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

26

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION Wilson, Bryan R.
1973 Magic and the Millenium. New York:

Snow, David A., Louis A. Zurcher,Jr. and Sheldon Ekland-Olson 1980 "Socialnetworksand social movements:A microstructural approach to differential recruitment." American Sociological Review 45: 787-801. Wallis, Roy A 1977 TheRoad to TotalFreedom: Sociological Analysis of Scientology.New York:Columbia University Press.

Harper and Row. Worsley, Peter
1968 The Trumpet Shall Sound. New York:

Schocken Books. Zygmunt, Joseph F. 1970 "Prophetic failure and chiliastic identity: The case of Jehovah's witnesses." American Journal of Sociology 75: 926-948.

The Cults and Communities: CommunityInterfacesof 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 dynamicrelationshipbetween cults and their communityenvironments.This paper focuses on three different cults (or marginalreligious movements) and their community context, a midwestern metropolitanarea. Of particularinterest here are (1) the similar problems of cults in relation to their community context, and (2) the ways that their particulargoals influence their differing "communityinterfaces." This concept is developed and used to extend the social movement organizationliterature to understandbetter the dynamic relationship.Some hypotheses are offeredabout the relationaspects of the movement-environment ships between types of community interfaces and directions of organizationalchange.

of The growthof religious"cults"has been amongthe moredramaticreligiousphenomena the last decade.Cults have been the subject of much investigation and commentaryfrom various scholarly perspectives. Some analyses have focused on the growth of such cult movements in relationto the youth movements of the 1960s (Larkin& Foss, 1979),while others considerthe broaderculturalsignificance(Needleman& Baker, 1978),and analytic distinctionsbetweendifferenttypes of movements(Robbins, 1978). Anthony& Richardson, Notwithstandingsuch literature,there is a need for researchwhichfocuses on the relationships between cults and their social environments.It 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.

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

26

CULTS AND COMMUNITIES

27

controversialgroups and their immediatesocial environmentsthat a conventionalunderstanding of their nature and normative status emerges. Such emergent social definitions have beenunderstoodin varioustheoreticalcontexts, including"claims-making" interby ested parties (Kitsuse & Spector, 1973), labeling (Becker, 1952; Matza, 1969), societal reaction (Scheff, 1964; Wallis, 1974) and the "social construction of reality" (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). These conceptions of cult-environment relationships can be considered as the
community interface of an organization. This concept includes (1) collective "face work"

(Goffman,1967), that is, the mannerin which an image of the group is presented to the public, (2)the modes of coping with group definitions - often negative ones - by agents of the wider community, and (3) the actual modes of surviving and pursuing a mission in a communitywhichdoes not share a group's distinctive worldview. Such a community interfaceis illustrated in the way in which membersof a group explain themselves to outsiders. It is further illustrated in the way in which an organizationdeals with outsiders who are hostile or inquisitive. The concept may include "publicrelations" as a contrived strategy for dealing with outsiders, but more generally it is all modes of relating to the community. The term "cult" is difficult to use for scholarly purposes because its popular usage carriesheavy value connotations which appearto make any "new"or "deviant" religion malevolent. Some prefer to describe such religious movements as "new" or "deviant." My own preferenceis to describe them as "marginalreligious movements" (MRMs)to indicate their peripheralposition in relationto the institutionalizedreligious(andperhaps secular) core of the society. Previous research has examined the relationship between the Unification Church and ("Moonies") the emergentanti-cultmovementsat the societal level (Shupe& Bromley, 1979; Bromley, Bushing & Shupe, 1980). This paper adds to the understandingof such relationships by focusing on the local community interfaces of three different MRMs in the Omaha-Council Bluffs metropolitanarea. Data for the report derive from field work the summer of 1979, which included semi-structuredinterviews with about 25 during individualswho were either adherentsof or knowledgeableabout the Unification Church (UC), the Churchof Scientology (SCI), and the Assembly.' A brief description of the community is necessary because the focus is on the interaction between MRMs and their community environments. The Omaha-Council Bluffs area has a combinedpopulationof about 500,000. Located in the Midwest, metropolitan it tends to be culturallytraditionaland politicallyconservative.Culturalchanges usually begin on the East or West coasts and graduallydiffuse into the Midwest, so that by the time things get to Omaha they are likely to have occurredalready in other parts of the
1. The methodology can be described as the "classic ethnographic style." Depth interviews were conducted with eight membersof the Unification Church,and five membersof The Assembly. Since Scientology's hostile communitystyle did not permit interviewswith its active members,interviewswere conductedwith two former members and two others knowledgeableabout SCI. Other interviews were conducted with six persons in the about the local "cult situation,"as well as two membersof the local anti-cultorganizacommunityknowledgeable tions. In addition,data wereobtainedfromtapes of the meetings of the anti-cultorganization, from "cult-related" articles from the local press, publications of the MRM's themselves, and other publications too diverse to enumeratehere.Fulleranalysesof the UC and SCI can be foundin Lofland(1977)and Wallis(1977)respectively.I don't think there are other analyses of the Assembly as a religious movement.

28

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

country.The areais thus not fertile as an areafor culturalinnovations(includingMRMs). The whole "cult controversy" developed and became a "hot media topic" elsewhere, so that by the time MRMs got to Omahaa negative national climate of public opinionwas alreadyin existence. Thus, the MRMs consideredhere developedin a communitycontext wheretherewas a negative pre-existingopinionabout them, derivedprimarilyfrommedia coverage. These generalizations are less true for the Assembly, rooted in indigenous Evangelical Christianity, than for UC and SCI. THREE MARGINAL RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS Three MRMs are discussed first in terms of their goal orientations. Then evidence from field work is discussed in a subsequent section.
The Goals of the Unification Church.

the and The missionof the UC is to unify worldChristianity prepare way for the coming of of the "Lordof the Second Advent;" the "right relationshipbetween God and Man" will will thus be created,andthe millenium begin.AlthoughRev. Moonis thoughtto play an important role in this process, his exact role is always left deliberatelyambiguous. The UC is a collective crusadeto convert as many as possible to the unificationistviewpoint, to preparepeople for the second coming, and in the long run to develop a work orderthat nature of can be describedas "theocraticsocialism."The crusading,world-transforming the UC mission is described by an informant:
Most religions start out to change society, but they have been changed by society through compromises.... Our challenge in the UC is to live up to God's standards ... no compromises.People say we do Rev. Moon's bidding, but really we do God's.... If we can live by those standards the wholeworldwill benefit.... We are engaged in the spiritualequivalentof war.... If we lose, twenty years from now young people won't believe in God.... In the UC we have like a small cornerwhere the good world is growing.... There are deeper relationshipsbetween people [here]because of their relationship to God.

Thus, the goals of the UC are truly pan-institutional:the long-rangegoals are to bring about a new world order.
The Unification Church in Omaha

By the time the UC established a center in Omahain the mid '70s, the earlierrapid growthof the movementhad begunto level off and then to decline.Publiccriticismbeganto grow because of "deceptive"practices in recruitmentand fund raising (Lofland,1977). Thus while trying to build organizationalstrength throughrecruitmentand fund raising, much of the energy of UC membersin Omahawas spent in trying to portray the UC in a positive light and to neutralize its negative public image. For instance, one member responded that charges of "manipulation"and "mind control" are
completely wrong! I felt completely in my own motivation. I felt I was workingfor something very important. I still feel that way.... People feel [that we are controlled]because we understandthat there's a need for organization and central figures.... [Without them] you can't accomplish big things.... [Rather than being exploited] I feel privileged to be able to contribute.

CULTS AND COMMUNITIES

29

Such responses to negative public image are excellent illustrations of the notion of "secondary deviance" as developed by Lemert (1967). In Omaha the main mode of the UC's attempts to relate to the community can be describedas an active searchfor supportandpubliclegitimacy.They sought these in manifold ways. They contacted the press frequently, seeking publicity for special events and travelling national spokespersons.The leader sought - but rarely obtained - speaking engagements with churches and community organizations.He attended functions of the localclergyassociationbut was usuallytreatedas a curiousoutsider.Most effortsto explain the UC to others were met with indifferenceor hostility. The assessment of a recent state director is that the UC's attempts to relate to the community in Omaha were largely unsuccessful. Duringthe last few years the UC was involuntarilycast in the role of the most visible protagonistof the Omahaanti-cultorganization(LoveOurChildren,Inc.).The interaction between the UC and Love Our Childrenwas dynamic. Almost every activity of the UC was followed by an attempt of the anti-cult group to oppose, expose, and discredit that activity. Severalcuriousand somewhatfriendlypersonalrelationshipsdevelopedbetween the leadersof the UC and Love OurChildren. (Suchrelationshipsillustratethe "intergroupbindingfunctions"of conflictas discussedby Coser[1956:33] ). Even though the rancorous tone and extreme mistrust moderatedas this relationshipevolved, such changes did not alter the basic ideologicalantagonisms between the two organizations.Given the general climateof suspicionaboutcults, it was muchmoredifficultfor the UC to succeedin portraying its mission as legitimate than it was for Love Our Childrento discredit it. With such frustrations as 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 more fertile ground for their labors. Respondingto this move - and similaroutcomesin otherregions- severalinformants suggested that on the local and national policy levels, strategy changes are underway which would have the effect of making the movement and its activities more compatible with the norms of the larger society. When asked about the future, they said that in the near futurethe UC wouldbecomemore "familyoriented,"that is, it wouldgraduallyshift from a church based on single young adults living in a communalstyle to one composed of family units living and working in a conventional manner and worshippingtogether periodically.According to one informant:
wherepeoplelive in regularapartmentsand circulate [Thenew idea]... is to develop"homechurches," The idea is to use establishedfamiliesas a neighborinformation about the UC throughour newspaper. hood base for recruitmentand communityprojects (such as collectingfood and clothing for the poor). In New York City they started neighborhoodclean-upcampaigns.... Eventually most members will live out in communitiesrather than in centers.... [In the future, the UC]will be morelike other humancommunities(includingfamilies, schools, economicorganizationsand media)but it will have a different internal character than ordinary communities today.

Thus, there is a dilemma built into this situation. While they seek legitimacy and "respectability,"their heterodox doctrine and mission dictate that they cannot become "just another denomination."

30

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

The Goals of Scientology

In contrastwith the UC as a collectivecrusade,the SCI's goal is to improveindividual lives. The clients of SCI engage in a therapeutic process ("auditing")and take classes devoted to the improvement of personal skills and effectiveness (e.g., communication, Illustratingthese goals, the "freepersonality personalpower,releasefrom dependencies). test" offered by SCI bears the following caption:
CouldYOU BE HAPPY... HAVE MONEY... ACHIEVE ANY GOAL?Understandingyourself is how. All that Scientology has to offer is understanding.Take this Free Personality Test. Gain Understanding.

The differencebetweenSCI and similarprogramswithinthe "humanpotentialmovement" is that SCI takes placewithinnot only a theoryof humanpsychology,but also an elaborate metaphysicswhichposits the existenceof "thetabeings"as timelessfreespirits.According to SCI teachings these have assumed a variety of animate and inanimate incarnations for since the beginningsof cosmos. In sum, SCI is client-centered: fixed fees ("donations," clients take an elaborate sequence of courses.2 using religious language)
Scientology in Omaha

A SCI mission was established in Omahain the mid '70s, and by 1979 anothercenter was located in the suburbof Bellevue. The communityinterfaceof SCI is a combination of an aggressive recruitment,avoidance of the inquisitive, and active attack on real or perceived opponents. There is a curious blend: an active search for clients from the communitywith a deliberateattempt to maintaina "lowprofile"to otheroutsidersseeking but information.Like the UC, SCI is aggressively growth-oriented, for clients ratherthan of the directtransformation the world.Clientsare sought in placesof publicaccess (parking lots, civic festivals, etc.) and by convassing neighborhoodswith leaflets. As with the UC, potential clients are greeted with warm affective behavior and attempts to explain SCI in a positive manner.As an illustration, one informant approachedby a SCI operative gave the following description.
This chick stopped me in the parking lot and asked me if I wanted to take a free personality test. She said they were doing a survey, and the test only took 10 minutes. We drove back to the SCI centerand I took the test and it was gradedright away.Then I went into a smallroomwith a volunteer and we discussed what the results showed about your personality. He asked me questions about my life . .. difficulties, problems,relations with people. In that personality test they could always coursesthey offered, find some weaknessor problems,and they wereused as the basis forintroductory and how the courses will help you.... I put them off: "I'll think about it." As a last resort they tried to get me to buy a book, but I didn't have enough money. I was suspicious about the whole thing. After I went homevolunteers wouldcall me about once every two weeks for about 8-10 weeks 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, membersof the press, and others are told to stop inquiriesabout the nature of SCI and
of SCI 2. Likemanyother movementsfor individual transformation, arguesthat if thereareenoughpractitioners SCI, the world will, ipso facto, be changed.

CULTS AND COMMUNITIES

31

may be threatened with legal reprisals.3 Outsidersmay be officiallydesignatedby SCI as "suppressivepersons,"whichmakes them fairgame for a variety of harrassments.As an illustrationof the sharpdifferentiation between clients and other outsiders, the experience of a local journalist is informative.
I asked ... [the SCI administrator]... if I could go through his classes and he refused to let me do it as a reporterbecause'I wouldn'thave any interest in reportingit 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 informant said:
They do a good job, I mean, who can 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 public informationabout SCI, though there have been actual law suits - with mixed results. Such a policy toward outsiders is formulatedby the SCI Advanced Organizations and is apparentlystandardizedacross the nation.This involves not only reactivehostility. It also involves "pre-emptive hostility,"in whicheven those who arepotentiallythreatening to SCI (though they have not actually engaged in overtly hostile acts) are warned about the possible consequences of such acts. The Omaha anti-cult organization,for example, was warnedin advancethat any actionon theirpartinvolvingSCI wouldresultin litigation. This policy is relatedto the long history of dealingsbetweenSCI and civic and governmental agencies, a history of many conflicts and official investigations between SCI and governmentregulatoryand medicalassociations.The most publicizedrecent engagement betweenSCI aridgovernmentagencieswas the convictionin a U.S. District Courtof prominent Scientologistsfor conspiringto steal recordsfromthe IRS, the FBI, andotheragencies (October,1979). Wallis (1977)has documentedthe process of "devianceamplification"that has taken place as the result of these increasingly rancorousconflict. Thus was SCI transformed in the public definitionfrom a "harmless,if cranky, self improvementcult" (Wallis, 1977: 215) to a malevolent and deceptive movement which posed a threat to the public interest. From this point SCI came to view itself as the object of religious persecution and began to develop the strategies here termed preemptive hostility to deal with outsiders. While is Wallis argues that "deamplification" taking place - particularlyin England,Australia, and New Zealand- the recentconvictionof prominentScientologistscited above suggests this is not the case in the U.S. This assessment is also supportedby the fact that in 1980 betweenSCI missionsand the communitherewereseveralwellpublicized"conflagrations" This suggests the level of conflict ties in whichthey werelocated(e.g.,Clearwater, Florida). and resultant amplificationprocess has yet to abate in the U.S.

3. The difficulty getting informationabout SCI directly from its practitioners for research purposes meant on that fieldresearchabout SCI, unlikethe localUC, had to relyprimarily SCI literatureandoutsiders'knowledge able about SCI. Given its half-decadeof aggressive recruitingpractices in Omaha,such persons were not hard to find.

32

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

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 of the 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 group Evangelical piety: they make few demands upon the social environment, and seek only to 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 Christian communities 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 segments of the broader community. Unlike other Evangelical organizations, the Assembly is 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 administrators 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 community agency.

CULTS AND COMMUNITIES

33

Accordingto one observer"it'snot so muchwhat they believebut ratherthe intensity." The problem is viewed as one of overcommitmentto conventional beliefs, rather than commitmentto hereticalones. Religionbecomes an all-consuming passion. Membersgive most of the ordinarysocial pastimes that characterizeyoung adults. While they do up not give up jobs or school, they have become an exclusive reference group: members socializemore and more with each other and tend to becomeeach other's only important peers. The Omaha Assembly's style of community interface is to maintain low visibility, a deliberateavoidanceof publicity-seeking ratherthan a denialof information interested to UnlikeSCI's active avoidanceof publicscrutiny,the Assembly'smodeof relatingto parties. the external community can be termed passive avoidance. They simply don't seek the attention of the press or other organizations.Converts come to the Assembly not from anonymous encounters, but rather from existing friendship and affective networks. While the community interface consists of avoidance at the organizational level, members experienceconsiderabledifficulty at the interpersonallevel. They continually struggle to adapt the imperatives of their religion to the necessity for "getting along" in the mundaneworld.As student nurses, for example, some were told to "dropthe Bible stuff" and get on with work. Another worked at a restaurant and had trouble because she wouldn't work on Sundays. Another took his Bible to work at a grocery store and was "getting a lot of guff" from his peers, almost getting fired. Earlierin their existence in Omaha,distinctive dress (conservative)was viewed as a test of religiouscommitment. Recently,they have becomemorewillingto modifysuch things to get alongin the ordinary world.Now, accordingto one informant,such modificationsare less important.They are viewed as secondary to the maintenance of correct beliefs. Oneon-goingsourceof difficultyfor many membersis with theirfamiliesand relatives. Many such relationships are tense, uncertain, conflict-ridden,and heavily laden with emotion and guilt. The communityinterfaceof the Assembly at the organizationallevel is not a problem for members.However, the group has not been successful at constructing a satisfactory rolefor its memberswhichallowsthem to articulatetheir distinctivereligiousexpectations with the more conventional expectations held by outsiders. While the role expectations of the devoteeof UC or SCI are similarlydivergent,such peopleareprovidedwith elaborate interpersonal,ideological, and legal defenses in the face of public hostility. Returningto the questionposed above (aboutwhy the Assembly is treated as a MRM along with the UC and SCI, even though it is not nearly as "deviant"),it is clearly the interactional ratherthan the ideologicaldimensionsof the Assembly whichmake it controversial. As illustratedin the preceedingexamples,the problemis not that they aredefined by communityagents as deviantbecausethey are committedto differentbeliefs,but rather because they seem overcommitted to a conventional belief system. Given the general concern about weak or "watered-down" religious commitments in secular societies, it is to note that overcommitment(or negatively, "fanaticism")is also a source of important public concern.

34

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY In one sense the UC, SCI, and the Assemblyconfronta similarcircumstance regarding their community interfaces. They have the same practical problem:how to survive and maintaina distinctiveand deviantmissionis the context of an ostensiblyhostile or indifferent social world.In anothersense, as has been suggested, there are importantdifferences in how the three MRMs try to deal with such environingcircumstances.Such differences are functions of differing missions (goals) and different histories. Since the UC is a collective crusade to transformthe society, a primarycriterionfor its success is the recruitmentof a large numberof Americanconverts. This requiresthat the UC achievea degreeof publiclegitimacy,whichin turn generatespressurefor accommodation. As Bromley and Shupe (1979) put it:
Because world-transforming movements rely so heavily on a persuasion strategy, are subject to vigorous social control efforts, and cannot forciblyresist repressionwithout abandoningtheir basic with the largersociety. strategy, there is enormouspressuretowardsome measureof accommodation

Duringthe earlyyears of the movementin America,leadersof the movementprobably the underestimated extent to whichthe UC wouldhave to accommodate itself to American culturalnorms (Shupe& Bromley, 1980).Thus, the UC's aggressive and somewhatdeceptive recruiting/fundraising activities, its attempts to supercedethe established churches, and its emphasis on communalliving arrangementshad, by the mid 1970s, stimulated a strong negative reactionby segments of the public.Subsequently,the UC is intensifying its search for legitimacy and attempting to neutralize its negative public image. The dilemmait now faces is finding a means to adapt its activities to be morecompatiblewith Americancultural norms while at the same time maintaining the distinctiveness of its mission. This is perhaps an inherentdilemma which sooner or later confronts all movements for societal transformation. Ratherthan focussingon such a transformation, is client-centered, its primary and SCI is the effectivedeliveryof its distinctivepersonalgrowthopportunities individuals. to goal this does not requirethat SCI be as concernedabout legitimacy in public Accomplishing forumsbut ratherthat it create sufficient autonomywithin its surroundingcommunities to allowfor the effectivepracticeof SCI. SCI needs the freedomto recruitclientsin placesof public access and be left sufficiently alone by regulatory bodies which might suppress the free practice of SCI. Thus SCI mainly seeks legitimacy with its clients in controlled settings and has devoted considerableinterpersonal,public relations, and legal energies in segregating the organizationfrom community control. "Pre-emptiveaggression" has evolved as a deliberate strategy from a long history of hostile and rancorous contacts between SCI and societal agents. The currentsituation between SCI and FederalGovernmentAgencies may have two plausible outcomes. SCI may change in "adaptive modes," seeking to portray itself in a more positive fashion, or it may become increasinglymore hostile and covert. With all of the publiccontroversyabout "cults,"SCI alonehas drawnmorethan a passing interest by GovernmentAgencies. It is possible that so severe a climate of suppressionhas been created that SCI will join the graveyard of other movements in Americanhistory that dwindledinto insignificanceafter oversteppingthe bounds of publictolerance.Even such

CULTS AND COMMUNITIES

35

attempts by Government Agencies may not, however, be sufficient to destroy SCI. It is well known that such "persecution"can galvanize a movement. Persecution has been held by some to be an essential ingredient for the survival of such movements (Gerlach & Hine, 1970).It confirmsthe moralrighteousnessof the cause amongdevotees and forces them into more effective modes of mobilizationin relation to the environment.If so, the opposition should be strong enough to requirethe effective mobilizationof resourcesbut not so strong that the movement is destroyed. Where SCI lies along this continuum of societal reaction is a subjective judgment. My own assessment is that the opposition is becomingtoo strong for it to survive much longerin its old "combative"mode, but rather than move towardaccommodation, will developmoreelaborateinsulatingmechanisms SCI and otherwise remain unchanged. The situation of the Assembly is very different. It is not a transformingmovement like the UC and, while it does aim at individual transformation(like SCI), it doesn't do cash nexus. Hence, it does not require so within the context of an explicit entrepreneurial massive public sanction as does the UC nor is it likely to become enmeshed in entanglements with public and professionalregulatoryagencies. Even though there is an absence of the kind of communityinterface at the organizationallevel which produces an intense set of dilemmasfor the organization, there arenonethelessintense interpersonal difficulties for individual members. Ironically,one difficultyin the long-termsurvivalof the Assembly may be the absence of such an interface to provide the external stimulus for effective group mobilizationand adaptation to a set of environmentcircumstances.That is, granting the foregoing argument, there may not be sufficient pressures for the maintenance of in-group solidarity and cohesion.Being within the religiousframework a pervasiveEvangelicalmovement, of the Assembly is not as ideologically "deviant" as the other two MRMs. This means it has easier access to public legitimacy, but also it must contend with many religiousalternatives within fundamentalist Christianity. Thus, without a nationwide organizational supportsystem or a distinctive ideology,it wouldseem that each local Assembly will have difficulty in the long run in maintainingitself as a distinctive religious group. Its future will dependnot only on the uncertaintiesof local recruitmentand maintenanceactivities but also on the future of the broaderEvangelical movement. AN EXTENSION OF MOVEMENTORGANIZATION THEORY Thereexists a sizable literature about the developmentand transformationof social movement organizations(Messinger, 1955; Gusfield, 1955;Zald & Denton, 1963; Zald & Asch, 1966; Curtis & Zurcher,1973). While Richardson,Stewart and Simmonds' (1979) examination this literaturein the context of theirstudy of a religiousmovementis mainly of supportive, they point out that such literature to date has dealt mainly with "internal variables,"such as goals, leadershipstyles, memberincentives, etc. Thus, while a general recognitionexists that the relationsbetween a movementorganization(MO)and its social environment are important, few explicit treatments of such relations are to be found in the MO literature.What follows is an attempt to extend MO theory so as to conceptualize the mannerin whichthe MO-environment relationsaffect the developmentand transformation of social movements. The following relies heavily on the case materials presented here, as well as other writings about MRMs (especially Bromley & Shupe, 1979).

36

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

In general,whethera Movementorganizationfinds itself in a hostile climate of public opinion and community relations will be a function of the following six factors: 1. Visibility.Since MOs often are embeddedin movementswhich representsubcultural alternatives and/or advocate social change, they are likely to generate controversy and hostility to the extent they are publicly visible. While the three MRMs treated here have developed a degree of public visibility, it is possible to find a multitude of similar organizationsin the same community which are generally unknown and have not become objects of public controversy. Goals. The goals of a MO are also critical determinantsof the kinds of relationships that MOs have with their environments. The distinction is conventionally drawn between those movements which seek to change society - what Bromley and Shupe (1979) call "worldtransformingmovements" - and those which seek primarilyto transformindividuals.While Richardsonet al. (1979)arguethat this is an ambiguous distinction in that movements often claim both goals, I think the distinction is still useable and important. It is one thing to claim, as do Scientologists, that if enough individuals 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 transformthe world by socialism." Worldtransforming movements,since they pose a instituting a "theocratic threat to existing social arrangements,would seem to have a much greater potential for generatinghostileenvironmental relationsthan wouldthose whoseprimaryinterest is individual change.
The degree of "ideological deviance. " The greater the discontinuity between the MO

2.

3.

for ideologyand morebroadlysharedculturalvalues,the greaterthe likelihood conflictriddenrelationsin the socialenvironment. This factoris especiallylikelyto bringMOs into conflict relations with those agents responsiblefor maintainingand promoting various culturalorthodoxies. For instance, part of the hostility toward the UC is its Churchleadershave persistent attempt to representitself as a Christianorganization. been particularlysensitive to this issue, and concernedabout the potentialfor MRMs to spread heterodox beliefs.
4. The degree of discontinuity between the lifestyles of MO members and that prevailing

in the social environment.Some MOs requirelittle alterationof members'lifestyles outside of organizationalparticipation,while others require extensive alterations. Among MRMs, there are those which requirenothing other than participationin regularworship or meditation sessions, while others 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 living in highlyregimented, self-sufficient and cohesive,andeconomically communities, which remove members from conventional pursuits and lock them into social "actually marginality"(Robbins,Anthony & Curtis, 1975: 56). It is this issue more than any other which has stimulated the development of a broad-basedanti-cult movement in the United States, the motive force for whichis suppliedby cult members'families who are angry because of the deflection of the family member'sconventional "life

CULTS AND COMMUNITIES

37

career." In this regard, it is impoartant to observe that the Assembly has become locally controversial over the issue of lifestyles, not heterodox religious doctrine. 5. The extent to which MOs find themselves in competition with established agencies in the community. The exemplary case of this factor is the long-standing enmity between SCI and the mental health establishment, although MRMs have also come into conflictswith counsellingagencies,campusministryorganizations,and established churches.The issue here is mainly a matter of "turf"encroachments,rather than ideological differences. The shift from the practice of Dianetics (as an alternative psycho-therapeuticsystem) to SCI as a religion is partially explainablein terms of increasing pressure from the medical establishment. The style of communityinterfacedevelopedby the MO. The central argumentof this paperis that the communityinterfaceof a MOis an importantvariablein determining the nature of movement-environmentrelations. Three styles have been suggested: (1) passive avoidance, (2) active avoidance (including"pre-emptivehostility"), and (3)an active searchfor externalsupport and legitimacy. Passive avoidance,if successful, is likely to minimize environmentalhostility, because it minimizesthe visibility of the MO.This is not always possible, however.Nationally,anti-cultgroups arebusy trying to monitor the whereabouts and activities of MRMs (e.g., The Way International, the "Jim Roberts"cult) which are otherwise trying to avoid publicity. Where this occurs,the MOis likely to attempt to "go underground" adopt a covert style and of existence. Moreover, passive avoidanceis not a likely option for expansionistmovements. The other two types of communityinterfaces are both likely to create hostile relations in the social environment.

6.

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 necessarily die out. As suggested earlier, some analysts argue that a degree of environmentalconflict is essential to the effectivemobilization a movement,and that theremay be a curvilinear of between the degree of oppositionto a movement and its growth and developrelationship ment. What does seem clear is that when a movement exists in a hostile and conflictridden social environment, it will most likely undergo transformation.To paraphrase Blumer's famous dictum about understanding individual behavior,4it can be said that the direction of change in a MO comes not directly from environmentalhostility and pressurebut ratherfromhow the organizationhandles,neutralizes,and responds to such pressures; hence of central importanceis the community interface as a constructed set of responses to environmentalconditions.5
4. "His behavior, accordingly is not a result of such things as environmentalpressures, stimuli, motives, attitudes, and ideas but arises instead from how he interprets and handles these things in the action which he is constructing" (Blumer, 1962). 5. To view the communityinterface of a movement as an on-goingseries of constructed responses is accurate, I think,yet movementsdo not have completefreedomin the constructionof such responses."World transforming movements," since they are likely to be dependent on persuasive strategies are most likely to search actively for supportand legitimacy within the environment.And, as mentioned,there are those movementswhichwould prefer to avoid visibility but which nonetheless are not allowed to do so.

38

JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

REFERENCES Anthony, Dick and Thomas Robbins 1974 "TheMeherBaba Movement:Its effect on post-adolescent social alienation." In Zaretskyand Leone(eds.),Religious Movements in Contemporary America. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Becker, Howard S. 1952 "Becoming a marijuanauser." American Journal of Sociology. March 57: 451-65. Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckmann
1966 The Social Construction of Reality. Garden

City, New Jersey: Doubleday Anchor. Blumer, Herbert 1962 "Society as symbolic interaction." In Arnold Rose (ed.), Human Behavior and Social Processes. Barton: HoughtonMifflin. Bromley, David G., Bruce Bushing and Anson Shupe 1980 "TheUnificationChurchand the American family:Strain,conflict,andcontrol."Paper presented to the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion. Bromley, David G. and Anson D. Shupe, Jr. 1979 Moonies in America: Cult, Church, and Crusade. Beverly Hills, California:Sage Publications. Coser, Lewis 1956 TheFunctionsof SocialConflict.New York: The Free Press, a division of Macmillan Company. Foss, D. and R. Larkin 1979 "The roar of the Lemming: Youth, postmovementgroups,and the life construction crisis." Sociological Inquiry 49: 264-85. Gerlach, Luther P. and Virginia H. Hine 1970 People, Power and Change:Movements of Social Transformation.Indianapolis and New York: Bobbs-Merrill. Goffman, Erving 1967 InteractionRitual:Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden City, New Jersey: Doubleday Anchor. Gusfield, Joseph R. 1955 "Social structure and moral reform: A study of the WCTU.'AmericanJournalof Sociology 61: 221-232. Kitsuse, John I. and MalcolmSpector 1973 "Toward a sociology of social problems: Social conditions, value judgments, and social problems."Social Problems20: 414. Larkin, R. and D. Foss 1978 "Worshipping absurd:The negation of the social causality among post-movement youth." Sociological Analysis 39: 157-64. Lemert, Edwin M. 1967 Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Lofland, John 1977 Doomsday Cult. Enlarged edition. New York: Irvington Press. Matza, David 1969 Becoming Deviant. EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. Messinger, S. L. 1955 "Organizational transformation: A case study of a declining social movement." American Sociological Review 20: 3-10. J. Richardson, T., M. W. Stewart and R. B. Simmonds 1979 Organized Miracles: A Study of a ConFundamentatemporaryYouth,Communal, list Organization. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books. Robbins, Thomas, Dick Anthony and Thomas Curtis 1975 "Youthculturereligiousmovements:Evaluating the integrative hypothesis." Sociological 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, Thomas J. 1975 "Labelling theoryof mentalillness."American Sociological Review 39: 444-452. 1964 "Thesocietal reactionto deviance:Ascriptive elements in the psychiatric screening of mental patients in a Midwesternstate." Social Problems 11: 401-413. Shupe, Anson and David G. Bromley 1980 "Reversemissionizing: Sun MyungMoon's Unificationist Movement in the United States." FreeInquiryin Creative Sociology 8: 197-203. 1979 "The Moonies and the anti-cultists:Movement and counter movement in conflict." Sociological Analysis 40: 325-34. Wallis, Roy 1977 The Road to Total Freedom. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press. 1975 "Societal reactionto Scientology:A study of the sociology of deviant religion." In Wallis(ed.),Sectarianism: Analyses of ReliSects. London: Peter gion and Non-religious Owen. Wilson, Bryan 1970 Religious Sects. New York: McGraw-Hill. Zald, M. N. and Roberta Asch 1966 "Social movement organizations:Growth, decay, and change." Social Forces 44: 327-341. Zald, M. N. and P. Denton 1963 "From Evangelism to general service: On the transformation the YMCA." Adminiof strative Science Quarterly8: 214-234. Zurcher,Louis A. and Russell L. Curtis 1973 "A comparative analysis of propositions describingsocialmovementorganizations." Sociological Quarterly14: 175-88.