A Cult of Personality - or is that Cult Pseudo-Personality?
As we dipped our toes into the still-fresh waters of 2023, I took the time to do a little thinking. The past seven years had seemed so strange as to be fictitious, outshone only by the twenty-five-odd years that went before them. Although at the time, that life was all I knew. So how could I truly scrutinise my reality given I had nothing to compare it to?
Last year was bonkers. Among it all, there was a lot of talk in my private and unchurchable circles about the c-bomb. Cults. What are they? What defines a cult? What is their damage? When you look around in popular literature, you see a fair bit of chatter about the markers of cultism - things like love-bombing, control of information, decision-making expectations, shaming, shunning, demand for purity, and many other elements that link to coercive control. You also see a fair bit of commentary about the markers of a cult leader - things like a charismatic personality with a decent helping of narcissism or Narcissistic Personality Disorder thrown in. And you know what, it’s possible that I will write about these things again later. But for now, I want to pay attention to something that’s been weighing on my little brain that sits adjacent to these troubling thoughts.
It’s a thing called a Cult Psuedo-Personality or Pseudo-identity. Essentially, it’s what happens when a person’s whole life and belief system become caught up in a high-demand group or cult. It is due in part to the intense nature of the influence cults wield over the person, and the fact that personal transformation is often part of the expected trajectory of a participant in the cult’s thought-reform process. Dr Gillie Jenkinson, PhD, cited this little gem in her investigation into the topic: “As part of the intense influence and change process in many cults, people take on a new social identity, which may or may not be obvious to an outsider. When groups refer to this new identity, they speak of members who are transformed, reborn, enlightened, empowered, re-birthed, or cleared [my addition: saved, surrendered]. The group-approved behaviour is reinforced and reinterpreted as demonstrating the emergence of “the new person.” Members are expected to display this new social identity.” [1, 2]
Dr Jenkinson’s commentary on the issue was one I found interesting. She recounted research by one of my favourite cult dudes, Robert Lifton, who suggested the cult pseudo personality is doubling, as well as other research that suggested it might be the development of a false self, or even simply dissociation. While all three of these hypotheses could be true, it’s helpful to first have a little bit of understanding of how personality and one’s sense of “self” develops.
What is Personality Anyway?
This could be the most rapid tour of personality development you’re ever likely to read. But for the sake of understanding the phenomena of cult pseudo personalities, here we go with the basics! The most popular line of thinking these days is that personality has five key aspects. The “Big five” as they are called, include openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and my favourite, neuroticism. Openness is broadly defined as creativity and responsiveness to life’s only constant — change. Conscientiousness covers things like well, conscientiousness (circular reasoning is circular!). It also covers attention to detail and organisation. Extraversion is that old scale of socialness and expressiveness. Agreeableness refers to your ability to play nice with the other kids and be genuinely interested in them. And finally, neuroticism is all about mood and stability. Frankly, I think that last one is what makes a person truly interesting. But I’m a little fascinated by the human condition in general. People watchers, say what?
Beyond the big five, many theories exist. One of the big ones hails back to old mate Sigmund Freud. Yes, he was and remains to be a controversial sort. But some of his work still holds weight, and academic critiqiues of his work have certainly fed into more recent thinking on the development of personality. But…
He theorised that there were three elements to a structural model of personality: the id, the ego and the superego. The id is thought to be present from birth. It’s primal and drives us towards our most basic needs and urges [3]. This, I suppose, could be thought of as the “nature” aspect of the “nature vs. nurture” debate in personality development. The ego is the next part, and it develops over time. It is “the aspect of personality charged with controlling the urges of the id and forcing it to behave in realistic ways.” So — when a baby is born it’s all id. Food, comfort, sleep, poop, repeat. As we grow, we learn to not poop ourselves in public. We learn to behave, not to throw tantrums (well, some of us learn this), and we learn how to interact with the society around us. Those primal urges and needs remain. But we keep it polite with a functioning ego.
Then there’s the superego. This is the seat of all our ideals, morals and values. Usually, it’s our parents and culture that play big roles in the development of this part of our personality.
So! While other theorists such as Piaget, Erikson and Kohlberg had thoughts about which key ages and stages exist in personality development, and how they flow together, my tiny, unqualified brain sees Freud’s id, ego and superego as well as the Big Five to be the most important in the cult pseudo-personality. Bookmark that. But first, let’s talk about a person’s sense of self.
What is the “Self”?
This is a complex question to answer succinctly, but it’s a phenomenon including more than 80 facets and the truth is that the “Self” develops over the lifespan and intersects with personality. [4] But there’s an irony that comes into our self-concept — we think about ourselves almost entirely in relation to other people. Our sense of self-concept is essentially our beliefs about our attributes - who, what and why we are. We are, of course, our neural circuits, our personality, our cells, and our thoughts, consciousness and the meaning we make of life. We are multifaceted. While personality can be a checklist and a few puzzle pieces that fit around each other, our self-concept is an onion that philosophers have been exploring for millennia.
Our self-concept can involve things like demographics: which group do I belong to? Who am I like? Who am I most unlike? What are my attributes and the things I like and dislike about myself? These things are what some call our “categorical” self. [5] For example, I am a late-30’s mother of two young kids. I am caucasian, of German, Irish and Scottish descent (I think). I am an exvangelical. I was raised in country Victoria, the eldest of five kids. I was homeschooled. I’m a brunette. I like red lipstick and love shoes. The categories about me could go on. The ways we identify ourselves start with the basic categories and then continue into the finer details of what makes us individuals as we grow.
Then there’s the existential self. Ooof. This is the part of me that is different and distinct from others. It’s my awareness of me. It’s my awareness of how I interact with the world. Included in our self-concept are our self-esteem and our self-image. While self-image is how we see ourselves, self-esteem is how we perceive our value to ourselves and others. We compare ourselves to others, gauge their reactions to us, identify ourselves within the context of others, and form our concept of social roles because of others. So there’s some irony in the term “self.” Because really, it involves so many other people.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of self-concept is that there is often a complex Venn Diagram that exists in our head: how much do our real self and our ideal self overlap?
What happens in cults then?
A cult is, by definition, a group that exerts significant influence over a person. Five aspects of cultism according to Langone can be seen below [1]:
“A cult is a group or movement that, to a significant degree,
(a) Exhibits great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea, or thing,
(b) Uses a thought-reform program to persuade, control, and socialize members (i.e., to integrate them into the group’s unique pattern of relationships, beliefs, values, and practices),
(c) Systematically induces states of psychological dependency in members,
(d) Exploits members to advance the leadership’s goals, and
(e) Causes psychological harm to members, their families, and the community.”
So let’s bring it all together. Let’s say you’re an introverted, slightly change-avoidant and neurotic person with a high degree of conscientiousness and openness. You are drawn into this beautiful group of friendly people who promise you unconditional love and enduring purpose. Their ideas about the world fascinate you. You want to be part of it. You don’t realise you are being love-bombed, but soon you are in. Then you enter the thought-reform process. Some call it discipleship or mentorship. Others might call them accountability programs. You don’t care. It’s self-improvement and you are all for it. After all, how are we to reach this God-willed Utopia, this Heaven on Earth, unless we are all in? At this point, your personality is untouched. But your sense of self is gently changing.
How? You are now identifying as part of this group. Your friends are in it. Your purpose is in it, and your existential self is beginning to become intertwined with it. We don’t often reflect on the fact that the “self” develops and changes over time. So you don’t scrutinise the fact that your values, morals and ethics might be changing to assimilate with the group. Many cults have an emphasis on a certain way of viewing the world, and thus, continuing to be part of this group involves assimilation. The degree to which you internalise this and make their beliefs your beliefs is the degree to which your self-concept changes. “I am” a member of. “I believe” what they believe. And even “I am being persecuted because I am a member of blah and believe blah blah.”
Years pass. You marry into the group. You have kids in the group. You raise your kids according to the requirements of the group. You socialise, educate, discipline, evangelise and dream according to the will of the group or its leader. Your mood becomes influenced by activities within the group. In a high-demand group or cult, it is foreseeable that your whole self-concept could become swallowed up in a sort of group-think or hive mind. While aspects of you may remain distinct, the group’s characteristics become so important that it’s hard to extract yourself from it.
It has been said that “if you change someone’s perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, thinking strategies, emotions and behaviors (whether in a cult or in an intimate relationship) you have basically changed someone’s identity or personality.” [6] One theorist (Edgar Schein) talked about a particular mind control tactic as “Unfreezing, changing and refreezing.” I.e. You unfreeze a persons personality or sense of self by breaking the person down and getting them to doubt their reality or themselves, you change them via indoctrination and the installation of new beliefs, values, ideas and behaviours. Social norms in the group can feed into this. And you refreeze them by strengthing the new pseudo-identity and solidifying it over time. Group norms and expectations are hugely important to this process, so too is the thought-reform process. It’s also how entire groups of people can start to become more and more like their leader. Its literally developing a cult pseudo-personality.
But back to our example (which is just an example!)
Now let’s look at the personality. Remember how back in the beginning, you were introverted and didn’t like change all that much? You were also sort of neurotic? Well, guess what. On your journey through the thought-reform process, these areas have been highlighted as problematic. It’s the will of the leader and thus the expectation of the group that you subdue your introvesion and become more extroverted, less emotional and more open to change. This causes you significant shame and distress. You start to hate these parts of yourself and are constantly being pushed out of your comfort zone so you can “grow” and “become transformed” into this more enlightened version of yourself.
This is where a cult pseudo-personality starts to solidify. Aspects of who you actually are by nature are being replaced. The cult is starting to become the culture and sometimes even the pseudo-parental role that shapes the superego. You might feel pressure and shame every time you slip back into your “old” ways - so your natural personality according to the Big Five becomes less and less like who you really are, and more and more like what the group or the leader desires.
Thats why it’s not uncommon for cult members to assimilate towards a central personality and take on characteristics of the cult leader. After all, this is the great enlightened one, the one with the direct line to God. Why wouldn’t we imitate that?
It’s interesting. Someone asked me the other day if hypothetically I would be able to recognise who wrote a piece of writing from within a group I used to be part of. The truth is I wouldn’t. All I could tell them is whether or not it was authored by a member of that group. Why? Because linguistics can even be influenced by high-demand, totalitarian cultures. It’s called code-switching. Those who are imitating a certain leader switch their linguistic styles and mannerisms toward that central character’s styles and mannerisms. That gives rise to what Robert Lifton called “Loading the language.” A topic for another day though…
Shame + Cultism + Conformity + Time = Psuedopersonality. But what happens when you lose it all?
I hope I’m painting a picture of just how easy it is to literally lose yourself in a cult or high-demand group. Over the years since my exit from toxic evangelicalism, I’ve heard story after story about how women were shamed for being too emotional, too loud, too opinionated, too attractive or too “unsubmitted.” I’ve also heard of people who were naturally introverted being pushed towards extroversion which felt entirely wrong for them. I’ve heard of artistic or sensitive men who put off that part of themselves in favour of the group’s idea of ideal (cough *toxic* cough) masculinity. It’s funny how gender roles and ideas about emotions and extroversion often repeat across different groups wherever there’s a spiritual sort of bent to the high-demand group in question.
This is also a common story: “I’ve left the group. But now I don’t even know who I am, what I like, what my purpose is, or how I want to live my life.”
That feeling of being deeply and fundamentally unmoored — it’s awful. It’s scary. And if it’s you, you are not alone. So many people before you have gone through it, and so many people after you will go through it. It takes time to reclaim your pre-cult personality and develop your post-cult self-concept. There can be guilt and shame for having lost yourself in it — but I encourage you to be kind to yourself. The smartest, most confident people can find themselves in these situations because no one joins a cult. You are befriended by the nicest people you have ever met. Then you become aware of this amazing way of thinking that could change the world. You were seduced and entrapped in a thousand tiny increments, not in one fell swoop. Brainwashing is years not hours. Reversing it all is years not days. I wish I could fast-forward it for you. But all I can say is have fun with the rediscovery. And get a therapist. It helps.
Those of us who were born into such groups and raised within have a different journey ahead. How can you spot a single red flag when you were raised in a sea of them? How can you discover who you are when you were raised to be someone specific: formed and shaped for a specific purpose? When your purpose pivots to being free, happy, and healthy, you can still feel incomprehensibly lost when you ask even simple questions: is pink really my favourite colour? Do I really just like classical music? Am I really asexual, or just not attracted to the opposite sex? These questions can terrify us.
I’m sorry to say it, but the only way through is through. But plenty of us have made it through and I hope that boosts your deterination and self-acceptance.
The only thing you can do is find a good therapist, and try to enjoy the journey of self-discovery. Eat all the food and ask yourself if you really like each item. Listen to all the music and find what makes you want to dance. Watch every genre of movie or TV series and see what floats your boat. Don’t hate yourself for not having had the freedom to find yourself. Listen to your body. Listen to your breath, your heart rate, your gut…
But for the love of all that is good, get a therapist. That is my only solid piece of advice. Cult pseudo-personalities exist. But somewhere under all the layers of the onion is you. Still there. Still wanting to be discovered.
As to Dr Jenkinson’s question as to whether the pseudo-personality is the development of a false self, whether it’s dissociation so we can cope with the trauma of what we are living, or whether it’s us adapting to an incredibly controlling, coercive and demanding environment? Who’s to know? But over time I am certain of this: if it made one’s time on the inside more survivable, and if it meant getting to this day when one is again free to discover or rediscover who they really are, then we can’t look on it with anything but self-compassion. You did what you had to do, and became who you had to become. Onwards and upwards now, in health, hope and healing. Corny ending with the three H’s. I am unapologetic. Because I want all three for all of us. For me. For you. For everyone on their journey out, or trudging their way through the life after. We all deserve good things.
Big love.
Mama Kit.
REFERENCES:
1. Jenksinson, Gillie (2008). An Investigation into Cult Pseudo-Personality: what is it and how do they form? Spiritual Abuse Resources. https://www.spiritualabuseresources.com/articles/an-investigation-into-cult-pseudo-personality-what-is-it-and-how-does-it
2. Singer, M. T. (2003). Cults in our Midst. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA. Pp. 77-78
3. Cherry, K (2022). The Psychology of Personality Formation. Very Well Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/personality-development-2795425
4. Thagard, P (2008). What is the Self? You are a System of social, psychological, neural and molecular mechanisms. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/hot-thought/201406/what-is-the-self
5. McLeod, S (2008). Self Concept. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/self-concept.html
6. https://www.decision-making-confidence.com/mind-control-tactics.html
Thinking Errors and Thought Stoppers in Cults
Welcome to part 6 of the “Cults and Unhealthy Groups” series. I thought I’d be done by now, but as it turns out there are a few more things that popped up on my radar that made me go “Hmmm. Now that needs a little more awareness.” So we need to talk about cognitive distortions and thought-stopping clichés. A couple of slightly tidier terms for these are “thought-stoppers” and “thinking errors.”
I’m going to try and keep this light, but if you are exiting or have recently exited a cult/unhealthy group, you may find some examples triggering. If you do, make sure you contact one of the helplines listed at the bottom of the article. Look after yourself, friend. You are worth it.
When it comes to cognitive distortions (thinking errors) – anyone can have them. To me, that seems pretty much human. We can be healthy in some areas of our thinking and others can be thoroughly unhelpful. But there are counsellors, journals or wise friends to help us recognise these and get through them. Whether you are in a cult or not, you can have a couple of these going on. No biggie. But there’s a big difference between say, the cognitive distortions of a teenager with an eating disorder and the cognitive distortions of a cult leader and the effect that could have on their followers.
If you are going to pick up a book on this topic, then “Captive Minds: Captive Hearts” by Lalich and Tobias is about as good as it gets. The topic of cognitive distortions in cults is not a newie and all of these terms have come from experts (i.e. not me!) But! When it comes to cults/unhealthy groups, the thing I find interesting is the way that thinking errors can feed into the power and control structures of the group. I’m not an expert and this is a step outside my comfort zone. I’d rather just lay out the research. But I feel like examples will help make this more relatable. So its research writer meets fiction writer today. I hope it helps.
We need to know what these things are before we can be empowered to recognise them. We can’t always help others see their own thinking errors, especially in cults. But we can free our own minds from their negative effects.
Cognitive Distortions/Thinking Errors
There’s a list of 15 at Psych Central, and another list of 50 at Psychology Today but I thought I’d pick out the ones that may be most applicable to cults. Psychologist Linda Tilgner (and co-writers) flagged the first five of these when they were writing on the topic of institutional abuse. The last two are added by yours truly based on other reading. If you’ve read the first few pieces in this series, you’ll know by now that cult leaders can wield a whole lot of control over their followers – in every area of life, potentially. What I’m going to jump right into is what these thinking errors are and how they might be used to further entrench the ideas and control structures of the group.
1 – Mental filtering. This occurs when you filter out some of the details of a story or situation and fixate (usually) on the negatives. A person may ignore all the positives in a situation and focus only on the down-sides, thus allowing their thinking to spiral toward a dark or doomy conclusion.
How might a cult leader do this? They may ignore or filter out the good progress society is making in many areas and use a single crime to paint a picture of the world becoming a more depraved or dangerous place. The rumination on this single event could then be linked with unrelated events to create a dark picture of the future. This may then cause followers to fear/distance the outside world more, and further devote themselves to the teachings and lifestyle of the group – which they may believe will be the thing that ‘saves’ them. Their commitment to their group, and the leaders control over them, becomes more entrenched.
2 – Polarised thinking. This one is also called “Black and white” thinking, and basically it removes all grey areas or middle ground. You are either a complete success or an utter failure. People are either for you (team/pseudo-family/covenant) or against you (enemies/people who cannot be trusted). There is no middle ground like a neutral acquaintance or just steady progress in life with a minor setback here and there.
In a cult/unhealthy group setting, the most obvious way this might play out is the ‘us vs them’ mindset where people are either allies or enemies and nothing in between. This has the potential to create deep divisions between family/friends and the cult member, or even fuel a persecution complex.
But on a more personal level, the demand for purity (that Robert Lifton talks about in his work) means that this polarised thinking could result in the “complete success or utter failure” version of polarised thinking – If I mess up even once, it’s a disaster. I’m a complete failure. (This links with another thinking error called “catastrophisation” but time doesn’t permit me to go there.) Given the control structures within the cult, and the impact of failure on a persons standing in the group, the pressure to conform could be loaded with consequences here.
3 – Overgeneralisation. This is when we come to a general conclusion based on a single incident or a single piece of evidence. In a cult setting, the leader may use this tendency towards overgeneralisation to make sweeping statements based on single events, further entrenching their teachings, labels or view of the world, whilst also filtering out the details that don’t suit their narrative and using polarised thinking to further separate followers from “the rest of the world.” The world is getting darker. This group is a problem. This person has an agenda. This person or thing is a threat. That sort of thing.
4 – Emotional reasoning. Emotional reasoning is when you feel something so therefore you believe it is true. Lalich and Tobias, in “Captive Minds, Captive Hearts” (cited here) explain it this way: “In groups that place emphasis on feeling over thinking, members learn to make choices and judge reality solely based on what they feel. This is true of all New Age groups and many transformational and psychology cults. Interpreting reality through feelings is a form of wishful thinking. If it really worked, we would all be wealthy and the world would be a safe and happy place. When this type of thinking turns negative, it can be a shortcut to depression and withdrawal: “I feel bad, worthless, and so on, therefore I am bad, worthless, and so on.”
Side note: One of the reasons cult leaders have such power over their people is that their followers believe they have special enlightenment, or a special ability to hear God or be God. So they’re not going to call emotional reasoning what it is. It would take someone pretty darn ballsy (or unconcerned with their reputation or standing in the group) to say “I don’t think that’s based on fact. I think its emotional reasoning.”
What might emotional reasoning look like in a cult or high demand group? Imagine an extended meditation session guided by a guru, or perhaps an extended praying in tongues session, or intense music that leads you into an altered state of consciousness, one where you are emotionally heightened, open-minded and impressionable. Things said at the peak of such an experience may resonate very strongly because of the emotional state you are in. It can be very easy to take them as truth during this time even if the evidence in your life is contradictory. “I must change.” “God will only love me if I change.” “I must become better.” “I must work harder.” Or “A particular thing in my life is about to change. I just know it. I’m going to make life decisions based on this feeling.”
Experiences during such heightened states may not be recognised as emotional reasoning, but this is what it can indeed be.
5 – Labelling. This happens when we take one occurrence or characteristic and apply a label to someone. Its unhealthy when we do it to ourselves or other people, but when a group dynamic is added, and a single person has the power to label someone and have a whole group agree without questioning – that’s powerful. In Scientology, dissenters are branded “Suppressive persons”. In other groups, there are other words. “Jezebel” is one I’ve heard thrown around a bit. Labels can damage a persons self-esteem, but also their relationships and standing within the group. A person could be labelled anything by a cult leader, and because followers lack the ability to question him/her, it can be difficult or impossible to shift.
The “us vs them” mindset is also an example of labelling in the cult/unhealthy group context. This has the power to make followers disregard the care and input of entire groups of people because they’ve been labelled as an enemy.
6 – Mind reading.“I just knew what they were thinking.” If a guru/central person in a cult tells us this, we may whole-heartedly believe they actually knew what someone was thinking. We may even react pre-emptively based on this assumption. Guess what: We can’t read minds. No one can. So if you are told “they were thinking this,” and it didn’t come straight from the mouth of the person who was thinking it, it’s a cognitive distortion. No one can read minds. Not even your guru/pastor. This links with another cognitive distortion called “fortune telling” where people claim to know what happens next. “They’re thinking this…they’ll do this next.” That sort of thing. No one can know. They can only guess.
How might this look in a cult/unhealthy group setting? “She’s thinking this. She’ll do this next” is said by the guru/central person and the group goes into damage control mode. All over something that may not have been thought, and hasn’t been done.
7 – Cognitive Conformity (also known as) Group Think. Psychology Today explains cognitive conformity (or group-think) as “Seeing things the way people around you view them. Research has shown that this often happens at an unconscious level.”
A cult or unhealthy/high demand group may exhibit this group-think by unquestioning agreement with the central person in the group. This culture of “Don’t question the leader” may result in unconscious agreement with everything he/she says, even if it means suppressing ones own misgivings.
If you are to look in a normal group of say, 20 people, there are likely to be clusters of opinions on a particular issue and not all of them will be in agreement. But if a leader gives a statement and then says “Do you agree?” to a group of 20, and everyone agrees or adds more so-called evidence (which may be based on emotional reasoning or mind-reading) to the leaders statement, you may have yourself a thinking error in action. This should be especially concerning (in my opinion) if you feel fear about voicing a differing opinion. My belief is that this potentially links with another thinking error, the in-group bias where we tend to trust people in our circle, from our background or from our own experience more than others. If you can only trust people in your group, if you can only listen to opinions from an echo chamber, you may have a problem.
How do these cognitive distortions work together in a cult or unhealthy group setting?
Individually, they look a little different. They may make it difficult for a person to be happy or at peace in life. They may screw with personal relationships. But they don’t have the same controlling or coercive power they have in a cult/unhealthy group. As I mentioned further up, its the interplay that I find interesting. I’m not an expert. But here’s how it could play out.
You’ve been trained not to question the leader. You believe he possesses a level enlightenment you’ve not seen equalled. You’ve gone through the programs and have learned to see things his way, to look through his eyes. So you haven’t even noticed that you are subject to group-think or an in-group bias. You start to filter out uncomfortable details – details that mess with your groups way of seeing the world. People who disagree with you are distanced, disregarded or cut off from your life. If they aren’t for you, they’re against you. You are seeing things through the polarised thinking that is part of the group. No one picks you up on this, because everyone thinks the same way.
You go to one of those meditation sessions. After hours of pushing yourself to the limits and stilling your mind so you can receive enlightenment, the guru speaks. Its truth. You know it. You feel it. You don’t pick up on the fact that he used overgeneralisation and mental filtering to lead you to the point of unquestioning belief. You start to think about implementing this new truth in to your life. You don’t realise its emotional reasoning, because you don’t check it against anything. What you do know is that you must succeed at it. This is vital. This leader has a unique level of enlightenment. You won’t question it because you don’t want to miss out. Group think, meets emotional reasoning, meets polarised thinking, influenced by overgeneralisation and mental filtering. If anyone challenges you, you know to shut them down. You have something precious, even if it doesn’t make sense to anyone else. Even if you can’t explain it. If there was ever a conflict, you know you would agree with the guru. He has the keys for you life. You feel it. Therefore it is true.
Now for a little more on Thought-Stoppers
I know the “thought-stopping” cliché was mentioned in part two of this series, but I felt it warranted a little more of an example, hence its mention here. Thought-stopping cliches are used in cults and unhealthy groups to kill dialogue or healthy, investigative thought. Nathan Dial (of Medium) wrote, ” It is an essential tool of totalitarians and would-be brainwashers. Be aware of it, and guard against it. A very large amount of both everyday and politically-oriented (and at times, religious oriented as well) rhetoric consists of these.”
Robert Lifton also talks about it in his discussion of “Loading the Language” which you can read here.
Some everyday examples include:
It is what it is
S@*t happens
God works in mysterious ways
Its all good
Just choose joy (actually I wrote a whole blog post on that here).
All of these could cause someone to silence their misgivings or questions in order to just accept something and move on without thinking about it. But there are other examples. “Its apples and oranges” may cause someone in a cult/unhealthy group to stop comparing their own groups thoughts/doctrines with others, when in fact they can be compared. Another one is “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t” which can reduce tricky situations to a double binds which can’t be solved.
I just wanted to illustrate how thought-stoppers can affect someone in a group. I agonised over what kind of an example to use here. I decided to use one regarding women, because its a story I’ve heard a lot: (Trigger warning: deals with disclosures of abuse)
Person A discloses abuse to Person B. The story goes around the group and a few people now know about it. The guru/central person needs to shut it down. Guru says to Person B “She’s just not seeing things straight. Her perception is altered. You know, she’s been through so much.”
Person B doesn’t investigate further. “She’s not seeing straight. She’s been through so much” was enough to make them nod, agree, and not look any further. Person B now assumes Person A is mentally affected, and unable to see things straight. The thought process has been stopped. This may be repeated through-out the group to discredit the person who disclosed the abuse. (Abhorrent behaviour, in my opinion! All victims should be given the benefit of our compassion and belief. Anyway..!)
Let’s think this through. Follow-on questions could probe beyond the thought-stopper and arrive at the conclusion that the victim is actually seeing things straight and should be believed.
“What has she been through, then?” (Ahhh, so she has faced abuse? So she is seeing things straight).
“And who did that to her?” (And there’s the whole ballgame. Don’t get me wrong, abusive people will dodge, weave, gaslight and lie to avoid getting caught. But eventually the truth comes out, because the more lies that are required to cover the tracks, the more likely it is that one will end up in a “Gotchya” moment.)
Asking questions beyond the thought-stopper is powerful. Whether we are allowed to do it out loud (without putting ourselves at risk) or whether we do it in the silence of our own thoughts until we can get to a place of freedom, it can be liberating. It’s important.
Too often, we stop at “They’ve been through so much” as a means of discrediting someone. Too often, victims end up defending themselves because they have a right and need to be heard but they’re in an establishment that’s not listening. Next time someone tries this on you, ask what they’ve been through. Ask who did it. Don’t fall for the thought stoppers.
If any of these rang a bell for you, and if you feel you need support right now, please call either Lifeline on 13 11 14 (for mental health support) or the Cult Information and Family Support Service. You aren’t alone. You can get through this. There are people here who get it, and are here to help.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Grohol J , Psych Central “15 Common Cognitive Distortions,” https://psychcentral.com/lib/15-common-cognitive-distortions/
Boyes A, Psychology Today, “50 Common Cognitive Distortions,” https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/in-practice/201301/50-common-cognitive-distortions
Tilgner L, Dowie T, and Denning N, Integrative Psychology, “Recovery from church, institutional and cult abuse: A review of theory and treatment perspectives,” https://integrativepsychology.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/institutional-abuse.pdf
Tobias M and Lalich J (excerpt cited on International Cultic Studies Association), “The Role of Cognitive Distortion” http://www.icsahome.com/articles/the-role-of-cognitive-distortion-tobias
Dial, M, Medium, “Beware the Thought Stopping Cliche,” https://medium.com/@nathandial/thinking-friends-please-be-informed-about-the-thought-stopping-cliché-ea6b0d9510d8
And the rest of the articles in this series if you missed them
How do I know if I’m in a cult – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/06/how-do-i-know-if-im-in-a-cult/
8 Key Characteristics of cults – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/06/8-key-characteristics-of-cults/
What cults have in common – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/08/cult-commonalities/
What is gaslighting in cults and high demand groups? – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/12/what-is-gaslighting/
Whats the difference between a cult and a healthy church: the Kit Kennedy Opinion -https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/16/difference-between-cult-and-church/
What is the Difference Between a Cult and a Healthy Church?
After an interesting week, to say the least, and more than 2000 hits on a blog series I haven’t advertised at all, I’m taking a short break from the juicy cult stuff to write about an important topic – what to look for in a healthy church. After this, I’ll be writing about cognitive distortions (unhelpful thinking patterns) common in cults, and theological cat-fishing. Can’t wait to bring you those, but in the meantime, lets talk about something positive!
First of all, I have to acknowledge an irony here: my husband and I skipped church today. We just couldn’t bring ourselves to go. We’d had a big week. Our phones have been pinging constantly for two weeks following a couple of Facebook posts which mentioned that we were no longer members of my family’s church (the one they run), a disclosure that lead my Dad (the senior pastor) to comment in the local newspaper about it. Not going to lie: that stung. But the public response to that fiasco lead to yet more support for us, and sadly, more disclosures of peoples own sad stories. I’m seeing that there are a lot of people wounded by church. I mean, I knew there would be a lot of hurt people out there because there are a lot of unhealthy churches out there. But it really hit home this week. It motivates me to write more. Because knowledge is power, and because to me, faith should be empowering not crushing.
I understand that if you’ve been wounded by a church or cult experience, it can be seriously difficult to approach church or faith again. But there is a difference between cults and true christianity, just like there’s a difference between healthy and unhealthy churches. I can’t possibly cover the whole gamete here, but I can give you a few gems on what I believe you should to look for in a healthy (vs. unhealthy) church.
Here’s my list of considerations:
1. The Hebrews 10 test: In Hebrews 10:23-25 it says “Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.” Some translations say “for the uplifting and edification” of the saints.” But whatever the translation, this is about stirring up hope, love, good works, and leaving us feeling encouraged and edified or empowered. Sure, exhortation can also involve delivering the tough-love truth in order to bring us further along in our walk with God, but it should always leave us feeling more empowered.
This scripture doesn’t encourage us to hand over control of our walk with God. It’s about stirring up love and good works. “Assembling together” and “exhorting one another” sound very egalitarian to me – eluding that we are peers, we are together, there is not one whose place is over us to make demands or control us. A healthy church, to me, has a pastor as a leader among peers, not ever on a pedestal to be the one through whom we filter our faith or our relationship with God. There is a mountain of scripture I could go through here, but lets save that for another blog post.
Another quick caveat here – Ephesians 2:8-9 says that “Salvation is by grace through faith and not of works, lest anyone should boast.” So there’s a line. Exhorting each-other towards good works is one thing, demanding it so it qualifies you for salvation is quite another.
What to look for: a church that lifts you up, empowers you, doesn’t avoid preaching truth, but always binds it in love, hope, and exhortation towards good works. A church should make a positive contribution to the families and community that it touches.
2. The Romans 14 test: In Romans 14: 17 it says “for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” So look at that last bit. Righteousness is right standing with God. That is something that can only be attained through Christ. If we think good works is the key here, and if there is no peace or joy, we have legalism – a problem (in my opinion). If we do not have peace, then there’s a problem. If there is no joy, then there is another potential red flag. If this is the metaphorical three legged stool, then we need to look for evidence of all three. Otherwise we have ourselves in a wonky establishment, something we can’t rest our metaphorical tooshes on without risk of a fall. The Bible exhorts us to judge a tree by its fruit. So have a look around and see how this is sitting.
How do you test it? Follow your heart, honestly, as that’s the best barometer of whether or not you’ve found your spiritual home. But be aware. “In their slick advertising, cults present smiling faces and happy families (Aron, Cults, too Good to be True).” So if the smiles are too wide and constant, you might be looking at something with a shiny facade that can’t be trusted.
The other point up for consideration is mental health. In mental health terms, the antithesis of peace is anxiety and the antithesis of joy is depression. Does this mean that depression and anxiety shouldn’t exist in the church? I’m not saying that. One in four people in the modern world will have mental health struggles at some point, that’s ok. That’s life. A healthy church will support them as they find treatment and restoration. But church should build us up. It should support us. If you are looking around and seeing a lot of people diagnosed with mental health issues after becoming involved in a group, you might have to think about why.
What to look for: three legs to the stool – righteousness, peace and joy. But make sure its genuine, not a front.
3. The Doctrinal Question Test: What happens when a doctrine is questioned? Does the pastor react poorly? Or do they say “Make yourself a cuppa. Let’s kick this around”? Are you allowed to arrive at an “agree to disagree” point after discussion? Cults and high demand groups usually don’t allow questions, even from the inner circle (More on that here). In a healthy church, questions and genuine respectful debate are allowed or even encouraged. The truth is that the Bible is a complicated book. Theologically, there are many different lenses you can apply to it. Choosing one over the other shouldn’t leave you feeling excluded, mocked, shamed or at worst, excommunicated. The other part to the “doctrine” test is this: does your church know what it believes and is this consistent through each layer of the church? If you don’t know what your church believes when it comes to basic doctrines, you could have a problem.
What to look for: a church that encourages healthy discourse when it comes to matters of faith, doctrine, or even the how the church itself runs, and is clear on what it’s key doctrines are.
4. The Friends, Family and Community Test: Does your church encourage healthy engagement with friends, family and community, strengthening them and building them up? Or does it drive a wedge between you and them? Does it encourage legitimate, altruistic engagement with your community, or is there another agenda behind it? A healthy church will never divide you from your family or friends, and it won’t foster and “us and them” mentality. Dividing someone from friends and family is something that is flagged as a concern in domestic-abuse type relationships. If a church exhibits this characteristic, it is no less concerning (read more on that here). I’ll also have to flag here that I’m strongly anti-dominionist in my theology. My belief (based on Philippians 2:5-11 among others) is that Jesus came to serve not to conquer and we should emulate that. Not everyone will agree with that, but I’m strongly skeptical of churches that exhibit dominionist theology and want to take over a community rather than serve it.
What to look for: A church that doesn’t divide families or do harm to communities. It should serve and uplift both.
5. The Discipleship Test: Discipleship programs are common in churches, just as thought-reform programs are common in cults. I like to ask this question: does the discipleship program build up the person so they are more empowered, more discerning, more informed, more able to make their own life choices in accordance with where they believe God is guiding them? Or are they less able to engage in independent thought, becoming more and more dependant on the group? If the latter, watch out. (Because I’m dropping in a reference or scripture in every section here, I’ve linked this article on abusive forms of discipleship, but only read it if you’re in for something heavy!)
What to look for: Programs that make people more personally empowered and capable of independent thought, rather than more dependant on the group and less capable to think independently.
6. The Clear Structure Test: If you were to have a grievance in your church, would it be clear to you who and how this would be rectified? Or would you feel fear and potential isolation? I’m a little wary of independent churches, especially if there is no board the pastor legitimately answers to. Most cults are ‘self-sealing systems‘ – they are their own power structures which can make grievances difficult to air or resolve. The central person becomes “the voice of God” who can’t be questioned. If your pastor has no one they are accountable to, or if you don’t know who you could take a grievance to, then this risk is wide open.
What to look for: Somewhere where there are clear lines of communication and accountability, clear policies and procedures, and consistency through-out the whole organisation.
7. The Truth Test: I didn’t know what to call this one, but I guess the thing I’m questioning here is this – does your group have a single guru-type that it gleans all its truth from, or does it recognise truth can and does come from multiple sources? Does it always come back and check “truth” with the Bible and consider the interpretation of it against the nature of God? If your church is only allowed to ‘draw from one well’ so to speak, then you could have a problem. Clean water is clean water wherever you drink it from. Truth is truth, wherever you glean it from. My other little flag here, and it is a personal flag, is this: does your church talk about different types of truth, or suggest that facts and truth may differ. They don’t. Truth is truth. If the facts don’t line up, then there’s an issue.
What to look for: a church that genuinely seeks to grow in its understanding of truth and doctrine, that looks for confirmation from multiple sources and checks back with the Big Guy and His Book (meaning God and the Bible).
8. The “I’ve missed a Sunday” test: I missed this Sunday. I missed it because we had a huge week, one that was incredibly raw emotionally. There was no demand on me to justify why I missed it. I just did. This, to me, is good. Because it means my church trusts me to make my own decisions, and doesn’t treat me as its property. If your church puts unreasonable attendance demands on you, even for midweek meetings or for “volunteering” opportunities (which may be voluntary in name only), then you might consider the possibility that this could be a high demand group. (Read more here)
What to look for: genuine freedom, known by its fruit and not just by its narrative.
9. The Robert Lifton Test: I’m not going to spell this all out again, but check out my blog post on 8 Key Characteristics of Cults. They’re taken from a well-respected psychiatrist who researched mind-control techniques. Read that and make sure your group doesn’t check too many boxes!
If you want another opinion on this whole issue of finding a healthy church, check out this article here.
As mentioned above, this past week or so has seen us inundated with contact from people with various stories. Some of you will find it impossible to even think about walking back into a church again. I completely get that. So I have three encouragements for you: 1. Allow yourself to heal. That takes time. 2. Feel free to use this post as a checklist if you find yourself able to consider church again. 3. If you can’t ever walk into a church again, know that doesn’t mean you can’t ever approach God again. I’d encourage you to find a friend, even one, that you can share your life and faith with. Even if thats just over a coffee or a beer every now and then, because guess what “Wherever two or more are gathered in My [God’s] name, there I AM in the midst.”
Take the pressure off, friend. Recover. Then revisit this stuff always remembering that your gut instinct is something to be listened to. Once again, I’ve hyperlinked the heck out of this article. Don’t feel like you have to follow every link. Its just so you know I didn’t make up all these opinions myself. There are a mountain of considerations you could make. These are just my top 9.
Cheers and good luck.
Kit K
What is Gaslighting in Cults and Toxic Groups?
What do we do when something upsets our status quo? When it confronts our deepest held ideals, threatens to dethrone our idols, and tarnish our heroes? What do we do when someone comes forward and says “I was a victim of abuse. This person [who you all held in such high regard] took something from me, damaged me profoundly.” And out pours their awful story.
In my time in evangelicalism, I’ve observed the lengths people will go to in order to protect the way they see the world. Sadly, sometimes, even often times, this does not deal kindly with those who deserve our utmost compassion and care, and whose deep craving to be heard and believed is too often met with scorn and cover-ups.
Long before the abuse victim finds the courage to speak up (if they find it at all), there exists a psychological phenomenon that has a unique ability to keep them silent and make them doubt their own story. This can be true for cults and toxic groups. It can also be very true for domestic violence situations – very often, in fact.
Guys. We need to talk about gaslighting.
“Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, making them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction and lying, it attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim’s belief. Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim [1].”
The term has its origins in a pretty messed up movie called “Gaslight” from the 1940’s. In it, an overbearing, abusive husband paints his wife as the crazy one, and makes her believe she is seeing and hearing things, by messing with the gaslights and denying it. That is the super quick version, but the full movie was pretty twisted by 1940’s standards. In recent years, the term has been used in clinical and research literature quite extensively.
It’s just a shame more people don’t know what it looks like, because this little trick is one that can be used by abusive individuals or toxic/unhealthy groups to hold people captive, and make them believe they are crazy or incompetent.
It’s horrible. Insidious. It can heap more damage on people who are nothing like the narrative set up around them, and put the monster inside their own head as the words of the abuser continue to do damage even when they are not around. Let me show you how it can look, but before I do – a hefty trigger warning! The Lifeline phone number will be at the end of this post. Call it if you need it.
Now. Gaslighting is often a term used in domestic violence relationships. But I think it’s fair to say that in cults or toxic groups, it is often individuals in positions of power who abuse other individuals. So the gaslighting example I’m about to give you could be one between guru/pastor/leader and follower:
A victim, lets call her Karen, attempts to confront her abuser over something he said that she didn’t believe to be true. She’s tried before one on one, but he yells at her until she stops and just listens. No one is there to witness it. So this time she asks him about it in front of someone. “I just wanted to clarify something you said to me on Tuesday,” she says, fearful.
“I didn’t speak to you on Tuesday,” he responds, glibly.
“Yes you did. I was at your office. I arrived at five past ten. I texted you because I was going to be late,” Karen says. She starts to feel anxious.
“No you didn’t,” he says. “I wasn’t there Tuesday.”
She knows he was. She goes to check her phone/diary. “See, here’s my appointment. I was there. SO were you.”
He grabs his phone and opens up their text message history, fumbling for a second. “Here. No text message. You weren’t there Tuesday. Your memory is playing tricks on you.”
She panics, but presses on with rising anxiety. “Anyway! We had a discussion where you said (insert damaging statement here).”
He leans across the table, face exuding empathy and care, “Karen, that conversation never happened. You imagined it. Your mind is not reliable.” He then turns to the person sitting next to them. “She clearly needs our support. She’s just not stable.” Karen feels shame, embarrassment and confusion. She is still hurt by the original thing he said, the one she tried to confront him over, but now her mental stability has been called into question in front of a witness, perhaps even a friend who now looks down on her.
The thing is, she was there on Tuesday. She did send the text message. He just deleted it so the evidence was gone, and denied the conversation that would have outed him as having damaged her psychologically. Ask any abuser if they are an abuser. The vast majority will say no. They’ll say no up until a criminal conviction and then sometimes after that. Jails are full of people still claiming innocence. That’s why its important to know gaslighting when you see it – so you know you aren’t the guilty one.
Karen’s guru/pastor/leader may have set himself up as an authority figure or a person with power and control over her life. To anyone else, including the person beside him in the example above, he may seem eloquent, caring, and utterly incapable of abuse.
Karen isn’t crazy. The first time gaslighting happened to her, she may not even have noticed it or second guessed her own mind. But as the behaviour progresses, she may doubt herself more and more. She may experience abuse, be it psychological or otherwise, and yet he may erase evidence and pretend it never happened only to point again to her ‘faulty brain’ and ask her why she is imagining such awful things.
Its insidious. It can be big moments like this, or like in the movie – causing the lights to dim and then denying that they have dimmed – or it can be subtle.
– An “I forgive you” from the abuser when the victim has done nothing wrong.
– An “I love you” from someone who causes you physical harm. If you want to know what love looks like, check out 1 Corinthians 13: 1-13. It’s a pretty good checklist on what love is and isn’t.
In an article on Psychology Today, Robyn Stern (PhD) suggests there are three stages to gaslighting. The first is “disbelief.”
“When the first sign of gaslighting occurs,” writes Stern. “You think of the gaslighting interaction as a strange behavior or an anomalous moment. During this first stage, things happen between you and your partner, or your boss, friend, family member, that seem odd to you.”
The second is defense, where you try to defend yourself against the gaslighting type of manipulation. I wasn’t going to lift a big quote from Sterns article, but gee, its good. She explains it this way:
“Think about it—you tell your boss, for example, you are unhappy with the assignments you have been getting; you feel you are being wrongly passed over for the best assignments. You ask him why this is happening. Instead of addressing the issue, he tells you that you are way too sensitive and way too stressed….. well, maybe you are sensitive and stressed, but, that doesn’t answer the question of why you are being passed over for these better assignments. But, rather than leave it at that, or redirect the conversation, you start defending yourself, telling your boss you are not that sensitive or stressed, or, that the stress doesn’t interfere with your ability to work. But, during this stage, you are driven crazy by the conversation…. going over and over, like an endless tape, in your mind.”
The third stage cited by Stern is depression:
“By the time you get to this stage you are experiencing a noticeable lack of joy and, you hardly recognize yourself anymore. Some of your behavior feels truly alien. You feel more cut off from friends—in fact, you don’t talk to people about your relationship very much—none of them like your guy. People may express concern about how you are and you are feeling—they treat you like you really do have a problem.”
Side note: she is the author of a book called “The Gaslight Effect: How to Spot and Survive the Hidden Manipulations Other People Use to Control Your Life.” If you need it, get it.
What are the warning signs?
I’m no psychologist. I’m no expert on gaslighting even though I’ve experienced it. But I can tell you that, no matter how long you’ve faced it for, you can get back to a place where you can spot it and deal with it. It might take therapy. It might take time. But it can be done.
I think we could probably say that the first warning sign is that those three stages listed above rang some bells with you. Gaslighting isn’t always obvious. In fact, it uses subtlety and confusion as weapons. It isn’t always “on purpose” as the abuser may operate this way almost habitually. It is always damaging, I would argue. But again, I’m not an expert.
Who is? Dr. Stephanie Sarkis PhD. She posted these 11 warning signs in an article on Psychology Today. Read it for further detail. Its good. But here’s the scoop. (Thanks Psych Today/Dr Sarkis):
They tell blatant lies
They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof
They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition
They wear you down over time
Their actions do not match their words
They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you
They know confusion weakens people
They project [ie. accuse you of the thing they are guilty of]
They try to align people against you
They tell you or others that you are crazy
They tell you everyone else is a liar
Seriously, if you’ve got the time to do it, go read the article. The examples might help you understand what is happening to you or someone close to you. I’m not going to try and write some pithy, cutesy article with all the answers here. But I am going to tell you this: you can recover. I’m a huge advocate of therapy here. It might start by calling a domestic violence service. They can help you through it and point you to where you can get some good counselling and reclaim that beautiful brain of yours.
I have experienced this phenomenon. I remember, at the height of my gaslighting (in one scenario), I believed I was dumb, defective and utterly hopeless. I can’t tell you how dark that time was. Imagine my utter horror when I was chosen in a human resources class to do an IQ test (we were studying psychometrics). My result came back, well, okay I’ll say it – high.
So high I had to sit back and think “Well. I’m not dumb then, am I? If I’m not dumb, then maybe there are some other things I am being lied to about here.” That was my trigger for a journey out. It has taken time, but I’ve reclaimed my brain. It’s a good one. I like it.
I’m telling you that because encouragement helps. But like I said, I’m not going to offer you five steps out of the situation you may be in. I’d strongly suggest:
– Contacting a domestic violence service. Google one in your local area (Click here if you need to clear your browser history afterwards)
– Contacting the Cult Information and Family Support Service (or a cult support service in your local area if you have one). www.cifs.org.au
– Access counselling services through your local GP
– Calling the police if your immediate safety is at risk
– Calling Lifeline on 13 11 14 if you are feeling depressed and at risk.
Gaslighting is wrong. It is abusive. It might feel too hard to overcome. I get that. But you can do it. Just don’t feel like you have to do it alone. There is so much help out there. Don’t quit. Please access help. Life can be beautiful again.
8 Characteristics of Cults
Hello again! This is the second in a series on what is and isn’t a cult. Its a hot topic, a hurtful topic for some and one that I’ve only written because of the overwhelming amount of questions I’ve, well, avoided. Look after yourself as you read. Remember this isn’t about me branding a group as a cult. Its about education and understanding. I won’t brand a particular group a cult in this series (except those named in the article that have already been publically scrutinised a lot. Scientology for example). That is not my job, my right, nor my intent. But I hope it helps you understand what you may be concerned about, to form your own thoughts, and know where to go for help if you need it.
Okay people. On with the show. Here are 8 key characteristics of cults
Dr Robert Lifton was a psychologist with a special interest in mind control. His work, “Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brainwashing in China” outlined eight criteria for so-called thought reform. This has been quoted in many a cult-related document, but many of them are quite academic (targeted, for example, at counsellors who help exiting or post-exit cult members). They are profound points though, and when you go and watch or read up on cults (such as Scientology, Rajneesh Purim, The Family, The Children of God, Heaven’s Gate, Jonestown etc) you will see many or all of these points in action. Your particular experience may not be as hardcore as some of the cults I just mentioned, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t profoundly damaging and difficult to leave. I’m going to try and paraphrase it so it’s a bit easier to digest, but it all comes from Lifton’s. I’ll pop the deets in the bibliography at the end.
Point 1 from Robert Lifton: Milieu Control
This is a fancy term for control of communication and information within the group. It may involve control of information and communication within the environment and ultimately to the individual. It can result in a significant degree of isolation from society.
What do you look for? On one end of the spectrum, it may involve certain publications being frowned upon. They may be mocked rather than expressly forbidden. On the other end of the spectrum, you may only be allowed to read or watch certain things and others may be explicitly forbidden. Information about people may be another thing that can be strictly controlled or contrived. If you feel isolated from society because of your involvement with a group, then this is a big red flag. If your information isn’t kept confidential, or if it gets twisted, then this may be another sign.
Point 2: Mystical Manipulation.
This is a tricky one. It involves “the manipulation of experiences that appears spontaneous but is, in fact, planned and orchestrated by the group or its leaders in order to demonstrate divine authority, spiritual advancement or insight that sets the leader and/or group apart from humanity, and that allows reinterpretation of historical events, scripture and other experiences. Coincidences and happenstance oddities are interpreted as omens or prophecies.”
I say its tricky because, although its incredibly common, it can also be genuine. I don’t know what Lifton says about it, but my thoughts (and they are just my thoughts) on what to watch for include:
– Extra Biblical revelation, or self-proclaimed apostles or prophets. Who gave them their credentials? Does what they say reinterpret the Bible or line up with it?
– The belief that your group has a superior truth to other groups or the rest of humanity.
– Do you feel peaceful about it? Or do you feel controlled by it. The Bible says that “you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.” If the so-called “Truth” being presented to you causes you to be further within someone else’s control, then it isn’t the kind of truth the Bible was talking about. God’s truth brings freedom, liberty and peace.
Point 3: Demand for Purity
A cult believes that its ideology is superior to that of the rest of the world. You have to stay pure and loyal to that ideology or you are at odds with the group. There’s a certain irony in the fact that every cult believes it is unique and holds a superior truth. When does it become problematic? Ask yourself the following questions:
Does your group take a black and white view of the world? Are your members constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection? Are guilt and shame used to control members? These are your warning signs here.
Its important to note that no one in a cult is going to outright say “I’m using guilt and shame to control you.” This is subliminal. You may believe the cult leader is superior and you are inferior, that you must strive to reach their approval. You may feel shame and guilt when you fail and then ride a constant merry go round of failure, shame/hiding and then re-engagement.
Point 4: Confession
In Scientology, “audits” are used to extract peoples secrets. In other cults, programs of reform are used to extract confessions and replace old mindsets with new ones. The information given/extracted in these sessions can later be used to control members. Other groups may use confession to various degrees to control. “Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members’ “sins”, ”attitudes,” and “faults” are discussed and exploited by the leaders.
Your brain might go straight to Catholic confession. I don’t believe Lifton was referring to that. I think that for two reasons: Sins were defined by the Bible, and not by individual priests and confidentiality is an enshrined rule and value – a highly political topic right now.
Your brain might also go to Romans 12:1-2 – “Be transformed by the renewing of your mind that you might prove the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” This scripture may be used in a good, kind, uplifting way. It shouldn’t be used in a controlling, coercive, shaming or threatening way. Listen to your heart here.
What do you look for? Stringent accountability structures, information being exchanged without confidentiality, information being used against people, whole groups of people knowing and discussing personal sins, sins being defined by the group.
Decent groups respect people and their confidentiality. They recognise humans are imperfect. If your group doesn’t, then warning, warning.
Point 5: Sacred Science
This one has been hinted at in previous points. Perhaps that was Robert Lifton. Perhaps that was me seeing the interplay. Either way, sacred science is the belief that the groups doctrine or ideology is the ultimate truth. It is beyond question or dispute. Truth doesn’t exist outside the group. “The leader, as the spokesperson for God or for all humanity, is likewise above criticism.”
What to look for? Does your group seem so special, so unique that it cannot be found anywhere else in the world? Are you allowed to question or disagree with something? What happens if you do? Would you be punished, shamed or shunned? These are your warning signals.
Now, the office of the prophet can be a dicey one here. It is my belief that prophets do exist and are bona-fide gifts to the body of Christ. But. This comes with caveats. If a prophet demands, even tacitly, unquestioning obedience to their word, then you have a possible problem. If they are self-proclaimed, you may have a problem. If they are unchecked, you may have a problem.
How do you check a prophet? Look at what they’ve said and ask if it has come true. Try to avoid coincidence. If they’ve seen someone playing a musical instrument and prophesied a music ministry, then that’s pretty obvious. That’s not necessarily prophecy. That’s an educated guess about what someone might want to hear.
Point 6: Loading the Language
Are there words or phrases that mean something different to your group than to the rest of the world? Is your groups jargon such that the rest of the world wouldn’t understand what you mean unless you explain it? According to Lifton, “This jargon consists of thought-terminating clichés which serve to alter members’ thought processes to conform to the groups way of thinking.”
That might sound tricky. So I’ll break it down. Is there a word you use to describe a person who should be avoided perhaps? Scientologists call them “Suppressive persons.” Other pseudo-Christian cults may brand a person a “jezebel” for example. This is quite a common one actually. Again, not a statement about a particular group. Jezebel was a problematic Biblical character and churches may use this term legitimately. It’s only a problem, in my opinion, if it causes a person to go “oh ok, avoid them. They can’t be trusted” and further thought is terminated.
Are there words you use to describe aspects of your doctrine that a ‘normal’ person or a person outside of your movement wouldn’t understand? When you hear these words used, do you actually think about them, or just think “Yes, I agree/I know what that means” and move on?
Point 7: Doctrine over person.
“Members personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.” Okay this one is loaded! Does your group cover up abuse? Does it talk about bad or abusive experiences as being the will of God, or somehow a qualifying factor for promotion? Do you have to look back on abuse or misfortune and feel thankful for it or apologise for it? Do you have to look back on experiences you may otherwise have enjoyed and feel guilty over it? Does the doctrine come before you or other people in terms of value? Does leadership gloss over abuse/poor treatment of people because the “end justifies the means”?
If it does, warning, warning.
Point 8: Dispensing of existence
Okay this one is one that is scary, but be brave as you read. With Lifton’s final point, he talks about the group deciding who has the right to exist and who doesn’t. “This is usually not literal, but means that those in the outside world are not saved, unenlightened, unconscious and they must be converted to the groups ideology.” If they don’t they ought to be shunned, excommunicated or rejected by members.
This “convert or reject” mentality can isolate cult members from their families. It can also make people very scared to leave because they will lose friendships.
This is going to come across harsh: but if your ‘faith’ or ideology isolates you from family or friends, or brings distance between you causing you to distrust them, warning, warning. If you can’t leave a group you are uncomfortable with because you will lose friendships, warning, warning. This is a cult characteristic and those friendships aren’t genuine.
There’s a lot to think about. If you’ve Googled this because you’re in crisis, check out the help resources below. I’ve got another post coming soon on things cults have in common with each-other. In the meantime, know this: unless your personal safety is immediately at risk (in which case get in contact with the police, a cult service or a domestic violence service now to ensure your safety), you have time. You don’t have to change your life today.
If you are in a cult though, your information will be used to control you and your thought processes. This might hurt to hear, but it really isn’t wise to confide in members of the cult. This information will likely filter through to leadership and be used to keep you in the group or excommunicate you before you are ready.
Do your thinking in private. Take your time. Consider your options. Make your plan, then take action. I know the crisis is now. I know it hurts like heck. But a successful plan takes time. I’m not the expert on exiting cults but I have done a little research (ahead of writing this piece) on where you can find help if you need it. I didn’t want anyone to read this post and feel alone and scared. There is help available.
Now! If you are in a cult, and people may be keeping an eye on your communication, here’s how to clear your browser history. https://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000510.htm
Good luck. Below is a list of resources that might help, including a couple of experts you can contact if you need to. Give this blog a follow so you don’t miss any of the good stuff, but the next instalment in this series is HERE.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Cults: Too Good to Be True – Raphael Aron – https://www.amazon.com/Cults-Too-Good-be-True/dp/1863717609
Why I left an evangelical cult – Dawn Smith (Ted Talk) – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U4Cq-dgNnw&t=193s
Robert Lifton – the Wiki Summary because the book is heavy stuff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism
A more detailed look at the Lifton themes – http://www.exitsupportnetwork.com/artcls/mindctrl/lifton.htm
A handy checklist about dangerous traits of cult leaders https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/spycatcher/201208/dangerous-cult-leaders
WHERE TO GO FOR HELP
Cult Consulting Australia – www.cultconsulting.org
Cult Information and Family Support Service http://www.cifs.org.au/