How not to be a cult.

I ran across the following in the forums of a counselor who specializes in cult recovery.

(content edited)

-----------------------------------------------------------

Memo to Cult Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult

by John on Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:53 pm

Give me a moment. I mean to give this article a positive agenda. But it may take a second to get there.

I could complain about my group, Transcendental Meditation. But I'd like to give the new leaders a few tips on how not to be a cult.

Perhaps other cults and leaders could incorporate a few of them.

This is what I observe. When critics label a group cultic, there's a knee-jerk reaction. The group enters an escalating spiral of defensiveness.

First, they claim they are not a cult. They give dozens of reasons why they're just like other religions or groups. They attempt to destroy their critics. They claim critics are "disgruntled," criminal, bankrupt, unbalanced -- downright crazy.

When these tactics don't work, cults ratchet up repressive isolation of their members and forbid them to read critics.

Critics rightly point out these defensive maneuvers make the groups even more cultic than before. Which sets off another round of defensiveness.

Not every organization that critics label a cult started out to abuse its members. But without forethought, any organization can become cultic. Look at the problems the Catholic Church faces.

So here are a few tips for cult leaders. Maybe, just maybe, they can dodge the cult label.

Be Transparent

* discuss policies, procedures & scandals openly
* publicize open complaint procedures
* report public scandals promptly to members, law officials & public media
* allow free information flow & fully disclose "secrets," especially those that might affect potential members' choice to join
* fully disclose the group's political & legislative involvement
* fully disclose finances, particularly international finances, with third-party audits
* create a member-driven task force to set reasonable fees for retreats & "courses"
* dialogue openly with laity, the press & the public

Be Accountable

* publish -- and adhere to -- a set of ethics
* publish -- and adhere to -- all fees & donation policies
* oversee clergy & other agents with governing boards
* if any group agent acts unethically or illegally, take full responsibility

Advocate Freedom

* allow open questioning of the leader's beliefs & practices
* Create a mechanism for modifying beliefs & practices
* create an elective or accountable structure of representation (as in most churches)
* promote freedom of speech within the group, without reprisals for contrary opinions
* promote academic freedom for clergy & scholars
* allow access to files/records held on members & public individuals
* advocate freedom to explore our spirituality without shunning or other repercussions
* avoid use of shame or guilt to control members

Provide Member Protections

* institute safeguards against members devoting damaging amounts of time, money & emotional resources to the group

Value Respect for Non-Members

* foster a systemic respect for other spiritual traditions & non-members
* foster a systemic respect for the rule of law, rather than the belief the ends justify the means
* foster a systemic respect for members' families, whether they are members or not
* foster a systemic practice of charity & support to the less fortunate
* encourage members to live or socialize with non-group members

Provide Informed Consent

* fully disclose negative side-effects of group's mind-altering or medical techniques
* undertake real efforts to address & heal side-effects
* accept financial responsibility for members suffering side-effects

Imagine a cult that acted with this kind of integrity.

That's a spiritual organization I could be proud of.

------------------------------------------------------------

How about it?

SRF received a good deal of negative publicity thanks to a group of ex-members who had children in the cult and an ex-spouse still active in the cult. The leadership of SRF actively resisted the rights of the ex-members to visit or have partial custody of their children. The affected ex-members fought, through the legal system, to restore their rights.

Several news articles were published, claiming that SRF was behaving in a cult-like manner and that thought control, financial abuse, psychological abuse and even child abuse were conducted. Many ex-members helped blow the whistle on this dysfunctional organization.

Later, Steve Sanchez published a bombshell, tell-all book about his abuse at the hands of SRF. SRF later printed a tome on their website calling Steve mentally ill and used their radio show and newspaper to discredit the whistle blowers.

Instead of complaining about the negative publicity, couldn't SRF have started a positive P.R. campaign? To be fair, they tried. But being too cheap and insular to hire a professional to help, they tried to do it on their own.

Because of their history of causing tension among the membership, the leadership could not get people to cooperate with each other to build a positive campaign. Instead, everyone fought.

If you've lost your moral compass and are operating only in your own self-interest, why be transparent? Why be accountable? Why practice respect for current and former members?

If you have lost your humanity, why advocate freedom, protect members and provide informed consent?

A cult belongs to the people who run it. Not the people who attend it. Many legitimate churches are managed and guided by board of directors constituted by members of the congregation. The spiritual education will be directed by a council of ministers, a national church association or another organization that is external to the church.

Churches are created for the spiritual well-being of the congregation and properties and assets are held in the name of the church for the benefit of the congregation. Cults are not.

The congregation is not represented in the SRF board of directors as thye would be in many churches.

The congregation should have a rotating seat where one person will take a turn attending board meetings and participating in the direction of the church. Many churches do that. Someone from the congregation at SRF should have that opportunity.

But, what's the point? If you are so beaten that you accept humiliating treatment and if you are so enamored with status, power and greed that you have lost your ability to work and cooperate with your fellow church members, you won't be interested in working for the benefit of the group.