Photo by Mike Burstein. 28 Oct. 2008. 28th Burstein!'s photostream. Flickr.Com
Paula Drammeh-Davis
Research Paper
March 24, 2011
Social Problems 1160
Although it is expected for one’s past to shape his present, one’s present shape may unexpectedly become irregular. Two years after he earned a law degree from Washburn University in 1962, he started his own law firm in Topeka, Kansas, which will later be staffed mostly by his adult children. At first, the firm gained recognition for its numerous cases that dealt with civil rights such as African American clients claiming discrimination by school systems, a predominately black American Legion alleging police abuse, non-white clients accusing discrimination by Kansas Power and Light, Southwestern Bell, and the Topeka City Attorney, two female professors claiming discrimination by universities in Kansas, and so forth. One website quoted his daughter: “We took on the Jim Crow establishment, and Kansas did not take that sitting down. They used to shoot our car windows out, screaming we were nigger lovers,” and claims that their firm represented one-third of civil-rights cases on Kansas’s federal docket (qtd. in “About”). These cases earned him three awards in 1986 and 1987; notably, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People gave one of the awards (“About”; “Timeline”).
It may be shocking to most people that the above person is the very one and same Pastor Fred Phelps from the notorious Westboro Baptist Church (WBC). By picketing various events with signs expressing extreme statements of hatred and intolerance, they are constantly making waves in the news, which is paradoxical when compared to their civil rights history. Most recently, the Supreme Court’s ruling that their offensive protests are protected by the First Amendment has been splashed all over the media. The fact that WBC considers other conservative Christian denominations, including both mainstream and fundamental ones, to be too liberal or too radical exemplifies their extreme reactionary beliefs. An example was stated on one of their now-deactivated websites: “Methodist, Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Catholic, Northern and Southern Baptist, Church of Christ, Assembly of God, etc. have all departed from God. Most well-known preachers (Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc.) have departed from God, and disassociated themselves with pure Gospel preaching” (qtd. in “WBC: In Their Own Words”). Myriad critics from all walks of life have many definitions for this unorthodox flock ranging from cult to hate group, but most frequently just as “a bunch of nuts.” From a sociological perspective, is WBC a cult? By looking closer at not only how the usage of the term “cult” in an academic discipline differs from the mainstream usage but also the different usages of “cult” within the sociology field, one can see how WBC fits and does not fit the profile of a cult.
In his book, The New Believers, David V. Barrett devotes the entire second chapter to the problematic, complex definition of the word “cult.” The author’s first main point is that the definition depends on who is using the word. Journalists, theologians, preachers, psychologists, sociologists, anti-cult activists, and so on refer to the word “cult” differently because of their diverse positions and intentions (Barrett 19). Barrett compiles laypeople’s stereotypical associations with cults such as peculiar religious beliefs, unseemly practices, usage of false promises to tempt people to join, money swindling, an unscrupulous, controlling leader, brainwashing, and so forth, and he gives an example of how a tabloid journalist and an anti-cult watch group often take advantage of the above, implied, derogatory mindset toward the term “cult” as an unspoken definition because these assumptions serve their purpose—unlike a more neutral term such as “sect” or “alternative religion” (20). Other familiar usages of “cult” are mentioned in the chapter, but the author’s above point captures the subjective meanings of “cult” as opposed to the objective meanings used within the academic circle.
Studies on cults are found primarily in two interdisciplinary fields: sociology of religion and social psychology. Sociology of religion focuses on religious organizations’ roles in society, and social psychology focuses on relations between individuals and groups. Both of these fields are not concerned with the validity of a cult’s ideology. The sociology of religion’s typology provides an objective definition of cult, and the social psychology’s concentration on the relationships within a cult offers different characterizations for cults.
The church-sect typology is a widely used framework in sociology of religion that defines the different type of religious organizations on a continuum.
Even though the typology looks simple, it is based on ideal types, which can be a misleading term. “Ideal type” is a sociology term that has nothing to do with perfect or desirable traits. Ideal types are constructed from common, consistent elements found in typical cases. Because reality consists of variations, ideal type is mostly used as a tool to measure or compare any given sociological subject. Basically, the first type, a church exists when there are no other competing religions in its society, and it is usually entangled with its society’s politics and economics. A recognizable example is the Roman Catholic Church in 12th century Europe before religious pluralism. Denomination occurs when a church loses its monopoly such as the present day Roman Catholic Church (In some Latin American countries, it still qualifies as a church.) or when a sect’s membership grows and become more established such as Lutherans. A sect is a religious group that splits from its parent religion, which is typically a denomination. Sects usually claim that their parent denominations have become too liberal and vow to return to the “true religion.” Most denominations in the U.S. started as sects like Baptists and Seventh-day Adventist. If a sect does not dissolve or develop into a denomination, it tends to remain steady in growth and forms fixed norms or, in other words, become institutionalized. An example of an institutionalized sect is the Amish. The chief distinction between a cult and a sect is that a cult embraces new religious concepts instead of advocating the return to the “pure religion.” Cults often claim that they have discovered lost or forgotten sacred texts or a new prophecy. Other distinctions include that a cult is rarely a split from a parent religion, often combines existing religious ideologies, tends to remain in a transitory state that will later dissolve after the death of its leader or founder, and is most likely led by a charismatic leader, who bring forth the new or lost religious concept which becomes the focal aspect of the cult. For example, The Book of Mormon and temple worship are new concepts that originally defined Mormons (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) as a cult, but now most sociologists label them as a denomination due to their growth and their development of more mainstream religious characteristics (“Introduction”). The above typology and brief summary of the ideal types of religion help illustrate not only the objective, traditional identification of cults but also how it relates to other classifications of religions.
Yet still another complication exists with defining cult among scholars. The term “new religious movement” (NRM) is often used by some modern day sociologists in order to avoid the pejorative implications of the word “cult” (“Introduction”; Barrett 24). The debate surrounding the NRM is noted in several sociological texts including Barrett’s book. The problem with the NRM term is that not all NRMs are new. For example, in the East the Hare Krishna movement is best described as an ancient variant of Hinduism, but in the West, the movement (better known as the International Society for Krishna Consciousness) fits the NRM description. After Barrett gives details for other arguments over the NRM term, his conclusion, similar to that of many other sociologists, is to use Eileen Barker’s proposal that NRM is a term designated to religious movements formed after WWII and to use the term “alternative religion” for both NRMs and older religious groups (sects and cults) that are different from mainstream religions (24).
Where does WBC fit in the church-set typology? WBC refers to itself as Primitive Baptist also known as Old School Baptist (“About”), which is a sect of Baptist that is characterized mostly by its Calvinistic beliefs, especially predestination (Daniels), although no mainstream Primitive Baptist churches claim any association with WBC. Eastside Baptist Church built a new church, named it Westboro Baptist, and asked Fred Phelps to become pastor of the newly built church. WBC officially opened in May of 1956, but very soon afterwards Phelps lost support from Eastside’s congregation mostly due to his hostile behavior and preaching beliefs that went beyond Eastside’s strict conservative beliefs (Bell). Based on this above history, it is clear that WBC split from a denomination. The blurred aspect is that WBC is claiming to be a sect known as Primitive Baptist, yet Phelps preaches a more extreme version of the mainstream Primitive Baptist doctrine. By viewing WBC as putting a new spin or a different emphasis on an existing sect’s dogma, WBC can easily be seem as a cult masquerading as a sect. On the other hand, WBC claims that it is returning to the very basic concept of Primitive Baptist dogma, and this suggests a newly formed sect splitting instantly off a parental sect. Since one main trait of a cult is adding a new concept to an existing religious concept, WBC’s belief on how “true Christians” should behave, express their viewpoints and treat nonmembers (referring mostly to their numerous protests and lawsuits) is a vastly new behavior for religious organizations in a developed country. This aspect of WBC makes WBC more of a cult than a sect.
In the social psychology field, the term “cult” has very little to do with classification of religion organizations, and much more with group dynamics. In his book, Cults, Conspiracies, and Secret Societies, Arthur Goldwag offers a clear interpretation of the word “cult” that is used among cult experts: “…a coercive or totalizing relationship between a dominating leader and his or her unhealthily dependent followers… how much authority its leaders grant themselves—and how slavishly devoted to them its followers are” (4). Goldwag points out that Wicca, Gnosticism and many other religious movements, which fit the description of alternative religions, often lack the controlling and abusive characteristics. Thus they are not viewed as cults (5). Cult scholars in this field are often associated with secular or human rights anti-cult movements instead of the religious-based cult watch groups like the Apologetic Index website. Since cult is defined solely on the configuration of an organization, non-religious groups can also be considered cults. Some of Goldwag’s examples include Taliesin (Frank Lloyd Wright’s School of Architecture), Hitler’s Nuremberg rallies, and Amway (a multilevel marketing company) (7).
Anti-cult advocates may use the word “brainwashing,” but experts in cultic studies avoid using this popular term. “Brainwashing” was originally coined by a journalist, who poorly paraphrased a scientific research, and the controversial “brainwashing theory” used in many court cases will later become a hypothesis discredited by the American Psychological Association (Barrett 30). A renowned psychologist, Robert Lifton’s studies, especially his study on American prisoners after the Korean War, are commonly mentioned by numerous experts; however, it was his research that was unfairly blemished by the word “brainwashing” (Barrett 30). Nevertheless, many professionals including both Barrett and Goldwag still refer to Lifton’s research (Barrett 30; Goldwag 5); moreover, the usage of the term “brainwashing” can be an indication of the author’s credibility. According to many of his writings, Lifton is convinced that there is a global epidemic of ideological totalism, which is threatening civil liberties. Cult is one form of ideological totalism that Lifton addresses in his article, “Cult Formation[1].” In this article, Lifton states that there are three recurring psychological themes in cultic studies that can be used to identify a cult: “1) a charismatic leader who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose their power; 2) a process I [Lifton] call coercive persuasion or thought reform; 3) economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.” The article continues by explaining methods of ideological totalism that are very much the same as the eight criteria for thought reform outlined in his book, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, which is posted on several websites.
Of Lifton’s three identifying traits for a cult, WBC fits the second one on thought reform and the third one on exploitation the best. The first one referring to a charismatic leader is iffy. Fred Phelps is hardly described as charming in the media, but in his youth there are a few accounts that suggest he can be somewhat appealing. In 1951 when Phelps was 21 and attending John Muir College in Pasadena, California, (before WBC’s existence), he was featured in Time Magazine as a soapbox preacher: “…drew crowds of up to 100. Over & over he denounced the ‘sins committed on campus by students and teachers…promiscuous petting…evil language…profanity…cheating…teachers’ filthy jokes in classrooms…pandering to the lusts of the flesh’” (qtd. in “Religion”). When Fred Phelps first arrived at Eastside Baptist Church, he was so well liked that the congregation hired him as an associate pastor (Bell). By reading various narratives about Phelps’ background, the general impression is that when people disagree with or confront Phelps he will react in a hostile manner. Phelps’s hostility isolates him from people whereas a typical cult leader uses his charisma to smooth people over.
By applying Lifton’s criteria on thought reform and exploitation to WBC one can show how “cultish” the flock is. The WBC flock has been cited to have between 71 to 150 members by various sources. A majority of the members, about 90 of them, are related by blood or marriage. Basically the Phelps clan is three generations that include the nine loyal adult children and their children (“About”). The fact that WBC is mostly just one family clan emphasizes Phelps’s tendency to isolate himself and family from the rest of the world, and the reason there are often children involved in the protest events is that the children are his grandchildren. Fred Phelps has 13 adult children, but four of them are estranged. His seventh child, Nate Phelps is now speaking out about his abusive childhood. He has an official website, gives numerous speeches against the dangers of religion and child abuse, advocates for LGBT, and is currently writing a book about his childhood (Phelps). Most of the inside story of WBC’s early days, which are often used in other sites, comes from Nate Phelps’s interviews, speeches, and blogs. Bell’s online narrative, Addicted to Hate: The Fred Phelps Story, mostly quotes both Nate and Mark Phelps, the second son who is also estranged, when describing what it was like to grow up in the Phelps household.
Lifton’s two main criteria for thought reform are “Milieu Control” that refers to “the control of all communication within a given environment” and “Mystical Manipulation” that is the choreography of experiences that appear spontaneous but are planned. Fred Phelps purchased adjoining houses around his original house/church creating a compound that shares a common backyard (Bell). This geographical isolation is one way to control communication with the outside society. Although Nate and Mark both attended public school, they were not allowed to attend classes that taught evolution and Christmas events. Their father threatened to sue the school; therefore, Nate and Mark often sat in the library during these occasions (Bell). Lifton’s examples of mystical manipulation techniques include fasting, chanting, and limited sleep. Mark Phelps’s bio page states that he “…was taught his father’s extreme version of Calvinism from an early age. This was accompanied by extreme physical punishments and abuse, extreme dietary and health requirements, and other extreme expectations.” Another Lifton’s criterion is “Demand for Purity” that is when members are constantly pressured into conforming to the viewpoint of the world as black and white and into striving to fit the ideal. WBC’s messages during protests and other public appearances obviously illustrate not only the above criterion but also another Lifton’s criterion, “Dispensing of existence.” Dispensing of existence refers to the privilege to decide who has the right to exist or not. WBC’s belief of predestination and never-ending assertion that all outsiders are sinners and are “going to burn in hell” exemplifies this. The above is just a very brief summary of comparing some of Lifton’s criteria to WBC; moreover, this shows the strong aspect of WBC as a cult without going into in-depth details of the family’s history.
What makes WBC dramatically not a typical cult is that it is not making any effort to grow with new members. WBC purposefully isolates itself from society at large by staging protests that offend almost everyone. Despite their strange dogma and behaviors that gives a distinct impression that they are insane, WBC consists of well-educated, skillful lawyers who are constantly filing frivolous lawsuits often associated with the First Amendment despite their hatred toward America. WBC has been awarded million of dollars in various lawsuits (“About”; Bell). Some critics claim that WBC is just a fake religious organization using their infamous protests for monetary gains, but Fred Phelps’s past strongly suggests that he genuinely has zealous, radical beliefs. There is clearly some truth behind the concept that WBC puts itself out there publicly in an unfavorable way anticipating their civil rights to be violated for financially gain. Although it is sometimes common for cults to desire media attention, WBC’s method of economical support is atypical for cults.
Another way that WBC is stunting its growth is that Fred Phelps forbids marriage outside the church, and Phelps’s granddaughters expressed no desire to marry because they claim they are “…living in the last of the last days” in a documentary entitled, The Most Hated Family in America (qtd in “About”). Sociologists in religion do characterize cults as having a tendency to remain in transitory state. If the cult does not grow and become a more established religion, it will dissolve after the death of its founder or leader. A historical example of a cult’s birth and growth is Christianity. Before his death, Jesus and his followers would be described as a Jewish sect as well as the period after his death when his brother James led the Jerusalem church. When Paul became the leader with a different focus, the reformist Jewish sect became the cult of Christ. Christianity did not become a major religion until Emperor Constantine legalized Christian worship (Barrett 21). Now that Fred Phelps is advancing in age, what is WBC’s future? Will the group dissolve? It doesn’t seem likely because these last few years Phelps’s daughter, Shirley Phelps-Roper, who is an attorney at the Phelps Chartered Law Firm, has been the running the daily operations and acting as the spokesperson for WBC (“About”; Bell). She may be changing the WBC’s focus. Recently many critics have been describing the group more as a religious hate group similar to the Ku Klux Klan. Personally, I consider WBC to be a cult—just a new type of cult that uses modern technology and laws in order to fight against modern society’s more liberal values. Most of all, I hope that the Phelps clan overlooks the biblical story of Lot’s daughters in Genesis 19: 30-38 when seeking growth for the church. Works Cited
“About Fred Phelps.” God Hates Fred Phelps. WordPress.Org.WordPress, n.p. Web. 10 Mar. 2011.
Barrett, David V. The New Believers: A Survey of Sects, Cults, and Alternative Religions. London: Cassell, 2001. Print.
Bell, Jon Michael. Addicted to Hate: The Fred Phelps Story. The Anti-Phelps Underground, n.d. Web. 15 Mar. 2011.
Daniels, W.R., Jr. “Predestination.” Primitive Baptist Online. PrimitiveBaptist.org, n.p. Web. 20 Mar. 2011.
“Fred Phelps Timelime.” splcenter.org. Southern Poverty Law Center, 2011. Web. 10 Mar. 2011.
Goldwag, Arthur. Cults, Conspiracies, and Secret Societies. New York: Vintage, 2009. Print.
“Introduction to Sociology/Religion.” Wikibooks: The Open-Content Textbooks Collection. Updated 25 Feb. 2011.The Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 8 Mar. 2011.
Lifton, Robert Jay, M.D. “Cult Formation.” Cultic Studies Journal 8.1 (1991): 1-6. International Cultic Studies Association. ICSA Inc., 2011. Web. 15 Mar. 2011.
Phelps, Nate. Nate Phelps Official Website. Natephelps.com, n.d. Web. 20 Mar. 2011.
“Religion: Repentance In Pasadena.” TIME in partnership with CNN, 11 Jun 1951. TIME Inc., 2011. Web. 20 Mar. 2011.
“Westboro Baptist Church: In Their Own Words: On Christians.” Extremism in America. ADL. The Anti-Defamation League, 2011. Web. 20 Mar. 2011.
[1] This article is an electronic reprint with no indication of the printed version’s page numbers despite the pagination in Works Cited.
