Although the term Anti-cult Movement is in general usage, the groups more frequently refer to themselves as a Counter-cult Movement. So, will use that term here.
The CCM started as a response to happenings during the 1960's, the decade of the hippies. Many new religious movements (NRM) were created, often under the leadership of a single charismatic leader. Young adults flocked to these groups, seeking an intense spiritual experience and inter-personal intimacy. Some of these movements encouraged their followers to sever relationships with their friends and families of origin. Many followers abandoned their academic pursuits in order to devote more time to the movement. Some parents became alarmed, fearing that their children had become the mindless victims of mind control techniques and brainwashing. Walter Martin's extremely successful book:
The Kingdom of the Cults, Bethany House, Minneapolis MN (1965)contains a chapter "The Psychological Structure of Cultism". This heightened the parents' concerns. (The book went through 36 printings between 1965 and 1985). Small non-profit, minimal-budget counter-cult agencies sprang up throughout the country, starting in the early 1970's. They considered NRM's to be illegitimate religions who were a potential hazard to all young people. Rumours spread that cults kept their members in a sort of prison and engaged in brainwashing techniques to convert them into "zombies". (The American Psychological Association and the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion deny that this is possible).
The tiny, local CCM groups coalesced into a smaller number of well organized agencies:
Some parents of cult members, some disillusioned former cult members, and some "kidnappers for hire" have become "Deprogrammers". For a fee which can exceed $10,000, they kidnap members of NRM's, hold them against their will and subject them to intense and abusive manipulation in order to break their allegiance to the group and return to their family of origin. It is ironic that the deprogrammers use the same practices that they accuse the cults of engaging in. They appear to be successful in avoiding criminal charges after most kidnapping, largely because their victims realize that such charges would implicate members of their family in a conspiracy. In other cases, the deprogrammers convince the former members to remain out of the cult, and to get on with their lives with no residual animosity.
Many Child Protective Services in North America became caught up in the hysteria, suspected that children were being physically or sexually abused within religious groups and intentional communities. Many children were taken into care without any evidence of wrongdoing.
The counter-cult movement was able to have included a "cult induced disorder" in DISM-III (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) . This manual is in general use by psychiatrists, psychologists and other therapists. Under the title "atypical dissociative disorder", the manual describes a variety of dissociative states:
"that might occur in persons who have been subjected to periods of prolonged and intensive persuasion (brainwashing, thought reform and indoctrination while the captive of terrorists of cultists)."
The radical part of the counter-cult movement continues today, but at a lower activity level. The use of kidnapping and abuse has lessened, particularly since some of the deprogrammers were given jail sentences. The Family, formerly The Children on God estimates 1000 deprogramming attempts per year in the US. Illegal activities have been largely replaced by "exit counselling" of NRM members who have left their religious group. Seizure of children by the state has decreased, due to greater understanding by child protection officers of the reality of communal living and due to experience gained in many lost court cases.
But these do not appear to be the type of groups that the CCM targets. In the past, they have concentrated on the Unification Church, Hare Krishnas, Children of God, the nonexistant underground movement of abusive Satanists, etc.
Destructive cults are vastly outnumbered by benign new religious groups. One ancient example were the Nazarenes during the middle of the first century CE. These were the Jewish followers of Jesus Christ, and were heavily persecuted by followers of the dominant religion of the day. There have been perhaps tens of thousands of groups since. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) began as a small new religious movement which was heavily persecuted by orthodox Christian neighbors. They have evolved into a 9 million member established Christian denomination.
Much of the confusion over new religious movements relates to a misunderstanding of the conformity which is often required of its members. Sociologists D. Bromley and A. Shupe once described the Tnevnoc Cult which recruited young women, required them to shave their heads, wear special uniforms, gave them new names in a foreign language, required them to give up their personal possessions and sleep on hard pallets. During their initial membership in the cult, they were isolated from family contacts. They were later required to ritually marry the dead founder of the cult. They received many inquiries about this abusive cult from people who did not realize that "Tnevnoc" spelled backwards is "Convent".
Down through history, many religious groups (like convents, monasteries, intentional communities, etc) have required their members to adhere to strict diets, schedules, repetitive praying, abstinence from sexual activities, isolation from former friends and their family or origin and other disciplines. To the casual outside observer, this might appear to be abusive. However, members accept the rules, enter and stay with the group because they find it a generally positive experience. If it becomes no longer positive, they leave and move on.
One of the potential disadvantages of religious freedom is that people are free to believe what they wish and to enter into religious associations with other individuals. This sometimes leads to unpleasant experiences; in rare cases, it can cause death. But that is one of the prices we have to pay for living in a democracy, with freedoms of religion, association and speech.
They operated a group for former cult members, called Focus. CAN estimated that "five million people...have been seriously affected by the more than 2500 destructive cults."
In 1995-SEP, the Cult Awareness Network, Rick Ross and two others were found guilty of conspiracy to violate the civil right to freedom of religion of Jason Scott, a member of the [Pentecostal] Life Tabernacle Church. Ross was ordered to pay more than 3 million in damages; CAN was ordered to pay in excess of 1 million. After a brutal kidnapping, Scott was forcibly confined for five days. Ross attempted to get Scott to abandon his Christian beliefs. CAN's involvement in the criminal activities appears to have be limited to recommending Rick Ross as a deprogrammer to Scott's mother. Ross charged $25,000 for the kidnapping. We are unaware of any unethical or illegal practices of the Life Tabernacle Church that would have motivated concern by CAN.
The crippling damage award, plus a large number of civil cases brought against it by the Church of Scientology International have driven it into bankrupcy. Their office closed on 1996-JUN-21. They have expressed concern on their home page that their records and cult archives may get into the wrong hands, that the information might be destroyed and their donors, supporters and callers might be harrassed.
Return to the OCRT home page. Return to the "Not So Spiritual" page.