What Distinguishes a Small Religion from a Large Cult
Author: Lai Peng
20230507 Grade 10, Beijing.
I. Introduction
The Internet has been the infrastructure of society and has been embedded in people's daily lives. With communication technology as a medium, people have enriched communication. The connection among people has become more convenient, and more communities based on the relationship of interests are emerging. Cults are growing rapidly in the network society (Stalnaker, 2019).
Cults are complicated. Most comments about cults from the media are negative (Moynihan, 2023). However, not all cults are dangerous and destructive. Some cults have slowly developed into religions. More and more scholars (Richardson, 1993) propose that the term new religious movement should take the place of the name cult to eliminate cult’s negative metaphors.
what distinguishes a small religion from a large cult? The research question of this paper can be broken down into two questions:
1. what is the difference between cult and religion?
2. what kind of cult will become a small religion?
The first question will be answered from the view of definition. The second question tries to explain which factors can make a cult to be a religion when the cult becomes large. Only a part of cults will become a religion. Those factors contribute to some large cults becoming religions and some large cults not becoming religions. When we find the factors, the main research question of this paper has an answer. Those factors are also the ones that distinguish a small religion from a large cult.
Back to the origins and definitions, it is found that there is no sharp distinction between cults and religions. Taking Flying Spaghetti Monsterism as an example, this paper argues that only when the cult’s religious culture and practices are accepted by contemporary society, can the cult evolve into a small religion.
II. The Difference Between Religion and Cult
In order to understand the difference between cults and religions, this paper will first introduce the definition of cults and religions.
What is religion? James Henry Leuba (1912) analyzed 48 definitions of religion in his book: A psychological study of religion. He divided religious definitions into three categories: the intellectualist, the affectivistic, and the voluntaristic. Thus, we could see that the concept of religion became complicated because religion was studied from multiple disciplines such as the sociology of religion and philosophy of religion. In the long history of scholarship on the concept of religion, scholars (Geertz,1973; Woodhead, 2009) have attempted to answer the question of how many elements are included in the concept of religion. However, there is no consensus on the concept of religion (Griffiths, 2000). The concept of religion is usually summarized as a range of social practices. This paper considers the seven dimensions of religion (Smart,1998) as a framework for exploring and understanding religion. The seven dimensions of religion include the ritual dimension, experiential dimension, mythological dimension, doctrinal dimension, ethical dimension, institutional dimension, and material dimension. The definition interprets the structure of religion. The seven dimensions of religion contain the relationship between the individual and religion, and the relationship between religion and society. This definition is the latest expansion of the definition of religion by scholars so this paper will use it as an observing framework.
What is cult? The definition of cult is relatively controversial. Cult might be defined in a general way as dealing with sacred things (Leuba, 1913). It is not similar to a sect that diverges from a traditional religion. A cult originates from mainstream society through cultural innovation or cultural fragmentation (Stark& Bainbridge,1986; Eister,1972). Cults usually seem to be negative (Heller, 2021; Collins,1982). In fact, the implication of the term cult has only changed in the past decades. Some scholars had made efforts to give a clear definition for cult and keep it away from the extremely negative meanings (Richardson, 1983). Scholars(Gallagher, 2007; Barker,1999）advocate that the term cult should be taken place by the term new religious movement.
According to the definitions, the difference between cults and religions usually included 3 points: First, cults are usually organized more loosely than religions. Second, doctrines and rituals of religions are socially accepted. But some cults get social exclusion because they bring terror, crime, and suicide. Third, religions are legal, but some cults are illegal.
Religions and cults are not distinct clearly. Both cults and religions believe in the existence of the supernatural and believe in mystical power outside of the real world. As the new religious movement, cults’ religious ideas rebel against traditional religions. The difference between cults and religions is not the opposite relationship but innovation versus tradition, newly born versus already existing. When a cult gradually evolves into a religion, it means that it is accepted by society, and it will coexist with the traditional religion.
III. What Kind of Cult Can Become a Religion
Some cults eventually became religions, but others would not evolve forever. Then what are the main factors which enable some cults to become religions when cults become large?
As analyzed in the previous section, when a cult evolved into religion, it means that the new religious culture and practice are accepted by traditional society. The social integration theory could help us understand cults’ social acceptance and social exclusion. Robert Ezra Park (1924) argued that social distance between immigrants and original social structures can be generated. After experiencing "contact," "competition," and "adaptation," an "assimilation" will occur. As an outsider to traditional religious culture and mainstream society, cult’s development has the same direction. Only after a cult gets social acceptance, will it evolve into a religion. After social integration, the new religion will share the same social structure with other traditional religions.
This paper uses the 7 dimensions of religion (Smart, 1998) as an analysis framework to determine what kind of cult will get social acceptance. The ritual dimension, experiential dimension, mythological dimension, doctrinal dimension, and material dimension (including church, slogan, and so on) can be summarized as cultural aspects. Thus, cultural, ethical, and institutional acceptance enable some cults to become religions.
Firstly, some cults get the cultural acceptance of society. Religious rituals, experience, mythology, and doctrines of a cult result from cultural innovation. They usually have a tense relationship with the traditional mainstream culture. However, the religious-cultural innovation of the cult is still rooted in real society. Some of the cults have a cultural basis of reality life. When the religious doctrine of the cult could meet the need of some people, the cult will gain cultural identity. For example, Christianity in its early stages was also a cult (Nelson, 1968). After having a degree of cultural acceptance, Christianity was claimed as the state religion of the Roman Empire.
Secondly, some cults get legal and ethical acceptance. Only if the cult’s religious practice brings people decent and legal experiences, it will slowly gain legal acceptance. When the religious feeling and experience of a cult is destructive, it means that the cult will not be accepted by the law or ethics of mainstream society. For example, Aum Shinrikyo in Japan (McCurry, 2018) committed a series of criminal activities including murder in the subway. Because of religious terrorism, the cult was not admitted by law and ethics in Japan, and the founder of Aum Shinrikyo was sentenced to death.
Thirdly, some cults get the acceptance of the public. The cult’s organizations are often loose (Sweet, 1951) so there is no clear distinction between members and non-members. When a cult acquires public support and has a tightly organized system, they acquire some characteristics of a religion. For instance, Sikhism in India (Nikky-Guninder Kaur Singh, 2011) believes that everyone has equal status in the eyes of God. At the beginning of development, the number of members of Sikhism was not large. Since the doctrine was in line with the public's expectations, Sikhism developed very fast and became one of the top 10 largest religions in the world. Not all cults will be accepted by the public. The public fear and avoid destructive cults.
IV. A Case Study: The Flying Spaghetti Monsterism
In order to make the answer clearer, this paper takes Flying Spaghetti Monsterism as an example to describe the interaction between cult and society. How did a new religion be accepted by society?
Flying Spaghetti Monsterism was a cult that believed the world was made by a flying spaghetti monster. Bobby Henderson, a physics graduate of Oregon State University, created the Flying Spaghetti Monsterism in 2005 (Spaschi,2021). Bobby Henderson wrote an open letter and claimed that the drunk “flying spaghetti monster” created all things in the world because he wanted to sarcastically protest intelligent design theory that cannot be proved (Henderson,2006). However, the jokes get a lot of young fans. Young People follow Flying Spaghetti Monsterism for absurdity, irony, and rebellion. According to the official website of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, the members of this cult have spread to about 60 countries.
Flying Spaghetti Monsterism is evolving from a cult to a religion. Just as the appreciation words of Bobby Henderson showed--- “more and more people devoted long hours and considerable mind power” (Henderson,2006), Flying Spaghetti Monsterism gain social acceptance. From the cultural dimension, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism has an independent system of religious concepts, doctrine, slogans, and so on. The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster was publicly published. Flying Spaghetti Monsterism established religious institutions (Maćkowiak,2016)， and also gained legal status in some countries. For example, Flying Spaghetti Monster was approved to officiate weddings in Zealand (Zauzmer,2016).
As seen in this case, cults evolve into a religion mainly because they gain acceptance and recognition from society. This is a process in which a marginal religious culture collides and interacts with the culture of mainstream society.
In this case, the role of the internet cannot be ignored. The internet has facilitated the development of cults. These are the things promoting the rapid development of cults: internet users being re-tribalized; communities of interest; accessibility of human connection, fast diffusion of religious ideas, the cross-geographic connection of religious sites, and online worship. Flying Spaghetti Monsterism Created a myth about religious and cultural innovation. In a network society, the relationship between people is changed deeply (Castells, 2009).
It is worth considering that some people still do not believe Flying Spaghetti Monsterism is a religion. Although it is controversial, the case has answered the question of what distinguishes a small religion from a large cult in the network society.
V. Conclusion
Based on social integration theory, by the case of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, this paper argues what distinguishes a small religion from a large cult is social acceptance. Cults represent heresy and innovation. Thus, the relationship between cults and mainstream society is usually tense and conflicting. After a cult becomes a religion, the cult’s relationship with mainstream society changes from tension to balance and interaction.
There is no strict distinction between cult and religion. Not all cults are negative. a cult will evolve into a religion when the conditions are appropriate. Re-understanding cults means not only acceptance of multi-culture but also the evolution of religion with the times.
Bibliography
Barker, E. (1999). New religious movements: their incidence and significance. In: Wilson, Bryan and Cresswell, Jamie, (eds.) New religious movements: challenge and response. Routledge, London, UK, p. 15-32.
Castells, M. (2009). The Rise of the Network Society. Wiley-Blackwell. p.500.
Collins, G. (1982). “The psychology of the cult experience.” New York Times. March 15, 1982, Section B, p.5.
Cresswell, J. & Wilson, B. (1999). New religious movements: challenge and response. Routledge London, p.15-32.
Eister, A.W. (1972). “An Outline of a Structural Theory of Cults.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 11(4), 319–333.
Geertz, C.（1973）. The Interpretation of Cultures, New York: Basic Books.
Gallagher, E. V. (2007). “Cults and New Religious Movements.” History of Religions, 47(2/3), 205–220.
Griffiths, Paul J. (2000). “The Very Idea of Religion.” First Things, 103(May): 30–35.
Heller, Z. (2021). “What makes a cult a cult?” New yorker. July 2021. Available from: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/07/12/what-makes-a-cult-a-cult.
Henderson, B. (2006), The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Villard.
Leuba, J.H.(1912). A Psychological Study of Religion: Its Origin, Function, and Future. Macmillan Company, p.369.
Leuba, J.H. (1913). “Sociology and Psychology: The Conception of Religion and Magic and the Place of Psychology in Sociological Studies: A Discussion of the Views of Durkheim and of Hubert and Mauss”. American Journal of Sociology, 19(3), 323–342.
McCurry, J. (2018). “Japan executes sarin gas attack cult leader Shoko Asahara and six members.” Guardian, July 6, 2018, Available from:
Maćkowiak, A.（2016）. Mythical universes of third-millennium religious movements: the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Matrixism. Maska, (1 (29)).
Marty, M. E. (1960). “Sects and Cults.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 332(1), 125–134.
Moynihan, C. (2023). “Sex Cult’s ‘Lieutenant’ Receives Over 4 Years.” New York Times. New York edition Feb 22, 2023, Section A, p.21.
Nelson, G. K. (1968). “The Concept of Cult.” The Sociological Review. 16(3): 351–362.
Nikky-Guninder Kaur Singh (2011). Sikhism (eBook). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Park, R.E &Burgess, E.W. (1924). Assimilation: introduction to the science of sociology. University of Chicago Press. p.735.
Richardson, J.T. (1993). “Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-Negative.” Review of religious research. Vol. 34, No. 4 (Jun. 1993), p. 348-356.
Spaschi, C.F. (2021). “A cognitive analysis of the invented religions: the Flying Spaghetti Monster case”. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, p.128-140.
Smart, N. (1998). The world's religions. Cambridge University Press. p.11-21.
Stark, R. & Bainbridge,W.S. (1986). The future of religion secularization, revival and cult formation. University of California Press. p.24-30.
Schilbrack, K. (2022), "The Concept of Religion." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available from:
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2022/entries/concept-religion/.
Stan Stalnaker (2019). “Technology-oriented religions are coming.” Quartz. October 9, 2019. Available from: https://qz.com/1723739/technology-oriented-religions-are-coming.
Sweet, W. W. (1951). “The Church, the Sect, and the Cult in America.” Southwest Review, 36(1), 29–38.
Woodhead, L. (2011). “Five concepts of religion”. International Review of Sociology, 21:1, 121-143.
Zauzmer, J. (2016). “In New Zealand, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is an approved religion now. Here’s its first wedding”. The Washington Post, April 19, 2016, available from: