What's the Difference Between Cults and Religion?: Crash Course Religions #3
Summary
TLDRIn this episode of Crash Course Religions, John Green explores the blurry line between cults and religions, discussing how the term 'cult' has evolved. Once associated with small, socially accepted groups, the word now evokes fear due to associations with brainwashing and violence. Green examines historical and modern examples, from the early days of Christianity to controversial new religious movements. He argues that the term 'cult' often reflects societal judgment rather than objective truth, suggesting that many religious groups, traditional or not, share common human desires for belonging and meaning.
Takeaways
- 🤔 The distinction between a religion and a cult is not always clear, as societal views on what constitutes a cult have evolved over time.
- 🏛 Historically, the term 'cult' referred to small, elite groups devoted to specific deities in ancient Rome, not the negative connotations it carries today.
- 🌟 Early Christianity was considered a cult before it became widely accepted, highlighting that many religions were once viewed as cults.
- 🔮 Joseph Smith's discovery of the Book of Mormon and the founding of the Latter-Day Saints movement exemplify how a new religious movement can grow from being seen as a cult to becoming mainstream.
- 📚 The term 'cult' gained negative connotations in the 1950s with the rise of fears about brainwashing, particularly during the Korean War.
- 🧠 The Unification Church, founded in South Korea, was one of the groups that faced accusations of brainwashing, despite research showing limited success in recruitment.
- 👤 Charismatic leaders are often associated with cults, but similar leadership is also found in established religions, challenging the distinction.
- 🏦 Financial exploitation and abuse are not unique to cults; they occur in many religious traditions, including those with widespread acceptance.
- 🚨 The label 'cult' can lead to increased danger and marginalization for groups that are already targeted, as seen in the tragic case of MOVE in Philadelphia.
- 📉 Many scholars suggest abandoning the term 'cult' because it implies that harmful practices are exclusive to certain groups, when in fact they are widespread across religions.
- 🌐 Contemporary scholars prefer terms like 'new religious movement' or 'minority religion' that do not carry the negative implications of 'cult' and recognize the fluidity of religious acceptance.
Q & A
What is the historical origin of the term 'cult'?
-Historically, the term 'cultus' in ancient Rome referred to small, elite groups devoted to worshiping particular deities, similar to fan clubs for obscure gods.
How did the perception of cults change over time?
-The perception of cults shifted from being somewhat eccentric but accepted in ancient times to being seen as bizarre, outlandish, and dangerous in modern times, often associated with groups involved in mass suicides or terrorist acts.
What is an example of a cult that was considered bizarre and dangerous?
-Heaven’s Gate is an example of a cult that was considered bizarre and dangerous, as its members died by mass suicide in 1997.
What is the significance of the Book of Mormon in the context of the script?
-The Book of Mormon is significant as it was revealed to Joseph Smith, who claimed to have translated it using special stones. It became the foundation of the Latter-Day Saints movement.
How did Joseph Smith's movement evolve over time?
-Joseph Smith's movement, initially seen as a fringe group, evolved over time, spreading and growing from the margins to becoming more mainstream, with millions of believers two centuries later.
What is the connection between the concept of 'brainwashing' and the modern understanding of cults?
-The modern understanding of cults is connected to the concept of 'brainwashing', which emerged in the 1950s during the Korean War as a way to explain why people joined movements deemed abnormal by society.
Why did the Unification Church become associated with the term 'cult'?
-The Unification Church became associated with the term 'cult' due to fears of brainwashing and its practices such as mass wedding ceremonies and aggressive recruitment, despite having roots in traditional Christian ideas.
What are some characteristics that the Devil's Advocate suggests are unique to cults?
-The Devil's Advocate suggests that cults have charismatic leaders, enforce rigid social norms, exploit people for financial gain, and can be associated with abuse.
How does John refute the Devil's Advocate's claims about cults?
-John refutes the Devil's Advocate's claims by pointing out that similar characteristics, such as charismatic leaders, rigid norms, exploitation, and abuse, can be found in established religions as well.
What is the argument for avoiding the term 'cult' according to the script?
-The argument for avoiding the term 'cult' is that it implies that negative traits like abuse and exploitation are unique to certain groups, when in fact these issues are present across religions. It also suggests that the label can lead to further marginalization and danger for already targeted groups.
What alternative terms do scholars suggest using instead of 'cult'?
-Scholars suggest using less charged terms such as 'new religious movement' or 'minority religion' to describe groups that have been labeled as cults, as these terms do not carry the negative connotations associated with the word 'cult'.
What is the potential danger of labeling a group as a 'cult'?
-Labeling a group as a 'cult' can lead to increased marginalization, change how it is policed, and potentially escalate violence against the group and its members, as illustrated by the MOVE bombing incident in Philadelphia.
Outlines
🤔 The Complexity of Defining Cults
This paragraph explores the difficulty in distinguishing between a religion and a cult. It starts with a welcoming scenario that could be mistaken for a cult, then delves into historical perspectives on cults, such as the ancient Roman use of 'cultus' for small, elite groups devoted to specific deities. The paragraph discusses how groups like Christianity were once considered cults and how the term has evolved to include negative connotations like brainwashing and exploitation. It also touches on the story of Joseph Smith and the founding of the Latter-Day Saints movement, illustrating the blurry line between what is considered a cult and a religion.
📚 The Harms and Misconceptions of 'Cult' Labeling
Paragraph 2 discusses the harms associated with labeling a group as a cult, emphasizing that such harms are not exclusive to cults but can be found across various religions. It points out that exploitation, abuse, and the suppression of victims' stories occur in many religious traditions, not just those deemed cults. The conversation between John and the Devil's Advocate highlights the arbitrary nature of the cult label, suggesting that it often reflects societal biases rather than the actual practices of the group. The paragraph also addresses the dangers of the cult label, such as the potential for increased police violence and marginalization, using the example of the MOVE bombing in Philadelphia.
🎥 Behind the Scenes of Crash Course Religions
The final paragraph is a closing statement that provides information about the production of the Crash Course Religions series. It mentions that the episode was filmed in Indianapolis, Indiana, and acknowledges the contributions of the people involved in creating the series. It also invites viewers to support the show on Patreon to help keep it free for everyone.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Cult
💡Religion
💡Brainwashing
💡Latter-Day Saints Movement
💡Charismatic Leader
💡Rigid Social Norms
💡Exploitation
💡MOVE
💡New Religious Movement
💡Marginalization
💡Abuse
Highlights
Introduction to the complexity of defining a 'cult'.
Cults historically were accepted by society and not always negative.
The term 'cultus' in ancient Rome referred to small groups devoted to worship.
Christianity was considered a cult in its early days.
Joseph Smith's story and the founding of the Latter-Day Saints movement.
The Book of Mormon as a catalyst for a religious makeover.
The evolution of the Latter-Day Saints movement from fringe to mainstream.
The 1950s shift in perception of 'cults' due to fears of brainwashing.
The Unification Church's association with the 'cult' label.
The Devil’s Advocate segment discussing the characteristics of cults.
Comparison between cults and religions on charismatic leaders and social norms.
The argument that the harms associated with cults are not unique to them.
The suggestion to abandon the term 'cult' due to its negative connotations.
The 'cult' label's impact on law enforcement and societal perception.
The MOVE bombing as an example of how the 'cult' label can escalate violence.
The fluidity of the line between traditional and non-traditional religions.
The conclusion that the term 'cult' is often used to marginalize groups.
The call for less charged terms like new religious movement or minority religion.
The upcoming episode's预告 on the fuzzy lines between magic and religion.
Transcripts
Hi! I'm John Green. Welcome to Crash Course Religions.
So, picture this: you’re in a cozy room, surrounded by
people welcoming you with good food and kindness. They’re showing interest in your questions,
your anxieties — in you. Hold on a second: is this a cult?
We’ve all read the headlines, watched the documentaries,
and worried about the MLM our cousin joined.
But without the stereotypes of white robes, wilderness compounds,
and tinfoil hats, can we really tell the difference between a religion and a cult?
[THEME MUSIC]
When we think about cults, we often think about groups that are bizarre,
outlandish, and dangerous. Like Heaven’s Gate,
a doomsday group whose members died by mass suicide in 1997.
Or Aum Shinrikyo, a group that piped deadly gas into the Tokyo subway system in 1995.
Stories like these gain notoriety, capture our imagination – and make bank on Netflix.
But the word hasn’t always been so…loaded. Historically, cults were a little eccentric,
sure, but for the most part accepted by society. In ancient Rome, the word “cultus” was used for
small, elite groups devoted to worshiping particular deities.
Like fan clubs for obscure gods, whose temples were
closer to frat houses than doomsday compounds. The rites of Dionysus got pretty wild, y’all.
Even what we know as Christianity began as a cult—and was viewed as a pretty
weird one in its early days.
In fact, many belief systems and traditions that we consider religions today were called
cults when they first emerged. Let’s head to the Thought Bubble…
In the 1820s, a man named Joseph Smith said he was visited by an angel.
The angel led him to unearth a golden book written in a language Smith called “Reformed Egyptian.”
In ninety days, he translated it using special stones, gave the gold book back to the angel,
and published all 588 pages. He called it the Book of Mormon.
And with it, he started the Latter-Day Saints movement.
Smith argued that Christianity needed a total makeover, and the Book of Mormon,
which recounts Jesus’ visit to the Americas, was the start of that makeover.
Smith’s movement drew tens of thousands of followers, but also countless haters.
Fleeing persecution, Smith led his flock– who had picked up the nickname
Mormons– west from New York to Ohio, then on to Missouri, and eventually, Illinois,
where, after the locals got wind of his teachings, he was killed by an angry mob.
But the Latter Day Saints movement didn’t die with Smith.
It spread and grew, at first on the margins…then, more mainstream.
By 1972, historian Sydney Ahlstrom wrote, "One cannot even be sure,
whether [it] is a sect, a mystery cult, a new religion, a church, a people,
a nation, or an American subculture; indeed, at different times and places it is all of these.”
Whatever it’s called, two hundred years and millions of believers later,
the Latter-Day Saints movement isn’t the fringe movement it was when it started.
Thanks Thought Bubble! The way we think of the
word “cult” today started in the 1950s, when fears of brainwashing took hold during the Korean War.
To the American public, brainwashing was a scary but convincing answer to the question,
“Why would anyone become a communist?” And before long, it became a way to explain
people’s interest in other movements that society deemed abnormal, like new religions.
That’s what happened with the Unification Church, which was founded in South Korea in 1954.
The church itself was influenced by traditional Christian ideas, but became known for holding
mass wedding ceremonies and recruiting new members by showering them with attention.
Fears of brainwashing swirled around the Church, even though research showed very
few people recruited actually joined. Like other small religions before it,
the movement got slapped with the “cult” label – only this time, the word picked
up associations with scientifically unfounded ideas like mind control that continue today.
So where’s the line? Can we really separate cults from religions?
[Cell phone vibrates]
Well, if it isn’t the Devil’s Advocate – I forgot rhetorical questions summon you.
[DEVIL’S ADVOCATE] Hey Johnny boy! Yeah, the answer is simple.
Cults have obvious tells: For one, charismatic leaders like L.
Ron Hubbard, of the secretive – and litigious – Church of Scientology.
[JOHN] Please don’t sue us.
But religions have Jesus, Muhammad,
and Siddhartha Gautama, who I’d argue were a lot more influential than L. Ron Hubbard.
And better writers. Even the ones who didn’t write.
Seriously though, please don’t sue us.
[DEVIL’S ADVOCATE] Sure, sure, but what about the rigid social norms that cults enforce?
Like how The Family International required its members to “forsake all”: school, voting,
doctor visits, even having a job. Seems sus.
[JOHN] Dude, wait until you find out about Catholic nuns and priests.
[Devil’s Advocate] But think about it. Cults exploit people.
Members get manipulated into forking over cash in hopes of gaining enlightenment,
salvation, or belonging. And there’s abuse.
We’ve seen it with the Branch Davidians, The Family International—.
[JOHN] —and with Catholic, evangelical, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and Hindu communities.
Lots of religious leaders gain wealth from their followers,
including millionaire pastors of evangelical megachurches.
And sadly, abuse and suppression of victims’ stories happen in many religious traditions.
[Devil’s Advocate] But what about–
[JOHN] See you’re just going to do this for literally ever.
That’s how these arguments work. I’ve been on Twitter.
[Devil’s Advocate]: It’s actually called X now.
[JOHN]: And…I’m done. The harms we associate with
“cults” aren’t unique to them. Listen, I have to go.
I have a dental procedure I would prefer to this conversation.
So, as I was about to say, many scholars of religion today think we should ditch the word
“cult” altogether because it implies that things like abuse, exploitation,
and violence only happen within those communities – when the truth is they occur across religions.
Communities labeled “cults” are often viewed as doing religion “wrong,” even if their beliefs
aren’t that different from accepted religions. Like, devotees of Santa Muerte follow many
Catholic traditions, like praying with rosaries or placing offerings on altars.
But they do it in honor of “Saint Death,” who often appears as a
skeletal woman in a white dress. And, because “Saint Death” isn’t
recognized by the Catholic Church, her followers get labeled as cultists.
So, some scholars argue that the “cult” label reveals less
about the group itself, and more about whoever’s using the label.
So again I’m not saying that religions–including religions with few followers that demand total
obedience–can’t cause harm. They cause harm all the time.
Any system that has both secular and spiritual power is always going to be
at risk of causing terrible, terrible harm. I’m saying that this harm is always a threat,
and always something to pay attention to in the context of religion,
regardless of the novelty of belief and practice.
Most experts today prefer less charged terms, like new religious
movement or minority religion. Words that don’t label a religion
as necessarily “bad,” just “recent” and “practiced by fewer people.”
By that definition, many movements qualify: Shakers and Jehovah’s Witnesses,
crystal enthusiasts, and the “spiritual but not religious.”
Because here’s the thing: maybe we want to call an unfamiliar group a cult because
we’re worried about its members and we want to highlight that they might be in danger.
But the problem is that sometimes calling something a cult brings on new types of danger.
And in groups already disproportionately targeted by the police, further marginalization
can be especially dangerous. Take what happened in 1985 between
the Philadelphia police and a primarily Black new religious movement called MOVE.
MOVE’s members were dedicated to resisting racist systems through what they saw as a
“natural” lifestyle, with practices like composting and communal living.
But law enforcement repeatedly misunderstood MOVE’s beliefs and labeled them a cult.
Ultimately, when neighbors complained about members shouting on bullhorns and children
living in reportedly filthy conditions, police bombed a home where members lived.
The bombing killed eleven people and destroyed the homes of 250 neighbors.
A report one year later condemned the police’s actions as “unconscionable.”
But no one associated with the bombing was ever criminally charged.
So, while we tend to associate the word “cult” with violence,
we have to also account for how the label itself can escalate violence.
Calling a community a “cult” can change how it’s policed,
sometimes bringing more harm to vulnerable people.
At the end of the day, the word “cult” is… complicated.
It’s changed over time and stretched to include everything from “drinking
the Kool-Aid” to being a little too obsessed with Disney World.
Though the word tries to draw a hard line between traditional and non-traditional
religions, time tends to blur that line as new religions gain following and acceptance…
and old religions participate in some of the abusive practices we associate with cults.
That line eventually gets so fuzzy that many scholars argue it doesn’t exist.
So, what is a cult, really? Well, many contemporary scholars argue it’s
often a way of saying, “This group is too weird or threatening or dangerous to count as a religion.”
Now, some of those groups are weird and threatening and dangerous!
But that label doesn’t bring us closer to addressing harms within or beyond them.
The members of these movements seek the same things followers of any other
religion seek – belonging, meaning, and acceptance.
And when we look at it that way, the line isn’t just fuzzy, it’s practically invisible.
Next time, we’re going to examine some more fuzzy lines, specifically, the ones between
magic and religion. I’ll see you then.
Thanks for watching this episode of Crash Course Religions which was filmed at our
studio in Indianapolis, Indiana, and was made with the help of all these nice people.
If you want to help keep Crash Course free for everyone,
forever, you can join our community on Patreon.
Voir Plus de Vidéos Connexes
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)