.

Charismatic/infallible leader - A leader/originator who's teaching is taken as absolute truth. Questioning is unthinkable.


There are other possible characteristics. Any religious group can display all these to some degree, the question is how strongly they are represented. Take the Catholic Church, it can rate high in the infalliable leader section, but it's doctrines are pretty much well known, not very insular, and despite their efforts at times don't have much control over the lives of members. On the other end of the spectrum Scientology scores very high. Groups like JW and Mormons fall a bit inbetween. Are they cults? They might display some characteristics, but it becomes a question of where to draw the line.

Marc,

Would you not agree that were a cult like Scientology to grow to the size of Catholicism many of the more "cultish " elements you describe above would be unnecessary and even unworkable.

For instance, "disconnection" is no longer necessary once the cult has reached a certain size because the majority of family members and members of the general public the cult member comes across are likely to also be members.

Most of the elements are, obviously, directed towards keeping the cult member in the cult but if the cult forms a large part of society this is less of a concern.

Graham

[Marc]

Originally posted by Graham
Marc,

Would you not agree that were a cult like Scientology to grow to the size of Catholicism many of the more "cultish " elements you describe above would be unnecessary and even unworkable.

For instance, "disconnection" is no longer necessary once the cult has reached a certain size because the majority of family members and members of the general public the cult member comes across are likely to also be members.

Most of the elements are, obviously, directed towards keeping the cult member in the cult but if the cult forms a large part of society this is less of a concern.

Graham

Yes, that is possible. Growing to that size makes maintaining the type of control expressed in smaller groups a real problem. The catholic church is trying, such as their letters to politicians on abortion and gay marriage, recent forbidding communion to politicians that support abortion rights.

Then again this could be in part a function of society. In the middle ages the church was large but very controlling and abusive. Strong ties with government helped that along. In that case they didn't practice disconnection, and just went to inquisition for non-believers. Or even believers who did not agree with the leadership.

In the end keeping cult members seperate from the larger part of society is an exercise to help control them. Keep them from exposure to criticism and other ideas. If the majority of society is a member of the group then the group pretty much has control of society. A big difference to me between a cult and religion is not just the control but the abuse. What happens to those that do not toe the line? How does it maintain it's control?

[Flaherty]

Shermer says the difference is about 100 years.

[triadboy]

Originally posted by shemp
Religion: A cult that got lucky.

Which, in turn, was a myth that got lucky.

[MLynn]

Originally posted by shemp
Religion: A cult that got lucky.
What about Scientology? Are there any existing threads about this cult? (or whatever the h*ll it is....)

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by MLynn

What about Scientology? Are there any existing threads about this cult? (or whatever the h*ll it is....)
Not many threads, as far as I know.

One of the scary things about Scientology is the fact it was designed to spread. Most cults spring up in a disorganized fashion and die out on their own due to Natural Selection, however Scientology was designed from the ground up with intention to become highly successful and highly manipulative cult (its been described as the mafia of religion).

Scientology is a cult. I think to define "cult" properly, psychological criteria must be considered. From CultInformation.org (http://www.cultinformation.org.uk/faq.html#cult):
Every cult can be defined as a group having all of the following five characteristics:

1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members

2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society.

3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma.

4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds recruit people.

5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society.

http://www.xenu.net/ is very good for Scientology information.

[c4ts]

Cults are basically religions, only smaller and a whole lot worse.

[BoulderHead`]

There are some distinctions between a cult and a religion. It is my opinion the primary distinction lies in one having more political clout than the other.

[evildave]

Your class of insane assumptions and bizarre beliefs belong to YOUR CULT.

My equally insane class of assumptions and bizarre beliefs belong to MY RELIGION.

[The GM]

Hey guys,
Found this page that gives a very good definition of a cult and how to communcate effectively w/ cult members. Thought you might find it interesting.

http://www.cultinformation.org.uk/faq.html#do

EDIT: But I see that Yaweh already posted to a different part of the same article. It's a good read nevertheless. Sorry about the double post on that URL.

[Frostbite]

Originally posted by shemp
Religion: A cult that got lucky.

Or rather, religion = a cult that killed all the other cults and oppressed entire populations for centuries until it reached its current status of religion.