Home Page › Forums › General Discussion › Cult accusations
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 22, 2010 at 9:57 pm #204778
Anonymous
GuestSome Mormons find it offensive and even absurd that critics try to label the LDS Church a cult. However, looking at some generic “cult checklists” it seems like there really are some questionable characteristics that are actually quite common in the current culture of the Church. Now I’m not trying to claim that the Church leaders and members are intentionally trying to brainwash or manipulate people (including their own children) in a deliberately dishonest or malicious way. They probably have perfectly well-meaning intentions for whatever they say and do mostly based on the sincere belief that this is (in their opinion) the only “true church” directly approved by God and supposedly the only path to true salvation. However, one problem with these kinds of exclusive and rigid attitudes is that they can create a rather intolerant and oppressive environment for non-members or less faithful members. If many of your family, neighbors, co-workers, spouse, etc. are all true believers in this tradition it can make it really inconvenient to deal with legitimate questions or concerns in an honest way. In my case, I am basically afraid to openly admit some of my strongest doubts about the Church simply because I don’t think my wife would understand; in fact I wouldn’t be surprised at all if she left me over something like this.
Who says honesty is the best policy? Not if it means that I have to introduce all kinds of unnecessary stress and pain in my life just for the sake of voicing my own opinions. So at this point I’d rather just suck it up and be a good soldier and pretend to be what everyone expects me to be even if I don’t believe in some of the Church’s claims anymore.
Personally, I think a lot of the anti-Mormon hate and bitter feelings of ex-Mormons toward the Church are to some extent due to the intolerant and self-righteous attitude of more than a few members as well as what many consider to be deliberate deception and lies by Church leaders. I don’t agree with this kind of negative reaction myself but I think a more realistic and understanding attitude on the part of Church members towards people with different beliefs would go a long way towards improving the way people perceive the LDS Church in general.
February 22, 2010 at 10:49 pm #227841Anonymous
GuestThere’s no denying we often walk like a duck. And I think good humor can go a long way toward helping ourselves see it. For example, if we have a good attitude, we can occasionally ask whether something or other we see comes across “culty”. That’s an example of talking about cultiness without pushing the “LDS is a cult” button. And it uses a funny, non-threatening form of the word. “Yeah, some times we seem pretty culty.” I think a statement like that would be acceptable to many traditional believers, and might even come out of their mouths.
February 23, 2010 at 2:14 am #227842Anonymous
GuestThe emotional and spiritual energy we broadcast out into the universe around us, it comes back to us. We also paint in the colors in the world around us with this energy. People who are angry find a world full of enemies to fight. People who fear find danger all around them. On the bright side though, people who love find beauty and friends everywhere they go. Church members that treat their neighbors in the community with scorn and fear create angry apostates.
On the subject of being understood and accepted by traditional members, I seek to understand and respect them first. I have had positive experiences. But a part of that I know is that I decide what to talk about with various people based on my relationship with them. You just can’t talk about every idea with everyone. It isn’t appropriate. I know that need to be understood. We find peace though when we are comfortable with our beliefs, not needing to explain and “convert” everyone around us.
Tom gave good advice. A smile and a sense of humor goes a long way.
I would not even use the word “cult” at all if I really felt I needed to make a point with someone. I would just talk about the behavior (that is in fact cult-like) and point out how it probably isn’t the most Christ-like and mature behavior.
February 23, 2010 at 3:54 am #227843Anonymous
GuestEvery single organization that ever has been constructed has elements of the cultish when the checklist that was established by existing organizations to describe their newer competitors is used. Think about that for a moment – seriously – and I think you’ll see what I mean. My take is simple:
Are there cultish elements in the LDS Church? Absolutely. Are there cultists in the LDS Church? Absolutely. Would it be wonderful if they were removed somehow? Absolutely. Do I do my best to address them when I observe them? Absolutely.
Is the LDS Church a cult – in the generally understood meaning of the word or in any unique way? Absolutely not.
February 23, 2010 at 5:48 am #227844Anonymous
GuestI agree completely with everything Ray said. However, the church in Utah with BY as prophet??? That may have been a cult??? In some ways, you may be able to trace every major religion back to its roots… and find a cult.
😯 February 23, 2010 at 6:34 am #227845Anonymous
GuestI am reminded that early Romans referred to Christians as a cult. After all, they were practically cannibalistic–Christians claimed to eat the body and blood of Christ as part of a ritual called Communion, or the Sacrament. This type of rhetoric isn’t acceptable today, but it was fair game back then. Perjorative words like cult seem to change over time, though there are some hard-line Evangelicals that refer to Catholocism as a cult as well. Are you comfortable with referring to all religions as cults? The Crusades seem to be much worse than anything Mormons have engaged in.
February 23, 2010 at 4:42 pm #227846Anonymous
GuestQuote:Personally, I think a lot of the anti-Mormon hate and bitter feelings of ex-Mormons toward the Church are to some extent due to the intolerant and self-righteous attitude of more than a few members as well as what many consider to be deliberate deception and lies by Church leaders. I don’t agree with this kind of negative reaction myself but I think a more realistic and understanding attitude on the part of Church members towards people with different beliefs would go a long way towards improving the way people perceive the LDS Church in general.
May I point out that in most cases the actions of a few are reflected as a policy of the church.Ray said:
Quote:The emotional and spiritual energy we broadcast out into the universe around us, it comes back to us. We also paint in the colors in the world around us with this energy. People who are angry find a world full of enemies to fight. People who fear find danger all around them. On the bright side though, people who love find beauty and friends everywhere they go.
I think that all the answer have been full of great advice.I do feel the need to add a word of caution.
Cults; as they destroy the lives of those who interact with them,are a serious danger that should be avoided. (run like —-) I usually don’t even give them energy by speaking about them. These are the bad guys not the folks that wear funny hats or have strange clothes. The boy scouts can be consider a cult “by some generic “cult checklists” There are groups that try to destroy or torture both the body and the soul. By their fruits you shall know them. The church is a favorite target of these groups.
February 23, 2010 at 5:21 pm #227847Anonymous
GuestShoot – I made a comment to this but it didn’t go through. But then several of you mentioned the same things I did. Early Christian sects were called “cults,” as are almost all new religious movements (NRMs – another term used interchangeably with “cult” that generally applies for the first few hundred years a religion exists). If a new religion didn’t get people fired up and committed, it would never get off the ground. IMO, though, the word “cult” is simply a slur aimed at successful, competing emerging sects. As far as “cultish” behavior – IMO, a true “cult” requires both conspiracy and fraudulent intent to qualify as well as clearcut strong-arm tactics to prevent one from departing the group. There are wack jobs in any organization and people who like to turn their brains off and march to the beat of someone else’s drum, and there are manipulative people and bullies. But that doesn’t make every organization a cult – it just means some practitioners are jerks.
February 23, 2010 at 6:09 pm #227848Anonymous
GuestI think that the darkest example of cultiness in Mormonism is Mountain Meadows Massacre. It’s a great example of how a system (a people) can take bright eyed, hopeful youngsters, involve them in a cold blooded atrocity, then defend or deny that action for decades. When we continue to cry persecution over people’s indignation and inquiries on the massacre, we continue to look culty. A recent comment thread I saw on Youtube was downright embarrassing (then again, most Youtube comment threads are downright embarrassing 😆 ) in the way that the Saints talked right past the humane issue toward their own suspicious defender of the faith agenda. In the 21st century, it’s that very attitude that harms us most, I think.February 23, 2010 at 6:54 pm #227849Anonymous
GuestTom – I agree that MMM qualifies as cultish behavior. It meets my standards of conspiracy and fraudulent intent and even throws in bullying to boot. So, is that a chicken & egg question? Are new religions prone to cultish behavior because they create or attract fanaticism? Even so, there are factions that are cultish in some long-standing religions (Opus Dei comes to mind). February 23, 2010 at 8:02 pm #227850Anonymous
GuestWe should always ask ourselves those probing questions about our own faith, no doubt. I often have a knee-jerk reaction to the word cult though. It’s a knee-jerking inducing kind of pejorative word that gets thrown around far too often and freely. It loses meaning when that happens. February 24, 2010 at 6:27 am #227851Anonymous
GuestIf you look at the etymology of the word “cult”, you’ll see it wasn’t pejorative until recent times. Like just about all of our English words, this one can mean different things. In some ways, “cult” defines our church. In other ways, “cult” is the opposite of our church. On the few times I’ve been told that my church is a cult, I ask them what do they mean by “cult”? If they mean blindly following an extremist way outside the societal norms, I invite them to sneak into church, listen to what’s being taught, and then save me. February 25, 2010 at 1:39 am #227852Anonymous
Guestmormonheretic wrote:I am reminded that early Romans referred to Christians as a cult. After all, they were practically cannibalistic–Christians claimed to eat the body and blood of Christ as part of a ritual called Communion, or the Sacrament.
This type of rhetoric isn’t acceptable today, but it was fair game back then. Perjorative words like cult seem to change over time, though there are some hard-line Evangelicals that refer to Catholocism as a cult as well. Are you comfortable with referring to all religions as cults? The Crusades seem to be much worse than anything Mormons have engaged in.
It almost looks like some of these “cult checklists” were created from the start to single out Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 7th Day Adventists, Moonies, etc. to try to claim that these groups are more like each other than the majority of “mainstream” Christians. Maybe this cult label is really mostly just name-calling and an attempt to portray the LDS Church as somehow sinister and scary.
Sure the early Christian church was relatively small and must have looked very different and radical to the existing Jews or pagans and all religions could be considered a cult by some definitions. However, what concerns me more than the actual LDS doctrines being significantly different than many popular Christian churches is mostly the idea that the LDS Church relies on mind-control techniques and peer-pressure to manipulate people. Ideally, it seems like the truth should sell itself without the need for mind games or psychological tricks.
When I see Church leaders make comments like “when the Prophet speaks the debate is over” or “not everything that is true is useful” it makes me wonder. It gives the impression that we are expected to just trust everything they say without question and sometimes it sounds almost like they want us to basically stick our heads in the sand and ignore the outside world as much as possible. What happens if what they say is wrong for whatever reason?
I understand that many Mormons are perfectly happy with the LDS Church and if they believe in the assumption that the LDS Church is essential for salvation then it makes perfect sense that they would be disappointed with people around them who reject it. But at the same time it seems like the Jehovah’s Witnesses are similarly convinced that they are absolutely right and everyone else is wrong.
My point is that it’s fairly easy to make claims like this that we are special and right but as far as everyone else out there, not so much. Personally, I just don’t think it’s very realistic to expect everyone to believe the same thing and to assume that if they don’t agree with us then they are completely wrong to think that way. Maybe different people have perfectly understandable reasons for believing what they do.
February 25, 2010 at 2:37 am #227853Anonymous
Guest“Some things that are true are not very useful.” -Elder Boyd K. Packer, “Do not spread disease germs!” Brigham Young University Studies, Summer 1981, pp. 259, 262-271
I know this is an often quoted, firecracker statement from Elder Packer. I can’t help but think how differently that same statement would sound if it came from the Dalai Lama or a poet like Rumi. I could just as easy see one of those guys saying it. The funny thing is, I actually agree with that comment in a lot of ways. It was just delivered in a context that makes it unpalatable to a lot of people.
February 25, 2010 at 5:53 am #227854Anonymous
GuestSome people feel the same way about the Catholic church, which is why they call it a cult. For example, I have heard pretty much the same thing: “when the [Pope] speaks the debate is over”; let’s nor forget that the Catholic church didn’t like mass production of the Bible. Some Baptists think levi’s should never be worn–does that make them a cult too, according to your definition? Isn’t this a form of mind-control as well? After reading the Da Vinci Code, I became more interested in Opus Dei, a lay Catholic organization. Do a google search for them. I found sites that referred to Opus Dei as “Mormon Catholics” for their recruiting tactics, mind-control techniques, etc. In fact, I was amazed at how the writing about this group was very similar to anti-mormon writings. The word “cult” is always thrown out as a pejorative. When we look at it, many religions and even some organizations seem to resemble cults in some way. Any group which tries to enforce strict adherence to certain principles could be accused of cult-like behavior. Even Toyota’s attempt to minimize bad publicity from these recent recalls seems to have exhibited cult-like attempts at damage control. The word has taken on a connotation that is almost about as bad as a racial slur at this point, which is why I think so many people take exception to its’ use.
-
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘Cult accusations’ is closed to new replies.