Cults and Communities: The Community Interfaces of 3 Marginal Religious Movements (Harper)

8/3/2019 Cults and Communities: The Community Interfaces of 3 Marginal Religious Movements (Harper)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cults-and-communities-the-community-interfaces-of-3-marginal-religious-movements 1/13

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGIONOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

Snow, David A., Louis A. Zurcher,Jr. and Sheldon

Ekland-Olson

1980 "Socialnetworksandsocialmovements:A

microstructuralapproach to differential

recruitment."American Sociological Re-

view 45: 787-801.

Wallis, Roy1977 TheRoad to TotalFreedom:A Sociological

Analysisof Scientology.NewYork:Colum-

bia University Press.

Snow, David A., Louis A. Zurcher,Jr. and Sheldon

Ekland-Olson

1980 "Socialnetworksandsocialmovements:A

microstructuralapproach to differential

recruitment."American Sociological Re-

view 45: 787-801.

Wallis, Roy1977 TheRoad to TotalFreedom:A Sociological

Analysisof Scientology.NewYork:Colum-

bia University Press.

Wilson, Bryan R.

1973 Magic and the Millenium. New York:

Harperand Row.

Worsley,Peter

1968 The Trumpet Shall Sound. New York:

SchockenBooks.

Zygmunt,Joseph F.1970 "Propheticfailure and chiliastic identity:

The case of Jehovah's witnesses." Ameri-

can Journal of Sociology 75: 926-948.

Wilson, Bryan R.

1973 Magic and the Millenium. New York:

Harperand Row.

Worsley,Peter

1968 The Trumpet Shall Sound. New York:

SchockenBooks.

Zygmunt,Joseph F.1970 "Propheticfailure and chiliastic identity:

The case of Jehovah's witnesses." Ameri-

can Journal of Sociology 75: 926-948.

Cults andCommunities:TheCommunity nterfacesof Three

MarginalReligiousMovements*

CHARLES L. HARPERt

Religious"cults" have been the subject of many investigations by social scientists. There is,however,still a need for researchwhichfocuses on the dynamicrelationshipbetweencults andtheir

communityenvironments.This paperfocuses on three differentcults (ormarginalreligiousmove-

ments) and their communitycontext, a midwesternmetropolitanarea. Of particular nterest here

are (1)the similarproblemsof cults in relation to their communitycontext, and (2)the ways that

their particulargoals influencetheir differing"community nterfaces." This concept is developedand used to extend the socialmovementorganization iteratureto understandbetter the dynamic

aspects of the movement-environmentelationship.Somehypothesesareoffered aboutthe relation-

ships betweentypes of communityinterfacesand directionsof organizationalchange.

The growthofreligious"cults"has beenamong he moredramatic eligiousphenomena f

the last decade. Cults have beenthe subjectof muchinvestigationandcommentary romvarious scholarlyperspectives.Some analyses have focusedon the growth of such cult

movementsin relationto the youth movements of the 1960s (Larkin&Foss, 1979),while

others consider he broaderculturalsignificance Needleman&Baker,1978),andanalyticdistinctionsbetweendifferent ypes of movements Robbins,Anthony&Richardson, 978).

Notwithstandingsuchliterature, hereis a needforresearchwhichfocusesonthe relation-

shipsbetween cults and their social environments. t is throughsuch interactionbetween

*Support from the Nebraska Committee for the Humanities is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks also to the

Creighton University Wednesday Social Science "Kaffe Klatsch" and in particular Saul F. Rosenthal for the

critical comments on early drafts of the paper.

tCharles L. Harper is Associate Professor and Chairman of Sociology at Creighton University.

Cults andCommunities:TheCommunity nterfacesof Three

MarginalReligiousMovements*

CHARLES L. HARPERt

Religious"cults" have been the subject of many investigations by social scientists. There is,however,still a need for researchwhichfocuses on the dynamicrelationshipbetweencults andtheir

communityenvironments.This paperfocuses on three differentcults (ormarginalreligiousmove-

ments) and their communitycontext, a midwesternmetropolitanarea. Of particular nterest here

are (1)the similarproblemsof cults in relation to their communitycontext, and (2)the ways that

their particulargoals influencetheir differing"community nterfaces." This concept is developedand used to extend the socialmovementorganization iteratureto understandbetter the dynamic

aspects of the movement-environmentelationship.Somehypothesesareoffered aboutthe relation-

ships betweentypes of communityinterfacesand directionsof organizationalchange.

The growthofreligious"cults"has beenamong he moredramatic eligiousphenomena f

the last decade. Cults have beenthe subjectof muchinvestigationandcommentary romvarious scholarlyperspectives.Some analyses have focusedon the growth of such cult

movementsin relationto the youth movements of the 1960s (Larkin&Foss, 1979),while

others consider he broaderculturalsignificance Needleman&Baker,1978),andanalyticdistinctionsbetweendifferent ypes of movements Robbins,Anthony&Richardson, 978).

Notwithstandingsuchliterature, hereis a needforresearchwhichfocusesonthe relation-

shipsbetween cults and their social environments. t is throughsuch interactionbetween

*Support from the Nebraska Committee for the Humanities is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks also to the

Creighton University Wednesday Social Science "Kaffe Klatsch" and in particular Saul F. Rosenthal for the

critical comments on early drafts of the paper.

tCharles L. Harper is Associate Professor and Chairman of Sociology at Creighton University.

? Journalfor the Scientific Study of Religion, 1982,21 (1):26-38Journalfor the Scientific Study of Religion, 1982,21 (1):26-38

266

266



CULTSAND COMMUNITIES

controversialgroupsand theirimmediatesocialenvironments hat a conventionalunder-

standing of their natureandnormativestatus emerges.Suchemergentsocial definitions

have been understood n various theoreticalcontexts, including"claims-making" y inter-

ested parties (Kitsuse & Spector, 1973), labeling (Becker,1952; Matza, 1969), societalreaction (Scheff, 1964;Wallis, 1974)and the "social constructionof reality" (Berger&

Luckmann,1966).These conceptions of cult-environmentrelationships can be considered as the

community interface of an organization. This concept includes (1) collective "face work"

(Goffman,1967),that is, the manner n which an image of the groupis presentedto the

public,(2)the modes of copingwith groupdefinitions- often negative ones - by agentsof the widercommunity,and (3)the actual modes of surviving and pursuing a mission

in a communitywhich does not sharea group'sdistinctive worldview. Sucha communityinterface s illustratedin the way in whichmembersof a group explainthemselves to out-

siders. It is further illustratedin the way in which an organizationdeals with outsiderswho are hostile or inquisitive.The concept may include"publicrelations"as a contrived

strategy for dealingwith outsiders, but moregenerallyit is all modes of relating to the

community.The term "cult" is difficult to use for scholarlypurposesbecause its popularusage

carriesheavy value connotationswhich appearto make any "new"or "deviant"religionmalevolent. Some preferto describe such religiousmovements as "new"or "deviant."

My own preference s to describe them as "marginalreligiousmovements"(MRMs)to

indicate theirperipheralpositionin relationto the institutionalizedreligious(andperhapssecular)core of the society.

Previous research has examined the relationshipbetween the Unification Church("Moonies") nd the emergentanti-cultmovements at the societallevel(Shupe&Bromley,1979;Bromley, Bushing & Shupe, 1980).This paper adds to the understandingof such

relationshipsby focusing on the local communityinterfaces of three different MRMs in

the Omaha-CouncilBluffs metropolitanarea. Data for the reportderivefromfieldwork

during the summer of 1979, which included semi-structured nterviews with about 25

individualswho were either adherents of or knowledgeableabout the Unification Church

(UC),the Churchof Scientology (SCI),and the Assembly.'A briefdescriptionof the communityis necessary because the focus is on the inter-

action between MRMs and their communityenvironments. The Omaha-CouncilBluffs

metropolitanareahas a combinedpopulationof about 500,000.Locatedin the Midwest,it tends to be culturallytraditionalandpoliticallyconservative. Culturalchanges usually

begin on the East or West coasts and graduallydiffuse into the Midwest, so that by the

time things get to Omahathey arelikely to have occurredalreadyin other parts of the

1. The methodologycan be described as the "classicethnographic style." Depth interviews were conductedwith eight membersof the UnificationChurch,and five membersof The Assembly. SinceScientology'shostile

communitystyle did not permit nterviewswith its active members, nterviewswere conductedwith two formermembers and two others knowledgeableabout SCI. Other interviews were conductedwith six persons in the

communityknowledgeable bout the local "cultsituation,"as wellas two membersof the local anti-cultorganiza-tions. In addition,data wereobtained romtapes of the meetingsof the anti-cultorganization,rom "cult-related"

articles from the local press, publications of the MRM's themselves, and other publications too diverse toenumeratehere. Fulleranalysesof the UCandSCI can be found n Lofland 1977)and Wallis 1977) espectively.Idon't think there are other analyses of the Assembly as a religious movement.

27



JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

country.The area s thus not fertile as an area for cultural nnovations(includingMRMs).The whole "cult controversy"developedand becamea "hot media topic"elsewhere,so

that by the time MRMsgot to Omahaa negative national climateof public opinionwas

already n existence.Thus,the MRMsconsideredheredeveloped n a communitycontext

wheretherewas a negativepre-existingopinionaboutthem,derivedprimarily rommedia

coverage. These generalizationsare less true for the Assembly, rooted in indigenous

Evangelical Christianity,than for UC and SCI.

THREE MARGINAL RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS

ThreeMRMs are discussed first in terms of their goal orientations.Then evidence

from field work is discussed in a subsequent section.

The Goalsof

theUnification

Church.

Themissionofthe UCis to unifyworldChristianity ndpreparehewayfor thecomingof of the "Lordof the SecondAdvent;"the "rightrelationshipbetween God and Man"

will thus becreated,and themilleniumwillbegin.AlthoughRev.Moon s thoughtto playan

importantrole in this process, his exact role is always left deliberatelyambiguous.The

UC is a collectivecrusade to convert as many as possible to the unificationistviewpoint,to preparepeoplefor the secondcoming,andin the long runto developa workorder hat

can be describedas "theocraticsocialism."The crusading,world-transforming atureof

the UC mission is describedby an informant:

Most religions start out to change society, but they have been changed by society through com-

promises.... Ourchallengein the UC is to live up to God's standards... no compromises.People

say we do Rev. Moon'sbidding,but reallywe do God's.... If we can live by those standards the

whole worldwillbenefit.... We areengagedin the spiritualequivalentof war.... If we lose, twenty

yearsfrom nowyoung peoplewon't believein God.... In the UC we have like a small cornerwhere

the good world s growing.... Therearedeeper relationshipsbetweenpeople[here]becauseof their

relationshipto God.

Thus, the goals of the UC are truly pan-institutional: he long-rangegoals are to bringabout a new worldorder.

The Unification Church in Omaha

By the time the UC established a centerin Omaha n the mid '70s, the earlierrapid

growthof the movementhadbegunto leveloff and thento decline.Publiccriticismbeganto

grow because of "deceptive"practices in recruitmentand fund raising (Lofland,1977).

Thuswhiletrying to buildorganizational trength throughrecruitmentand fundraising,much of the energyof UC members n Omahawas spent in trying to portraythe UC in

a positive light and to neutralize its negative public image. For instance, one member

respondedthat charges of "manipulation"and "mindcontrol"are

completelywrong!I felt completelyin my own motivation.I felt I was workingforsomething very

important.I still feel that way.... Peoplefeel [that we arecontrolled]because we understandthatthere's a need for organizationand central figures.... [Withoutthem]you can't accomplishbig

things.... [Ratherthan being exploited] I feel privilegedto be able to contribute.

28




Such responses to negative public image are excellent illustrations of the notion of

"secondarydeviance" as developedby Lemert (1967).

In Omahathe main mode of the UC's attempts to relate to the communitycan be

describedas an active search orsupportandpublic legitimacy.Theysoughtthese in mani-fold ways. They contactedthe press frequently,seekingpublicity for specialevents and

travellingnational spokespersons.The leadersought - but rarelyobtained- speaking

engagementswith churchesandcommunity organizations.He attended functions of the

localclergyassociationbutwasusuallytreatedas acuriousoutsider.Mosteffortsto explainthe UC to otherswere met with indifferenceorhostility. Theassessment of a recent state

director is that the UC's attempts to relate to the community in Omaha were largelyunsuccessful.

Duringthe last few years the UC was involuntarilycast in the role of the most visible

protagonistof the Omahaanti-cultorganization LoveOurChildren, nc.).Theinteraction

between the UC and Love Our Childrenwas dynamic.Almost every activity of the UCwas followedby an attempt of the anti-cultgroupto oppose, expose, and discredit that

activity. Severalcuriousandsomewhatfriendlypersonalrelationshipsdevelopedbetween

the leadersof the UC and Love OurChildren.Suchrelationshipsllustrate he "intergroup-

binding unctions"of conflictas discussedby Coser 1956:33]).Eventhoughthe rancorous

tone and extreme mistrust moderatedas this relationshipevolved, such changes did not

alter the basic ideologicalantagonismsbetweenthe two organizations.Given the generalclimateof suspicionaboutcults,it was muchmoredifficult or the UC to succeed nportray-

ing its mission as legitimate than it was for Love OurChildren o discredit it. With such

frustrationsas these after five years of struggle in the Omahaarea,a decision was made

in the fall of 1979 to move the Nebraska UC to Lincoln,Nebraska as a fresh and morefertile ground for their labors.

Responding o this move- andsimilaroutcomes notherregions- several nformants

suggested that on the local and national policy levels, strategy changes are underwaywhichwouldhave the effect of makingthe movementand its activities morecompatiblewith the norms of the larger society. Whenasked about the future,they said that in the

near future the UCwouldbecomemore"familyoriented," hat is, it wouldgraduallyshift

froma church based on single young adults living in a communalstyle to one composedof family units living and workingin a conventionalmanner and worshippingtogether

periodically. Accordingto one informant:

[Thenewidea]... is to develop"homechurches,"wherepeople ive inregularapartmentsandcirculateinformation boutthe UCthroughournewspaper.The idea s to use established amiliesas a neighbor-hood base for recruitmentandcommunityprojects(suchas collectingfood andclothingfor the poor).In New York City they started neighborhoodclean-upcampaigns.... Eventually most memberswill live out in communitiesrather than in centers.... [In the future,the UC]will be more ike otherhumancommunities(including amilies,schools,economicorganizationsandmedia)but it willhave

a different internal characterthan ordinarycommunitiestoday.

Thus, there is a dilemma built into this situation. While they seek legitimacy and

"respectability," heir heterodox doctrineand mission dictate that they cannot become

"just another denomination."

29




The Goals of Scientology

In contrast with the UCas a collectivecrusade, he SCI'sgoalis to improve ndividual

lives. The clients of SCI engage in a therapeutic process ("auditing")and take classesdevoted to the improvementof personal skills and effectiveness (e.g., communication,

personalpower,release fromdependencies). llustratingthese goals, the "freepersonalitytest" offeredby SCI bears the followingcaption:

CouldYOUBE HAPPY... HAVE MONEY... ACHIEVEANY GOAL?Understandingyourselfis how. All that Scientology has to offer is understanding.Take this Free PersonalityTest. Gain

Understanding.

ThedifferencebetweenSCIand similarprogramswithinthe "humanpotentialmovement"

is that SCI takesplacewithinnot onlya theoryofhumanpsychology,butalso an elaborate

metaphysicswhichposits the existenceof "thetabeings"as timelessfreespirits.Accordingto SCI teachings these have assumed a variety of animateand inanimateincarnations

since the beginningsof cosmos.In sum,SCIis client-centered:orfixed fees ("donations,"

using religious language)clients take an elaboratesequenceof courses.2

Scientology in Omaha

A SCImissionwas establishedin Omaha n the mid '70s,andby 1979 anothercenter

was locatedin the suburbof Bellevue.Thecommunity nterfaceof SCI is a combination

of an aggressive recruitment,avoidanceof the inquisitive, and active attack on real or

perceived opponents.There is a curious blend: an active search for clients from the

communitywitha deliberateattemptto maintaina "lowprofile" o otheroutsidersseekinginformation.Likethe UC,SCI is aggressively growth-oriented, ut for clientsratherthan

the directtransformationf the world.Clientsaresoughtinplacesof publicaccess(parking

lots, civic festivals, etc.)andby convassingneighborhoodswith leaflets.As with the UC,

potential clients aregreetedwith warm affective behaviorand attempts to explainSCI

in a positive manner. As an illustration,one informantapproachedby a SCI operative

gave the following description.

This chick stopped me in the parking ot and asked me if I wanted to take a free personalitytest.

She said they weredoing a survey, and the test only took 10 minutes. We drove back to the SCI

centerandI took the test and it wasgradedright away.ThenI went intoa smallroomwith a volunteerand we discussed what the results showed about your personality.He asked me questions about

my life . .. difficulties,problems,relations with people.In that personalitytest they couldalwaysfindsomeweaknessorproblems,andtheywereusedas the basis for ntroductoryoursestheyoffered,

and how the courses will help you.... I put them off: "I'll think about it." As a last resort theytriedto get me to buy a book, but I didn't have enoughmoney. I was suspiciousabout the whole

thing.After I went home volunteers wouldcall me about onceeverytwo weeksfor about 8-10weeks

in the evening about buying books, taking courses,or just coming to the center to talk again.

Outsiders who are not potential clients are treated quite differently.Researchers,

members of the press, and others are told to stop inquiriesabout the natureof SCI and

2. Likemanyother movements orindividualransformation,CIarguesthatif thereareenoughpractitioners f

SCI, the worldwill, ipso facto, be changed.

30




may be threatenedwith legal reprisals.3Outsidersmay be officiallydesignated by SCI as "suppressivepersons,"whichmakes

themfairgamefor a varietyofharrassments.As anillustrationof the sharpdifferentiation

between clients and other outsiders, the experienceof a local journalist is informative.

I asked ... [the SCI administrator] .. if I could go throughhis classes and he refused to let medo it as a reporterbecause I wouldn'thaveanyinterestin reportingt objectively.'He wouldwelcome

me as an individual,but not as a reporter.... I was told that I had to accept their teachings in

order to go through with it.

About the threat of law suits, the same informantsaid:

They do a good job, I mean,whocan withstand law suits? The N. Y. Times?The WashingtonPost?

The media keep hands off because of threats.... A lawsuit could kill them.

Thus, the threat of legal action is generally sufficient to prevent the free flow of publicinformation about SCI, though there have been actual law suits - with mixed results.

Such a policy toward outsiders is formulatedby the SCI Advanced Organizationsand is apparently tandardizedacrossthe nation. This involves not onlyreactivehostility.It also involves"pre-emptive ostility," n whicheven thosewhoarepotentially hreateningto SCI (thoughthey have not actuallyengaged in overtly hostile acts) are warned about

the possible consequencesof such acts. The Omahaanti-cultorganization,for example,was warnedn advance hat anyactionon theirpartinvolvingSCI wouldresult n litigation.

Thispolicyis relatedto the long historyof dealingsbetweenSCI and civic andgovern-mental agencies,a history of manyconflicts and officialinvestigations between SCI and

governmentregulatoryand medicalassociations. The most publicizedrecentengagementbetweenSCIaridgovernmentagencieswas the conviction n a U.S. District Courtofpromi-nentScientologists orconspiring o steal records romthe IRS,the FBI, and otheragencies

(October,1979).

Wallis(1977)has documented he processof "devianceamplification" hat has taken

place as the result of these increasinglyrancorousconflict. Thus was SCI transformed

in the publicdefinitionfrom a "harmless, f cranky,self improvementcult" (Wallis,1977:

215)to a malevolentanddeceptivemovementwhichposed a threat to the publicinterest.

From this point SCI came to view itself as the object of religiouspersecutionand beganto developthe strategies heretermedpreemptivehostility to deal with outsiders.While

Wallisarguesthat "deamplification"s takingplace- particularlyn England,Australia,and New Zealand the recentconvictionofprominentScientologistscited abovesuggeststhis is not the case in the U.S. This assessment is also supportedby the fact that in 1980

there wereseveralwellpublicized"conflagrations"etweenSCImissions andthecommuni-

ties in whichthey were ocated(e.g.,Clearwater,Florida).Thissuggests the level of conflict

and resultant amplificationprocess has yet to abate in the U.S.

3. The difficulty getting information about SCI directly fromits practitionersfor researchpurposes meant

that fieldresearchaboutSCI,unlike he localUC,hadto relyprimarily n SCI literatureand outsiders'knowledgeable aboutSCI. Given its half-decadeof aggressive recruitingpracticesin Omaha,suchpersons were not hard

to find.

31




The Goals of the Assembly

The Assembly is a small but nationwide network of intensely religious "born again"

Christians who form Assemblies or "Gatherings of God's People." While the founder ofthe Assembly (George Gustafson) is seen as having charismatic qualities, he has not been

elevated to the messiah-like status of Rev. Moon or Ron Hubbard (the founder of SCI).

As a contrast with both the UC and SCI, the Assembly is neither a collective crusade

nor a client-centered practice. Rather, the Assembly considers itself to be a gathering of

true Christians living in the midst of a corrupt world. Their manifest goals were described by

one informant as making it possible for the few who will to lead "victorious Christian

lives." Another informant described them as leading a "hermit-like existence in society."

As such, they seem to fit the description of "introversionist" sect in Wilson's (1970)

typology.

The energies of the group are wholly given to the practice of personal and groupEvangelical piety: they make few demands upon the social environment, and seek onlyto be left alone by it. Recruitment to the Assembly is low key and highly selective, and

as a movement it is not as growth-oriented as either the UC or SCI. They meet in member's

homes and maintain no "church" or center.

They do not have the heavy investment in literature and promotional materials the

UC and SCI do. There is no formally organized leadership within each local Assembly.

And as a movement the relationship between the Assemblies is a loose and almost covert

one, though they do recognize each other and their common history. While a part of the

broader Evangelical movement, they do not recognize the legitimacy of the "Churches,"

even the Evangelical ones. "Churches" are viewed as a perversion of what true Christiancommunities should be like. They do, however, recognize the legitimacy of several free

"covenant communities" in the area. Being a part of the broader Evangelical movement,

the Assembly is more ideologically "respectable" than either the UC or SCI. In terms

of its community interface, the Assembly should have an easier time of it than either of

the other MRMs discussed. Why then is the Assembly being treated here an MRM and

similar in some respects to the UC and SCI?

The Assembly in Omaha

The Assembly group in Omaha has come to be viewed as "cult-like" by several seg-ments of the broader community. Unlike other Evangelical organizations, the Assemblyis composed primarily of young people (most are under thirty years old), about one third

of them college students. They originally maintained residences for unmarried members

which appeared to some local observers to be suspiciously like the communal residences

of the Moonies. They are considered a cult by the local anti-cult group, and by some of

the families of their converts - particularly those from Liberal Protestant and Roman

Catholic backgrounds. The Assembly tried to get official university recognition for its

on-campus Prayer Group, but failed because it was viewed by some students and admin-

istrators as "cult-like." This was a charge that could not be effectively refuted, and the

incident represents one of the only known "clashes" between the Assembly and a comm-

unity agency.

32




According o one observer"it's not so much whatthey believebut rather he intensity."The problemis viewed as one of overcommitment to conventionalbeliefs, rather than

commitment o hereticalones. Religionbecomesan all-consumingpassion.Membersgive

up most of the ordinarysocial pastimes that characterizeyoung adults. While they donot give up jobs or school, they have become an exclusive referencegroup:members

socializemoreand more with each other and tend to becomeeach other'sonly important

peers.The OmahaAssembly's style of communityinterfaceis to maintain low visibility,

a deliberateavoidanceofpublicity-seeking ather hana denialof information o interested

parties.UnlikeSCI's activeavoidanceofpublicscrutiny, heAssembly'smodeofrelating o

the external communitycan be termedpassive avoidance.They simply don't seek the

attention of the press or other organizations.Convertscome to the Assembly not from

anonymousencounters,but rather from existing friendshipand affective networks.

While the community interface consists of avoidance at the organizationallevel,membersexperienceconsiderabledifficulty at the interpersonal evel. They continually

struggle to adapt the imperativesof their religionto the necessity for "getting along"in the mundaneworld.As student nurses,forexample,some weretold to "dropthe Bible

stuff" and get on with work. Another worked at a restaurant and had trouble because

she wouldn'twork on Sundays. Another took his Bible to work at a grocerystore and

was "getting a lot of guff" fromhis peers,almost getting fired. Earlier n theirexistence

in Omaha,distinctive dress (conservative)was viewed as a test of religiouscommitment.

Recently, hey havebecomemorewillingto modifysuchthingsto get along n the ordinaryworld.Now, according o one informant,such modificationsare less important.They are

viewed as secondaryto the maintenance of correct beliefs.Oneon-goingsourceof difficulty ormanymembers s with theirfamiliesand relatives.

Many such relationships are tense, uncertain, conflict-ridden,and heavily laden with

emotion and guilt.Thecommunity nterfaceof the Assemblyat the organizationalevel is not a problem

for members.However,the grouphas not been successful at constructinga satisfactoryrole for its memberswhichallows them to articulate heirdistinctivereligiousexpectationswith the more conventionalexpectations held by outsiders. While the role expectationsof the devoteeof UC or SCI aresimilarlydivergent, uchpeopleareprovidedwith elaborate

interpersonal, deological,and legal defenses in the face of public hostility.

Returning o the question posedabove(aboutwhy the Assemblyis treated as a MRMalong with the UC and SCI, even though it is not nearly as "deviant"), t is clearlythe

interactional atherthanthe ideologicaldimensionsof the Assemblywhichmake it contro-

versial. As illustrated n the preceedingexamples,the problem s not that they aredefined

by communityagentsas deviant because heyarecommitted o differentbeliefs,but rather

because they seem overcommittedto a conventional belief system. Given the generalconcernabout weak or "watered-down" eligiouscommitmentsin secularsocieties, it is

importantto note that overcommitment ornegatively, "fanaticism")s also a source of

public concern.

33




DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY

In one sensethe UC, SCI,and the Assemblyconfronta similarcircumstance egarding

their communityinterfaces.They have the same practical problem:how to survive andmaintaina distinctiveand deviantmission s the contextof anostensiblyhostileor indiffer-

ent social world.In anothersense, as has beensuggested, there areimportantdifferences

in how the threeMRMstry to dealwith suchenvironingcircumstances.Suchdifferences

are functions of differingmissions (goals)and different histories.

Since the UC is a collectivecrusade to transformthe society, a primarycriterion or

its success is the recruitmentof a largenumberof Americanconverts.This requires hat

the UCachievea degreeof public egitimacy,which nturngeneratespressure or accommo-

dation. As Bromley and Shupe (1979)put it:

Because world-transformingmovementsrely so heavily on a persuasion strategy, are subject tovigoroussocial controlefforts, andcannotforciblyresist repressionwithout abandoning heir basic

strategy,there is enormouspressure owardsome measureof accommodationwiththe largersociety.

Duringthe earlyyearsof the movement nAmerica, eadersof the movementprobablyunderestimatedhe extent to whichthe UC wouldhaveto accommodatetself to American

culturalnorms(Shupe&Bromley,1980).Thus,the UC'saggressiveand somewhatdecep-tive recruiting/fundraisingctivities, its attempts to supercede he establishedchurches,and its emphasis on communal iving arrangementshad, by the mid 1970s, stimulated

a strong negativereactionby segmentsof the public.Subsequently, he UCis intensifyingits search for legitimacy and attempting to neutralizeits negative public image. The

dilemma t nowfaces is findinga meansto adaptits activities to be morecompatiblewithAmerican cultural norms while at the same time maintainingthe distinctiveness of its

mission. This is perhapsan inherentdilemma which sooneror later confronts all move-

ments for societal transformation.

Rather hanfocussingon sucha transformation, CIis client-centered,nd its primary

goal is the effectivedeliveryof its distinctivepersonalgrowthopportunities o individuals.

Accomplishing his does not require hat SCI be as concernedabout legitimacyin publicforumsbut rather that it create sufficientautonomywithin its surrounding ommunities

to allow or the effectivepracticeof SCI.SCI needs thefreedom o recruitclients nplacesof

public access and be left sufficiently alone by regulatorybodies which might suppress

the freepracticeof SCI. Thus SCI mainly seeks legitimacywith its clients in controlledsettings and has devoted considerable nterpersonal,publicrelations,and legal energiesin segregating the organization romcommunitycontrol."Pre-emptiveaggression"has

evolved as a deliberatestrategy from a long history of hostile and rancorouscontacts

between SCI and societal agents.The currentsituationbetween SCI andFederalGovernmentAgenciesmay have two

plausibleoutcomes. SCI may change in "adaptivemodes," seeking to portray itself in

a morepositive fashion,or it may becomeincreasinglymorehostile and covert. With all

of the publiccontroversyabout"cults,"SCI alonehas drawnmorethan apassinginterest

by GovernmentAgencies. It is possible that so severe a climateof suppressionhas been

created that SCI will join the graveyardof other movements in Americanhistory thatdwindled nto insignificanceafteroverstepping he bounds of publictolerance.Even such

34




attempts by GovernmentAgencies may not, however,be sufficient to destroy SCI. It

is well knownthat such "persecution"can galvanizea movement. Persecution has been

held by some to be an essential ingredientfor the survival of such movements (Gerlach

&Hine,1970).It confirms he moralrighteousnessof the causeamongdevotees and forcesthem into moreeffective modes of mobilization n relation to the environment.If so, the

oppositionshould be strong enoughto require he effective mobilizationof resources but

not so strong that the movement is destroyed. Where SCI lies along this continuumof

societal reactionis a subjective judgment. My own assessment is that the oppositionis

becoming oo strongforit to survive muchlonger n its old "combative"mode,but rather

thanmove towardaccommodation, CIwilldevelopmoreelaboratensulatingmechanisms

and otherwise remainunchanged.The situation of the Assembly is very different.It is not a transformingmovement

like the UC and, while it does aim at individual transformation(likeSCI),it doesn't do

so withinthe context of anexplicit entrepreneurialash nexus. Hence,it does not requiremassive public sanction as does the UC nor is it likely to become enmeshedin entangle-ments withpublicandprofessionalregulatory agencies.Even though thereis an absence

of the kindof community nterfaceat the organizational evel whichproducesan intense

set of dilemmas orthe organization,here arenonetheless ntenseinterpersonal ifficulties

for individual members.

Ironically,onedifficulty n the long-term urvivalof the Assemblymaybe the absence

of such an interface to providethe external stimulus foreffective groupmobilizationand

adaptationto a set of environmentcircumstances.That is, granting the foregoingargu-ment, there may not be sufficient pressures for the maintenance of in-groupsolidarity

andcohesion.Beingwithin the religiousframework f a pervasive Evangelicalmovement,the Assembly is not as ideologically"deviant"as the other two MRMs. This means it

has easier access to publiclegitimacy,but alsoit must contendwith many religiousalter-

natives within fundamentalistChristianity.Thus, without a nationwideorganizational

supportsystem or a distinctiveideology, t would seem that each localAssemblywillhave

difficultyin the long runin maintaining tself as a distinctive religiousgroup. Its future

willdependnot only on the uncertaintiesof localrecruitmentand maintenanceactivities

but also on the future of the broaderEvangelical movement.

AN EXTENSION OF MOVEMENTORGANIZATION THEORY

There exists a sizableliteratureabout the developmentand transformationof social

movementorganizations(Messinger,1955;Gusfield,1955;Zald&Denton, 1963;Zald&

Asch, 1966;Curtis &Zurcher,1973).While Richardson,Stewart and Simmonds'(1979)examination f this literaturenthe contextof theirstudyof a religiousmovement s mainly

supportive,they point out that such literature to date has dealt mainly with "internal

variables,"such as goals, leadershipstyles, member ncentives,etc. Thus,whilea general

recognitionexists that the relationsbetweena movementorganization MO)andits social

environmentare important,few explicit treatments of such relations are to be foundin

the MO literature.What follows is an attempt to extend MOtheoryso as to conceptualizethe manner n whichthe MO-environmentelationsaffectthe developmentand transforma-

tion of social movements. The followingrelies heavily on the case materialspresentedhere, as well as other writings about MRMs (especiallyBromley & Shupe, 1979).

35




In general,whethera Movementorganization inds itself in a hostile climate ofpublic

opinionand communityrelations will be a function of the followingsix factors:

1. Visibility.Since MOsoften are embedded n movements whichrepresentsubculturalalternatives and/oradvocate social change, they are likely to generate controversyand hostility to the extent they arepubliclyvisible. Whilethe three MRMs treated

here have developeda degree of public visibility, it is possible to find a multitude

of similarorganizations n the same communitywhich are generallyunknown and

have not become objects of public controversy.

2. Goals. The goals of a MO are also criticaldeterminantsof the kinds of relationshipsthat MOs have with their environments. The distinction is conventionallydrawn

between those movementswhichseek to change society - what BromleyandShupe(1979)call "worldtransformingmovements"- and those which seek primarilyto

transform ndividuals.WhileRichardson t al. (1979)arguethat this is an ambiguousdistinctionin that movements often claimboth goals, I think the distinctionis still

useable andimportant.It is one thing to claim,as do Scientologists, that if enoughindividuals are changed, then, ipso facto, so will the world,but it is quite another

to announce,as do the Moonies,that the primarygoal is to transform the worldby

institutinga "theocratic ocialism."World ransformingmovements,sincethey posea

threat to existing socialarrangements,would seem to have a muchgreaterpotentialforgeneratinghostileenvironmentalelations hanwould hose whoseprimarynterest

is individualchange.

3. The degree of "ideological deviance. "The greater the discontinuity between the MOideologyand morebroadly haredculturalvalues,the greater he likelihoodorconflict-

riddenrelations n the socialenvironment.Thisfactor s especially ikelyto bringMOs

into conflictrelations with those agents responsibleformaintainingand promotingvarious culturalorthodoxies.Forinstance,part of the hostility towardthe UC is its

persistentattemptto represent tself as a Christianorganization.Church eadershave

beenparticularly ensitive to this issue, and concernedaboutthe potentialfor MRMs

to spreadheterodox beliefs.

4. The degree of discontinuity between the lifestyles of MO members and that prevailingin the social environment.Some MOsrequire ittle alterationof members' ifestylesoutside of organizationalparticipation,while others requireextensive alterations.

Among MRMs, there are those which require nothing other than participation n

regularworshipor meditationsessions, whileothers requiregiving up conventional

social roles to become a full-timecommunaldweller,fundraiser,campaignerand so

forth. Robbins,Anthony and Curtis (1975)have drawn the distinction along these

lines between adaptive and marginalmovements,the latter usually entailing livingin highlyregimented, ohesive,andeconomicallyelf-sufficientommunities, ndwhich

"actually remove members from conventionalpursuits and lock them into social

marginality"(Robbins,Anthony &Curtis, 1975:56). It is this issue more than anyother which has stimulated the developmentof a broad-basedanti-cult movementin the United States, the motive force for which s suppliedby cult members' amilies

who are angry because of the deflectionof the family member's conventional "life

36




career."In this regard,it is impoartantto observe that the Assembly has become

locally controversialover the issue of lifestyles, not heterodoxreligious doctrine.

5. Theextent to whichMOs find themselves in competitionwith establishedagencies

in the community. The exemplarycase of this factor is the long-standing enmitybetween SCI and the mental healthestablishment,althoughMRMs have also come

into conflictswithcounsellingagencies,campusministry organizations,and establish-

ed churches.The issue hereis mainlya matter of "turf"encroachments,rather than

ideologicaldifferences.The shift from the practice of Dianetics (as an alternative

psycho-therapeutic ystem) to SCI as a religionis partially explainable n terms of

increasing pressure from the medical establishment.

6. Thestyle of community nterfacedevelopedby theMO. The centralargumentof this

paper s that the community nterfaceof a MO s animportantvariable n determining

the nature of movement-environment elations. Three styles have been suggested:(1)passive avoidance, (2)active avoidance(including"pre-emptivehostility"), and

(3)anactive searchfor externalsupportandlegitimacy.Passive avoidance, f success-

ful, is likely to minimize environmentalhostility, becauseit minimizes the visibilityof the MO.This is not alwayspossible,however.Nationally,anti-cultgroupsarebusy

trying to monitor the whereaboutsand activities of MRMs (e.g.,The Way Interna-

tional, the "Jim Roberts"cult)which areotherwisetrying to avoidpublicity.Where

this occurs,the MO s likelyto attempt to "gounderground" ndadopta covertstyleof existence.Moreover,passive avoidance s not a likelyoptionforexpansionistmove-

ments. The other two types of community nterfaces are both likely to create hostile

relations in the social environment.

The fact that a social movement exists in a hostile climate of public opinion,and in

a state of conflict with community agencies, does not mean that it will necessarilydie

out. As suggested earlier,some analysts argue that a degree of environmentalconflict

is essential to the effective mobilization f a movement,andthat theremaybe a curvilinear

relationshipbetween the degreeof oppositionto a movement and its growthanddevelop-ment. What does seem clear is that when a movement exists in a hostile and conflict-

ridden social environment,it will most likely undergo transformation. To paraphraseBlumer's famous dictum about understandingindividualbehavior,4t can be said that

the direction ofchange

in a MO comes notdirectly

from environmentalhostility

and

pressurebut rather from how the organizationhandles,neutralizes,andrespondsto such

pressures;hence of central importance s the communityinterface as a constructed set

of responses to environmentalconditions.5

4. "His behavior,accordinglyis not a result of such things as environmentalpressures, stimuli, motives,attitudes, and ideas but arises instead from how he interpretsand handles these things in the action whichhe is constructing"(Blumer,1962).

5. Toview the community nterface of a movement as anon-goingseries of constructedresponsesis accurate,I think,yet movementsdonot havecomplete reedom n theconstructionof suchresponses."Worldransforming

movements,"since they arelikely to be dependenton persuasivestrategies are most likely to searchactivelyfor supportandlegitimacywithin the environment.And,as mentioned, hereare those movements whichwould

preferto avoid visibility but which nonetheless are not allowedto do so.

37




REFERENCES

Anthony, Dick and Thomas Robbins

1974 "The MeherBabaMovement:Its effect on

post-adolescent social alienation." In

Zaretskyand Leone(eds.),ReligiousMove-ments in ContemporaryAmerica. Prince-ton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Becker,HowardS.

1952 "Becominga marijuanauser."AmericanJournalof Sociology. March 57: 451-65.

Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckmann1966 The Social Construction of Reality. Garden

City, New Jersey: DoubledayAnchor.

Blumer,Herbert

1962 "Society as symbolic interaction." InArnold Rose (ed.),Human Behavior andSocial Processes. Barton: Houghton-

Mifflin.Bromley,DavidG., BruceBushingand Anson Shupe

1980 "TheUnificationChurchand the American

family:Strain,conflict,and control."Paperpresentedto the Society for the Scientific

Study of Religion.Bromley,David G. and Anson D. Shupe,Jr.

1979 Moonies in America: Cult, Church,andCrusade. Beverly Hills, California:SagePublications.

Coser,Lewis

1956 TheFunctionsofSocialConflict.New York:The Free Press, a division of Macmillan

Company.Foss, D. and R. Larkin

1979 "The roar of the Lemming:Youth, post-movementgroups,and the life construction

crisis." SociologicalInquiry 49: 264-85.

Gerlach,Luther P. and VirginiaH. Hine1970 People,Powerand Change:Movementsof

Social Transformation.Indianapolis andNew York:Bobbs-Merrill.

Goffman,Erving1967 InteractionRitual:Essays on Face-to-Face

Behavior. Garden City, New Jersey:

DoubledayAnchor.

Gusfield,Joseph R.1955 "Social structure and moral reform: A

study of the WCTU.'AmericanJournalof

Sociology 61: 221-232.

Kitsuse, John I. and MalcolmSpector1973 "Towarda sociology of social problems:

Social conditions, value judgments, andsocialproblems."Social Problems20: 414.

Larkin,R. and D. Foss1978 "Worshippinghe absurd:Thenegationof

social causality among post-movementyouth." SociologicalAnalysis 39: 157-64.

Lemert,Edwin M.1967 Human Deviance, Social Problems, and

Social Control. Englewood Cliffs, New

Jersey: PrenticeHall, Inc.

Lofland,John

1977 Doomsday Cult. Enlarged edition. New

York:Irvington Press.

Matza, David1969 BecomingDeviant.EnglewoodCliffs,New

Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Messinger,S. L.1955 "Organizationaltransformation: A case

study of a declining social movement."American SociologicalReview 20: 3-10.

Richardson, . T., M. W. StewartandR.B. Simmonds1979 OrganizedMiracles:A Study of a Con-

temporaryYouth,Communal, undamenta-list Organization.New Brunswick, New

Jersey: Transaction Books.

Robbins,Thomas,Dick Anthony and ThomasCurtis

1975 "Youthculturereligiousmovements:Eval-uating the integrative hypothesis."Socio-

logical Quarterly16: 48-65.

Robbins, T., D. Anthony and J. T. Richardson

1978 "Theory and research on today's new

religions."SociologicalAnalysis 39: 95-122.

Sheff, ThomasJ.1975 "Labelling heoryof mental llness."Ameri-

can SociologicalReview 39: 444-452.1964 "Thesocietal reactionto deviance:Ascrip-

tive elements in the psychiatric screeningof mentalpatients in a Midwestern tate."Social Problems 11: 401-413.

Shupe, Anson and David G. Bromley1980 "Reversemissionizing: un MyungMoon's

Unificationist Movement in the United

States."FreeInquiry n CreativeSociology8: 197-203.

1979 "TheMooniesandthe anti-cultists:Move-

ment and counter movementin conflict."

SociologicalAnalysis 40: 325-34.

Wallis, Roy1977 The Road to Total Freedom. New York:

ColumbiaUniversity Press.

1975 "Societal reaction to Scientology:A studyof the sociology of deviant religion." In

Wallis(ed.),Sectarianism:Analyses ofReli-gionandNon-religious ects.London:PeterOwen.

Wilson, Bryan1970 Religious Sects. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Zald,M. N. and Roberta Asch1966 "Social movementorganizations:Growth,

decay, and change." Social Forces 44:327-341.

Zald,M. N. and P. Denton1963 "FromEvangelismto generalservice: On

the transformation f the YMCA."Admini-strative Science Quarterly8: 214-234.

Zurcher,Louis A. and Russell L. Curtis

1973 "A comparative analysis of propositionsdescribing ocialmovementorganizations."SociologicalQuarterly14: 175-88.

38

Documents

Cults and Communities: The Community Interfaces of 3 Marginal Religious Movements (Harper)