American Family Foundation

Cultic Studies Journal A Journal on Cults and Manipulative Techniques of Social Influence Vol. 8 No. 2 1991

CONTENTS Articles Conversion, Religious Change, and the Challenge of New Religious Movements Johannes Aagaard Why Cultic Groups Develop and Flourish: A Historian‟s Perspective Natalie Isser

3

12

Ritual Child Abuse: Understanding the Controversies David W. Lloyd

23

Outreach to Ex-Cult Members: The Question of Terminology Michael D. Langone William V. Chambers

30

Interesting Times Kevin Garvey Linda Blood

41

Task Force Study of Ritual Crime Michael Maddox

69

Book Reviews Tu Eres El Amor de Dios (You Are the Love of God) By Alfredo Silletta. Gladys Martin

113

Monkey on a Stick By John Hubner & Lindsey Gruson Arthur A. Dole

114

Exit Counseling: A Family Intervention By Carol Giambalvo Judy Safransky

115

Cults on Campus: Continuing Challenge By Marcia Rudin Doris Holloway Abels

116

*Note: these pages referenced are different than the original published journal. Please check the end of each article for the original pagination.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 2

Conversion, Religious Change, and the Challenge Of New Religious Movements Johannes Aagaard, Ph.D. Aarhus University Aarhus, Denmark Abstract Conversion in the biblical sense is concerned with a change in faith and one's personal relationship with God. It is a personal experience. Religion is the orientation, the code, that undergirds cultures. Religious change refers to the process by which this underlying code is altered. Religious change and conversion are related but distinct. Contemporary culture is undergoing a marked religious change in the direction of the "Pacific paradigm," a transsyncretism that fuses eastern mysticism and western capitalism. Traditional churches are largely unaware of this shift and are derelict in their duty to challenge the new religious movements (NRMs) that represent the paradigm. Those who do challenge it -- the "anti-cult movement -- tend to focus on illegal and evil deeds of NRMs, rather than their creeds. Scholars who form an "anti-anti-cult movement," however, also pretend to credal neutrality. Professor Kirsten Haastrup, "Mission and Murder: The Christianization of Iceland in the Year 1000" (Jordens Folk, 1987), concludes: Religious change in the year 1000 was something entirely different from conversion from one faith to another. It was not the Christian message that was the central theme in the religious change. It was rather the recognized need for a new "code." The new era was colored by the Christian world view much more than the faith. (p. 75) The distinction between religious change and conversion has much significance as a model for understanding Europe and North America in the 90s. While conversion in the biblical sense is concerned with a change in faith and one's personal relationship with God, religious change is a process which revolves about the "decoding" of existence, that is, with cosmology. Cosmology in this sense is not a matter of science or knowledge as much as a question of explaining and interpreting the world (however, cosmology often professes to be a kind of science). Conversions occur at any time, but when they take place in a time of cultural transition to a new era, conversions as religious transformations become decisive acts. This happens when two cosmologies are in conflict and one overcomes the other. During such a movement a change in the understanding of life's meaning takes place, and this change will color a personal conversion in a decisive way. The conversion includes a change in one's whole religious outlook and not simply a personal conversion. One should not assume that a certain number of conversions gradually create a religious change and the adoption of a new code, nor that religious change is the precondition for conversions. The two are related but distinct phenomena. The religious change of a human grouping -- i.e., a culture, whether it includes a whole people or a local community -- is a very complex process, and on a large scale it is not carried out consciously. This does not mean that it happens without awareness, but it is not necessarily understood as religious change, for its simple elements are not seen as part of the whole to which they belong. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 3

A religious change deals specifically with that orientation without which people cannot live. When a culture loses its orientation and is confused about its values it has little chance to survive unless it is buttressed by very strong external supports. All cultures are religiously oriented but not in the same way. Even ostensibly secular cultures, e.g., Communist Russia, have religion in the sense described here. The various religions are the expression of the common cultural orientations which hold together human life. Religion holds together that social totality of which the religion is registered only as a part. For this reason one religion confronts another just as one society confronts another. Thus, society has religions. Individuals, however, are religious. It is "my religiosity," but it is "our religion." When confusion arises in a society, so that it is disoriented in its understanding of life, then it loses its religion; yet the members of society are still religious, though there may be much vagueness about the significance and meaning of that religiosity, for the significance and meaning of religiosity derives from a religion. Religion then, is something we have in common, but religious is what a person is as a human being. Secularization may be understood as the disorientation which arises when a particular religion loses its grip on people and becomes subordinated to a secular cosmology. Secularization and religion, however, by no means necessarily contradict each other. Indeed, one can find religious forms of secularism, such as Communist Russia, in which all religion was branded as an opiate for the people while communism became more and more cultic and of the nature of a religion. If a society has many different religions within its borders, this will not only lead to rivalry and the possibility of mutual antagonism; it can at its worst lead to religious war. Attempts at neutralization, however, may also occur, and a "civil religion" may arise and combine elements of the various competing religions in a sort of secular, ersatz religion. This appears to have happened in the United States, for example. Pseudoreligions in Competition with Traditional Religions More passionate and confrontational than civil religions are the secular, pseudoreligions of nazism, fascism, and communism. These ideologies have developed as systems that appropriate, or seek to appropriate and mold, the citizens' religiosity in competition with traditional religions. Their dismal failures are interesting. In the long run, after the orchestrated parades are over, they become so boring that they can no longer inspire, much less attract to themselves the people's true religiosity. In part, their failure results from their lack of concern regarding the individual's need to understand the meaning of life. Only genuine and honest religions have dealt with the problem of the meaning of life in such a way that the religious passion expresses itself in a full interpretation of life and death. Humankind has three great problems: death, love, and boredom. Only religions which take all three seriously can make a go of it. The secular, pseudoreligions are bankrupt because they provide inadequate explanations for death, do not stimulate love, and do stimulate boredom. Indeed, boredom is perhaps the most serious illness which can attack a culture. When time becomes something that one "kills," then the culture itself is moribund. Religions, on the other hand, are largely concerned with making life exciting, attractive, and fanciful. Through love people affirm the values and rules that give a necessary orderliness to human life. Love says "this is worth defending." Morality elucidates the rules needed to defend that which is loved. The eternal conflict between religion and sexuality, therefore, is not by chance. Sexuality, though having an intrinsic value of its own, is the most conspicuous and pervasive moral factor that can threaten the orderliness required to defend that which is Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 4

truly loved. Religion, consequently, must attend to sexuality and place it in its proper context. Through its interpretation of death, religion defends the culture's values against the ultimate threat. Without a satisfying religious explanation, death thrusts the abyss of absurd emptiness in our faces. The fundamental question becomes not how to live but rather, as Camus stated in his essay, "The Myth of Sisyphus," whether to live: "There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide" (Camus, 1955, p. 3). A culture cannot survive long if its primary concern is whether or not survival is worthwhile. By finding meaning in death, religion endows life with significance. The meanings put forth by different religions -- their models for addressing death, boredom, and love -- vary greatly and may come into opposition. Thus, within a given cultural system the once regnant model may lose its power and a new model gain in power as people reevaluate their ways of dealing with death, boredom, and love. The New Age Movement The World's Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1893 can well be taken as the beginning of the world wide expansion of Neo-Hinduism (Vivekananda), Neo-Buddhism (Anagarika), and Theosophy (Annie Besant). From 1893 these three movements have grown as part of the same New Age Tree, The Tree of Knowledge, or Gnosis. This New Age Tree of Knowledge (or New Age Movement) has become, with the decline of the secular pseudoreligions, the primary challenge to traditional religion in western culture. Of the three, Theosophy in various forms -- including Anthroposophy, The Wisdom of Martinus, Alice Bailey, Elizabeth Claire Prophet, Ananda Tara Shan (The Rosegarden), Benjamin Creme, etc. -- seems to be the common denominator of most the New Age groupings. The theosophical paradigm seems to constitute in some way a synthesis of what one could superficially call East-West spirituality or Neo-Gnosticism. What is a Paradigm Shift? In connection with the New Age a lot is said about the new paradigm shift. But very little is explained about its content. Paradigm is another term for pattern. It is used in grammar, indicating, for example, the pattern of verbs. Language, of course, is built up around various paradigms, and therefore all communication in words are paradigmatically determined. When we apply the notion of paradigm to that of cosmology, we must conclude that new patterns can make a substantial difference in the content and form of a culture's basic ways of communicating. Paradigm shifts are not necessarily for the good. They can represent a degeneration or an improvement, although most shifts involve both. A Historical Approach One can approach the paradigm shift historically. Cultural and religious paradigms come into existence as a result of intercommunication, of mutual influencing of cultures and religions. Thus, early in history rivers were very important, for they were the major "roads" when boats were the major means of transport. Not only the Nile, Euphrates, and Tigris, but also the Indus, Ganges, and Donau, and the Rhine, Tiber, and Thames were such major "roads" of communication and mutual influence. Important cultures and religions centered on such rivers, each with its own paradigm.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 5

When the Mediterranean sea became a means of transport, a very important culture and religion developed around this sea. The Roman civilization and the Roman Catholic Church was the paradigmatic result, the Mediterranean paradigm. Later -- after the Reformation -- the Atlantic Ocean became the means for the development of mainly Anglosaxon culture and Protestantism. This Atlantic paradigm became -- and still is -- the major source for the international society that is the paradigmatic base for nearly all people today, at any rate in principle. Civil rights, human rights, the claim for justice and a new world order: these are all expressions of the Atlantic paradigm. Another paradigm, however, is coming into being. We can call it the Pacific paradigm, for it combines East Asian cities, with their millions of inhabitants, and the western part of the American civilization, most notably California, a state crowded with Christian names but now a melting pot of syncretism, a new metropolitan. The Pacific Paradigm The Pacific Ocean -- with Hawaii in the middle -- is the new center of power in the world. A new republic of grand cities (a metropolistan) is coming into being, beyond all national boundaries and beyond all political control. From its Pacific base, this new culture is spreading all over the world. It can be characterized as a mixture of the light from the East and the enlightenment from the West. It comes into being as a fusion of the light of mysticism with the enlightenment of rationalism. The result of this fusion is not yet clear, but it seems to be a sort of "transsyncretism," in which a strong holistic trend brushes aside classical eastern religions as well as classical Christian faith. In fact, however, this holism is monism, and it is much closer to its Hindu-Buddhist-Occult roots than to its Christian origins, in which personal engagement is at the heart of life. A red thread in this new trans-religion is its emphasis on divinization. Man has become his own divinity, or is able to become so. Human beings are all gods and goddesses in process. "There is no other god than man" echoes through most of the thousands of new religious movements all over the world. This hubris has also come to mean that anything which is possible is also necessary. If euphoria is possible, then it must be tried out. There are no limitations to human capacity. This mental attitude, of course, has external consequences. In many ways it fits in well with capitalism, which had its birth during the Atlantic paradigm but has come of age during the first period of the Pacific paradigm. Both models of capitalism are characterized by belief in the limitless nature of man. In the Atlantic version of Capitalism, a lonely hero works his way through all sorts of trials on a road to the stars. In the Pacific version of capitalism, success is more communal, epitomized by the multinational corporation with its anonymous top. The various religious models of the Pacific paradigm -- often related to forms of NeoHinduism and Neo-Buddhism and mediated by various forms of theosophy and occultism -have arrived in the West, where they have adopted a communal, multinational approach. Although in their first generation, during which a charismatic guru is usually at the top, these groups are not anonymous, after the guru's death a camarilla takes over, and the conversion to anonymous multinationals is complete. It is interesting to examine what happened to the Godmen from Asia. They came barefoot and simple-minded, accustomed never to touch money and women. In a short time, however, they were swallowed up by the market mechanism and consumerism of the West. They certainly looked for and developed disciples, but the disciples, who had imbibed the principles of capitalism, also made their gurus. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 6

The transformation of the godmen into moneymen was swift and effective, for the market had already been created by Christian salesmen, the rightist fundamentalists with whom they began to compete for money, influence, and souls. Thus, the high tide of the Pacific paradigm has, ironically, incorporated the waning Atlantic paradigm to accommodate to the possibilities of the new world marketplace. This new religiosity came as a surprise for most people. They had settled down to the belief that the time of religion had ended and the time of secularism had arrived. Yet suddenly, religion flared up unexpectedly. The simple fact is that this new boom in religion has not come about in spite of secularization, but because of secularization. As noted earlier, secular models -- whether civil religion, fascism, or communism -- do not adequately address death, love, and boredom. The new religious movements have stepped into this void. But they also are failing. They too are pseudoreligions. Many specialists in religion do not recognize these counterfeits for what they are. They seem to assume that all expressions of religion are genuine, that counterfeits do not exist. Tell that to an art specialist who has to own up to buying a counterfeit painting! Counterfeits do exist. And learning to distinguish the genuine from the fake is a challenge that offers true religosity and true religion an opportunity for renewal. "Recoding" The quotation with which we began this essay dealt with Iceland in 1000 A.D. If we should apply it to Europe and North America in the year 2000, it might read as follows: The religious change to an oriental religiosity in the year 2000 was something quite different from conversion from one faith to another. It was not the content of the Hindu-Buddhist faith that was central in the religious change. It was rather the recognized need for a new code. The new era was marked by the oriental world view much more than by faith. With this understanding of what is already happening in 1991, but which may well find its culmination at the end of this decade, we can explain why so many deny the confrontation between Christianity and Hinduism-Buddhism. They do not experience it as a question of their faith. They see it rather as a question of a new world view, and for them it has nothing to do with religion or faith or conversion. This skewed understanding obviously has nothing directly to do with conversion. The pioneers in the coming religious change have no desire to undertake a conversion to Hinduism-Buddhism. They do not wish to become Hindus or Buddhists, much less to be considered Hindus or Buddhists. Many of them, indeed, wish to stay in the Church and be reckoned as Christians. Some believe, furthermore, that they have become better Christians by accepting the new world view. The distinction between religious change and conversion is the key to the situation, for in 1991 a comprehensive religious change in Europe and North America is undoubtedly taking place, yet there are only a limited number of conversions to oriental religiosity. Moreover, the content of the religious change is discussed in terms of a new vision of the world. The process of religious change is most apparent in the religious education in schools. A debate has been set into motion by a group of educators who have undergone religious change, even though they have not been converted to anything at all. Of course, they will not admit this, for it is characteristic of the process of religious change that it is not recognized. There are, nonetheless, some prominent representatives of the process who honestly admit that there is a "conspiracy" (see Ferguson, 1980), but most do not see it and participate unknowingly.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 7

This fundamental recoding stems from a tolerance that is so absolute it becomes intolerant. The underlying premise of the recoding is that in the religious world all religions have the same goals and all are true. Those who disagree with this assumption of absolute tolerance -- those who believe that in the arena of religion, as in other arenas, there is the good and the bad, the best and the worst -- are not tolerated at all. Their critique of religion is rejected by the proponents of "tolerance" as intolerance. Therefore, they cannot be tolerated! The process of religious change, which initially and primarily functions as a cosmological recoding, is decidedly neither neutral nor objective. It operates in close relationship to the limited number of converts, who in fact guide the process and function as catalysts. A comprehensive and popular conversion and the consequent establishment of a HinduistBuddhistic religion in the western world will depend on the progress of the process of religious change. This progress in turn will depend on the progress of the process of individual conversion. The two have a reciprocal relationship: more religious change makes individual conversion easier; more conversions make religious change easier. Nevertheless, the two processes are also independent in that each is also influenced by other, distinct factors. Responses to New Religious Movements To date the progress of religious change has occurred in a consistent and determined way. This progress results in large part from the inability of the old religion's representatives to notice it. The progress of religious change also results from the churches' systematically separating themselves from popular religiosity. Their unwillingness to be the force that forms popular religiosity enables others to take up the unfulfilled task. Indeed, popular religiosity has developed a resentment toward the churches which have abandoned it, and toward Christianity in general. Individuals whose religiosity is free of ties will inevitably seek a religion which can give their "free-floating" religiosity meaning. Oriental religion seems able to do this, first and foremost because of its vision of the world, its cosmology. This word refers to giving the cosmos an explanation and interpretation that are not intrinsically present in it. Cosmology is a comprehensive system of symbols which gives structure and order to the meaning of existence. In order to work, this system requires a conscious development of rituals and symbols that people can use in their religious search and experience. This new code for the understanding of the world and human existence is what people seem to find to some degree in the new religious movements. Even though these new codes may be contorted and unbelievable, they are nonetheless better than the disorientation and bewilderment of living without meaning and direction. That churches currently relate to the present processes of religious change and conversion with almost total incomprehension and passivity -- resentment even -- is unfortunate. The possibility of revitalization, however, presents the churches with an opportunity. They must first seriously attempt to understand the historical movement of which we are a part. History moves and we with it. It acts on us whether we like it or not, whether we realize it or not. We are not able to stop it. But we can at any rate re-act more or less responsibly, depending upon the clarity of our analysis and interpretation of historical data. When in the middle of the next century some historian gives an account of the last part of the twentieth century, one chapter title could well read like this: "The period when the most decisive religious change took place, without the churches noticing it." But it could also read like this: "The period when the most decisive religious change took place, and the churches finally came back to reality."

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 8

Whether or not Christianity successfully meets the challenge of new religious movements will depend upon how it responds. It must confront the new paradigms directly at the core credal level, not merely at the superficial behavioral level. Unfortunately, in most western countries the major criticism of new religious movements comes from secular organizations that ignore the creedal question. Many of the people supporting such organizations are relatives of cultists and former cultists. These organizations understandably tend not to care much for the subtleties involved in differentiating NRMs. They also tend to respond negatively to research about NRMs, because researchers, especially sociologists, do not generally stand up against cults, but "set the truth question aside." Parents organizations, however, also tend to set the truth question aside, for they consider the cults only as arenas of exploitation having no genuine religious characteristics. To ask the truth question in relation to NRMs would, for them, be as phony as to ask the truth question in relation to the Mafia. In fairness to the parents organizations, it should be noted that they do not operate as religious bodies and do not deal positively with religion as a common option. They have no alternative stand of their own. So of course they do not ask the truth question, even though many members are often Christian or Jewish, although some seem to be decidedly antiChristian or anti-religion. Parents organizations will say that they do not care about "creeds," only about "deeds." They will let people believe what they prefer. Only when the creed is turned into wrong deeds are the parents organizations expected to react. Although it may be necessary for organizations whose only common ground is the most elementary standards of human rights to adhere to the "deed-not-the-creed" philosophy, this view does not hold water intellectually. Should the world not have cared about Hitler's Mein Kampf because that book was part of his creed? The evil deeds of the concentration camps were already in the creed, which, consequently, should have been taken seriously. One has to understand that a creed is a deed. And if one wants to stop evil deeds, one has to react against evil creeds. But that makes an alternative creed necessary! That is where the parents organizations get into real trouble. And the best of them are struggling with that problem, for it is the problem of their own identities. Are they only united because of a common negation? If so, then there is a serious problem. First-Amendment Neurosis In the marketplace the only goal that matters is to "get the organizations roaring along." Success, and success only, matters. Make money and make more money. The means are secondary. The only check is the law, and even that can be evaded, for every man has his price. Ethical standards are considered as relevant for a businessman, including a religious businessman, as for a bulldozer. We have now become so accustomed to public-relations manipulations and sales tricks in even religious matters that very few of us protest the many perversions of religions which appear and appeal. Even clearly illegal practices are tolerated and critical voices silenced. The term "permissive society" is normally applied to the sexual state of affairs. It is in fact even more serious. We have become a permissive society concerning the misuse of other persons' souls. Mind-bending and soul-killing take place all over, and yet there are no laws against it. Under the cover of religious freedom a deadly permissiveness has crept in.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 9

This is especially so in the United States, where the "First Amendment" is used to support all manner of evil exploitation in the name of religion. Anyone who pretends to be religious or runs something even faintly related to religion is considered virtually outside the law. The worst aspects of Medieval ecclesiastical policy in Europe has, for all practical purposes, come back to the United States: the contention that religions are exempted from the claims of law. The Scholarly Approach Research on NRMs has become a force in itself. Sociology of religion, psychology of religion, history of religion, etc., all share in a general attempt to collect data and clarify, analyze, and understand the NRMs as factual contemporary expressions of the religious search of mankind. In this attempt there is a general tendency to "set the truth question aside," for taking a stand concerning the truthfulness and reliability of NRMs would impair the "objectivity" and "neutrality" of the scholarly projects. This scholarly detachment is sometimes taken to an extreme, so that even value statements must be forsaken. Thus, for some scholars there seems to be the same value in Catholicism as in Scientology, in the Quakers as in Ananda Marga. Is this posture not an expression of naive and positivistic methodology? Is such supposed neutrality and objectivity anything but a dream? This dream sometimes turns into a nightmare when the "neutral" and "objective" scholar turns against the parents‟ organizations and attacks them for going up against the cults. The simple fact of being against cults and working in anti-cult organizations seems to be objectionable when seen from the "neutral" and objective" scholars' own presuppositions. But this sort of scholar is in trouble. In his or her neutrality, the role of an anti-anti-cult agent takes over the role of the scholar. One cannot uphold neutrality by negating an antiattitude. Minus against minus gives a plus, i.e., a factual standpoint -- a creed. The anti-cult movement is in trouble, but the anti-anti cult movement is in even more serious trouble by its lack of identity. Show me your hand and I shall tell you who you are. If you have no hand, you are nobody! Methodologically, this tends towards science for science's own sake, and that is of course "old hat." Like it or not, scholars too are part of the game. To pretend to stand aside having no creed of their own is a form of cheating. Thus, the anti-cult movement and the anti-anti-cult movement seem to have one important point in common: they will and must evade the truth question. They will not look at creeds, for that will force them to take up the age-old question: what is truth? To answer that they would have to take theology seriously. And in their confused cultural state, they seem to behave as though that were somehow against the First Amendment. References Camus, A. (1955). The myth of Sisyphus and other essays. New York: Vintage Books. Ferguson, M. (1980). The Aquarian conspiracy: Personal and social transformation in the 1980s. Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher. Haastrup, K. (1987). Jordens Folk (The People of the Earth), No. 4. ***************

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 10

Johannes Aagaard, Ph.D. is a Professor at the Institute of Missiology and Ecumenical Theology, Faculty of Theology, Aarhus University. He is also President and Chairman of The Dialogue Center, Denmark.

This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8, Number 2, pages 91-103. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 11

Why Cultic Groups Develop and Flourish: A Historian’s Perspective Natalie Isser, Ph.D. Pennsylvania State University Ogontz Campus Abstract A variety of religious or secular sects and cults were a continuing phenomenon in the United States. Many of these religious movements, especially the more deviant ones, were dependent upon strong charismatic leadership and syncretic belief systems embracing a combination of current ideals and sentiments. Sometimes the outcast cult could, with time, become a sect, and even enter the mainstream religions. The best known of this group would be the Mormon Church. The proliferation of religious, quasi-political, and nontraditional organizations was much more prevalent in the United States because of its favorable physical terrain, religious pluralism, and social mobility. Many Native Americans and Blacks founded cults, embodying both their ancestral traditions and Christian values. These cults provided a useful way of confronting the hostile dominant culture. Contemporary cults like those of the past have created opposition because their religious policies and proselytization techniques threaten prevailing traditions. The power of contemporary media has abetted these missionary efforts but has also provided the means to discredit them. Though some of these cults have faded from view, new ones will emerge as a challenge to the existing culture. The sudden efflorescence of cults that appeared in the tumultuous decade of 1965-75, the glare of unfavorable publicity that culminated in the Jonestown tragedy in 1978, and the continued prevalence of religious debates over church and state issues among various sects and fundamentalist Christian evangelicals have renewed academic interest in religious issues. Religious beliefs and institutions formed an integral part of man‟s experience. They provided transcendental explanations for existence and the rituals and rites that codified and civilized human behavior, further enhancing the maintenance of civility and order. More significant, religious rites marked the passages of life: birth, adolescence, marriage, death; while religious festivals celebrated the fruits of nature itself. Religious commitment satisfied human psychological needs by giving reassurance and comfort in periods of stress; it helped individuals deal with the prospect of death and frequently gave parental imagery and leadership that brought help and love. Thus a variety of beliefs, an enormous number of cults, and the "shelter" they provided for the confused, depressed, and bewildered was a continuing phenomenon in the history of Western civilization. Indeed, the emergence of new and sometimes challenging religious systems was a reaction by some to an ever-changing, inhospitable environment that frequently confronted the communities people lived in. Besides, change of religious belief was also a way for the young to rebel against the restrictions and inhibitions of their parents. The result was that with the triumph of Christianity and the establishment of new state religions, the notion of proselytization, or the need to spread the Christian (and the Moslem) truth, became, unlike in the Far East, a significant and enduring part of the Western tradition. During the Protestant Reformation the number of sects vying for both government support and community adhesion multiplied, further intensifying the spread of preaching and evangelical fervor. Thus while many perceive contemporary cults as a twentieth-century Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 12

phenomenon, cults‟ recruitment methods -- whether aggressive or more conventional -- are deeply rooted as an integral part of the Western Christian mainstream religious experience1. The subsequent emergence of secularism and materialism in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries did not supplant religions. Indeed, despite the seeming triumphant spread of secular humanism and the weakening of some mainstream religious institutions in the modern period, there appeared a multitude of new religious movements (some quasi-political), missionaries, and alternative religious cults in both the United States and Europe. The failure of modern secularism to satisfy important emotional, social, and psychological needs meant that the void was filled by a plethora of peculiar religious and occasionally secular organizations led by charismatic leaders. Definitional Issues The earmarks of past and contemporary cults and fundamentalist sects were that they had common characteristics, whether they were manipulative, self-seeking, or idealistic in purpose. Cults, distinguished from sects, were not part of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Sects were dissenting or schismatic groups organized in some form of opposition to the established mainstream religious institution. Cults depended upon strong, charismatic leadership and their beliefs were syncretic, combining a variety of current ideals and sentiments. The cult leader generally made claims to divinity, either as godhead or messiah, and therefore projected omniscience. Typically the leader was a powerful personality, sometimes brilliant, and often a master of psychological manipulation, flattery, threats, and guilt2. Members gave total obedience, loyalty, and allegiance. Rituals and dogmas were developed into a theological system, with a sense of asceticism and economic commitment (fund-raising or tithing).3 The glue that fastened the group was obedience and hierarchy, both serving to strengthen the prophet‟s enormous hold upon the imaginations, loyalties, and affections of the disciples. Followers dedicated their lives to their leader, to the cult community, and to the dogmas that were delineated. All religious ideals of these believers depended upon the hopes, fears, and ambitions of the leadership. Communal groups committed their members to some type of group living, investment of time and/or property, and often total immersion in an alternative life-style. Very often, depending upon the nature of beliefs, these cults were rejected by the majority. Likewise, cultists rejected their former lives. For example, followers of Purnell in the Koreshan cult or Joseph Smith of the Mormons revered their leaders and rejected their families and former communities to accept the demands and discipline of their new cults.4 Cults could and did become sects. Sects that were originally heretical groups, such as the Salvation Army, the Church of God, the Church of Nazarene, and the Jehovah‟s Witnesses, were nominally Christian but separated from the established churches. They, too, often had charismatic leaders, but their preachers generally did not assume godlike pretensions. Embodying doctrines borrowed from prevailing formulas and philosophies, some cults blended with existing Christian principles and as their leaders died they became sects, such as Christian Science and the Mormons. On the other hand, others, such as Scientology, Theosophy, and Krishna Consciousness, have remained cults. American and Western European Experiences Differences The American and western European religious experiences, though sharing similar liberal, intellectual, and religious values, differed for many reasons. The first of these reasons lay in the historical development of the United States, a country geographically separated from the social rigidities of inheritance and land ownership and from the stifling control of more rooted European religious and political traditions. Never did American colonists and later the citizens of the new country tolerate the notion of hereditary landed aristocracy with special political or

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 13

social privilege. If not in actual practice, Americans passionately believed in political and social equality (except in matters of race). Secondly (although not always observed), Americans accepted the concept of separation of church and state. In this matter, they had no choice. In the establishment of the colonies there was a myriad of religious sects and communities, preventing any one church from emerging powerful enough to ally itself with the prevailing political powers. For instance, Anabaptists (who were regarded as a cult in England and in Germany in their time and even later)5 had founded the state of Pennsylvania. Today the Quaker tradition still remains powerful in Philadelphia and communities of Old Order Amish, Schenkfelders, and Mennonites dot the state. The Puritans who dominated in Massachusetts could not force their vision upon those in Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and other states. The result was a fertile intellectual climate for the development of newer, more daring and idealistic religious ideas. Thirdly, America‟s physical terrain was particularly suited for the proliferation of a variety of secular as well as religious beliefs. The frontier in the earliest days provides a perfect example of how European institutionalized religious movements were altered by the new physical environment. The Great Awakening during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was the result of the Methodist movement and its religious fervor which had emerged earlier in England. Methodist groups were widespread, influencing Presbyterian congregations. Consequently, missionary societies went abroad to transmit to the new world the message of Protestant Christianity. Its spirit permeated many other Protestant groups in Europe as well6. When these groups sought converts on the continent they often ran awry of the powerful local state churches7. In contrast, on the American frontier there were no established institutionalized churches. There missionaries found little organized resistance. Further, few formal demands existed for religious training and many self-proclaimed preachers gained acceptance. Unlike the Anglican and Presbyterian missionaries, Methodists demanded little rigorous training for their preachers. These evangelicals capitalized upon frontier conditions that produced an antiintellectual and more pragmatic environment. Their appeal had always been directed to the lower classes and, therefore, they preached a simple message of faith and emotional participation8. U.S. Fundamentalism Fundamentalist Christianity emerged as a powerful cultural force in the United States. The Pentecostal movement, the name later given to this development, encouraged a multitude of minuscule and obscure sects. Sometimes their preachers were charismatic, their fervor characterized by emotional and aggressive evangelical appeals to seek "rebirth" or "witness for God." Like their predecessors the Anabaptists, they believed in a literal interpretation of the Bible which led to unorthodox behaviors. Some sects believed in "speaking in tongues," faith healing, or snake handling9. The appeal of these sects continued unabated, even though often their leaders were discovered to have been venal, hypocritical, or even fraudulent10. The frontier was a particularly fertile area for the message of these religious missionaries. Those who came west faced hardship and more often personal tragedy. Speaking to the settlers‟ personal losses, their anxieties, and especially their fear of change (among those in rural small towns), these ministers brought reassurance and support for traditional culture. This heritage of homiletics, passionate oratory, and inspiration became firmly embedded in the American tradition, personified in such figures as Dwight Moody, Billy Sunday, Aimee Semple McPherson, and Billy Graham. These flamboyant preachers used vivid imagery to arouse their audiences‟ emotions, and their performances lasted days and nights. Today‟s television preachers (Oral Roberts, Robert Schuller, Jerry Falwell) have merely shifted their pulpit from the rural revival meeting to the television screen.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 14

The Great Awakening also led to the development of the Baptist churches, which made their greatest inroads among the poorer farmers and workers. In the wake of this revival, groups organized around their favorite ministers, and sects such as the Stonites and Campbellites appeared briefly. In essence, the missionary, oratorical, individualistic aspect of Christianity became an important segment of the American religious experience. Communes During the nineteenth century, a vast economic transformation led to the burgeoning of the secular spirit and with it the emergence of a variety of new teachings that would challenge traditional Christian values. In France in the 1820s, 1830s, and 1840s, new social ideals were being enunciated by the Englishman Robert Owen, Charles Fourier, and Etienne Cabet. These men advocated a new communal type of society predicated on economic as well as social equality. Though some founded communes in France and England, it was much easier to engage in communal experimentation in a more fluid and mobile society in which family, village, and social status were less fixed, as it was in the United States at the time. Besides, these socialist doctrines found in America a religious counterpart that fitted in with contemporary evangelical Christianity. Communal organization was one of the features of many of the contemporary, the older, and fundamentalist religions. This type of arrangement established the psychodynamics that promoted coherence, commitment, and obedience. Communes were groups of individuals and their children, unrelated by blood, who agreed to live together, bonded by common goals or beliefs, and who shared their resources and finances. Features common to communes -whether cultic, secular, political, or psychotherapeutic -- were that they could and did renounce the established order as either sinful, unjust, or unhealthy. They stressed the possibility of perfection through restructuring social institutions. They were utopian politicaleconomic (Owen‟s New Harmony, Modern Times, Llano Colony) or religious (Oneida Community, Shakers, Hutterites) or psycho-social (Walden Two, Synanon)11. Communes differed in their methods of control and governance. The Hutterites, who traced their roots to the Reformation, relied upon physical isolation from the larger society and massive indoctrination of the young. Coupled with censure and threats of expulsion, they commanded absolute loyalty, although decisions were made democratically by the men. Allegiance was firmly cemented by early adulthood12. On the other hand, many of the socio-political communes such as Brook Farm, New Harmony, or the Llano Colony were democratic, cooperative, and socialistic. They did not indoctrinate; they preached harmony and reform. For the most part they failed, torn by dissension and economic disaster13. Other communes encouraged dependency upon the community and conformity by reducing the emotional bonds of their members. Their methods included separation from family and community and departure from normative family patterns. Shakers encouraged celibacy;14 some Fourierist groups, such as the Oneida Community, preached free love; and some, like the Unification Church, advocated group marriages15. Millenarianism was embodied in the Judeo-Christian religious heritage which looked to the arrival of the Messiah or to his Second Coming. These beliefs, which were never abandoned, were firmly entrenched in many religious sects of the nineteenth century (and are held even today)16. Evidence of the deeply held vision of impending doom was expressed throughout European history. The best-known movements were those that arose in the sixteenth century during the peasant revolts in Germany and in the Anabaptist sects that were part of the religious conflicts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. But those groups that persisted ceased to be prominent in Europe, having migrated to the United States, where, in the more fluid atmosphere of the new world, new cults manifested themselves and flourished.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 15

These groups were varied, peculiar, and widespread. The Oneida Community, the Shakers, the Hutterites, and the Mormons were religious communes that expressed millenarian aspirations. Some, like the Millerites under the leadership of William Miller, were short-lived. Miller predicted that the end of the world would come by 1840, but he was forced to change the dating. His failures may have ended the cult; but those who believed in the Second Coming followed Ellen G. White into the more enduring Seventh Day Adventist faith, while others joined the Jehovah‟s Witnesses. These sects flourished because they adapted to realities and could temper some of their prophetic interpretations without changing their fundamentalist beliefs17. In contrast, Owen‟s New Harmony, Brook Farm, and The House of David were more secular. Most of these failed since they rejected the established order and sought to create a perfect society, focusing on socialist economic utopian alternatives18. The contemporary communal cults that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s and the Kibbutz utopian movement in Israel are simply variants of the older ideals. Today, however, communes tend to be more narcissistic, quasi-therapeutic, or Eastern-oriented. Nevertheless, they represent, as did the earlier communes, an attempt by many to escape the injustices or emotional scars of a fast-paced post-industrial society19. Black and Native American Developments Another factor in the emergence of more cultic and evangelical ardor in the United States was the presence throughout the South of the Black slave. In both the Caribbean and the slave states, Blacks torn from their roots were forced to develop new ways of coping with their subordinated and psychologically damaging life. Religion was one of their most dependable solaces. They adapted the Christian church to their needs, gradually creating their own Black religious experience. As they were freed and subjected to the vagaries of unfeeling economic competition and insecurity, subjected to the racist discrimination of the North and Jim Crow in the South, Blacks found in cultic movements a source of comfort, assurance, and selfexpression20. Groups led by Marcus Garvey, Black Muslims, Father Divine, and Move21, all spoke to Black economic frustrations, abject poverty, and racist victimization. Their charismatic leaders preached self-help, separation, racial pride, and sometimes simply comfort 22. Garvey and Father Divine were charismatic figures who, in their lifetimes, were able to attract funds, admiration, and love. Garvey, however, was convicted of mail fraud; while Father Divine (George Baker), though accused of manipulation and exploitation, remained the head of his cult until his death, and his wife has preserved his memory and his work. Native Americans, too, found religious cults a useful way to confront the dominant culture, which denied them their lands and their traditional values. Like the Blacks, they developed cults that embodied both ancestral practices and many new Christian beliefs propagated by zealous missionaries. The two most pronounced of these cults were the Ghost Dance movement and the Peyote cult. The Ghost Dance differed from the Peyote because it stressed hostility toward the dominant white culture, while the latter used drugs to induce Christian ecstasy, remaining passive and inward. The Ghost Dance cult was eventually suppressed. The Peyote cult was ignored until the 1960s when apprehension over the increasing use of drugs caused its practices to be challenged. In spite of a series of court decisions and the passage of the Drug Abuse Act, permission to use peyote for religious purposes is still pending23. Both Native Americans and Blacks turned to cults that reflected the frustrations of displacement, poverty, and racism. Their responses to the prevailing society were attempts to assuage communal despair and anger. Acculturation and assimilation were far more difficult and almost impossible because of racial discrimination. Their religious responses ranged from a return to traditional fundamentalism and "born again" churches to adherence to a host of cults that denied the values of the intrusive majority. Appearing bizarre, these Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 16

cults were generally ignored by dominant groups and regarded as aberrations, such as Father Divine‟s group or the Peyote cults. They did not challenge society either in their doctrines or by excessive proselytization. If, however, cults emphasized ideals that offended the mores of the prevalent political state or if they stressed group conflict, opposition arose to curtail, limit, and even suppress such movements24. More often the belligerent, aggressive cult did not prosper and as it became more acculturated and less bellicose, it faded away to be replaced by newer and even more strident groups25. Western Europe Although the United States proved a more fertile environment for the spread of dissenting and different religious or secular movements, western Europe, which also underwent a process of rapid change caused by industrialization, was not immune to the growth of cults and sects. Changes created by new production, transportation, and communication unraveled and challenged existing precepts, while the generational gap became more divisive. Prosperity and education accelerated technological progress; increased urbanization created new classes and sharper antagonisms, stimulating worldliness. These factors also created anomie, alienation, apprehension, and often nostalgia for traditional values. Responses to these changes led to a variety of choices. Established churches, the voice of the status quo and the propertied classes, did not always meet the aspirations of the new classes or the displaced young. Responses were sometimes secular, with an avowed interest in revolutionary activity, or in adherence to the new spirit preached by Karl Marx, culminating in the twentieth century in allegiance to new totalitarian ideologies. However, not everyone reflected alienation by retreating to secularism. Religion is too potent a force and too significant in the binding of family and community. People did not abandon the church but rather sought a more communicative, emotionally satisfying variant: It was expressed in Catholic France, Italy, and Portugal by the growth of innumerable miracle devotions and prophetic movements, Lourdes being the most illustrious example26. The expression of religiosity was acknowledged by widespread devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and even more intensely to the cult of Mary27. Almost spontaneously a number of visions of Mary were widely reported. These apparitions were accompanied by prophecies and warnings28. Churches were dedicated to Mary, and confraternities such as the Association of the Living Rosary, the Children of Mary, and Our Lady of Victories were dedicated to her service. Visions were most commonplace in Italy; and although the church avoided delineating them as genuine miracles, it acquiesced in the folk respect given to the young witnesses29. These visions did not cease; in fact, world crises increased apprehensions and their occurrences accelerated (e.g., Fatimah in Portugal, current experiences in Yugoslavia, in Ireland, and in Philadelphia). Protestants in France and England, in response to their alienation, also underwent a movement similar to the Great Awakening in America. A new religiosity appeared that was marked by an increased piety and emotional expressions of belief by the faithful -- a more vibrant rebirth of a spiritual relationship between Jesus and his followers. These Protestants did not reject Christian dogma, but they possessed no doctrinal unity, and often loyalty was given to individual preachers. Heavy emphasis was placed on homiletic and especially missionary activity30. The greatest difference between the United States and Europe did not rest on a lack of religious activity but rather on the fact that most of the leaders preaching in European societies relied on variants of the mainstream faiths, and for very good reasons. The Catholic church and the Anglican and Lutheran churches enjoyed much real support from the political authorities, even in regions that practiced religious freedom. To the contrary, in the United States, the absence of a firmly established state church, along with a weak, newly emerging

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 17

Catholic church, prevented significant opposition to the development of new sects and the cults. In the twentieth century the industrialization of Europe, which led to greater national homogeneity and the subsequent threat of "de-Christianization," encouraged the movement toward either more traditional Catholicism or the growth of fundamentalist Pentecostal sects31. Furthermore, the gradual separation of church and state, completed in western Europe by the beginning of the twentieth century, weakened a traditional bulwark against the growth of new sects and cults. The groundwork was prepared for the transatlantic transfer of sects and cults, and then throughout the world, especially as the technology of communication and transportation made ideas and missionaries so accessible. The millenarian movements in particular flourished. Some, such as the Mormons, the Seventh Day Adventists, and the Jehovah‟s Witnesses, gradually became a part of mainstream American religions and then spread to the European continent as the forces of secularism eroded the strength of the dominant churches. The Watchtower movement, indeed, penetrated throughout Europe32. Comparison of Past and Present Cults and Sects Just as in the past cults drew upon the religious principles and attitudes of the time, so do the present ones. Contemporary cults promise salvation, often preaching anti-materialistic principles to appeal to members of the counterculture. They incorporate Eastern themes of meditation and peace. Some psychotherapeutic ones promise new self-esteem and worldly success. They feed not only upon common beliefs but also upon the hopes and fears of the times. Leaders compile a syncretic vision, drawing upon existing theological and social doctrines which are reordered and redefined to adapt to prevailing frustrations33. The contemporary cults, as did their predecessors, engender popular and legal opposition within their communities. Past opposition rested upon legal quarrels and policies of the cults, especially those that threatened prevailing traditions. Jehovah‟s Witnesses were engaged in courtroom actions over their refusal to salute the flag or take loyalty oaths. They were bitterly persecuted by the Nazis. Like the Christian Scientists34, they were and are subjected to legal action because of their refusal to accept scientific medical care. There is no doubt that many of the groups that we regard as eccentric, sometimes quaint or odd, were perceived in the context of their own time as cults. They were considered dangerous and antisocial; their leaders were thought to be self-serving. Mostly, as is sometimes the case today, these cults passed quickly into oblivion. If their membership was small, largely poor or lower middle class, and their resources meager, they presented little or no threat to the established society. This, of course, did not apply to groups like the Mormons or Seventh Day Adventists. Proselytization by Mormons was zealous. Their financial profits from the growth of their membership became prodigious and led to resentment. Moreover, practices such as polygamy and the separation of families when joining the commune produced even more distaste. (It is interesting to note that today a sect of the Mormon church is still in conflict over the issue of polygamy.) Instances of openly hostile persecution and ugly violence pervaded the relationship between the community and the Mormons. Only when the Mormons moved into the unpopulated West, abandoned polygamy, reduced their proselytization to more reasonable levels, and institutionalized their religious teachings did the cult become acceptable as a sect or church. Many contemporary cults have aroused the same antipathy because of proselytization techniques that often smack of deception and brainwashing, fund-raising that is fraudulent, and behavior of members that sometimes constitutes a public nuisance35.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 18

It is probable that some of the cults of the past pursued overly zealous methods and pressures in proselytization, that some communes and sects used pressures that resemble present-day "brainwashing," but there is little evidence indicating high levels of fraud and deception. For example, in the sect Church of God, the preacher A.J. Tomlinson was almost a dictator. After his ouster (under scandalous circumstances) the church remained highly authoritarian in its governance, but deception in proselytization was never practiced extensively36. While many churches and groups rigorously denied the right of dissent within their congregations, members knowingly accepted these regulations. Several modern cults, on the other hand, such as the Unification Church, Hare Krishna, Divine Light Mission, and Children of God, have adopted the worst features of the past. Sometimes the leadership has been demented (e.g., Charles Manson, Jim Jones) or corrupt (e,g, the Reverend Moon, Guru Maharaj Ji, Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh) and members have been exploited and manipulated for the benefit of these leaders. In the turbulent 1970s and even into the 1980s cults used both fraud and dishonest techniques of recruiting over and above ardent proselytization and some exerted extreme psychological pressures37. Their methods, derived from the discipline of earlier religious sects, focused on ritual, chanting, special diet, sleep deprivation, and above all separation from family and the community. The imposition of humility and sometimes the use of public confession lowered self-esteem and were especially effective in creating dependency. In some cults marriage and family were subjected to scrutiny and supervision. By demanding total immersion into the cult, cult leaders created social cohesion and the psychological pressure that ensured enduring commitment. Some groups, such as Father Divine‟s and the Hare Krishna, demanded that after conversion and "rebirth" members accept new names and identities. Missionary claims of salvation appealed to the psychologically vulnerable, those who were facing loneliness, the loss of loved ones, new decisions, and other major life crises. To those idealists disillusioned or disgruntled with materialism, the cults provided the promise of experiential social work. Through techniques of love-bombing, new friendships, and bonding, the recruit found new meaning, solace, and often an end to depression or despair, and sometimes a substitute for drug addiction. The family‟s anguish was exacerbated by the separation from their adult children in cults and by the knowledge that their children often relinquished schools or careers38. Modern leaders acquired more sophisticated techniques in persuasion and indoctrination, abetted by skillful use of the media. The result was heightened anxiety within the community at large, represented by protests and parents‟ attempts to kidnap and "deprogram" their children. The number of young middle-class adults in college who had forsaken their families, their careers, and their futures alarmed the church, the synagogue, the community, and especially the family. Moreover, some cults were very wealthy; their leaders lived in luxury while their members were given the most menial and demanding work, forced to live at the poverty level. Even more frightening has been the violence that cult leaders have been able to promote, either against themselves or the outside society. The Jonestown massacre is an example of violence perpetrated against its own members; whereas Charles Manson and his cult murdered outsiders. Move provoked so much opposition that it led to societal violence. There were also instances of terrorist violence by socio-political groups such as the Weathermen, the Baader-Meinhof gang, and the Symbionese Liberation Army. In Europe the astounding appeal of these cultic groups was addressed in a resolution proposed by the European Parliament in March 1982. The legislators advocated that the media expose cult activity as much as possible, that governments refuse tax, charity, and other benefits to cults, and that regular reports should be made concerning the activities of cults that represent a "threat to society"39. While mainstream church groups were upset and

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 19

even resentful of many cults‟ activities, at the same time they opposed anti-cult legislation, concluding that it might weaken First Amendment protection of all religions40. After the debacle of Jonestown and the press coverage of the indictments of the Reverend Moon for income tax fraud, of Guru Maharaj Ji for massive corruption, and of EST‟s Werner Erhard for scandalous and illegal behavior, cults became even more suspect. The media that provided evangelicals access to huge audiences also provided the information that discredited them and reduced their recruitment as even they became involved in a series of sex and fraud scandals -- Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggert41. The result has been not the disappearance of cults but rather their adoption of a low profile. Many cults have been attempting to acculturate and pass into the mainstream of American churches as new sects or denominations, as had been done in the past. Even if these contemporary cults fade away (which happens occasionally), they will be followed by a host of new ones with even more deviant doctrines, such as the emergence of the Satanic cults. Change, adversity, and threats to traditional cultural values always result in the emergence of new religious or secular communities (some may be imported from abroad like the Rastafarian)42. New ideas and sects are not necessarily bad and should not be rejected or condemned out of hand. Quite the contrary, dissent is a part of both the American and European religious past. So long as people seek philosophical and psychological truths, so long as they need reassurance and hope, and so long as change threatens their traditional values and culture, there will always be new preachers to provide answers and stability. As one historian wrote: If "passion for community becomes a mutual evasion of all responsibility, a haven for the undisciplined and bored, the paranoid and amoral...[If] sensitivity groups, through mere amateurishness or sheer quackery, descend from a level of rescue and redemption to one of abandonment and exploitation..."43 cults will meet opposition, disdain, and community anger. If, on the other hand, cults desist from unethical proselytization, desist from separating parents and children, desist from insisting that they alone have a monopoly on truth, these new cults -- whether strange, alien, or more in the mainstream -- can be accepted.

References 1. Natalie Isser and Lita Schwartz, History of Conversion and Contemporary Cults (New York: Peter Lang, 1988) 1-3. 2. Natalie Isser and Lita Schwartz, "Charismatic Leadership: A Case in Point," Cultic Studies Journal 3 (no.1, 1986): 57-55. 3. S.V. Levine, "The Role of Psychiatry in the Phenomenon of Cults," in S.C. Feinstein et al. (eds.), Adolescent Psychiatry, (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1980) 8, 123-125; M. Herbert Danziger, "Towards a Redefinition of Sect and Cult..." Comparative Social Research 10 (1987): 113-23. 4. Natalie Isser and Lita Schwartz, "Psychohistory and Conversion," in Jerrold Atlas (ed.), Psychology and History (New York: Psychohistory, 1986) 142-51. 5. Some writers as late as the 1960s still considered the Mennonites a cult, cf. Walter R. Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1965). 6. Hartzell Spence, The Story of America’s Religions (New York: Abingdon, 1960) 1-36. 7. Natalie Isser, "Protestants and Proselytization During the Second French Empire," Journal of Church and State 30 (Winter 1988): 51-70. 8. Sydney E. Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People (New Haven: Yale UP, 1972) 403-438; c.f. Edwin Scott Gaustad, A Religious History of America (New York: Harper & Row, 1966). Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 20

9. Charles W. Conn, Like a Mighty Army (Cleveland: Pathways, 1977) 47-88. 10. A.J. Tomlinson, dynamic and controversial preacher and leader, brought the Church of God (a Pentecostal sect) its first great prominence. He was involved in a financial scandal and forced to resign in 1923; yet that sect has become a large denomination. Mickey Crews, The Church of God, A Social History (Knoxville: U of Tennessee P, 1990) 1-37. 11. B. Zablocki and A. Aidala, "The Varieties of Communitarian Ideology," in B. Zablocki (ed.), Alienation and Charisma: A Study of Contemporary American Communes (New York: Free Press, 1980) 189-246; R.M. Kanter, Commitment and Community: Communes and Utopias in Sociological Perspective (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1972) 8-10. 12. Paul K. Conkin, Two Paths to Utopia, The Hutterites and the Llano Colony (Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 1964) 76-100. 13. Ibid, 148-153; John F.C. Harrison, Quest for the New Moral World, Robert Owen and the Owenites in Britain and America (New York: Scribner‟s, 1969). 14. Henri Desroche, The American Shakers, trans. John K. Savacool (Amherst: U of Massachusetts P, 1971); Diane Sasson, The Shaker Spiritual Narrative (Knoxville: U of Tennessee P, 1983) is a collection of autobiographical essays which illustrates how Shakers (years after conversion and communal life) adapted their past experiences to Shaker philosophy and values. 15. Kanter, 87. 16. Billy Hargis of the Christian Crusade is the best known of present-day millenarians. He stresses that the Anti-Christ and Satan is personified by the communists and predicted the final Armageddon will appear in the Middle East. Edwin Scott Gaustad, Dissent in American Religion (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1973) 102-3. 17. This was true of the Mormons, whose leading disciple William Clayton believed that the Civil War was the beginning of the apocalypse but was able to adjust his prophecies successfully. James B. Allen, Trials of Discipleship, The Story of William Clayton, A Mormon (Urbana & Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1987) 303-16. 18. Frederick William Evans, Anne Lee, A Biography with Memoirs (London & New York: J. Burns, 4th edition, 1869). 19. The best study of the French Utopians is F.E. Manuel, The Prophets of Paris (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1962). 20. cf. Rebecca B. Bateman, "Africans and Indians: A Comparative Study of the Black Carib and Black Seminole," Ethnohistory 37 (Winter 1990): 1-24. 21. George Eaton Simpson, Black Religions in the New World (New York: Columbia UP, 1978) 143-50, 314-20; cf. H. Cantril and M. Sherif, "The Kingdom of Father Divine," Journal of Abnormal Psychology 33 (1938): 147-67; S. Harris, The Incredible Father Divine (London: W.W. Allen, 1954). 22. Christopher G. Ellison and David A. Gay, "Religion, Religious Commitment, and Life Satisfaction Among Black Americans," Sociological Quarterly 31 (Spring 1990): 123-48. 23. Gaustad, Dissent, 85-92. 24. J. Milton Yinger, Sociology Looks at Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1961) 37-52; Charles W. Bowser, Let the Bunker Burn, The Final Battle with Move (Philadelphia: Camino, 1989); M.E. Knerr, Suicide in Guyana (New York: Belmont Tower, 1978); Charles Lindholm, Charisma (Cambridge: Basil Blackwell, 1990) 138-55. 25. Yinger, 37-52. 26. J.F.C. Harrison, The Second Coming, Millenarianism 1789-1850 (New Brunswick: Rutgers UP, 1979). 27. Adrien Dansette, Religious History of Modern France, trans. John Dingle (New York: Herder & Herder, 1961) I, 320. 28. Thomas A. Kselman, Miracles and Prophecies in Nineteenth Century France (New Brunswick: Rutgers UP, 1983). 29. Ibid. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 21

30. Isser, "Protestants and Proselytization," 51-70. 31. Ralph Gibson, A Social History of French Catholicism, 1789-1914 (London: Routledge, 1989); c.f. Robert Ellwood, Religious and Spiritual Groups in Modern America (Englewood: Prentice-Hall, 1973). 32. W.J. Schnell, Thirty Years a Watch Tower Slave (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1956); Barbara Grizzuti Harrison, Visions of Glory, A History and Memory of Jehovah’s Witnesses (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1976) describes missionary efforts in England and other European countries; J.A. Beckford, "Organization, Ideology, and Recruitment: The Structure of the Watch Tower Movement," Sociological Review 23 (1976): 893-909; Eileen Barker, The Making of a Moonie, Choice or Brainwashing? (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1984) though questioning whether Moonies are brainwashed discusses increasing numbers of the Unification Church in England. 33. S.M. Tipton, "The Moral Logic of Alternative Religion," Daedalus 1 (1982): 185-214. 34. Robert Peel, Mary Baker Eddy, The Years of Discovery (New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1966). 35. Paul W. Pruyser, "The Seamy Side of Current Religious Beliefs," Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic 41 (no. 4, 1977): 329-48; Maria I. Pereira de Queiroz, "Messianic Myth and Movements," Diogenes 90 (1975): 78-99; Harriet S. Mostatche, Searching: Practices and Beliefs of the Religious Cults and Human Potential Groups (New York: Stravon Educational, 1984). 36. Conn, 225-334. 37. Isser & Schwartz, Hist of Conversion, 107-37. 38. Ibid. 39. Barker, 1-5. This resolution was directed especially to the activities of the Reverend Moon and the Unification Church. 40. Isser & Schwartz, Hist of Conversion, 171. 41. New York Times, 21 July 1991, 14. 42. The Rastafarians are one of the fastest growing cults since 1983. Leonard E. Barrett, The Rastafarians, Sounds of Cultural Dissonance (Boston: Beacon, 1988) 235-46. 43. Gaustad, Dissent, 152. ************** Natalie Isser, Ph.D. is Professor of History at the Ogontz Campus of Pennsylvania State University. She has written numerous books and articles on cults and conversion. This paper was originally presented at the American Family Foundation annual meeting at Stony Point, NY, in September 1990. This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8, Number 2, pages 104-121. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 22

Ritual Child Abuse: Understanding the Controversies David W. Lloyd, Esq. National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect Abstract The phenomenon of “ritual child abuse” has created a major national controversy. The general public is confused by media reports of notorious cases with different outcomes in California, Florida, and Massachusetts, and other states. Professionals in the fields of child welfare, mental health, law enforcement, and law disagree about the definition of “ritual child abuse,” how frequently it occurs, and what we know about the individuals and groups who commit it. Positions have thus become polarized within the same field. This paper is intended to explore that controversy and some of the myriad issues involved. Currently there is no consensus definition of “ritual child abuse.” The term has been applied by both the media and professionals to such different situations as 

any bizarre or especially sadistic act(s) of physical, sexual and psychological abuse committed on one or more children,



group acts of religious worship to demonic powers in the course of committing physical, sexual, and emotional abuse of children,



psychological intimidation of children, including attempts to make them perform acts of religious belief in demonic powers or to abuse other children or animals, accompanying physical, sexual, and emotional abuse of children.

However, the term has been applied inconsistently to the physical, sexual, and emotional abuse of children that may result from religious beliefs. In general, it has been applied only to those practices of comparatively obscure and secretive sects and cults. This lack of a clear definition contributes to the controversy in several ways: 1.

It hinders our understanding of the variety of phenomena that are occurring. We may need different approaches to address different problems. Sadistic child abuse of numerous children by a group requires a different approach to investigation and intervention from that for sadistic child abuse of one child performed by one individual.

2.

It hinders our assessment of the harms to the child. Children who are physically abused, sexually abused, and neglected also suffer some psychological harm. However, children subjected to repetitive acts of sadistic psychological intimidation reveal symptoms of severe psychological harm.

3.

It hinders our understanding of the motivation of the abuser(s). For example, the perpetrator(s) may have performed such acts in order to achieve completion of the crime (“modus operandi” or “M.O.” in law enforcement parlance), namely to intimidate the child(ren) into obedience and secrecy, or in order to gratify sexual and other psychological needs of the abuser(s) and not as part of any belief system. For example, some individuals practice such deviant sexual behavior as eating feces and drinking urine, and may be seeking group legitimacy of their own needs by pressuring children to do the same. Others may be mentally ill and acting under the influence of religious delusions, while others may be deliberately attempting to convert children to religious sects. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 23

In addition, an emotional reaction to the allegation that demonic worship was a part of the child maltreatment may hinder our exploration of alternative explanations. We need to be aware of our own religious beliefs and biases and our prejudices against other sects and religions in this area. One proposed definition of “ritual child abuse” that may help address these concerns is: the intentional physical abuse, sexual abuse, or psychological abuse of a child by a person responsible for the child‟s welfare, when such abuse is repeated and/or stylized and is typified by such other acts as cruelty to animals, or threats of harm to the child, other persons, and animals. This definition focuses on the acts done and the harms to the child, not on the individual‟s motivation (which may never be known) underlying the intentional acts of psychological abuse. What is “Cult Ritual Child Abuse”? The term “ritual child abuse” is often used interchangeably with the term “cult ritual child abuse” when more than one individual is committing the abuse. Like “ritual child abuse” the term lacks precision and has been used to describe such different situations as 

a religious sect, which may have broken away from the mainstream beliefs of some religion, whose lifestyle and secrecy endanger the physical and psychological health of its children,



a group that involves children in acts that may be offensive to some but are not illegal while conducting religious worship to demonic powers,



a group that physically, sexually, and emotionally abuses children and has developed a common belief system to justify the psychopathological acts,



a group with no discernible religious or philosophical beliefs that psychopathically abuses children physically, sexually, and emotionally,



a group that performs acts of religious worship to demonic powers in the course of performing acts of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse on children, and vice versa, and



a group using psychological intimidation of children, including attempts to make them perform acts of religious belief in demonic powers, while physically, sexually, and emotionally abusing children.

The dangers in such imprecision of terms are: 1.

It may divert the attention of investigating agencies (including child protective services and child care licensing agencies) away from the illegal acts and harms done to the child and toward investigation of the unusual beliefs and religious practices of the group.

2.

We may inappropriately apply our knowledge of one cult‟s behavior to a different group. Although little is known about small groups who abuse children, there is a widespread assumption that the groups are Satanic cults. This may be due to the historic record of the practices of Satanic cults rather than to any current evidence.

3.

It may lead to inappropriate discrimination against groups whose beliefs and practices are unusual but are neither illegal nor detrimental to the welfare of their child, adolescent, or adult members. Unfortunately, some groups do things that are psychologically harmful to their adolescent and adult members, as well as to the younger children subject to their influence. It is not always easy to distinguish between the two types, especially if they are secretive about their practices.

One possibility is that we define “cult ritual child abuse” to mean: Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 24

the intentional physical abuse, sexual abuse or psychological abuse of a child by persons who are in a religious cult and who are responsible for the child‟s welfare, when such abuse is repeated and/or stylized and is typified by such other acts as cruelty to animals, or threats of harm to the child, other persons, and animals, and is performed to reinforce the cult‟s religious cohesion, and that we define “group ritual child abuse” to mean: the intentional physical abuse, sexual abuse, or psychological abuse of a child by a group of persons responsible for the child‟s welfare, when such abuse is repeated and/or stylized and is typified by such other acts as cruelty to animals, or threats of harm to the child, other persons, and animals, and is performed to reinforce the group‟s cohesion. How Widespread is “Ritual Child Abuse,” Especially by Cults? There is a widespread disagreement about the incidence and prevalence of “ritual child abuse,” for a number of reasons: 1.

There is no central public or private agency identified as the repository of information about allegations, nor is there any legal requirement that individuals or agencies make reports of allegations to any such central point.

2.

Since the term “ritual child abuse” has been so imprecise, and has been applied to so many different situations, it is difficult to count cases.

3.

Since only a few states are attempting to define and prohibit “ritual child abuse,” the convictions for behavior that seems to fit the phenomena are classified under existing criminal statutes prohibiting physical and sexual assault.

4.

Public support for the reporting of child abuse and child sexual abuse is only a few decades old. Only recently have adults who experienced such severe abuse many years ago begun overcoming the effects of psychological intimidation and come forward relating their experiences.

5.

Children and adults who have experienced sadistic psychological intimidation may have symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder or multiple personality disorder that are similar to those of severe mental illness. Depending on the investigative, forensic, and/or clinical skills of those intervening, accurate reports may be discounted, and delusions may be accepted as factual.

6.

Although some people have speculated that there is a large number of such groups who ritually abuse children in a large conspiratorial network, there is no evidence of such a linkage.

Part of the controversy over such cases as the Manhattan Beach, California (McMartin) case is the inability of the professionals, to say nothing of the public, to agree on how a claim of cult ritual child abuse is “validated.” Many knowledgeable professionals are understandably upset that the media apply the standard of proof in criminal prosecutions -- proof beyond a reasonable doubt -- as the criterion as to whether such acts occurred. It is unclear whether the lesser legal standard in civil proceedings -- proof by a preponderance of evidence -- is acceptable, given the legal doctrines that govern admissibility of evidence. Therefore, the debate about the number of “valid” allegations of ritual child abuse and cult ritual child abuse is based on complex, and perhaps unsolvable, philosophical debates about how we determine “truth.”

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 25

What Do We Know About Cults That Ritually Abuse Children? Although there is a growing body of knowledge about various cults, we know very little about groups that ritually abuse children. Our limited knowledge is derived from the following: 1.

clinical and forensic study of teenagers who dabble in the occult, especially in Satanic symbols and rituals (in part through the influence of “heavy metal” rock music and the drug culture), their acts of vandalism and animal mutilation, and the psychological effects of such activities on the participants;

2.

clinical and forensic study of adults who voluntarily join the thousands of religious, quasireligious, and mystical cults and secret groups in American society, their practices, and the harmful effects of such cults and groups on the participants;

3.

historical study of symbols and rituals associated with Satanic worship; and

4.

what is reported by clinicians who treat children and adults who have been (or allege to have been) victimized physically, sexually, and emotionally in such a bizarre way by a group of people that someone -- the children, or adult survivors, or clinicians -- has labeled a cult.

Whether the knowledge from the first three sources is useful or even very relevant in helping us understand anything about groups that abuse children is one of the major controversies in the field. For example, most religious cults and secular cult-like groups that have been studied have a craving for increased membership, for both financial and psychological needs, and therefore have some public visibility, usually with a charismatic leader. However, with respect to groups alleged to molest children there is no such visibility. They seem to be extremely small “familybased” groups who are so hidden that their numbers are impossible to estimate. In particular, there seem to be no identified charismatic leaders of the various Satanist groups around the country. Some visible cults and cult-like groups are dangerous to the emotional and physical wellbeing of their members, and may financially harm gullible contributors; their practices may be harmful to children of the members. For example, a cult‟s insistence on a subsistence diet and a prohibition of bathing may injure their children‟s health. Similarly, a cult‟s fear of the outside world may hinder their children‟s psychological development. However, there is no evidence that such visible cults and groups are ritually abusing children. Religious and secular cults are dynamic groups that can change over time. Many appear to be currently benign, but can devolve into activities that are harmful to their members or outsiders. Many were once considered to be dangerous, but have now become accepted; some of the major religions of the world -- Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam -- were once considered to be cults. Cults and sects splinter off from major faiths, and from other cults and sects periodically. In addition, scattered groups that worship demonic powers have emerged throughout history. Unfortunately, many people assume that any religious cult that is not part of a major faith is devoted to Satanism, is dangerous to adolescents, and may be performing illegal acts, including ritual abuse of children. The limited knowledge we have about child-abusing groups, combined with the spread of literature and training about the dangers of cults, may send an erroneous message to the general public -- especially to families whose teenagers have dabbled in Satanism or whose adult children are members of cults: that anyone involved in a group outside the mainstream is at high risk for ritually abusing a child. There is no evidence that such fears have a basis in fact.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 26

Why Aren’t There Criminal Convictions for “Cult Ritual Child Abuse”? If a phenomenon has not been specifically defined and prohibited in a state‟s criminal code, there is no reason for law enforcement agencies to investigate it. Instead, police officers generally investigate only the allegations of specific crimes; in the area of groups alleged to maltreat children the police will only investigate the sexual and assaultive offenses alleged to have been committed upon the children. Only a few states have attempted to define and prohibit the crime of “cult behavior” or “ritual child abuse.” When such legislation is enacted, law enforcement agencies will be obligated to investigate the broader phenomenon. Cult ritual child abuse is often alleged to have occurred in out-of-home care settings, thus complicating the investigative process. The roles of the police, child protective services, mental health therapists, and child care licensing agencies are frequently unclear, creating the potential for repetitious interviews, withholding of information and evidence, and inappropriate disclosure of investigative information to the media. The bizarre nature of the reported events frequently raises questions about the veracity of the children. The children may be in acute mental health crisis, which compounds the assessment of their credibility, and may be especially difficult to interview due to their young age and the use of terroristic threats against disclosure by the abusers. Thus prosecutors have concerns about filing charges in these cases, since they must prove the defendants are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The combination of unsatisfactory investigations and children whose credibility can be easily challenged tends to assist the defendant(s). Nonetheless, there have been convictions in Florida, Massachusetts, Nevada, Illinois and other states for various forms of child maltreatment in cases where the broader form of ritual child abuse allegedly occurred. How Can You Tell When a Child Has Been a Victim of Ritual Child Abuse? There is no single symptom or group of symptoms that conclusively proves that a child has been a victim of ritual child abuse. If the child has been physically or sexually assaulted there may be medical evidence, but frequently this has disappeared by the time the child is able to disclose what has happened. The child may show behavioral signs of stress, such as sleep disturbances, aggression toward toys, pets, and humans, regression to such behaviors as thumb sucking and bed wetting, and especially fears and phobic reactions. There may be bizarre statements. He or she may talk about demons and monsters who are watching him/her constantly and have the power to harm him/her and family members. The child may become preoccupied with the topic of death, and discuss animals and humans being killed and/or mutilated. He/she may discuss eating feces and drinking urine or blood, masked and robed figures, chants, rituals, candles and incense. Some of these behaviors may be attributable to other stresses in the child‟s life, such as a move, illness or death in the family, or family separation. Other behavioral symptoms may be symptoms of mental illness. It is unclear whether some behaviors and statements are reactions to exposure to films and videos depicting graphic violence, Satanic cults, and demonic powers. Unfortunately, it is difficult to differentiate between children who have delusions, children who have vivid night terrors, children who are incorporating fictitious film and video content, and children who recount real events of ritual child abuse by groups. Some child victims of alleged “cult ritual child abuse” report events that are clearly erroneous; e.g., “people were flying around the room, people were cut up and put back together,” etc. Whether these reports are hallucinations due to a diagnosable psychiatric illness, from having unknowingly ingested hallucinogens, misperception of magical illusions performed by the group, or from an unknown cause may be difficult to determine. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 27

Are the Accounts of Adults Who Claim to Have Experienced “Cult Ritual Child Abuse” as Children Accurate? There is some debate about the accuracy of reports by adults who claim to have been childhood victims of Satanic cults decades ago. Those with doubts argue that if these cults were in existence 20 and 30 years ago, at the time these adults were children, we should have heard the same rumors of child maltreatment that we hear today. Instead, there is little or no evidence of their existence -- no corpses, Satanic paraphernalia, or diaries by participants -- and there have been few identified survivors who could independently corroborate each other‟s accounts of experiences in the same location. Further, these individuals frequently suffer from multiple personality disorder or from posttraumatic stress disorder as a result of some traumatic childhood experience, but state that they had no conscious memories of these events until they had undergone hypnosis. A number of forensic experiments with hypnotic suggestion raise doubts about the accuracy of recall of events after hypnotic trances. On the other hand, since the effects of psychological intimidation can be long-lasting, survivors of ritual child abuse may not have felt safe in coming forward until recently, when the public has been more able to accept the reality of child sexual abuse. In addition, we have only learned about post-traumatic stress disorder and multiple personality disorder within the last few years. It is possible that those children and adults in previous decades who dared to report their childhood victimization were disbelieved and sent to mental health professionals where they were misdiagnosed as psychotic, without any meaningful investigation by law enforcement officials. Conclusion Since we lack consensus as to the nature of the phenomena we are faced with, including a lack of consensus regarding terms and criteria to measure incidence and validity, it is likely that the controversies will continue. In the meantime, we should exercise our critical judgment in evaluating what we see and hear from those who deny the existence of ritual child abuse and those who claim that it is widespread.

Selected Bibliography on Ritualistic Abuse of Children Cozolino, L.J. (1989). The ritual abuse of children: Implications for clinical practice and research. Journal of Sex Research 26:1, 131-138. Crewdson, J. (1988). By Silence Betrayed: Sexual Abuse of Children in America. Boston: Little, Brown. Faller, K.C. (Spring 1990). Sexual abuse of children in cults: A clinical perspective. Roundtable Magazine 2:2, 11-13. Finkelhor, D., Meyer Williams, L., & Burns, N. (1988). Nursery Crimes: Sexual Abuse in Day Care. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Ganaway, G.K. (1989). Historical versus narrative truth: Clarifying the role of exogenous trauma in the etiology of multiple personality disorder and its variants. Dissociation, 2, 209-220. Hollingsworth, J. (1986). Unspeakable Acts. Chicago: Congdon & Weed. Kelley, S.J. (1988). Ritualistic abuse of children: Dynamics and impact. Cultic Studies Journal, 5:2, 228-236. Kelley, S.J. (1989). Stress responses of children to sexual abuse and ritualistic abuse in day care centers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 4:4, 502-513.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 28

Lanning, K. (1989). Child Sex Rings: A Behavioral Analysis. For Criminal Justice Professionals Handling Cases of Child Sexual Exploitation. Arlington, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Lanning, K.V. (October, 1989). Satanic, occult, ritualistic crime: A law enforcement perspective. Police Chief. Lloyd, D.W. (Spring 1990). An exploration of our vocabulary: Ritualistic victimization. Roundtable Magazine 2:2, 17. Mulhern, S. (1990). Ritual abuse: Creating a context for belief. Paper presented at the International Conference on Child Abuse and Neglect, Hamburg, Federal Republic of Germany, October, 1990. Copies available from Sherrill Mulhern, D.E.A., at the Laboratoire des Rumeurs, des Mythes du Futur et des Sectes, U.F.R. Anthropologie, Ethnologie, Sciences des Religions, Universite de Paris, VII, 10 rue Charles V, Paris, 75004 France. Los Angeles County Inter-Agency Council on Child Abuse and Neglect. (November, 1988). Protocols Developed by the Multi-Victim, Multi-Suspect Child Sexual Abuse Subcommittee. Manshell, L. (1990). Nap Time: The True Story of Sexual Abuse at a Suburban Day-Care Center. New York: William Morrow. Marron, K. (1988). Ritual Abuse: Canada’s Most Infamous Trial on Child Abuse. Toronto: Seal Books. Pence, D. (1989). Investigating macro cases. The Advisor (Newsletter of the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children) 2:4, 5-7, 14. Pettinati, H.M. (Ed.). (1988). Hypnosis and Memory. New York: Guilford. Smith, B., Bulkley, J., & Jackson, J.A. (1988). Improving the Coordinated Response of Agencies to Child Abuse in Out-of-Home Care Settings. Washington, DC: American Bar Association, Center on Children and the Law. Wilson, C. (1986). Investigation of Sexual Abuse in Daycare. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America. ************ An abridged version of this article appeared in the Family Violence Bulletin, Vol. 6, Issue 4, Winter 1990, published by the Family Violence Research and Treatment Program, University of Texas at Tyler, 3900 University Boulevard, Tyler, TX 75701. A variant of the same article, entitled “Ritual Child Abuse: Where Do We Go From Here?” appeared in the Children’s Legal Rights Journal, Vol. 12, No. 1, Winter 1991, published by William S. Hein & Co., Inc., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14209. This article is reprinted with their permission. The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or policy of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, the Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, or the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services. ************ David W. Lloyd is Director of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Washington, D.C. At the time he wrote this article, he was Project Director at the National Resource Center on Child Sexual Abuse. This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1981, Volume 8, Number 2, pages 122-133. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 29

Outreach to Ex-Cult Members: The Question of Terminology Michael D. Langone, Ph.D. American Family Foundation William V. Chambers University of South Florida, Ph.D Abstract A questionnaire listing terms applicable to cults was sent former members of cultic groups. 108 were returned in time for analysis. Subjects were asked to rate and rank terms with regard to the degree to which they would be meaningful and acceptable to cultists who left their groups on their own (“walk-aways”). 71 of the 108 subjects were themselves walk-aways. Although subjects on average gave favorable ratings to the terms, subjects indicated that walk-aways would relate less well to traditional terms used by cult educational organizations, e.g., “cult,” “brainwashing.” Terms such as “psychological abuse,” “spiritual trauma,” and “trust abuse” received higher average ratings and rankings. A factor analysis produced five factors, two of which, Abuse and Trauma, were significantly more acceptable than the other three factors, Mind Control, Social Manipulation, and Group Intensity. The implications of these findings for cult educational organizations are discussed. Organizations such as the American Family Foundation (AFF) and the Cult Awareness Network (CAN -- originally called the Citizens Freedom Foundation) came into being in the late 1970s in order to respond to the needs of individuals and families troubled about involvement with groups that appeared to use high-pressure tactics to recruit and retain members. Such groups were often called cults because a) most at this time were religious and b) the term “cult” typically referred to new, marginal religious movements that were not connected to mainstream religions, as were sects for example (Nelson, 1968). The families and individuals disturbed by cult involvements began to organize and form organizations such as AFF and CAN because traditional helping sources, mental health professionals and clergy in particular, dismissed or misunderstood their concerns Affected individuals and families saw similarities between the tactics they had observed in the groups causing concern and those observed by students of Korean War POWs. The terms “brainwashing” (Hunter, 1953), ”coercive persuasion” (Schein, 1961), ”thought reform” (Lifton, 1961), and the more popular “mind control” were used to describe and explain the disturbing phenomena. The process of deprogramming, in which a cultist‟s family hired former cult members to physically restrain the cultist and force him or her to listen to information not available in the cult (Dubrow-Eichel, 1989), was a frequently employed method for helping family members in cults (in recent years “forced” deprogramming has been largely replaced by voluntary deprogramming, now called ”exit counseling”). The controversy over deprogramming became bitter as cult propagandists and sympathetic academicians (Bromley & Richardson, 1983), on the one hand, and affected persons and academicians and professionals sympathetic to the other side (Delgado, 1978; Langone & Clark, 1985) argued about whether cults or deprogrammers more severely curtailed civil rights. A change in terminology quickly resulted from this debate. Academicians sympathetic to cults stopped using the term “cult” (see Robbins, 1969 for an Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 30

early article in which the term “cult” was used), which they felt had acquired a pejorative connotation, and began to use the more neutral “new religious movement” (NRM). Cult critics rejected “new religious movement” because it seemed to give undeserved respectability to noxious groups and because even during the early days it was apparent that not all controversial groups were religious. Galanter‟s (1982) “charismatic group,” although neutral and applicable to nonreligious groups, is vague (was Red Auerbach‟s Boston Celtics a “charismatic group”?) and, like NRM, often perceived as euphemistic. Many professionals felt uncomfortable with “cult” because not all “cults” employed the high pressure tactics that fueled the controversy (e.g., the Meher Baba group described by Robbins, 1969). Shapiro (1977) coined the term “destructive cult” in order to distinguish that subset of groups that was harmful from that subset which was not. Shapiro‟s distinction, however, was not consistently employed by workers in the field. The adjective “destructive” was often omitted, and “cult” and “destructive cult” in practice became interchangeable. Many cult critics, especially those associated with the American Family Foundation, attempted to downplay the categorization of the “group” and stress the “processes” that harmed people. In a booklet for the layman (Langone, 1982), for example, the author purposely did not discuss specific groups in order to encourage readers to avoid “cataloguing” groups into “bad” and “acceptable” and to look instead at how the social influence processes in a particular group affected a particular individual. This booklet also introduced the term “unethical social influence,” which, it was hoped, might replace “cult,” “brainwashing,” “coercive persuasion,” etc. Around the same time, Margaret Singer (Singer, 1982) proposed “systematic manipulation of psychological and social influence” (SMPSI). Although fellow professionals saw the advantages of such terms, they did not strike a chord among the parents and ex-cultists we and our colleagues were trying to help. Thus, many of us found ourselves employing a variety of terms to describe the same phenomenon, adjusting the terminology to suit the group to which we were trying to communicate. By 1988 it became clear that despite their shortcomings we were stuck with “cult,” “mind control,” and their brethren. Too large a body of popular and professional literature had been produced, and these terms were implanted in the public mind. In 1988 the 1982 booklet, which had been entitled “Destructive Cultism: Questions and Answers,” was revised. The new booklet, acknowledging popular usage, was called “Cults: Questions and Answers” (Langone, 1988). During the past few years, however, the terminology we have so grudgingly come to accept has been challenged by a new development. As cult educational organizations have matured and endured, more and more people have become aware of their services. In recent years substantial numbers of people who left cultic groups without a family-inspired intervention have turned to such organizations for help. Some of these people have simply left the group for whatever reason. These have come to be called “walk-aways.” Others, who have been ejected from the group, have come to be called “cast-aways.” Based on the reports of those who do contact cult educational organizations, it appears that many, and probably most, walk-aways and cast-aways not only do not relate to terms such as “cult,” but indeed find them offensive. Several factors appear to account for this phenomenon. First, ex-cultists, like the public at large, tend to subscribe to the popular misconception that “cults” are deviant, “weird” groups for “weird” people. (The recent spate of media reports on Satanism has reinforced this misconception.) Because their group, their friends in the group, and they themselves are not “weird,” their group is not a cult. Second, even when ex-members Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 31

become aware of the ideas of those who see unethical manipulation as central to cult conversion, they do not automatically see their group in this light. For example, a former cult member, who now provides psychological services to ex-cult members, told the senior author that he had been out of his group for two years before he realized it was a cult, even though he had read material such as Lifton (1961). Reevaluating years of deception is not easy. Third, not all cults are highly manipulative or destructive. Some groups are only mildly so and will not comfortably wear the label “cult.” And lastly, the typical cult victim has been indoctrinated to believe that the group is always right and he or she, when dissenting, is always wrong. Many, therefore, stumble out of their groups feeling guilty and inadequate. They try to figure out what is wrong with themselves and frequently do not even consider the possibility that their problems may in large part have been caused by the group, rather than caused by their inability to live up to the group‟s standards. The tendency of walk-aways and cast-aways to turn a deaf ear to the terminology traditionally used by cult educational organizations poses a problem for those engaged in outreach to this population, a sizeable minority and possibly majority of whom have psychological problems (Galanter, 1983). These people will not avail themselves of help if helpers do not use terms that catch the ex-members‟ attention. In order to shed light on this problem a brief questionnaire was designed to measure ex-cultists‟ opinions about various terms. Method A one-page questionnaire was mailed to 204 former cultists who had previously completed a 19-page questionnaire currently being analyzed. The questionnaire inquired into how subjects left the groups with which they were affiliated, the names of the groups, and whether or not in retrospect the subject would consider the group a cult. The questionnaire then listed 20 terms which the subject was asked to rate and rank. Specifically, the questionnaire said, “Keeping in mind the full range of groups people leave, please rate how well walk-aways who are unfamiliar with „counter-cult‟ literature would relate to the following terms. Use the following rating scale ... 1 = will relate very well to the term, 2 = will relate to the term, 3 = uncertain/not sure, 4 = will not relate to the term, and 5 = will not relate to the term at all.” Subjects were further asked: “Again keeping in mind the full range of groups, please rank the above terms. Give that term which you believe walk-aways will most readily relate to a ranking of „1‟ and mark „1‟ to the right of the term. Mark „2‟ to the right of your second choice, and so on until you have ranked them from 1 to 20.” Subjects were not asked their own ratings or rankings for it was believed that their ratings and rankings would reflect education they had obtained since leaving their groups. Subjects were also asked to suggest other terms that they believed walk-aways might respond to. Results were tabulated and subjected to a principal components analysis. Results One-hundred-eight subjects had submitted questionnaires when the results were tabulated (several more arrived after tabulation). Of these subjects, 71 were walk-aways, 10 had been involuntarily deprogrammed, 10 had been exit counseled, and 17 had left through “other” means -- usually they were ejected. Nearly all subjects (N = 100; 93%) considered their group in retrospect to be a cult. The groups from which subjects came are listed in Table 1 (3 subjects did not list group names). Average ratings and ranking of the listed terms for all subjects are presented in Table 2.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 32

Inspection of Table 2 reveals that a) subjects did not ringingly endorse any term, b) there was general agreement between ratings and rankings and c) the terms traditionally employed by cult educational organizations did not fare as well as innovative terms, such as “psychological abuse/trauma/manipulation,” “trust abuse,” and “spiritual abuse/trauma.” Respondents on average were uncertain about “cult,” “brainwashing,” and “totalist groups.” Subjects in this study were much more varied with respect to group than in previous studies. In Conway, Siegelman, Carmichael, & Coggins (1986), for example, 76% of the subjects (representing 48 groups) came from five groups: Unification Church (44%), Divine Light Mission (11%), Scientology (10%), The Way International (6%), and Hare Krishna (5%). The largest number from any one group in this study was 14 (13%) -- from Scientology. We believe that these sample differences reflect changes in the population of ex-cultists seeking assistance, including the increase in walkaways. Seventy-three percent of Conway et al.‟s samplewere deprogrammed subjects, whereas 66% of this study‟s sample consisted of walk-aways. Table 1 Numbers of Subjects, By Group Group

Number

Alive Polarity Fellowship Aquarian Church of Universal Service Bawa Muheyaddeen Fellowship Boston Church of Christ Movement Bethel Christian Center Bible Speaks Blue Mountain Center of Meditation Brotherhood of the Holy Spirit Campus Crusade Church of Today/Le Pavillon Children of God Community Bible Church Covenant Players Church Universal and Triumphant Dayton New Covenant Church Democratic Workers Party Direct Centering Divine Light Mission Eckankar Emissaries of Divine Light est Family Ark Hare Krishna Jehovah‟s Kashi Ranch Lifespring Living Water Christian Fellowship Love Family Maranatha Mt Hope Foundation Muktananda Navigators

1 1 1 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 5 1 2 1 1 2 4 2 1 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 33

New Early Christian Church Nichiren Shoshu (NSA) Opus Dei People of Hope People of Praise People‟s Temple Rama School of Metaphysics Scientology Seed, The Spiritual Walk, The Sullivanians Synanon Transcendental Meditation Unification Church UFO University Bible Fellowship Warren Truth Fellowship Way International Worldwide Church of God Zion Bible Fellowship No name/not clear

1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 14 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 4 5 1 4

Note: A group‟s being listed here should not be interpreted as a definitive statement as to its cultic nature. These results reflect the opinions of subjects only.

Table 2 Average Ratings and Rankings of descriptive terms in Ascending Order (N=108) Ratings psychological trauma psychological abuse spiritual trauma psych. Manipulation spiritual abuse trust abuse mind manipulation high demand groups relationship maniplt. relationship abuse high intensity groups coercive persuasion charismatic groups mind control mind-game victims exploitative persuasion manipulated conversion

brainwashing totalist groups cult

Rankings 2.22 2.36 2.28 2.31 2.38 2.38 2.39 2.43 2.49 2.56 2.58 2.61 2.64 2.81 2.88 3.08 3.10 3.17 3.19 3.19

trust abuse psychological trauma psychological abuse spiritual trauma psych. manipulation spiritual abuse mind manipulation high intensity groups high demand groups relationship abuse relationship maniplt. mind control coercive persuasion charismatic groups mind-game victims exploitative persuasion brainwashing cult manipul‟d conversions totalist groups

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 34

7.81 7.96 8.09 8.33 8.49 8.78 8.92 9.31 9.32 9.60 10.01 10.76 10.82 11.32 11.73 12.75 12.79 13.03 13.35 13.72

Note: Ratings were based on the following: 1 = will relate very well to the term 2 = will relate to the term 3 = uncertain/not sure 4 = will not relate to the term 5 = will not relate to the term at all

In order to determine if there was an unusually high number of “3” ratings (“uncertain/not sure”), all ratings for all subjects were totaled. Table 3 summarizes these data. Table 3 Summary of Ratings for All Subjects and All Questions

Rating 1. Will relate very well to the term 2. Will relate to the term 3. Uncertain/not sure 4. Will not relate to the term 5. Will not relate to the term at all Total

Frequency 440 645 495 397 182 2160

Percent 26.4 29.9 22.9 18.4 8.4 100.0

Note: Each subject was asked to rate 20 terms in response to the question of how well walk-aways would relate to each term.

Given an average rating of all terms across all subjects of 2.65, this distribution indicates that ratings of “3” were not over-represented. Table 3 suggests that about half the ratings were favorable Factor Analysis Term 1. Mind Control Mind Control Cult Brainwashing Psych. Manipulation 2. Social Manipulation Relationship Maniplt. Mind Game Victims Relationship abuse Mind Manipulation Manipulated Conversion 3. Group Intensity Totalistic Group High Demand Group High Intensity Group

Factor Loadings Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

Factor 4

87 .85 .81 .54

.05 .05 .02 .30

.09 .15 -.13 .01

.17 .05 .05 .39

.03 .00 .14 .22

-.04 .40 -.14 .47 .26

.77 .72 .71 .54 .49

.14 .01 .07 .04 .45

.23 -.11 .06 .36 .03

.02 .07 .33 -.09 .13

.13 -.12 -.18

.12 .18 .21

.80 .78 .72

.23 -.12 .09

-.08 .29 .20

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 35

Factor 5

Charismatic Group 4. Trauma Psychological Trauma Spiritual Trauma Coercive Persuasion 5. Abuse Spiritual Abuse Psychological Abuse Trust Abuse

.18

-.12

.45

-.18

-.23

.27 -.01 .19

.24 -.06 .27

-.07 .09 .48

.79 .72 .56

.13 .43 .01

.11 .34 .06

.05 .29 .47

.10 -.09 .19

.17 .44 .09

.85 .60 .58

A principal components analysis was conducted in order to ascertain the structure of the ratings. Results indicated the presence of five components with eigenvalues greater than 1. Varimax rotation suggested the following factors: Mind Control, Social Manipulation, Group Intensity, Trauma, and Abuse (see Table 4). In order to determine the extent to which acceptability ratings differed across the factors, the 20 terms were partitioned into subsets corresponding to the factors. The average rating or “total score” for each factor was calculated for each subject. For example, the total score for subject one on the Mind Control factor consisted of the average of his or her ratings on the terms mind control, cult, brainwashing, and psychological manipulation. This procedure was used instead of factor scores because available computer programs did not supply nonnormalized factor scores. The mean acceptability ratings across all subjects were: Mind Control 2.86, Social Manipulation 2.75, Group Intensity 2.71, Trauma 2.37, and Abuse 2.33. Analysis of variance disclosed significant differences (F=7.32, df=4, 535, P<.0001) among the means. The Duncan procedure delineated two groupings: (Abuse and Trauma) vs. (Mind Control, Social Manipulation, and Group Intensity). No other groupings were revealed. Among the terms suggested by subjects were: destructive cult, spiritual disillusionment, information disease, guilt inducement, total commitment, cultic, cult-like, thought reform, mental abuse, authoritarian groups, hierarchical groups, manipulative groups, psychologically manipulative groups, totalitarian groups, psychological rape, headship/submission groups, fear-inducing groups, religious abuse, religiously exploitative, group think, enforced lifestyle, emotional abuse, authority abuse, confidence game, high pressure groups, Bible/Scripture abusers, disciple/discipling abusers, predatory spirituality, con games, manipulative religions, cultic trauma group, cultic abuse victim, false religions, dysfunctional organizations, professional deceptionists, closed intense groups, spiritual blackmail, emotional blackmail, double-message groups, elitist groups, enmeshment, mind rape, and religious addiction. The terms and comments in the question asking for other terms were generally consistent with the terms that received the highest ratings/rankings. Manipulation is a common underlying theme throughout the list. There was, however, some disagreement about the advisability of using the word “victim.” Some subjects obviously liked terms implying victimization, e.g., “psychological abuse,” “mind rape.” Others thought “victim” was negative: [a word] that implies they have been taken advantage of (their consent) but not one that refers to them as victims which in my opinion keeps them in the “cycle of abuse.”

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 36

I think most walk-aways are quite defensive at first. concept.

“Victim” is a very harsh

Several expressed frustration over the question of terminology: I can‟t figure out if you are assuming the walk-away knows he was in a cult. It took months of therapy before I could even begin to look at the possibility I had been manipulated. These terms are premature. This question is nearly an impossible one for me to answer because I think that the terms listed are all poor ones to use for people who are just beginning to “think” after coming out of a group that uses “mind control.” I have seen someone who was questioning “the church” who literally threw the Bible help book on the floor and stormed out of the room because she read the definition of the term “cult.” Discussion The frustration expressed by several subjects is not foreign to those who help ex-cultists and their families. Explaining the subtlety and complexity of the unethical social influence observed in cults is difficult enough when one has a person‟s attention and plenty of time, such as in anexit counseling. It is perhaps impossible to capture the essence of the phenomenon in one term. Nevertheless, those of us engaged in counseling, consultation, and education must attempt to communicate with our audiences, however imperfect that communication may be. In academia, where one‟s words may be printed in a specialized journal actually read by no more than several dozen colleagues, it is relatively easy to establish a consensus regarding terminology. When, however, one is attempting to communicate with thousands of people, for whom this subject is not a “specialty,” the matter becomes a bit more slippery. The results of this study testify to the difficulty of achieving consensus regarding terminology. The results also suggest that no term will suffice for all people and all situations. Some people will respond to “cult”; others will be highly offended. Some may respond to “psychological abuse”; others may rebel against any term containing “abuse.” Some may respond to “spiritual trauma”; others may see their experience as neither spiritual nor traumatic. The factor analysis was particularly revealing. On the whole, subjects perceive Trauma and Abuse as more acceptable than Mind Control, Social Manipulation, and Group Intensity. The contrast between these two groups of factors may reflect a higher-order dimension of effects versus processes. Trauma and abuse may represent the phenomenological effects of processes that are generally misunderstood or repressed by cult walk-aways. The processes of Mind Control, Social Manipulation, and Group Intensity, on the other hand, may serve as abstract explanations that help parents understand the changes they have observed in their children. Thus, during the years in which parents constituted the largest category of help seekers, the second group of terms was most acceptable. But now that walk-aways are seeking help in greater numbers, the first group of terms becomes attractive to more people. In short, walk-aways may tend to relate to terms that describe what they actually experienced (i.e., trauma and abuse), while parents and “educated” ex-cultists (i.e., those who were exit counseled or deprogrammed) may tend to relate to terms that explain what the cultists experienced (i.e., mind control). Although individual variation may be considerable, it should be kept in mind that the spread of mean acceptability ratings, even though statistically significant, was relatively small. Thus, none of the terms should be perceived as necessarily unacceptable at the individual level. The results merely suggest nomothetic dimensions worthy of further study. The meaningfulness of the factor loadings do, however, offer strong support for the coherence of the ratings. The ratings probably do reflect meaningful constructions that have been little Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 37

affected by random or systematic measurement errors. As such, the factor analysis represents a significant step in the empirical exploration of the cult experience. Given these conclusions, what do those of us in the trenches do? We should keep three concepts in mind: individuality, variety, and audience. Our communications will, for the most part, be directed at eight audiences: (1) family members seeking help; (2) cultists who are willing to talk about their group involvement; (3) former cultists requiring assistance in adapting to post-cult life; (4) the general public; (5) youth; (6) former cultists who are unaware of helping resources; (7) professionals; and (8) academicians. Each audience has different needs and backgrounds. Professionals and academicians, for example, may expect more precision in terminology and an explicit connection to prior professional or scholarly work. As this study of the ex-cult member audience demonstrated, even within a particular audience there will be different preferences. Some think “victim” is a harsh word; some think it is on the mark. Therefore, a program of education directed at any particular audience ought to deliberately and intelligently use a variety of terms -- but in a coherent, meaningful way. Thus, one outreach effort may formulate the message in terms of “psychological abuse,” while another formulates the message in terms of “spiritual trauma.” Newspaper and magazine articles and talk show appearances are fleeting opportunities to get the attention of an audience one wishes to educate. To talk about “spiritual trauma” when addressing the readers of Christianity Today and “psychological abuse” when addressing the readers of Psychology Today is not necessarily inconsistent (provided one‟s message variants are conceptually integrated and not deceptive or otherwise manipulative); it is merely a sign of respect and concern for one‟s audience. (See Litfin, 1982 for an interesting discussion of the ethics of persuasion.) Sometimes the use of multiple terms may be appropriate in order to emphasize that there is no agreement on the most appropriate label for the phenomena under study. A recently developed draft questionnaire, for example, states: This brief survey will inquire into your experience -- personal and professional -- with cultic and related groups that use highly manipulative psychological techniques of persuasion and control to exploit members. Such groups may be religious, psychotherapeutic, political, or commercial. A variety of have been applied to these groups and their psychologically manipulative processes, including: “thought reform,” “coercive persuasion,” “brainwashing,” “mind control,” “charismatic groups,” “spiritually abusive groups,” “high demand groups,” “new religious movements,” and “cult.” Groups that cause the most concern tend to be leader-centered, highly manipulative, exploitative, and totalistic (i.e., they dictate in great detail how members should think, act, and feel). Variety may be desirable -- most of the time. But sometimes it may be counterproductive. Each situation should be examined individually. With professional audiences, for example, an endless variety of terms is counterproductive, for the function of the professional community is to advance clarity and understanding. A variety of terms and concepts can be temporarily useful only when a weeding mechanism separates the wheat from the chaff. In order to contribute to the development of such a weeding mechanism, we would like to recommend particular terms for particular purposes. Doing this, however, would be premature. This study demonstrates two important points: (1) the terms we have traditionally used in this field are inappropriate for many people in many situations; (2) people affected by cults (and we strongly suspect the same would be true of professionals

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 38

working in the field) disagree considerably about preferred terminology. Our recommending specific terms at this time might be an exercise in arrogance. We are willing to recommend, however, that the American Family Foundation organize a study group on terminology. This study group should examine this study‟s findings, convene meetings to discuss the pros and cons of various terms for different audiences, and publish a set of recommendations to be reviewed by professionals and lay activists. Most cult educational organizations are now more than ten years old. In the early years, they mainly helped families with children in cults. As time passed, public and preventive education occupied more and more time. In recent years, as evidenced by AFF‟s “Project Recovery” (a multi-year program to improve the quality and quantity of services for excultists), more and more attention has been paid to the needs of cult walk-aways. The activities of cult educational organizations have changed dramatically over the years. Perhaps these organizations should now consider adjusting their terminology. References Bromley,D., & Richardson, J.(1983).The Brainwashing/Deprogramming Controversy: Sociological, psychological, legal and historical perspectives. New York: Edwin Mellen Press. Conway, F., Siegelman, J.H., Carmichael, C.W., & Coggins, J. (1986). Information disease: Effects of covert induction and deprogramming. update: A Journal of New Religious Movements, 10, 45-57. Delgado, R. (1977). Gentle and ungentle persuasion under the First Amendment. Southern California Law Review, 5 (1), 1-97. Dubrow-Eichel, S. (1989). Deprogramming: A case study. Cultic Studies Journal, 6 (2), 1-117. Galanter, M. (1980). Charismatic religious sects and psychiatry: an overview. American Journal of Psychiatry, 139 (12), 1539-1548. Galanter, M. (1983). Unification Church (“Moonie”) dropouts: Psychological readjustment after leaving a charismatic religious group. American Journal of Psychiatry, 140 (8), 984-989. Hunter, E.(1953). Brainwashing in Red China: The calculated destruction of men’s minds. New York: Vanguard. Langone, M. (1982). Destructive cultism: Questions and answers. Weston, MA: American Family Foundation. Langone, M. (1988). Cults: Questions and answers. Weston, MA, American Family Foundation. Langone, M., & Clark, J.G. 1985). New religions and public policy: Research implications for social and behavioral scientists. In B. Kilbourne (Ed.), Scientific research and new religions: Divergent perspectives, San Francisco: Pacific Division, American Association for the Advancement of Science, pp. 90-113. Lifton, R. J. (1961). Thought reform and the psychology of totalism. New York: W. W. Norton. Litfin, A. D. (1982). The perils of persuasive preaching. Cultic Studies Journal, 2 (2), 267273. Nelson, G. (1968). The spiritualistic movement and the need for a redefinition of cult. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 8, 152-160. Robbins, T. (1969). Eastern mysticism and the resocialization of drug users: The Meher Baba cult. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 8 (2), 308-317. Schein, E. (1961). Coercive persuasion. New York: Norton. Shapiro, E. (1977, February). Destructive cultism. American Family Physician, 15, 80-83. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 39

Singer, M. T. (1982, November 18). Cults: Dynamics of mind control. Paper presented in Santa Barbara, CA. Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Dr. Arthur Dole of the University of Pennsylvania for his extensive and valuable comments and suggestions and Carol Giambalvo and Nancy Miquelon, leaders of FOCUS, an ex-cultist support group, for their assistance in gaining access to subjects. ************** Michael D. Langone, Ph.D., Editor of the Cultic Studies Journal, is the Executive Director of the American Family Foundation and coauthor of Cults: What parents should know and Satanism and occult-related violence. William V. Chambers, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of South Florida. His specialty areas include Personal Construct Theory and psychometrics. This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8, Number 2, pages 134-150. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 40

Interesting Times Kevin Garvey - Linda Blood Abstract The report, Satanism in America, by the Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion (CSER) purports to show dm destructive effects and criminal activities allegedly associated with Satanism are actually the product of hysteria and can be explained away by exposing the “opportunism, emotional instability, and religious bigotry” of those who concern themselves with these problems. Here we show that the CSER report itself contains fundamental methodological flaws, including use of the logical fallacy known as the argumentum ad hominem, a naive approach to its subject, disregard for the empirical evidence, and omission of material damaging to the public postures of the “recognized satanic churches.” Thus a work which could have been a valuable contribution to the debate over the nature and extent of problems associated with Satanism merely contributes to, and indeed serves to aggravate, the already existing polarization concerning this subject. Irony and pathos increasingly emerge as the criteria by which our era must be assessed. As the signs of social deterioration multiply, swarms of pundits and apologists gather to feast on the shards of our former hopes and certitudes. The spectacle created by the advocates of competing viewpoints is a disquieting reminder of the Chinese aphorism, “May you live in interesting times.” We do indeed, and the irony is that the increased interest generated by the commentators on our crises too often fosters pathos. This is especially true when the pundits and apologists are easily exposed by their own inadequacies. Such is the case with Satanism in America, the recent report by the Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion (CSER). This report was written by a collection of authors officially representing the Academy of Humanism. This group is integrally connected to the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), which has produced various and admirable works exposing religious and scientific frauds. The parent group has as associates such reputable people as Martin Gardner and Carl Sagan. It is not necessary to agree with every word such people utter to know that one is being addressed by honest scholarship, intelligent reasoning, and challenging opinion. Such, alas, is not the case with Satanism in America, and that is why this report merits a detailed critique. It is not worthy of its impressive lineage, which endows it with an undeserved presumption of credibility. The obvious dilemmas posed by this report may partially stem from the fact that it was prepared by a committee. The primary authors are: Shawn Carlson, Ph.D., physicist; Gerald Larue, Emeritus Professor of Religion, University of Southern California; Gerry O‟Sullivan, April A. Masche, and D. Hudson Frew. These authors wrote the bulk of the report. Three shorter reports are included as appendices. They were written by Robert Hicks, a Criminal Justice Analyst, Kenneth Lanning, a Special Agent of the F.B.I., and Michael Stackpole, who writes on role-playing games such as Dungeons and Dragons. This is an impressivesounding group. Their product is also impressive - but not for the authors‟ intended purposes. What is impressive about this study? The first thing is its temerity. It addresses an important, difficult, volatile topic without failing to comment on each of its many facets. The second impressive aspect is the study‟s clearly stated intention. The authors declare in their Introduction: Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 41

The entire topic of Satanic belief, Satanic religious practices and ritual crime is an abyss of bigotry and ignorance because of thousand-year-old superstitions and misunderstanding. Satanism has reached the limelight, and remained there, because of religious arrogance and intolerance through which tiny bubbles of truth must perilously percolate [sic] if they are to break onto the surface of the public mind. Hopefully, this report will be one of those bubbles and, undoubtedly, this exposed will be quite controversial.1 It should be controversial, but not merely for its audacity. Indeed, the report‟s third impressive trait is its most important one - its pretentiousness. This shows through in many ways. The first is its claim to objectivity and scholarship. The second is the moral indignation it assumes when attacking those who attempt to address satanist influences. The third reflection of the authors‟ pretensions is clearly discernible in the manner of their attack on specific individuals: they use a blatant argumentum ad hominem approach rather than a coherent dissection of the claims of specific individuals. In the process, they misquote some sources, fail to verify others, and falsely expand their few accurate charges to include people who are not guilty of the errors alleged by the report. This mode of attack pervades the report and is accompanied by an equally pervasive, and equally shoddy, strain of pseudologic. The CSER report addresses a wide array of categories, people, incidents and statements. To justify their selection, the authors of the report, and the authors of two of the three appendices, cite the analytic tool known as Ockham‟s Razor. “Ockham‟s Razor,” the report states, “is a rule that is used in science, and many other endeavors, that helps sort the truth from nonsense. It stipulates that when several explanations could explain a SCA of facts, the one that is most likely to be true is the explanation that is simplest.”2 The authors then provide us with what amounts to their analytic theme. Emphasizing the importance of their views by the use of italics, they declare: “Never attribute to international Devilworshipping conspiracies what opportunism, emotional instability and religious bigotry are sufficient to explain.”3 This statement claims the mantle of scientific precision, introduces a powerful straw man - “international Devil-worshipping conspiracies” - and, in a particularly scurrilous implication, declares that all concerns about Satanism merely reflect “opportunism, emotional instability and religious bigotry.”4 This audacious assertion is more clearly emphasized in the report‟s Abstract. After informing the reader that Gerry O‟Sullivan “investigated the backgrounds” of those whom the report challenges, the Abstract states: In addition to presenting an analysis of the allegations made by conspiracy theory advocates, this report also documents the insanity, severe emotional problems of some, the thinly disguised extremist Christian agenda of others, the opportunism of a few and the self-guilt purging crusade of the rest. The anti- Satanism hysteria that is sweeping the country is being fueled by people for whom facts have little meaning. They invent “facts” to try and [sic] marshal the public‟s support on the side of unreason.5 Such extraordinary use of the ad hominem tactic serves the report s need to avoid logical debate. An examination of the analytic tool, Ockham‟s Razor, explains why the report rests upon such polemical tactics rather than honest debate. Ockham‟s Razor derives from the logical principles developed by William of Ockham during the early fourteenth century. His attempt to revise the assumptions underlying medieval realism in no way encompassed the report‟s rejection of fact, evidence, and analytic reason. Ockham‟s effort: .presupposed and was based on the principle that the human mind can directly apprehend existent individuals and their sensible qualities, and that it can also directly apprehend its own acts.”6 Ockham should be seen, and used, not as a grammatical impediment to due investigation, but in the service of a true .economy of ontological Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 42

commitment” through which extraneous arguments are bypassed. This did not imply any denial of facts or truth. It encouraged reliance on logically grounded assumptions and facts “established by evident experience or evident reasoning.” The CSER report violates this insistence on fact and reason. A few examples of their ad hominem approach will illustrate its deficiencies. Ad Hominem Approach of CSER 1. On page 22 of the report, the authors declare that retired police Captain Dale Griffis “claims that nationwide 50,000 children and teens are killed annually during satanic human sacrifice rituals.” [Emphasis theirs.] In a telephone conversation, followed by a written confirmation, Captain Griffis acknowledged having played a taped report by another investigator, which included this claim, during a conference in Buffalo, New York. This conference is the one cited by CSER. Griffis pointed out, however, that his comments about the tape strongly challenged the 50,000 figure. What he said at the conference was that such figures require validation, and that none is available. However, the CSER source, a Buffalo reporter, did not even attend the conference. The report also places Griffis at a 1989 conference sponsored by the organization Bothered About Dungeons and Dragons (B.A.D.D.), at which time he allegedly repeated his remark about the 50,000 sacrifices. In point of fact, Griffis had cancelled his appearance at that conference due to an injury and had remained at home on the advice of his physician. 2. Also on page 22, Patricia Pulling, founder of B.A.D.D., is quoted as having claimed that “the number of Satanic sacrifices could be as many as 10,000 sacrifices per year perhaps more. We have no way of knowing.” [Emphasis theirs.] What is left out is the tone of that interview. Pulling says that her statement was made during an exchange in which she was emphasizing the dangers of exaggeration, and that it was with a demeanor provoked by frustration, incredulity, and satirical defiance that she pointed out to CSER‟s source, reporter Rex Springston, that no one could answer his pointedly loaded questions about the number of satanic sacrifices. As Pulling recalls, her answer was along the lines of, “How should I or anyone else know? There could be 10 or there could be 10,000. We am dealing with a clandestine activity. We have no way of knowing the exact numbers.” This is a far cry from claiming 10,000 or more sacrifices per year. And, Pulling adds, no one from CSER contacted her before reprinting Springston‟s account of the story. (Nor, to the best of our knowledge, did CSER bother to contact any of the other individuals whom their report attacks. They did, however, see fit to send a draft of the report to Michael Aquino, high priest of the satanist Temple of Set, and invite his comments on their work - which were extensive and, not surprisingly, laudatory.) 3. The reports comments on Maury Terry, author of The Ultimate Evil, combine all its polemical tactics in one concerted attack. On page 96, the report asserts that Terry used “strangely interpreted evidence” and egregious leaps of logic.” It also maligns Terry‟s use of what it calls experts with dubious opinions and affiliations.” The report claims that Terry was sued by the Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.) over comments he made about that organization in his book, The Ultimate Evil, and that the case was settled out of court. One of the alleged ten-ns of the settlement was the deletion of all references to the O.T.O. from future editions. This is simply not true. Terry pointed out in a telephone conversation that the paperback edition of his book, released in 1989, contains all the original O.T.O. references. Terry also noted that the CSER report was marked by a conspicuous absence of comment on the hard evidence presented in the book, much of which has been borne out by recent developments in the Roy Radin murder case in Los Angeles.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 43

Not being content with this factual error enclosed within an argumentum ad hominem, the report‟s authors follow it up with the very serious charge that Terry illegally obtained, and then withheld, evidence in the much-publicized Lisa Steinberg murder case. The report refers to Terry‟s acknowledgement on the Geraldo Rivera Show that he possessed Hedda Nussbaum‟s appointment diary. The authors then state that they called the New York City District Attorney‟s Office on October 2, 1988, and “were told that, if Terry‟s claim was indeed true, he would be guilty of withholding evidence in a murder case - a crime.” The truth, as the authors could have learned by contacting Maury Terry themselves, is that Terry was in the Steinberg apartment after the police released it from crime scene status. With Joel Steinberg‟s permission, in the company of Steinberg‟s attorney, and with the knowledge of the police, Terry took the appointment book. If this was an illegal act, why hasn‟t Terry been arrested? Terry has also pointed out to us that documents going back to the early 1980‟s, in Hedda Nussbaum‟s handwriting, demonstrate that Hedda was involved in cultic activities that overlapped with child pornography. The police are currently in possession of these documents. These examples underscore the report‟s failure to abide by its authors‟ criteria for responsible commentary. The examples also undercut their claim to the valid use of Ockham‟s Razor. This leaves their intentions suspect. The selective scholarship which marks the Introduction dominates and distorts the reports main sections as well, and we have many questions about the bulk of the report‟s other claims and assertions. For one thing, the authors combine their selective scholarship with a guilt-by-association maneuver. After soundly berating several individuals who are widely considered to be charlatans, the report then attempts to claim that their chicanery contaminates everyone who criticizes Satanism‟s spread. But these individuals are not representative of all those who are willing to speak out on this topic. For another, the report‟s discussion of their generic topics - Satanism, Witchcraft, Child Abuse, and related criminal activities - is simply too disingenuous. CSER Error Number One: Wicca and Other Occult Religions In their section on “Wicca and Other “Occult” Religions,” the authors attempt to portray Witchcraft and other forms of neo-pagan religion, as well as Native American Religion, and Santeria, Voodoo, Palo Mayombe, and other African- Caribbean-American religions, as entirely benevolent and innocent (while characterizing Evangelical Christianity as vicious, intolerant, and superstitious). However, the authors overlook the fact that the concept of “black magic” appears in some form in virtually all of these religions. In keeping with its consistent use of its original straw man, the International Satan-worshipping Conspiracy, the report flatly states that Wicca has .nothing to do with the Devil.” This assertion, because it appears in conjunction with a blanket claim incorporating several religions, cannot go unchallenged. Satanic religion, “devil worship,” and Wicca all rely upon a central religious experience which, despite variations in perspective, reflects a uniform underlying impulse and belief system. The report completely misses the point that what ties these religions together, and sets them apart from Biblical theology, is their reliance upon theological concepts derived from Animism. What the ancient Greeks meant by their word (entheos), the root of our word enthusiasm, entails a necessarily passive state of mind without which the rituals lose their power. While the individual religions do have varying applications of this core belief, the principle is uniform. A deity, it is believed, can be drawn into the person, or self, of an individual, or the selves of a group, and thereby redirect the perceptions, convictions, and actions according to the wishes of the deity. The subsequent and perceptible shifts are accepted as the palpable signs of the deity‟s presence. This is what these people believe happens, and, via the necessary reification of their own sensations, what they worship. In Wicca, for example, the sought-for shift largely affects the sexual realm. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 44

CSER‟s list of Wicca-type religions possesses a common thread of magic, the goal of which is to bring down discarnate spirits to a point where they infuse the suppliant This may be done for purposes of expiation, in order to gain direct control over reality, or for a number of other reasons. However, it is not comparable to practices such as kosher butchery and the slaughter of turkeys for Thanksgiving, as the report tries to imply. The difference is in immediate intention and ultimate goal. Kosher butchery is done in acquiescence to the authority of a distant deity, possibly to incur the deity‟s favor, but with no intention of infusion into the rabbi, the animal, or those who par-take of the animal. The same applies to Thanksgiving, which is the celebration of an act which was originally performed simply to express gratitude for sustenance. CSER cites Michael Aquino of the Temple of Set as an authority. Here is what Aquino has to say about bringing down the spirit of Set to infuse the celebrant: [T]he Priesthood involves the opening of a very special kind of door: the merging of the consciousness, indeed the personality, with that of the Prince of Darkness himself. In this Working the Priest or Priestess in no sense loses personal identity of Self-awareness; rather one‟s consciousness is augmented, energized, and strengthened by that of Set. Hence the Priest or Priestess when acting as such, for “Priesthood” is a deliberate act, not an office - is something more than human, something more than the individual whose human visage appears before onlookers. At such times he or she is not “possessed,” but is rather become a veritable living Temple indwelled by the presence of Set. Each Priest and Priestess of Set is a Temple of Set: a psyche so purified, educated, consecrated, and initiated that is has become a fit medium for the Prince of Darkness. Nowhere is this more succinctly illustrated than in the ultimate admonition of the Egyptian sage to Her-Bak, at the culmination of the latter‟s initiation as a Priest: “O Her-Bak. 0 Egypt. You are the temple which the Neter of Neters inhabits. Awaken Him ... then let the temple fall crashing.”7 Aquino‟s description should remove any doubt about the intention of satanist practice. Rhetorical double-talk to the contrary notwithstanding, what Aquino is describing is indeed possession. It is to allow one‟s self, one‟s thoughts, beliefs and acts of will, to be absorbed into those belonging to an alien entity - and the “temple” must indeed come crashing down. One‟s self - that is, one‟s unique, authentic non-cult personality - thus becomes the first sacrifice to one‟s satanic Self merged with that of the Prince of Darkness. This initial psychic casualty accounts for the reversed ethical judgments of many satanists. Restraint is replaced by aggression, compassion fades into cruelty, and the pursuit of the experience of power emerges as the means and the end. Satanists do not see these shifts as evil. A knowledgeable Satanist such as Michael Aquino considers judgments of good and evil to be subject to purely personal criteria.8 A believing and practicing Satanist is more than a theological maverick. He or she is also a philosophical subjectivist. Wicca is a contemporary form of traditional witchcraft. As such it incorporates attributes of the generic craft and traits normally found in more obviously occultic practices. Wiccan practice is a syncretistic quagmire in that it is not based on a uniform ritual, universal theology, or coherently ordered network. It is possible, however, to discern parallels between Wicca and the CSER report‟s description of satanic worship. The report says that “Satanists believe that there exists an all-pervasive and creative “force of Nature” that is responsible for the “balance” in nature ... the one thing that is necessary to personally experience this “force,” to know it and to be able to use it to advance one‟s life, is to indulge in earthly pleasure.”9 The similarity between Wiccan beliefs and the Satanic beliefs expounded by the report can be observed in the book The Witches’ Goddess by Janet and Stewart Farrar. The authors write, “paganism (and perhaps the Craft in particular is strongly Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 45

Nature-based. Both in their worship and in their daily lives, pagans love, respect and endeavor to attune themselves to their natural environment ... its currents and rhythms.”10 Attuning to this environment is assisted by acts of communion with the Goddess of Nature. This is not, however, “a purely rational activity.” It must be expressed through myth and ritual and ultimately depends on “the psychic fermentation which cannot be hurried but which gradually transmutes knowledge into personal awareness.” 11 Another parallel between Satanism and Goddess worship is the monist conception on which each rests and from which each religion‟s ominous aspects emerge. The Farrars write that, “The Goddess is both the womb and the tomb; she gives birth, she creates form, she nourishes, and she reabsorbs the outworn preparatory to its reshaping and rebirth. If she were not the destroyer, she could not be the renewer.” 12 The report says that Satanists believe that “one cannot know love without also knowing hate, one cannot know ecstasy without also knowing agony.”13 The Farrars go even further and acknowledge that the dark side of the Goddess is the force “the patriarchal order” mistakes as the Devil.14 This is quite telling, because of the similarity between the types of sorcery each requires. The most striking parallel between Wicca and the report‟s cited satanic beliefs is to be found in the phenomenon of sought-for possession. Where Aquino acknowledges the Prince of Darkness, the Wiccans seek the presence of the Goddess. The ritual is called Drawing Down the Moon. The Farrars describe a very explicit ritual in which the Priest “addresses the Goddess independently of the woman, invoking her to “descend into the body of thy servant and priestess.”15 The Farrars claim that this ritual “works.”16 “Time and again, an “ordinary” human woman seems transformed by it, so that the coven has no difficulty in reacting to her as the voice and presence of the Goddess.”17 The Farrars explain that the words of the Charge, or its human channel, are often replaced by something quite different. “Every experienced High Priestess is familiar with the strange feeling of observing from a corner of her own mind, of listening to the Goddess using her vocal chords, and wondering what will come next.”18 As the history of Goddess-worship so clearly attests, “what will come next” may well be human sacrifice. In his book Witchcraft in the Middle Ages, the reports designated expert on witchcraft, Jeffrey Burton Russell, acknowledges that many medieval witches did indeed perform the horrific acts attributed to them. He cites Lynn White‟s observation that “Witchcraft is always a turning upsidedown of the moral standards of the world in which the witch lives.”19 White also noted that it is a rebellion, a repudiation, “a form of nihilism which is demanded by mentally and emotionally unstable people in any time of rapid change.” 20 In a predominantly Christian world the rebellion would necessarily be against a Christian moral order. As the Farrars point out, contemporary witches express an anti-Christian view.21 This is not surprising. “People alienated from society escape ambiguity, dissonance, and despair only by throwing themselves totally into another symbolic order. In turning away from God, the witches naturally sought to discover their identity in total union with the Devil.”22 This, then, is what the report obscures. Wicca and Satanism share, metaphysically speaking, a regression to an ethical mode based upon the relinquishing of personal responsibility in the experience of possession. By acquiescing to the directive will of a spiritual Force greater than the individual, all manner of license is permitted, then demanded. A state of primal innocence is entered, wherein actions are considered to be ultimately those of the spirit, not the individual. It is increasingly evident that contemporary practitioners are, as were those of the Middle Ages, pursuing ecstasy through domination of themselves, of Nature, and of other people. And total dominance means just that. Death. For, as history demonstrates, the Earth Goddess and the Devil do demand death. (The drift toward this demand is already apparent in another realm we shall be examining, the social fascination with magical and satanic themes found in certain forms of rock music.)

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 46

But the CSER report ignores this historical fact, as it does any unpleasant fact about “alternative religions.” It is patronizing and inaccurate to deny the place of malevolent “black magic” practices in Voodoo, Santeria, Brujeria etc., especially when its existence is acknowledged by recognized experts on these religions. As for Palo Mayombe, the very name means “way of the black witch,” and it is described by Migene Gonzalez-Wippler as having been derived from the black magic of the Congo. 23 Metraux notes that in Voodoo society sorcerers, or boko, are those whose patron gods, or loa, are believed to be mercenary and, therefore, amoral.24 Harvard anthropologist Wade Davis has described how and why some of these boko create “zombies” as a tool of social control. In addition, the report ignores related issues such as the cult of pain in Native American religion (e.g., the Sun Dance), the ritual sacrifice of young women by the Blackfeet, the body-piercing rituals of the ancient Maya, and the wholesale human sacrifices - including the sacrifice of children - of the Incas and Aztecs. While these practices were not specifically “satanic” in intent, they certainly give the lie to the notion that these “folk religions” were, or are, all sweetness and light. “Black magicians‟ are not limited to practices which might be defined as “legitimate Satanism” - whatever that is - but are happy to employ whatever works. Authorities in the field recognize that, due to the inherent moral neutrality of magical practice, certain folk religions, such as Brujeria and Palo Mayombe, are popular with criminals. Adolfo Constanzo, high priest of the Matamoros drug-trafficking cult, borrowed liberally from the whole magical menu, and threw in elements of Aztec ritual sacrifice for good measure. Military investigators who examined the contents of Manual Noriega‟s headquarters in Panama discovered that the General apparently had invoked every unorthodox creed he could think of in an effort to magically confound his enemies.25 For the authors of the CSER report to contend that the Matamoros incident is unrelated to the phenomenon of “satanic” crime because, in effect, the members of the cult were not “traditional satanists” is absurd. Complaining that the practices of Constanzo and his cohorts were a “perverted” form of Palo Mayombe, and hand-wringing over alleged “distorted views” and “ignorance about minority religions,” cannot wipe out the fact that the Matamoros massacre is a nearly textbook example of occult-related murder and mayhem. Unfortunately, readers who are relatively unfamiliar with these folk religions will tend to accept CSER‟s laundered version of their beliefs and practices. However, our interest lies in dealing with crimes committed in the name of any form of malevolent occultism, not just traditional European- American “Satanism.” The focus is on the criminal activity. If, as CSER implies, criticism of Satanism were merely a case of “religious persecution,” then where were the persecutors 25 years ago when the Church of Satan announced itself to the world? Error Number Two: The Nature of Satanism Another of the Report‟s claims involves an attack on its targets‟ methodology. Its authors extend their argumentum ad hominem to the point of suggesting that concerns about satanic influence are the product of prejudgment. Contrary to CSER‟s assertions, however, reputable investigators in this area did not start out with the assumption that an “international conspiracy of Devil-worshippers” was plotting atrocities and then attempt to make the facts of individual crimes fit into that framework. Instead, over a period of several years, we and others equally concerned were confronted with a series of crimes and incidents sharing certain characteristics which led us to identify them as part of a pattern of criminal activity in which practices consistent with malevolent forms of occultism played a significant role. This pattern is sufficiently consistent to allow the suspicion that a common source exists. This does not mean that a consensus about a conspiracy also exists. CSER, on the other hand, apparently began its “investigation” with the attitude that a collection of venal, demented, and/or hysterical fundamentalist Christians were beating the bushes for Satanists, and has steadfastly ignored any and all evidence to the contrary. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 47

In their summary of the report published in Free Inquiry, Carlson and Lame refer to Satanism as a „benign” religion which has been “unfairly maligned and much misunderstood.”26 Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary defines the word “benign” as signifying “kind ... gracious ... generous ... beneficial.” Satanism fits that description only in regard to its own members‟ belief that their deity is a good and gracious god -- to them. However, in its outlook on humanity in general, Satanism is essentially misanthropic and predatory. In the seventh of his “Nine Satanic Statements‟ Anton LaVey declares that “Satanism represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on afl-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!”27 In other words, according to LaVey, the hallmarks of our humanity - our reason and self-awareness - serve only to mark us as vicious, predatory beasts whose aim in life should be to dominate others. Nowhere in any of the “satanic literature” is there any statement acknowledging the existence of human rights, whether natural or “God- given.” Satanists believe in “rights” only for the satanic “elite.” The “legitimate” Satanist “churches” must avoid outright violence and illegality, as well as exhortations to same, in order to stay in business. But their philosophies clearly demonstrate an “us-versus-them” mentality in the form of contempt for, and hostility towards, non-satanists. The CSER report claims that the “modem era” of Satanism was inaugurated in this country in 1966 with the founding of Anton LaVey‟s Church of Satan. 28 Even if this rather arbitrary assertion is true, it no more grants LaVey the right to establish the definition of “Satanism” than does a similar Johnny-come-lately position entitle the Church of Jesus Christ of LatterDay Saints to rewrite the definition of Christianity. The report, however, blithely assumes that it does - and then proceeds to contradict itself as it lists the following tenets and conditions of “Satanism”: 1. Satan is the symbol of rebellion against authority; inverted anti-Christianity associated with the Black Mass is not practiced. In fact, the Church of Satan disbelieves in the existence of the Christian Devil.29 “Rebellion against authority” is a broad term capable of both praiseworthy and sinister applications. The irrationalist in Dostoesky‟s Notes from the Underground declares, “What do I care for the laws of nature and arithmetic, when, for some reason, I dislike those laws and the fact that twice two makes four?” This, too, is “rebellion against authority” - the authority of reality - and it is essentially this sort of rebellion that is practiced by the followers of LaVey and Aquino. In regard to the Black Mass, it has indeed been performed in the Church of Satan, and LaVey‟s The Satanic Rituals contains a full-length Messe Noir. Michael Aquino notes that LaVey explains in the Satanic Bible that the purpose of a Black Mass ritual is to: purge participants or onlookers of any conditioned fears they may have as a consequence of old superstitions or indoctrinations. Once he has seen his sacred cows trampled upon with impunity, he will never feel quite the same about them again, no matter how artificial he recognizes the desecration to be.30 Lest we confuse this process with harness “psychodrama,” Aquino then goes on to discuss “an excellent example of a “Black Mass” technique in George Orwell‟s 1984, wherein the magician O‟Brien forces his victim/student Winston Smith to “trample upon the sacred cow” of his love for Julia,” thereby destroying the “illusion” of that love. 31 The fictional O‟Brien is not the only “magician” to have recognized the effect of such an “initiatory” experience. In The Informed Heart, Bruno Bettelheim, writing of his experiences in the Nazi death camps, notes that new prisoners were “initiated” through a pattern of torture, abuse, and exhaustion intended to traumatize them and break their resistance: Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 48

The guards also forced prisoners to hit one another and to defile what the SS considered the prisoners‟ most cherished values. They were forced to curse God, to accuse themselves and one another of vile actions, and their wives of adultery and prostitution ... any failure to obey an order ... or any help given a tortured prisoner was viewed as mutiny and swiftly punished by death.32 Are these the beliefs and practices of a “benign” alternative religion? Hardly. Such nihilistic exhortations are not novel, nor do they lack ambiguity. Indeed, it might be said that the Satanists and their ilk are attempting to perform a “Black Mass ritual” on our entire civilization. Church desecrations and heavy metal music may be only portents of what Dr. Carl Raschke, in his book Painted Black, calls the satanists‟ policy of “cultural terrorism.” The predatory nature of the abuses reported by Bettelheim are paralleled in the cases of apparent satanic activity. A taped interview with a teenage girl raped by four of her teachers, and left unreported because of her family‟s fear, is chilling in its details. She describes how they ritualistically positioned her, glacially drank in her vulnerability and terror, appeared to violate her according to a hierarchy of rank, and, when done, viciously employed a broom handle so violently that it broke! Without a note of concern for their act, and with an arrogance and confidence borne out by her family‟s silence, they left her where the violation had taken place.33 CSER‟s report repeatedly claims and implies that no facts exist which can demonstrate a satanic intent based upon Anton LaVey‟s books, The Satanic Bible and The Satanic Rituals. The many reports of the presence of these books among the personal belongings of young criminals is dismissed as coincidence or, at best, a reflection of a curiously anarchistic and fruitless search. Besides, the report contends, Satan is merely a metaphorical figurehead to the Satanists and therefore cannot function as the source of a genuine religious impulse. To demonstrate the inadequacy of this position it is merely necessary to go to the source. Here is what Michael Aquino, formerly LaVey‟s protégé/colleague, has to say about the Church of Satan and Satan himself, quoting from the introduction to his religious statement, The Book of Coming Forth by Night: In its formative years the Church of Satan took an essentially metaphorical approach towards the being from whom it took its names. “Satan” was the term representing, it was thought, simply the principle of carnality. Such rituals and ceremonies as the Church first celebrated, therefore, were conceived as illustrative, inspirational, and allegorical. At least, that‟s the way it all began. “When he is called,” Eliphas Levi once observed, “the Devil comes and is seen.” And in that prosaic statement lies a truth whose implications challenge the rational constructs of the most exacting intellects. The one common feature to all the gods of all the nations of history, it may be said, is that they do not come and are not seen. Satan, however, did come to the Church of Satan - first as the faintest of atmospheres in its ceremonies, and ultimately as a metaphysical presence whose expression of being was awesome, exhilarating - the very fire of life to those who took his name as a part of their own and called themselves Satanists.34 Such “sacred” revelations were not, of course, to be shared with the “profane.” So while LaVey continued to preach the gospel of symbolism to the ignorant masses, the Church of Satan‟s select” inner circle hugged their secret to their bosoms: Satan is the symbol of the self, then, as it should be within the Satanist. But this symbolism is only part of the truth, because man‟s very ability to think Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 49

and act in disregard of the “balancing factor” of the Universe necessitates a source for that ability. And that source is thus the intelligence that made the Church of Satan far more than an exercise in psychodramatic narcissism. It is the intelligence of what mankind has personified as the Prince of Darkness himself - no symbol or allegory, but a sentient being. This was the central “secret” - and the heart - of the Church of Satan. With the irony that so often accompanies great truths, it was proclaimed in the institution‟s very title; yet in its simplicity it confronted such a massive psychological block in the minds of even some of the most dedicated Satanists that it remained unnamed and unacknowledged. In the discussions and debates which regularly surfaced, it would be referred to obliquely and in hesitant tones. Eventually Anton and I spoke openly to one another about it, but only at times and in places of sacred significance to us.35 So much for the CSER report‟s contention that Satanists do not worship Satan. It is true that church and cemetery desecration might be the product of merely rebellious teenagers. But repeated incursions into a Pennsylvania Catholic church, noteworthy for the patterned drippings of black candle wax around an impromptu bed, violations of the altar and tabernacle, “calling cards” of amulets, books, and an altar stone stolen from another church, point toward more design and intent than one would expect from a drunkenly spontaneous group of young “rebels.”36 Is it not reasonable, then, to deduce that an adolescent perpetrator of an act of extreme violence is probably acting out, no matter how indirectly, an act of Satanically inspired predation? To continue with the CSER report‟s assertions: 2. A large percentage of the membership consists of mail-order members, about whom the groups‟ [sic] administration knows little and over whom they have no control (e.g., a teenager who scrawls Satanic graffiti and claims to be a member of the Church of Satan is acting without the group‟s knowledge or sanction). Members who are found to be breaking the law and who are more closely associated with the Church of Satan than being simply a mail-order member are expelled.37 This statement raises more questions than it answers. If this policy is characteristic of the Church of Satan, what, then, are we to make of the Temple of Set - headed by Michael Aquino, a former Church of Satan leader - which takes pains to contact and supervise even its isolated “mail-order” members and requires extensive correspondence and participation? Does this put the Temple of Set outside the definition of “Satanism?” And if a kid with a Church of Satan mad-order membership desecrates a church but doesn‟t get caught, does that mean he is still technically a “real” Satanist because he is, after all, a member of a “recognized” satanic church? Or that “closely associated” Church of Satan members are “real Satanists” until they get caught breaking the law and are expelled? Are members of non-public, non-Church of Satan-affiliated groups “true Satanists” so long as they don‟t break the law? The report parrots the claim of LaVey and Aquino that a “real” Satanist would never commit a heinous crime such as human sacrifice. Anton LaVey claims that his Satanic Bible expressly forbids actual human sacrifice and therefore cannot be cited as an influence on Satanism-fixated people who kill. However, LaVey himself seems a bit cavalier about how literally that admonition is to be taken. In an interview published in the August 10, 1986, edition of the Los Angeles Herald Examiner, LaVey was asked about an instruction in The Satanic Rituals calling for a human arm or leg bone, which is to be waved about in the course of one of the rites. “I figured people would get the bone someplace other dm by Hling a person. But if they‟re going to kill, I hope they at least get a deserving victim,” LaVey cracked.38 Lest this be excused as a mere slip of his tongue, in an interview in the Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 50

“Modem Primitives” issue of Research LaVey elaborates on his view that those he deems “stupid” should be “put to the flamethrower, regardless of race.” “Satan knows we sure need a good thinning-out process,” LaVey fulminates. “Every time there‟s a disaster... I start tallying things up and wondering not that it was such a tragedy, but wondering only, “So few? Is that all?”39 3. The total number of Satanists, people who are recognized by one of the Satanic churches as being a member is most likely to be between 10,000 and 100,000 in the U.S.40 This example of CSER‟s scientific precision, with its 90% margin of error, is used to defend the notion that Satanism is a well-established alternative religion. From where, however, do they derive these figures, and how are they documented? Just what constitutes a “recognized Satanic church?” Are they limiting this to the Church of Satan and Temple of Set and claiming these groups can boast a combined membership in the tens of thousands? Or are they including neo-Nazi, Church of Satan-affiliated groups such as the Abraxas Foundation and the Werewolf Order? Furthermore, cults are notorious for inflating estimates of their membership for publicity purposes, and Aquino claims in his book The Church of Satan that LaVey did so regularly. Yet, while the report‟s authors blithely attack the opponents of Satanism for inflating their figures on sacrifice, breeders, and occult-related crime in general, they accept these grandiose figures without comment. In short, CSER‟s attempt to define Satanism fails because it too neatly circumscribes the issue and applies only to a very few selected cases. A proper definition must incorporate the essentials of a given concept. For example, the essential defining factor of Christianity is the belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ. It is not equated with the peculiar tenets of any given Christian sect. There is absolutely no justification for claiming that the assertions of Anton LaVey or Michael Aquino constitute the definition of “Satanism” or are valid for anything outside of their respective sects. They are certainly not grounds for discarding 2,000 years of common usage. CSER‟s re-defining of the ten-n crates a floating straw man and a red herring. Error Number Three: The Empirical Evidence Working off this “definition,” the report claims that there are no substantiated cases of Satanism-inspired murder. Here they are in disagreement with, to give just one example, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, which in August 1986 upheld the conviction of selfproclaimed Satanist Scott Waterhouse for the strangulation murder of 12-year-old Gycelle Cote. The appeal had centered on the prosecution‟s disclosure of Waterhouse‟s satanic beliefs. In the course of the trial, the state introduced into evidence portions of Anton LaVey‟s The Satanic Bible. In a tape-recorded conversation played at the trial, Waterhouse stated that Satanism represents the darker side of humanity and urges indulgence of man‟s carnal needs rather than abstinence, which certainly sounds like an accurate presentation of key features of LaVey‟s philosophy. The appeals court concluded that: As to identity, the evidence described above demonstrates that as a believer in Satanism, defendant could view commission of the heinous crime involved in this case as a means of achieving “physical, mental or emotional gratification.” Similarly, he could believe that a demonstration of strength by total domination of a weaker person would bring “reverence among men” at the expense of one who, being weak, deserved his fate. It was for the jury to decide whether such motivations were actually at work in this case, but the evidence of satanic beliefs is certainly probative of motive and, therefore, of the identity of the perpetrator ... On the issue of intent ... the consistency between the circumstances of the crime and Satanism‟s emphasis on sex [Waterhouse had masturbated over the body], destruction and denigration of Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 51

weakness, makes it more likely that if defendant killed the victim, he did so intentionally rather than by accident, i.e., though recklessness or criminal negligence.41 It appears that the state of Maine, at least, is prepared to take LaVey at his word. So should we all. For, as William of Ockham believed, one such incident provides a fact from which parallels may be deduced. It is logical, in Ockham‟s terms, to conclude that additional violent incidents accompanied by The Satanic Bible were influenced by LaVey‟s message. It is also worth noting that this decision was handed down before Satanism became a widely covered topic in the media. On the other hand, Michael Aquino stated on the Geraldo Rivera Show that the Satanic Bible is mere “polemics” and is not to be taken literally. If this is the case, it raises a number of questions in regard to CSER‟s report. The Church of Satan is presented as the exemplar of “recognized satanic churches.” If this “church‟s” scripture is exposed as nothing but “polemics,” what does that say about the legitimacy and sincerity of the “church” and the intellectual status and sense of responsibility of Anton LaVey? To be fair, however, we must note that LaVey may not be entirely to blame for the contents of the Satanic Bible. According to his former acolyte, Michael Aquino, LaVey lifted an entire section of the book from a previous work: The Satanic Bible consists of two comparatively distinct sections of writings: those articulating the social philosophy of Satanism (the Book of Satan and the Book of Lucifer) and those giving instructions for the practice of Satanic magic (the Book of Belial and the Book of Leviathan) ... The Book of Satan is represented as a diatribe by Anton on behalf of the Devil. Not until 1987 was it discovered that he was not its true author at all. It is in fact authored by a New Zealander by the name of Arthur Desmond, who wrote it under the pen name of “Ragnar Redbeard” in 1896. (Although Anton includes the name of Redbeard in his roster of names to whom the Satanic Bible is dedicated, he does not explain that dedication, nor credit Redbeard in any way as the true author of the contents of the Book of Satan.) The plagiarisms that constitute the Book of Satan are to be found through Redbeard‟s book Might is Right.42 In regard to the issue of “rebellious” youth who are supposedly using Satanism as an “excuse” to do things they would do anyway - a favorite CSER catchphrase - some observations on the phenomenon of the “thrill high” are pertinent. Rob Tucker, director of the Toronto-based Council on Mind Abuse, reports that some participants experience euphoria during certain satanic ceremonies, and this “high” is often linked to destructive acts against others. Tucker notes that the youths apparently “learn” this kind of pleasure; some report experiencing it as a powerful urge to harm, and say they can achieve it by systematically torturing and killing animals. (This “power rush” is celebrated throughout “dark metal” music.) These “thrill kids” are characterized by pleasure, lack of remorse, and lack of guilt.43 Heavy Metal But the authors of the CSER report see no such dangers deriving from the effects of heavy metal music. While acknowledging heavy metal‟s “wild and rebellious” lyrics, “shocking symbolism,” “ritual costumes,” and “concert theatrics,” the report denies that a specifically satanic message could be conveyed by such a “hodgepodge of symbols culled from various subcultures.” The symbols am not presented in a coherent or effective way for conveying a particular message, either in the lyrics, album covers, posters or stage acts. Rather, the symbols seem intended more to shock than to convert, or to give Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 52

the aura of the existence of some message just beyond the audience‟s understanding.44 One has to wonder how much the CSER authors know about our youth. Have they ever been to a concert of this type? It is common knowledge that such an experience is unpleasant to downright dangerous. Have they ever witnessed “slam dancing”? Have they lost sight of the difference between a lullaby, a dirge, and music composed for the sole purpose of producing the eradication of thought by the arousal of primal instincts and appetites? Or do they believe that the Rolling Stones‟ “Jumpin‟ Jack Flash” is indistinguishable from “Silent Night?” One must wonder about this in light of the easily procured evidence that points toward wholly different conclusions. The most concrete examples which disprove the report‟s claims about an absence of coherent messages in heavy metal music are to be found in the lyrics. The group Motley Crue proclaims in their double platinum album, Shout at the Devil, Not a woman, but a whore. I can taste the hate. Well, now I‟m killing you ... Watch your face turning blue. Their song, Bastard, says: Out go the lights. In goes the knife. Pull out his life. Consider the bastard dead. Make it quick. Blow off his head. This is not explicitly satanic. But it is far removed from the love songs of Elvis Presley and Buddy Holly. For more explicit encouragement to violence, one need only listen to the group called Bitch. Their song, Leatherbound, contains the following lines: The whip is my toy Handcuffs are your joy You hold me down and I‟m screaming for more When you tie me up and gag me The way you give me pain Give me lashes C‟mon and drag me. Perhaps this, too, lacks sufficient satanic references. For that we turn to the well-known band Venom. In order to avoid being misconstrued, this group conveniently compresses its message into a form suitable to the inefficient understanding of its audience. Its song, “Possessed,” could have been written by LaVey himself. Its “ambiguous” message is as follows: Look at me, Satan‟s child Born of evil, thus defiled. Brought to life through Satan‟s birth Come look at me and I‟ll show you things that will open your eyes... Listen to me and I‟ll tell you things that will sicken your mind. I drink the vomit of the priests, Make love with the dying whore... Satan as my master incarnate Hail, praise to my unholy host.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 53

It is important to remember that those whose lives straddle the worlds of satanic fashion, heavy metal music, and predatory violence listen to a collection of such records. The messages are driven home by repeated exposure, and merge with each other. The screaming sounds, relentless beat, and appeal to excitement do not encourage discernment. When combined with a need to exert power for power, per se, and with a more direct and local authorization for violence, this music contributes to the eventual outcome. It may not be the cause, but it is a factor in the cause even if that factor is limited to its being the anthem of satanically inspired anarchy. The attraction of violence and its visceral pleasures is not solely a contemporary issue. Saint Augustine‟s Confessions includes a vivid account of the power exerted by the gory spectacles in the local circus. The cruel killings provoked among the spectators a lust for more killings, even among those previously opposed. “We feel we are masters over life and death when we hold the fate of others in our hands,” wrote Ernest Becker in Escape From Evil, dealing with the same period. He pointed out that “the highest form of pure excitement is to watch another‟s death while you remain invulnerable.”45 But this sense of power does not need to be the product of its personal exercise. Being a part of a group or community can provide the same sense via identification with acceptable sadistic agents. The Roman spectacles of orchestrated mass murders allowed the individual the same sense of power he would normally experience in war. In his Confessions, St. Augustine recalls the experience of his young student, Alypius, who had gone to Rome to study law. Literally dragged along by his friends to view the gladiatorial shows, Alypius intended to demonstrate that, as a good Christian, he was immune to such influences. But such was not his experience. When they arrived at the arena, the place was seething with the lust for cruelty ... and Alypius shut his eyes tightly, determined to have nothing to do with these atrocities. If only he had closed his cars as well! For an incident in the fight drew a great roar from the crowd, and this thrilled him so deeply that he could not contain his curiosity ... So he opened his eyes ... When he saw the blood, it was as though he had drunk a deep draught of savage passion. Instead of turning away, he fixed his eyes upon the scene and drank in all its frenzy, unaware of what he was doing. He reveled in the wickedness of the fighting, and was drunk with the fascination of bloodshed. He was no longer the man who had come to the arena, but simply one of the crowd which he had joined, a fit companion for the friends who had brought him ... and when he left the arena, he carried away with him a diseased mind which would leave him no peace until he came back again, no longer simply together with friends who had first dragged him there, but at their head ... 46 As Becker observes, “for man, maximum excitement is the confrontation of death and the skillful defiance of it by watching others fed to it as he survives transfixed with rapture.” 47 While this is certainly not a universal response, it is common enough to have implications in regard to heavy metal music and satanic doctrine. Are these lessons suddenly inapplicable? Are our youth immune to the thrills so many sources carefully describe? Or are we justified in our concerns that this form of predatory pleasure is being encouraged? The report would have us believe we are not. The report emphatically states that, “there is no compelling evidence that heavy metal music compels teens to vandalize.”48 This flies in the face of heavy metal being a presence in every such incident we have examined. The report does acknowledge that heavy metal bands use a combination of acts, costumes, and lyrics which reflect ideas about “Satan, sex and drugs” then, as we have already noted, adds its vacuous observation that “the symbols seem intended more to shock dm to convert.”49,50 To shock whom? Do the reports‟ authors really believe that heavy metal music has no raison d’etre other than to scandalize Mom and Dad?

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 54

Teenage “Mischief” In their chapter on “Satanic Vandalism,” under “Desecration of Religious Property,” the authors of the report try to make light of the malicious vandalism of churches, synagogues and cemeteries by minimizing - using terms such as “occasionally” and “fewer than 100” and trivializing the issue. Statements such as: “Law enforcement agencies have no evidence that any of these occurrences are coordinated in any way,” and “It seems odd that a clandestine murderous Devil-worshipping cult that has maintained its secrecy for years would go about advertising its existence in such a public fashion,” employ the conspiracy red herring in an effort to divert attention from the real issue, which is the malicious desecration of religious sites using satanic symbols.51 “It‟s mischief,” Gerald Larue told an Illinois reporter. “They kind of want to shock the older generation by writing 666 on tombstones.”52 The report somewhat cryptically adds, “It is interesting to note that all of the reports obtained by CSER are desecrations of Christian sites which, of course, are more numerous than any other type of religious setting in this country.” 53 What does this state4rnent imply? That the vandals wished to wreck cemeteries - any cemeteries - but because they could only find Christian ones they are being unjustly labeled satanic? Surely a desecration that includes satanic graffiti can be recognized as more specifically focused than one that merely involves the breaking or overturning of headstones. Or do the authors mean to suggest that because Christian sites are so numerous, the vandals couldn‟t find the sites they really wanted to desecrate? What else are Satanists going to attack, if not Christian sites - or Jewish ones, if the Satanists involved are of the growing neo-Nazi contingent? (When Jewish cemeteries were vandalized in Europe several months ago, the French authorities saw fit to question members of a satanic cult. And an ominous fusion of Satanists with Nazi Skinheads is a growing trend in this country.) Assuming that the authors of the report would agree that desecration of Jewish sacred sites by neo-Nazis is a vicious hate crime, why is such action suddenly downgraded to “mischief” when committed by Satanists against Christians? A related issue is grave robbing. Again, CSER‟s assertions are not backed up by facts: “Grave robbing allegations are common, although most are not corroborated by independent police investigation.”54 This is patently false. Consider, for example, the following account of a grave-robbing incident reported in the February 1987 issue of Police: Special Investigations Bureau Prison Gang Unit, Los Angeles County Sheriff‟s Department, deputies were thrust into occult investigation after two Los Angeles mausoleums were broken into and 10 bodies were cut up and desecrated ... Deputies investigating the mausoleum desecration discovered the bodies had been lifted out of their coffins, bones and hands had been removed, and several heads had been placed outside the mausoleum. The vandals, who had not been apprehended at the time the article was written, had removed a crucifix and altar candles and left occult graffiti at the scene. They were first believed to be members of Los Angeles “stoner” gangs, but gang informants told police to look instead for “these weird people who hang around the graveyard, play records backwards, and do what the devil tells them to do.”55 This is only one of many cases in which this repulsive crime has been accompanied by satanic “calling cards.” The CSER reports authors don‟t seem to care about the anguish suffered by the families of those whose graves are robbed or desecrated and the parishioners whose churches are vandalized. Their attitude appears to be that these people should realize that it is all done in fun by high-spirited kids protesting their parents‟ “hypocrisy.” The report devotes four short paragraphs to the issue of animal mutilation and sacrifice. After reluctantly conceding that there are “some documented cases of willful mutilation,” the authors portentously caution their readers that “whenever animal bodies are found... Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 55

prominent promoters of the Satanic hysteria arrive on the scene to lend a new credibility to people‟s fears.”56 This statement is made with reference to a series of incidents in 1989 in which dead and mutilated animals, usually cats, were found neatly arranged on the front lawns of homes in Orange County, California. It is worth taking a closer look at this California cat caper, since it provides such a vivid illustration of the posturing and bumbling that ail too frequently accompany official “investigations” of such incidents. A report prepared for the City Council by the Acting Chief of Police of Tustin, in Orange County, dated March 21, 1989, acknowledges that the police “do have knowledge of some cat killing in the ... area being committed by the human hand.” The memo continues: There are two youth groups in the area that might be responsible for a portion of this activity. They are the Orange County Skinheads and “Da Boyz.” Information regarding these two groups indicates the Orange County Skinheads got a new leader approximately one year ago, and that individual is heavily involved in Satanic-type activity ... The change in leadership direction may be the cause of the increase in the cat killings we are now experiencing. Information on “Da Boyz” group reveals they are primarily Hispanic, with selected members who are involved in cat killing and animal mutilation connected with Satanic worship ... the Santa Ana Police Department has information on this group in their city, and they have advised there are a select few ... who are involved in this type of Satanism.57 “It looks like 10 to 15 cats were killed for skinhead fun and games or used in ritual or satanic worship,” wrote a police officer in charge of Community Resources, whose opinion was included in the Tustin P.D. report. In addition, notes from a February 1989 meeting of the Orange County Gang Investigators contains the following information: From the District Attorney‟s office: “Da Boyz have sacrificed cats and have access to AK47‟s and Uzis.” (No indication that they used the Uzis on the cats, however.) And, from the Tustin Police Department, “Two schools were broken into with the result of the “pet snake” being sacrificed with satanic and racist graffiti put up by O.C. Skins and War [White Aryan Resistance].”58 These documents clearly show that the local police departments were aware of Satanist activity involving the killing and mutilation of animals. This being the case, how did these same police departments deal with the public response to this issue? The Orange County Sheriff‟s Department representative expressed fears that the allegations of human involvement were “creating public panic or hysteria.” 59 To head off the prospect of wild-eyed cat lovers swarming through the streets with torches looking for hapless skinheads to lynch, the cops came up with the perfect scapegoat: coyotes. Now, the coyote, like its close relative, the wolf, characteristically devours its prey completely, leaving little more than scraps behind. But most of the animals in question were found neatly severed in half, their intestines strung out in a line or coiled into a circle nearby, perhaps with a severed head and/or matching set of paws completing the arrangement did dawn‟s early light revealed adorning ft front lawns of neighborhood pet owners. Nor did the police find anything “satanic” about one particularly gruesome lawn ornament: a deceased black feline found strapped to a two-foot-high wooden cross. Perhaps Orange County possesses an especially precocious breed of coyote. Local residents soon tired of the coyote party line and formed their own citizens‟ group, Tustin Residents Against Animal Killers (T.R.A.K.). They instituted night patrols and offered a $1,600 reward, later increased to $3,000, for information leading to conviction. The group‟s leader, Tustin resident Janet Hampson, managed to get permission to recover the bodies of 65 of the mutilated animals from Animal Control. She turned them over to local veterinarians, all of whom were of the opinion that most of the animals were killed by humans - while the bureaucracy continued to blame the coyotes. By the end of March, Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 56

1989, Hampson had meticulously recorded 70 cases, most of them clearly suspicious; the list eventually grew to more than 250. Hampson recently presented the Orange County Board of Supervisors with a 300-page report on the investigation. As of this writing, the Board has asked the Orange County Sheriff‟s Department to reopen the case, based on Hampson‟s report.60 But why, we must ask, was it left to private citizens to conduct a proper investigation of this situation? Given that extreme cruelty to animals by a youth is universally regarded as an early warning sign of a potential murderer, why have the police so adamantly refused to pursue an investigation of this sort of crime? Is this what the authors of the CSER report want - for law enforcement officials to turn their heads away from any crime, no matter how vicious, that might be associated with “Satanism?” Error Number Four: Significant Omissions The fact is that the report‟s authors have obviously lost sight of their subject‟s attributes - if indeed they ever had them in their sights in the first place. Elsewhere they have described Satanism as “a symptom of a sick mind” and then, virtually in the same breath, as a “benign religion”.61 Such contradictory statements detract from the report‟s credibility. Anton LaVey, whose magical watchword is “Indulgence,” explicitly exhorts his flock toward total self-aggrandizement. But the published goals of the Werewolf Order, a group related to the Church of Satan, make LaVey sound like a Boy Scout leader, and dispel any doubts about the nature of this “benign religion.” Nikolas Schreck, editor of The Manson File, is the founder of the Werewolf Order. Its motto is “To Unleash the Beast in Man.” The Order describes itself as “an international network of men and women of action dedicated to the creation of a new Satanic world order ... an unholy war for dominion of this earth.”62 It is linked to the Church of Satan, and credits “Dr. Anton LaVey” with inspiring its mission. Zeena LaVey, who is cited in the CSER report as official spokesperson for the Church of Satan and a source of “reliable and accurate information regarding the occult and ritual crime,” is also involved with the Order. Ms. LaVey, who, the report informs us, “consults with people interested in applying Satanic principles to their lives,”63 received early childhood training in these “principles” from her father. As she comments in her introduction to the elder LaVey‟s The Satanic Witch, “My father taught me how to crack a bullwhip at nine, so by the time I was eleven I was already attracting boys who needed to be told what to do (a recurring theme throughout my life).”64 Ms. LaVey should be able to put such training to good use in the Werewolf Order, of which she is listed as co-director. “The warrior priests and priestesses of our Order are lone wolves who shun the bovine herd of humankind and seek to fulfill their ancient legacy of power and mastery of the world,”65 declares its recruiting literature. The group appears fixated on psychotronics and bioacoustics as a tool with great propaganda potential. “We began our operations in 1984 with the activities of Radio Werewolf, the sonic propaganda unit of the Order,” the same recruiting material states. 66 In an earlier broadside entitled “Radio Werewolf Indoctrination,” a spokesman for the “Radio Werewolf Supreme Command” informs readers that the music of Radio Werewolf “is designed to instill the gleam of pride and independence of the beast of prey back into the eyes of the pitiless youth.” If this sounds familiar, it should, because the statement incorporates a direct quote from Adolf Hitler. Pretentious, deluded, and grandiose the Werewolf Order may be, but benign it is not. In an interview with a Boston reporter, a youthful member of the Abraxas Foundation which he described as an “occult-fascist think tank” with ties to the Church of Satan named Hider and Charles Manson as among those whose “feral nature” he admires. 67 The Werewolf Order and Abraxas Foundation hardly constitute an “international conspiracy,” but such details don‟t dampen the enthusiasm of a self-described “flesh and blood incarnation of the timeless archetype of Loki‟s legions, the avenging army that rises from the underworld

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 57

at the twilight of the gods” armed with a Thirteen-Year Plan” aimed at nothing less than the triumph of the “Demonic Revolution” by the year 2002. The growing fusion of some neo-Nazis and Satanists strikes another blow at the image of the benevolent Satanist. Indeed, fascination with Nazi occultism is a common feature of the “recognized Satanic churches,” such as Michael Aquino‟s Temple of Set, described in the CSER report as being “focused on a disciplined approach to magic as a means for succeeding in life.”68 In a recent exchange with some wary neo-pagans over the Magicknet computer network, Aquino chides those whose “cozy little house of black and white morality” prevents them from appreciating the “good and praiseworthy parts of Nazi ideology.”69 Discussion of such a topic, Aquino sniffs, “presumes a definition of “goodness” on which we all agree. I doubt that if you and Heinrich Himmler were discussing morals over coffee, you would be able to get very far, because what he would perceive as moral behavior would be quite alien to your notions on the subject. As one indoctrinated by the social morality of the political and social groups who defeated the Nazis in the 1940s, you assume that your standards are the standards - that, like the Judaeo-Christian “God,” you know “good” and “evil” because you have the exclusive prerogative to define them. [And how blasphemous it was when Set/”Satan” (or in the aforementioned illustration, Himmler) assumed this same prerogative, much less offered it to humanity! Assuredly deserving of condemnation and punishment!] In perhaps another 100 years, the profane world will be ready to consider objectively whether there is anything “good or praiseworthy” about Nazism ...”70 In the meantime, Aquino suggests, “those who want to see reassuringly 100% evil comicbook Nazis should go to Indiana Jones movies.”71 Or maybe just rent a video of the Nuremberg trials. Assuming, of course, that one is not too distressed at all the condemnation and punishment heaped upon those poor, misunderstood Nazis who had “offered” their peculiar conception of moral behavior to the world. CSER’s Appendices It is important to note that the CSER report is accompanied by three appendices, two of which are the product of law enforcement officials. Dissecting each of these appendices is beyond this essay‟s purpose. Each, it may be said, uses the same arguments, and much of the evidence, found in the report itself by contributing to this awesome apologia these officers, Robert Hicks, a Criminal Justice Analyst in Richmond, and Kenneth V. Lanning of the F.B.I. Academy in Quantico, VA, underscore the success Satanism has already achieved. To extend its influence, Satanism need not destroy its logical opponents. It need only disarm them. Lanning‟s and Hicks‟ views have been widely disseminated among police officers, several of whom have expressed to us general agreement with their misconceptions. Although these comments do not represent a consensus, we have heard other remarks which reflect new doubts about Satanism‟s importance. In a sense, this may be a healthy development, because skepticism is a necessary analytic component when addressing such issues, particularly for those who exercise a potentially punitive authority. Hicks and Lanning do not, however, merely reflect the CSER report‟s flaws. Where they offer views from their special realm of law enforcement they are, quite simply, wrong. Hicks extends the report‟s ad hominem approach to the level of a universal norm. He declares that, “whether or not people can get criminal ideas from belief systems ... has little to do with the belief system but rather with a person‟s own psychological make-up.”72 That this statement defies the root of our nation‟s legal system - recognition of the fact that ideas have consequences - is Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 58

disturbing enough. But Hicks also proceeds to defy one of the principal tenets of legal investigation when he adds, “It is not a law enforcement responsibility to guess at what might prompt a citizen to commit a crime.”73 Hicks intends this observation to be a cautionary note against public surveillance of general behavior, but it is insufficient for the legitimate practice of investigating criminal patterns. A serial killer operates from a mental construct. The police are obliged to assess that construct. Charles Manson‟s Family committed murders after the police investigation had begun. If Vincent Bugliosi had accepted Hicks‟ views, he never would have “guessed” at what prompted these crimes. Hicks‟ use of the argumentum ad hominem distorts his view of law enforcement. He claims that Anton LaVey‟s and Aleister Crowley‟s published works are attacked by anti-cult investigators because these works are accessible. The truth is, as was cited in the Scott Waterhouse judicial opinion, these works are cited because they repeatedly show up in the personal belongings of such violent criminals. They are attacked because they are influential - not only among teenage “dabblers,” but in the occult subculture as a whole. A valid application of Ockham‟s Razor demands the conclusion that the ideas the books espouse are at least causal factors in the crimes committed by students of each book‟s content Additional evidence of Hicks‟ attempt to disarm anti-satanic criticism surfaces when he states that, “What [Aleister] Crowley said was not meant to be taken literally, but figuratively.”74 Aleister Crowley was a notorious black magician who was deported from Mussolini‟s Italy after the occult practices at his Abbey of Thelema produced some very bad press. Several of his disciples died or went mad in the course of their involvement with him. But, of course, Hicks assures us, this was merely the result of “figurative” misunderstandings. Hicks‟ most egregiously biased distortion, however, and the one which clearly marks his work as satanic apologetics, is his remark about the mass murderers John Wayne Gacy and Henry Lee Lucas. He claims that, “These men, social isolates and psychopaths, invented or borrowed satanic trappings to justify their crimes.” 75 His implication is that the satanic trappings played no causal role in the murders. Hicks does not appear to realize that he is implying the validity of one of our concerns. That is, that the authorization for violence contained in the “satanic trappings” is itself a contributing factor to the violence, and it is for this reason that “satanic trappings” are a valid subject of police investigations. A concession to Hicks may be made in regard to his comments about the copy-cat phenomenon and, to some extent, to the role of what he calls “urban myths.” There is no question that the whole issue of Satanism is volatile and rife with ambiguities. It certainly requires a sound verification of fact and sound reasoning in investigation. But why does Hicks fail in this regard? Why does he embellish his valid objections so that they are reduced to straw men? Why does he deny the validity of what his targets are saying - that their interest is in preventing and solving crimes? Kenneth Lanning‟s appendix is more crucial than Hicks‟ if only because of Lanning‟s visibility as an F.B.I. spokesman. The appendix originally appeared in the professional journal, The Police Chief, in October 1989. It has, in other words, had a wide influence. This is unfortunate because it also repeats the report‟s methodology and conclusions. Lanning‟s key point is expressed in a way that extends the CSER argument that nothing criminal can be demonstrated to be the effect of a satanic - or, generally speaking, of any - belief system. He makes the point that what is called an M.O., a method of operation, is a set of actions performed “by an offender because it works.”76 He separates this from a sexual ritual by saying that it fulfills a need. Carrying on with his argument, he says, “Deviant acts, such as urinating on, defecating on, or even eviscerating a victim, are far more likely to be the result of sexual ritualism than religious or “satanic” ritualism.”77 He does acknowledge that religious themes can overlap sexually motivated compulsions, but he fails to see how such themes can be imposed or that the discernment of such impositions is a critical and valid act Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 59

of legal investigation. As demonstrated by the Scott Waterhouse case, and cited in the judicial opinion, the satanic themes definitely dictated what was done and how and why it was done. Waterhouse may have had a psychosexual need, but his acts met the criteria of a satanic ritual. Because his essay was written for a professional law enforcement audience, Lanning relies upon accepted professional presuppositions, which makes it more difficult to challenge his style. This style, however, also relies upon the same rhetorical shoddiness we find in the main report. Lanning is more sophisticated, but he is not more coherent. The bulk of his article is given over to a shopping list of obviously difficult questions. But he uses these as the base of his apologia. He cites, for example, the problem presented by the army of “experts” who conduct law enforcement seminars. Lanning is correct in pointing out that a comprehensive review of what these “experts” label Satanism ranges from astrology to Roman Catholicism. Certainly this demonstrates the existence of some bigotry. But bigotry on the part of some does not mean that truth never exists, nor does false reasoning always exclude valid conclusion. Lanning appears to think that it does. After citing other reflections of religious bias, Lanning rejects responsibility by adding, “Yet, it is just as difficult to precisely define Satanism as it is to define Christianity or any complex belief system.”78 Religious authorities do not experience such difficulties. Why does Lanning? A Buddhist, as the Dalai Lama has often said, cannot simultaneously be a Christian. A Jew does not believe that Christ was the Messiah. A Satanist does not believe that Jahweh‟s biblical religion ought to be practiced. Why does Lanning insist that this factor be separated from criminal investigations, and then insist that when distinguishing between satanic and non-satanic child abuse you must rely upon “specific satanic symbols, artifacts, or doctrine” [emphasis added]? He then immediately segues into a rejection of the significance of ritual when he adds, “rather than the mere presence of any ritualistic element.”79 Can not a ritualistic element be examined for its relation to doctrine? Apparently not. Another of Lanning‟s lacunae involves a list of child abuse crimes perpetrated by Christian parents. He asks the legitimate question, “How do we label [such] crimes?” 80 But, again, he fails to answer the question. Instead, in an elaborate argumentum ad hominem, Lanning slides through the issues. He acknowledges that most people would say that these “Christian” parents distorted Christianity, while Satanists abusing children are applying Satanism. But he then proceeds into a list of questions. Who decides, he asks, what is a misinterpretation? After all, the parents believed they were following their religion. Lanning appears to think that makes this an insoluble issue. But all religions present the follower with a sequence of beliefs ranging from the ethical to the mystical. Within this sequence there is room for deviations. This does not alter the orthodox belief system. Even Lanning‟s implication that because Christians believe in various forms of worship and dogma one can‟t define Christianity does not hold up. The core beliefs of Christianity are constant as are those of Buddhism, even if some adherents disagree on certain points. The generic elements remain, are discernible, and have discernible effects. The same is true of satanic variations. LaVey and Aquino have doctrinal differences. Each, as Aquino so conveniently attests, believes in Satan and in the predatory cruelty he demands. Lanning follows the pattern of the main report by establishing specific criteria that are nearly impossible to meet, and then denying the existence of evidence for his criteria. Satanic murder, for example, only occurs when two or more people rationally plan a crime whose “primary motivation is to fulfill a prescribed satanic ritual calling for murder.” 81 Scott Waterhouse, therefore, cannot be a satanic murderer! But what about the Ricky Kasso case in Northport, New York? Or the Sean Sellers case in Oklahoma? Are these, too, lacking in evidence of a satanic ritual “rationally” perpetuated? And if so, why? In each of these cases the prosecutor‟s evidence demonstrated a satanic influence, and the perpetrators Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 60

acknowledged that they were influenced by satanic ideation. But F.B.I. Special Agent Lanning apparently believes that his more pedantically constrictive criteria should be sufficient guides for judging satanic motivation. Another of Lanning‟s lacunae involves his acknowledgement that investigators must prove a connection between beliefs and crimes. But he then proceeds to declare that serious crimes lack such evidence. Although he accepts that valid evidence reveals a connection between Satanism and desecration, animal mutilations and the like, he obscures the issue by insisting that “a teenager‟s excessive involvement in Satanism ... is a symptom ... not the cause of a problem,”82 i.e., satanic involvement cannot be the cause of such a teenager‟s particular crimes. This subtle ad hominem argument neglects the obvious. While a troubled youth may seek a rebellious path, the one he embraces will strongly influence the destination. Satanism accelerates the progress to violence, frames its arena, and authorizes the act. It is not a necessary cause, but when present it can be a sufficient one. Lanning‟s conclusions are, at first glance, reasonable. He begins with a call for a balanced law enforcement perspective. He immediately follows this with a repetition of the main report‟s supercilious straw men. He waltzes through the charges about widespread claims of babies bred for sacrifice, the 50,000 per year figure for satanic sacrifices, and the claim that Satanists dominate the day care centers. [At this point, it may be pertinent to ask if the “50,000 baby sacrifices” is an “urban legend” that the CSER report itself has taken a major role in perpetuating.] As does the report, Lanning fails to provide valid evidence demonstrating who originated these statements. He is correct in warning against an antisatanic hysteria. He is not, however, serving the cause of responsible investigations. The third appendix, “The Truth About Role Playing Gaines,” by Michael A. Stackpole, repeats the themes of the main body of the report, while ostensibly demonstrating the benign nature of fantasy role-playing games. Stackpole repeats the arguments of Hicks and Lanning, his primary target being Patricia Pulling, founder of Bothered About Dungeons and Dragons [B.A.D.D.J. Stackpole extends the main report‟s scientific pretensions into an attack on what he claims is Pulling‟s misuse of statistics in regard to the issue of whether or not role playing games contribute to teen suicides. Stackpole argues that Pulling erroneously claims that they do. It is interesting to see how he develops his point. His first tactic is to cite a list of studies on attempted and successful teen suicides. Four such studies, Stackpole tells us, clearly fail to demonstrate a correlation between role playing games (RPG) and teenage suicide.83 This sounds impressive. The lack of relevance to Pulling‟s claim, however, is revealed in Stackpole‟s comment on the first of his cited studies. This study of “over 700 adolescents who had attempted suicide,” was conducted by Dr. S. Kenneth Schonberg of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. 84 Stackpole adds the observation that none of these cases indicated that a role playing game (RPG) was a factor in the attempted suicide. He also conveniently informs us that “the subjects were not selected for the study in any special way.”85 But he then proceeds to claim this and the other studies as authoritative reflections of the impact RPGs have on a very select crosssection of our adolescent population, those who play role playing games and attempt suicide. Stackpole uses this faulty observation as the background from which he attempts to demolish what he says are Pulling‟s errors. In truth, all he establishes is comparison. Stackpole uses Pulling‟s figure of 4,000,000 - the number of people her book, The Devil’s Web, says are Dungeons and Dragons players. He then cites an undocumented set of figures for the percentage of suicides among the 15-24 years old segment of our population, using a fluctuating rate of 11.7 per 100,000 to 12.8 per 100,000 during the period between 1975 and 1980.86 He adds the undocumented observation that the rate has since dropped. From these figures, Stackpole extrapolates necessary figures for suicide among D&D players of 468 and 512 per year, respectively. Then, resuscitating the by now tired straw man approach, he claims that this should add up to 6,840 suicides among “the players of role Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 61

playing games [emphasis added] since Dungeons and Dragons was published, role playing games did not incite teens to suicide.”87 [italics in original] This laborious line of reasoning culminates in Stackpole‟s revelation that Pat Pulling‟s book cites approximately 70 suicides among all RPG players “as of 1987.”88 He further reports: “But this number is only about 1% of the 6,840 successful suicides expected if D&D has no effect at all on the suicide rate of its players.”89 All this appears coherent until one examines some important contributing factors. Pulling, for example, thinks of adolescents as falling into the 13-20 years old range, not the 15-24 years old range. Her comments, therefore, refer to a different population group from the one Stackpole cites. Pulling also notes that the percentage of 13-20 years old players of Dungeons and Dragons is quite small relative to the population at large. She elaborated on her viewpoint during an extensive phone interview by pointing out that she believes that only 8%-10% of the 13-20-year-old population group plays Dungeons and Dragons. Fewer still are recurring players. Even in the absence of a solid statistical base, this means that the pertinent subject group is much smaller than that to which Stackpole alludes. By using his straw man of 6,840, Stackpole artfully diminishes the impact of Pulling‟s observations. Pulling‟s conclusions may overestimate the impact of D&D - we are not arguing that point. But Stackpole‟s argument does not support his accusation. Pulling‟s warning that D&D is a dangerous game that warrants serious scrutiny is home out by her analysis as well as by our own observations of its impact on individuals we have counseled. The issue is not the ratio of suicides per 100,000 people. The issue is whether or not it can be demonstrated that fantasy role-playing games have contributed to any suicides or murders. If, as we believe, this is the case, then Ockham‟s Razor says that Pulling‟s concern is legitimate. Stackpole is too eager to brush aside this concern. The percentage of suicides among people owning steak knives may be no higher than that of nonsuicides. But this does not mean that a steak knife which slashes an artery didn‟t contribute to a particular suicide. In keeping with the “independent” nature of his appendix, Stackpole faithfully resurrects the keen polemical edge of Ockham‟s Razor - but not effectively. After linking Patricia Pulling to a circle of allegedly spurious critics of Satanism, Stackpole reintroduces the grand conspiracy theory. His source for this is the newsletter File 18, which is published by a “questionable” investigator, Larry Jones, and which espouses the theory of a vertical Satanist conspiracy. We do not adhere to this viewpoint, and regret the lack of space in which to explain why we hold our position. However, we do wish to comment on several statements by Stackpole, including one that demonstrates that the mildest use of Ockham‟s Razor will reveal the flaw in File 18’s “ vertical conspiracy theory.”90 Stackpole notes that adolescents caught up in “bizarre occult antics” frequently say they learned them by watching Geraldo Rivera‟s talk show. 91 Because people we have counseled have made that same claim, we do not doubt Stackpole‟s observation. We do, however, seriously question his credulity. Those individuals we have counseled who have cited this show as the source of their satanic knowledge and inspiration have uniformly lied. Examples include members of a New England group which employed satanic symbols for over a year before the Geraldo Rivera show debuted. These youths calmly acknowledged their longstanding practice of self-mutilation, done to the energizing refrains of heavy metal music. A 17-year-old Pennsylvania girl who tried to calm her parents with this claim, had for a period of three years been a member of a ritualistic sex group which sacrificed animals for thrills and power. A group of drug dealers whose locale will go unspecified learned their dual trade of Satanism and dealing from their fathers. These cases do not suggest a worldwide conspiracy. They do satisfy us that a correct application of William of Ockham‟s logical economy leads to the conclusion that this problem exists, is based on fairly uniform influences, and certainly predates Geraldo Rivera‟s talk show.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 62

While allegedly representing an “expert” opinion, Stackpole inadvertently demonstrates his ignorance about the occult subculture when he dismisses the ersatz magical grimoire known as The Necronomicon as a “joke.”92 While the “Nec” is certainly not what it purports to be, neither is it merely a hoax. The book was not written by H.P. Lovecraft, but it was directly inspired by his works. Lovecraft created the legend of the Necronomicon as part of his Cthulhu mythos, derived from his interest in the power of myth. The “cth-” prefix is a key. It refers to the cthonic or underground deities so important to early Mediterranean religions. But the grimoire itself was written by Lovecraft fans - several of them, as Stackpole notes. A New York occultist named “Simon” is responsible for the paperback edition published by Avon. This is the Necronomicon used by teenage “dabblers” in black magic. Once again we are indebted to Michael Aquino for obligingly offering his insights into the real magical significance of a work such as the Necronomicon - namely, that its potency is not determined by its “authenticity.” In the chapter on The Satanic Rituals from his monograph on the Church of Satan, Aquino writes, “Anton LaVey states that the actual function of Satanic ritual is to enable the mind, whose processes are normally governed by perceptions of external reality (objectivity), to assume a mode of operation in which it itself controls reality by expression (subjectivity).”93 (Emphasis his.] Aquino notes that most of the book‟s readers do not bother to check up on the authenticity of the background information given for the rituals, but if they did they would soon find out that much of it is made up out of whole cloth. However, Aquino points out, this is irrelevant - because the rituals “work.” In Aquino‟s words, they work because “the great truth that underlies the art and science of magic [is] that both the power to create and the power to define are a function of the Will...”94 This is a rather overblown way of saying that they work for the same reason any good work of fiction works, because they create their own worlds. The same principle is at work with a flight of fancy like the Necronomicon, which in turn grew out of the bizarre universe of primeval forces created by Lovecraft. That principle is at work in a Role Playing Game such as Dungeons and Dragons as well. A subjective universe is created by the game‟s designers and extended by each player. With respect to Stackpole‟s comments about the application of Ockham‟s Razor to File 18’s vertical conspiracy theory, we must note that he once again demonstrates that he and the report‟s authors simply do not understand their topic. This is amply demonstrated by their ironic reliance upon what they call Ockham‟s Razor. A comment Michael Aquino makes about his Erstwhile satanic colleague, Anton LaVey, underscores by analogy the absence of understanding which pervades the CSER report. As Aquinas makes plain, LaVey‟s intention demands a set of abstract constants to support his metaphysical goals. Aquino and LaVey appeal to mental and extramental realities in order to entice agreement with their views, as the report does by substituting innuendo and fabrication for established fact and researched argument. The irony is that for William of Ockham the metaphysical realm supporting LaVey‟s concept simply does not exist because, for Ockham, “metaphysics in fact does not exist.”95 His Nominalism erected a strong barrier between external reality, or objects, and what the mind speculates about them. LaVey assumes a mind that is capable of abstract thought, but, for Ockham, “the mental process of abstraction... cannot be shown to exist.” 96 On the other hand, Ockham never doubted the independent existence of God and an independent external reality. This prevents the type of Idealism espoused by LaVey. For Ockham accepted that the “formal distinction is not made by the discernments of the mind of the observer. It is there in the object before we discern it.” 97 This is the basis for Ockham‟s principle of Parsimony: because things are there because God placed them there, Ockham said, “we must not assume anything as indispensable for explaining a certain event unless reason, experience or revelation requires us to do so.” 98 If the CSER authors understood Ockham, they would have realized that, being a faithful Christian, he would have applied his logical principle of Parsimony in favor of the supposedly Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 63

benighted Christians, not, as does the report, in favor of an attack on Christianity and, we should add, on scientifically grounded rationalism. It is highly unlikely that Ockham would have supported hysterical fundamentalists, but, given the weight of physical evidence, he probably would have agreed with those who view the current outbreak of Satanism as a serious issue. Whether or not Anton LaVey, Zeena LaVey, Michael Aquino, or Shawn Carlson and his colleagues are comfortable acknowledging the fact, it remains that for Ockham, scriptural revelation provides the most “economical” ground from which a judgment about Satan can be made. This acknowledgement of Ockham‟s ontological leaning does not reflect any tendency on our own part to disregard proper rationality. Nor, in fact, is our rejection of his theological simplicity contrary to Christian tradition. SL Augustine acknowledged that the Bible is not a scientific handbook, and St. Thomas Aquinas clearly stated the individual‟s obligation to use his or her own powers of reason, rather than rely upon mere authority, when he wrote that “truth properly speaking - and error in attendance - enters with the judgment and its expression in a statement, rather dm with simple apprehension [i.e., perception] and its manifestation in definition.”99 Summary The CSER report‟s attempt to analyze a serious social problem has not only failed, but its acceptance is, ironically, serving the cause it claims to challenge: confusion. And this leaves us with a disquieting observation. As Aquinas also noted, “the end sought by the intemperate man is not the loss of the benefit of reason, but sense-delight involving rational disorder.”100 The CSER reports efforts to rationalize our society‟s spreading disorder tends import to the intent of the aphorism which has inspired our reply. For the ancient Chinese did not intend their admonition about living in “interesting times” to be a blessing. It was a curse. Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Carlson, Shawn and Gerald A. Larne, Satanism in America, San Francisco, Gaia press, 1989, p.2. Carlson and Larne, p. 16. Carlson and Larne, p. 16. Carlson and Larne, p. 16. Carlson and Larne, p.ii. Encyclopedia of Philosophy, V. 7-8, p.307. Copyright 1976 by Macmillan, Inc. Aquino, Michael, “The Initiatory Degree System of Western Occultism,” Temple of Set Information Paper distributed at Ritualistic Crimes Seminar, Killeen, Texas, February 1989, p.4. “[T]hose of low intelligence ... consider good/evil objective and those of high intelligence... consider good/evil subjective.” Aquino, Michael, Temple of Set Reading List, Temple of Set, 1990, Preface to Category 16. Carlson and Larne, p. 13. Farrar, Janet and Stewart, The Witches’ Goddess:The Feminine Principle of Divinity, Custer, WA: Phoenix Publishing, Inc., 1987, p.3. Farrar, p.4. Farrar, p.19. Carlson and Larne, p. 12. Farrar, p. 19. Farrar, p.64. Farrar, p.64. Farrar, p.64. Farrar, p.65. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 64

19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43.

Russell, Jeffrey Burton, Witchcraft in the Middle Ages, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1972, p.278. Russell, p.278. Farrar, pp. 18-19; 63; and ch.vii. 1 86 Russell, p.279. Gonzdlez-Wippler, Santeria: African Magic in Latin America, New York: Original Publications, 1987, copyright, the Julian Press (Crown Publications) 1973, p.124. The CSER report‟s prim assertion that human sacrifice is “expressly forbidden” by Palo Mayombe irresistibly recalls an anecdote told by Isaiah Oke in his book, Blood Secrets. Oke, a former priest of the Nigerian folk religion of juju - a West African source of Santeria - attests that on one occasion he was forced to participate in a ritual human sacrifice. Sometime later he was discussing the subject with a very young anthropologist who heatedly insisted that juju priests no longer performed the rite except in 11 symbolic” form. “How did she know? Simple: She asked a jujuman, she said, and he told her so,” Oke recalls. “Besides, she reminded me, human sacrifice is against the law.” (Oke, Isaiah. Blood Secrets. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1989.) If this young woman thought legal strictures had wiped out the practice, she was misinformed. An item in the Boston Globe for October 26, 1989, entitled “Police will watch graveyards closely,” notes that authorities in the West African nation of Sierra Leone have tightened security at graveyards to prevent “witch doctors‟ from digging up bodies. “Ritual killing and grave robbing for witchcraft is widespread but little publicized in Africa,” the Globe reports. Metraux, Alfred, Voodoo in Haiti, New York: Schocken Books, 1972, copyright 1959 by Alfred Metraux, pp.65, 267. Raschke, Carl A., Painted Black, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1990, pp.25-26. Carlson, Shawn and Gerald H. Larne, “Giving the Devil Much More Than His Due,” Free Inquiry, Summer 1990, pp.25-27. LaVey, Anton, The Satanic Bible, p.25. Carlson and Larne, Satanism in America” p.1 1. Carlson and Larne, Satanism in America, p.12. Aquino, Michael, “The Satanic Rituals,” Temple of Set Information Paper, distributed at Ritualistic Crimes Seminar, Killeen, Texas, February 1989, p.3. Aquino, “The Satanic Rituals,” p.3. Bettelheim, Bruno, The Informed Heart, New York, Avon Books, 197 1, copyright 1960 by The Free Press. Kevin Garvey, personal communication. Aquino, Michael, The Book of Coming Forth by Night: Analysis and Commentary, p. 1. Aquino, Michael, “The Satanic Bible,” Temple of Set Information Paper, distributed at Ritualistic Crimes Seminar, Killeenn, Texas, February 1989, p.5. Kevin, Garvey, personal communication. Mr. Garvey was called in as a consultant on this case, which was kept confidential. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p. 12. Elias,Thomas, Devil worship: Police confront a modem nightmare, Los Angeles Herald Examiner, August 10, 1986, p.A II. “Modem Primitives,” Research, 1989, p.95. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p. 12. State of Maine v. Scott Waterhouse, Decision No. 4216, Law Docket No. Lin-8523. Aquino, Michael, “The Satanic Bible,” pp.2,5. Tucker, Rob, Teen Satanism, Paper presented at Ritual Abuse: Fact or Fiction? Conference sponsored by The Institute for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Aylmer, Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 65

44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78.

Ontario, May 29-30, 1989. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.33. Becker, Ernest. Escape From EWI, New York: Free Press, 1975, p. 114. St. Augustine, Confessions, Book VI, chapter 8. Trans. R.S. Pine-Coffin. New York: Penguin Books, 1961. Becker, p. 11. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.46. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.46. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.46. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.35. terHorst, Cheryl, The dark side of adolescence, Daily Herald [Palatine, IL, December 8, 1988, p. 1. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.35. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.35. Allen, Carole, and Metoyer, Pat., Crimes of the occult, Police, February 1987. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.37. City of Tustin Inter-Com. To: William A. Huston, City Manager. From: Fred Wakefield, Acting Chief of Police. Subject: Cat Killings. City of Tustin Inter-Com. C. Gewertz, Tustin group offers $1,600 reward in cat deaths, Los Angeles Times, September 19, 1989. Janet Hampson, personal communication. Carlson, Shawn and Gerald H. Larue, “Giving the Devil Much More Than His Due,” pp.25,26. “The Werewolf Order is the Frontline of the Demonic Revolution,” Werewolf Order Ministry of Propaganda & Public Enlightenment, Los Angeles, CA, 1990. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.99. LaVey, Anton, The Satanic Witch, Los Angeles: Feral House, 1989. [Originally published as The Compleat Witch or What to Do When Virtue Fails, New York: Dodd, Mead, 1971.1 “The Werewolf Order is the Frontline of the Demonic Revolution,” Werewolf Order Ministry of Propaganda & Public Enlightenment, Us Angeles, CA, 1990. “The Werewolf Order is the Frontline of the Demonic Revolution,” Werewolf Order Ministry of Propaganda & Public Enlightenment, Los Angeles, CA, 1990. Graham, Lamar B., Interview with a vampire... sort of, The Boston Phoenix, October 20, 1989. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America, p.12. Aquino, Michael, message #3463, “MAGICKNET,” 05-Mar-90 11:17. Aquino, Michael, message #3463, “MAGICKNET,” 05-Mar-90 11:17. Aquino, Michael, message #3463, “MAGICKNET,” 05-Mar-90 11:17. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Robert Hicks, Appendix One: Satanic Cults-. A Skeptical View of the Law Enforcement Approach, p.9. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Robert Hicks, Appendix One: Satanic Cults: A Skeptical View of the Law Enforcement Approach, p.9. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Robert Hicks, Appendix One: Satanic Cults: A Skeptical View of the Law Enforcement Approach, p.9. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Robert Hicks, Appendix One: Satanic Cults: A Skeptical View of the Law Enforcement Approach, p. 12. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Kenneth V. Lanning, Appendix Two: Satanic, Occult, Ritualistic Crime: A Law Enforcement Approach, p.3. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Kenneth V. Lanning, Appendix Two: Satanic, Occult, Ritualistic Crime: A Law Enforcement Approach, p.3. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Kenneth V. Lanning, Appendix Two: Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 66

79.

80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98.

Satanic, Occult, Ritualistic Crime. A Law Enforcement Approach, p.3. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Kenneth V. Lanning, Appendix Two: Satanic, Occult, Ritualistic Crime: A Law Enforcement Approach, p.4. In his book The Archaeology of Ritual and Magic, Ralph Merrifield notes that while archaeologists intellectually accept the proposition that religion, magic, and superstition have left many traces on the archaeological record, in their daily work they are apt to put forth “every other possible interpretation, however unlikely... provided that it makes sense in terms of accident or functional utility, while the possibility that it should be interpreted as yet another example of a not uncommon form of religious or magical ritual remains ignored. Any such suggestion is likely to be greeted with nervous laughter and the standard response that ritual is just something we don‟t understand, and therefore the term has to be avoided,” (Merrifield, Ralph. The Archaeology of Ritual and Magic. New York: New Amsterdam Books, 1988, pp.1-2). Merrifield, however, does not accept this “unduly defeatest proposition,” but regards it as the duty of the professional to .1 study such problems and try to solve them,” (p.2). Would that F.B.I. agent Lanning shared his attitude. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Kenneth V. Lanning, Appendix Two: Satanic, Occult, Ritualistic Crime: A Law Enforcement Approach, p.6. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Kenneth V. Lanning, Appendix Two: Satanic, Occult, Ritualistic Crime: A Law Enforcement Approach, p.9. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Kenneth V. Lanning, Appendix Two: Satanic, Occult, Ritualistic Crime: A Law Enforcement Approach, p.9. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.7. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.7. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.7. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.7. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.8. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.8. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.8. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.25. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p.25. Carlson and Larue, Satanism in America. Michael A. Stackpole, The Truth About Role Playing Games, p. 16. Aquino, Michael, The Church of Satan, San Francisco: Temple of Set, 1983, p.53. Aquino, Michael, The Church of Satan, San Francisco: Temple of Set, 1983, p.53. Knowles, David, The Evolution of Medieval Philosophy, Princeton University Press, 1964, p.32. Knowles, David, The Evolution of Medieval Philosophy, Princeton University Press, 1964, p.322. Weinberg, Julius, A Short History of Medieval Philosophy, Princeton University Press, 1964, p.246. Weinberg, Julius, A Short History of Medieval Philosophy, Princeton University Press, 1964, p.239. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 67

99. 100.

Thomas Aquinas, Commentary, 1, Sentences, xix, vol. 1, ad 7. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, la, xiviii ad 3.

Kevin Garvey, who has been an exit counselor for more than fifteen years, began his inquiries into the cult phenomenon while studying philosophy at Columbia University. He has special expertise in New Age and occult groups. Linda Blood is a former member of the Temple of Set and is co-author, with Michael Langone, of Satanism and Occult-Related Violence. What You Should Know. This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8, Number 2, pages 151-190. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 68

Task Force Study of Ritual Crime Michael P. Maddox Virginia State Crime Commission Abstract The very general and amorphous overtones that discussions of cults frequently assume present a particularly perplexing problem for the criminal justice field. Because these discussions are typically pervaded by extreme emotion, a rational response to allegations of cult, or ritual, crime becomes difficult. This predicament is exacerbated by the ignorance surrounding the occult. While attempting to be sensitive to the diverse viewpoints on ritual crime, this report offers an empirical basis for evaluating the level of such activity, as well as an objective attempt to clarify some of the conflicting issues inherent in claims of this nature. During the 1990 session of the Virginia legislature, Delegate Robert Tata sponsored House Joint Resolution No. 147 (HJR 147) directing the Virginia State Crime Commission to “study certain cult practices” and to (1) focus its study on those cults in Virginia that emphasize or promote their members‟ participation in dangerous, antisocial, or criminal activities as a part of their practices; (2) determine, to the extent possible, the prevalence of such cults and their recruitment and ritualistic practices; (3) identify risk factors associated with youth involvement in such groups; (4) confer with law enforcement agencies throughout the Commonwealth regarding the reports and documentation of occult activity, ritualistic crimes, and whether such acts involved youth; (5) inventory school divisions to determine the nature and magnitude of the problem and the perspectives of school administrators concerning how such problems should be managed; (6) assess the final impact of vandalism and destruction of public property due to such acts; (7) review the efforts of other states to prevent and control such cults and resulting criminal activity; (8) recommend appropriate ways in which the Commonwealth might respond to such activity to protect public property and safety while protecting the Constitutional rights of its citizenry; and (9) limit its study to such related matters as the Commission may deem appropriate. The resolution called for creation of a task force consisting of 13 members, reporting directly to the Crime Commission, in order to fulfill the requirements of HJR 147. In addition to members drawn from the ranks of the Commission, the task force was to be comprised of one member each from the House of Delegates and from the Senate, and four citizen members. Established by Section 9-125 of the Code of Virginia, the Crime Commission‟s legislative mandate is “to study, report, and make recommendations on all areas of public safety and protection.” Section 9-127 of the Code of Virginia provides that “the Commission shall have the duty and power to make such studies and gather information in order to accomplish its purpose, as set forth in section 9-125, and to formulate its recommendations to the Governor and the General Assembly.” Section 9-134 of the Code of Virginia authorizes the Commission to “conduct private and public hearings, and to designate a member of the Commission to preside over such hearings.” Pursuant to HJR 147, the Crime Commission established a task force and proceeded with this study per the authorization and direction of such resolution. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 69

Executive Summary House Joint Resolution 147 (HJR 147) directed the Crime Commission to establish a task force in order to study certain cult practices that represent a danger to citizens of the Commonwealth and to determine the prevalence of such practices, the risk factors that induce youth‟s participation in this activity, the fiscal cost resulting from property damage, and the means of addressing these concerns. Following expert testimony regarding the scope of issues relating to the occult and cult practices, the task force determined that parameters to this study must be carefully drawn and objectives narrowly focused. Particularly prominent was concern about potential conflicts with constitutional rights to free association and exercise of religion. To eradicate confusion and properly identify the subject matter of this study, the task force defined the focus to be that criminal behavior which is derived from or motivated by a specific spiritual belief system and the practices or ceremonies with which it is associated. Such behavior is regarded as “ritual crime” or “ritualistic crime” for the purposes of this study. Controversy about ritual crime, both in terms of its prevalence and its nature, is rampant. Much of the debate can be traced to the careless or inaccurate use of terminology. Inappropriate identification of and reference to groups and belief systems, as well as inexact descriptions of what constitutes ritual crime, inevitably cloud this debate and make more difficult an objective investigation into the actual incidence of occult-related crime. A statewide survey of all law enforcement agencies and school divisions, and geographically representative samples of social service departments and licensed mental health practitioners in Virginia produced comprehensive data about the incidence of ritual crime in the Commonwealth. Follow-up interviews confirmed that most incidents which could be linked to belief systems involved minor property crimes. The results make clear the difficulty in establishing causal connections between the reported cases and spiritual belief systems. Claims regarding incidents of ritual crime suffer in many cases from a lack of adequate evidence. While this is attributed by some to the effective disposal of evidence by cult members, it is clear also that indicia of unconventional belief systems are often speciously linked to ritual crime. The research evidenced a distinct schism between the types of reports from mental health therapists and other interviewees. While schools, law enforcement agencies, and social service workers pointed to specific cases of crime, therapists tended to provide more general accounts of ritual crime which they derived from their clients and which were frequently years or decades old. This contrast between law enforcement and mental health extends also to the goals of the respective groups. Therapists‟ focus is on treatment issues rather than the prevention and enforcement of crime. Response to ritual crime therefore by necessity differs for these two segments of the population and recognition of this fact is important both in interpreting data and in making recommendations for action. Based upon survey results, testimony, and intensive research, the task force made the following findings: 

Misconceptions about ritual crime are pervasive.



Evidence is insufficient to establish the existence of any major conspiracy or organized criminal network based upon an occult or spiritual belief system.



Unpopular belief systems are erroneously associated with criminal behavior.



Criminal activity that might reasonably by associated with belief systems consists

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 70

primarily of minor property crimes and is committed largely by “dabblers.” 

Existing criminal statutes in Virginia are adequate to address dangerous conduct that may result from participation in unconventional belief systems.



The ritual crime phenomenon has its greatest overt impact in the field of mental health.

As a result of and in accordance with these findings the task force made the following recommendations: 

That the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services develop a model curriculum addressing ritual crime for Virginia‟s law enforcement officers.



That the Crime Commission‟s continued research on youth gangs be tracked and reviewed for findings and ultimate recommendations.



That the Virginia Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services coordinate research efforts relating to the ramifications of ritual abuse in the mental health field.



That law enforcement personnel act in cooperation with appropriate agencies in the investigation and prosecution of claims involving ritual abuse of persons.



That school personnel and social service workers be provided objective and accurate information on ritual crime.



That the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services establish a definitional standard and review development of a separate reporting category for ritual crime. Study Design

The subject matter of HJR 147 being of a broad and amorphous nature, the methodology necessary for fulfillment of the resolution‟s mandate was by necessity incremental. Prior to specific investigation into particular activity the task force required establishment of definitional terms and an understanding of the allegations surrounding cults and the occult in order to determine the study‟s parameters and have a context for relating certain activity to study objectives. Consequently, an initial research project into the issues surrounding occultand cult-related crime was instigated. This research was initiated by reference to a vast array of literature addressing the occult generally, numerous specific groups, allegations of ritual crime, and discussion and analysis of these issues. The project was both guided and augmented by interviews and correspondence with individuals who are schooled in and have gained substantial exposure to this area of study and concern. As the work of the task force progressed, further literature was amassed while the focus of the research was properly narrowed and honed. Upon establishment of study parameters, three statewide surveys of law enforcement agencies, school divisions, and licensed mental health practitioners, respectively, were distributed. These surveys requested information relating to the respondent‟s awareness of ritual crime activity, its prevalence, the nature of such activity, responses to such activity, and opinions as to legislative or other action which should be taken to address the activity, based on the respondent‟s respective area of expertise. A subsequent statewide survey of juvenile detention facilities and regional and local social service agencies was also made, seeking similar information and emphasizing treatment concerns. Selected respondents from these surveys were interviewed personally and by telephone. Additionally, the field for interviews was expanded to include counselors in public school systems. The purpose of such interviews was to confirm information obtained through surveys, provide greater detail and analysis of such information, and permit an update of the information. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 71

The task force requested and received the public testimony of experts who had engaged in extensive research directly related to this area of study and heard testimony from other interested parties who chose to appear before the task force. The task force received further confidential information relating to investigations or alleged criminal conduct from numerous persons in private hearing pursuant to Section 9-134 of the Code of Virginia. Throughout the course of the study, consultation with interested parties and with academicians and professionals was maintained. Reliance was made upon organizations at the local, state, and national level that research and respond to ritualistic crime. Additionally, training seminars, workshops, and similar meetings dealing with ritualistic crime and related issues were reviewed. While such programs provided an expanded base of information about alleged ritualistic activities and options for responding to such activity, they also offered an opportunity to gauge the perceptions and knowledge of those who lecture, teach, and attend these meetings. Literature Review Because the Crime Commission‟s investigation into ritualistic crime necessitated a broad familiarity with the subject as a whole, initial stages focused heavily on the review of literature dealing with the occult, cults, and ritualistic practices arising from spiritual belief systems (particularly unconventional beliefs). The research dealt with four broad categories of interest: 1. Various spiritual belief systems and their historical bases. 2. Sources purporting to substantiate specific cases of dangerous ritualistic activities, or otherwise reporting allegations of such activity. 3. Scholarly works describing unconventional belief systems, analyzing ritualistic practices or consequences of such practices, or proffering solutions to adverse consequences arising from these belief systems. 4. Formal studies seeking to quantify the existence of a problem with ritualistic behavior, to identify the nature or causes of such problem, or to propose alternatives for responding to the adverse effects of ritualistic crime. The initial research objective involved definitional concerns. In order to properly differentiate between various belief systems it was necessary to gain some understanding of their goals and philosophies. To ascertain the scope of ritual crime an examination of the numerous allegations was required. This understanding also provided the basis for evaluation of claims regarding specific groups engaged in ritualistic practices. Ultimately, the sources helped to identify both the causes of ritual crime and approaches for response to it. As the study progressed, subject matter was narrowed considerably to focus on current research efforts, recent accounts of ritualistic abuses, and other newly published materials. A list of references is appended to this report. While not exhaustive, this reference list includes those sources cited most often, as well as those the task force found to be most credible and relevant to this study. Inclusion of a particular source does not represent an endorsement by this task force of the work or its author. Definitional Issues Too often literature, or speakers, dealing with the subject of ritual abuse, “deviant” religious practices, and criminal acts motivated by nontraditional belief systems utilize language that is insufficiently defined, and perhaps in some cases deliberately vague, to refer to their subject matter. Such terms as “occult,” “cult,” “cultism,” “satanic,” and “ritualistic” are regularly used

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 72

by therapists, law enforcement officers, and others who speak or write about the aforementioned activities. Two distinct problems arise from this usage. Identification of certain activities by reference to one or another of these terms is often made without defining the term in question. The connotation is left to the subjective perception or imagination of the listener. Further, many different and diverse beliefs and practices are grouped into a single category, and referenced with one or more of these titles. Both tendencies exacerbate and perpetuate the confusion and debate that necessarily pervade subject matter as controversial as this. The terms used to describe these various activities possess distinct meanings and should not be used interchangeably. Additionally, the activities themselves are not inherently related and reference to them as such makes quantification and analysis impossible. This ubiquitous ambiguity necessitated of the task force that it define both the subject matter to which it would devote itself and the terminology to be used in this study. While the term “ritual crime” is used by many in conflicting fashion, it was adopted for the purposes of this study with a specific and limited definition. Thus, throughout the course of the study and within this report, “ritual crime” and “ritualistic crime” have been used to connote the criminal behavior that is derived from or motivated by a specific spiritual belief system and the practices or ceremonies with which it is associated. Dangerous activities associated with these practices that are not presently prohibited by criminal law have been referred to as “ritualistic” behavior. In this context, the fact that commission of a crime involves some ritual or rituals does not in itself make it a “ritual crime.” The use by some individual of a modus operandi in commission of a criminal act would not cause such act to fall under the purview of this study. Only if these acts are driven by, or are the result of, a spiritual belief system does “ritual crime” apply as such term is employed by this task force. In no way is this definition meant to represent universal application of the phrase. Rather, it provides the reader with a clear notion of the task force‟s reference point in the study of this subject. Other terms are applied in their more traditional fashion, unless accompanied by specific explanation. Where “cult” is used in this report the term assumes the common definition of a group engaged in an unorthodox system or community of religious worship. The occult may refer to anything of a supernatural nature. While Satanism is of the occult, it is merely one of many such supernatural belief systems. The use of this various terminology is not directed at a specific group or belief system, nor does it necessarily carry with it connotations of criminal conduct. To avoid undue inferences, occult or cult activity of a criminal nature is explicitly referenced as such. Substantive Issues Addressed The task force assumed a sweeping responsibility in attempting to address this relatively unexplored area of criminal justice. Concerns relating to ritual crime manifest themselves not only in law enforcement and in the courts but also in schools and in the mental health community. In seeking to examine and respond to these concerns the task force endeavored to determine: 1. The prevalence of ritual crime in the Commonwealth. 2. The prevalence of other dangerous ritualistic activity that may not presently constitute a crime. 3. The geographic concentration of such activity. 4. The nature of such activity; whether it is associated with violent crime, crimes against property, or other crimes, and to what degree.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 73

5. The nature of other states‟ experiences with ritual crime, both in terms of the extent of such activity and the means by which such states address it. 6. Whether existing criminal statutes adequately address adverse ritual activity in the Commonwealth. 7. Whether measures beyond the criminal code need be employed to address adverse effects of ritual activity in the Commonwealth. Background Discussion The topic of ritualistic crime ignites strong sentiment on all sides of the issue. The controversy is only heightened by the fact that many allegations of pernicious activity involve ideas and concepts which, for some people, constitute deeply held religious beliefs. As a result, both the investigation by the task force and the production of this report required carefully crafted guidelines and objectives. In order to pursue an effective investigation into conduct that may represent a real danger to the citizens of this Commonwealth, to seek out remedies for individuals who suffer from participation in or consequences of dangerous ritualistic practices, and to preserve the rights of all persons, the task force defined and limited its investigation to practices that legitimately fall within the purview of the state. In researching this topic the task force was not interested in representing a particular viewpoint. Rather, the goal was to make a comprehensive but objective determination as to the prevalence of ritualistic crime in Virginia and assess alternative means for addressing whatever problem was ultimately found to exist. While written works dealing with mystical practices, ritualistic abuse, unpopular religions, and allegations of various related criminal endeavors abound, relatively few credible studies have been conducted on the nature and prevalence of these phenomena. Statistics regarding the frequency of ritualistic activities proliferate, yet sound bases for these numbers are rarely offered. A fundamental, yet common, problem is the failure to sufficiently identify the topic of discussion. The occult is an umbrella term for supernatural or mystical beliefs and practices. To the degree that conventional religions rely upon nonphysical entities and conviction by faith over reason they share this umbrella. This does not mean that all supernatural belief systems are equal, or that they represent comparable value systems. In fact “occultism” is generally referred to in the context of unconventional systems of belief. It is important, however, not to confuse unconventional beliefs with illegal practices. The latter is the primary focus of this report. Those who write or lecture about ritual crime frequently do not make the distinction between criminal acts and noncriminal practices involving occult or ritualistic elements. Rather, the discussion focuses on participation in belief systems that are deemed aberrant and viewed as potentially leading to dangerous or illegal conduct. Consequently, many spiritual belief systems are grouped together and subsequently treated with a single point of reference. Though these belief systems often have very disparate goals, values, and practices they are treated in comparable fashion. Some belief systems most often cited as falling into this group include witchcraft or wicca, Satanism, santeria, voodoo, palo mayombe, as well as other neopagan and syncretic religions. The treatment of believers or practitioners of these faiths as somehow comparable immediately confuses the discussion of ritual crime. Most do not belong to a major unified organization and are not represented by a single entity. Thus belief systems will differ dramatically even among individuals who claim to adhere to a specific religion. This is particularly true of the more generic titles. The Satanism cloak, for example, is cast over practices and beliefs that are utterly unrelated. Depending upon one‟s Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 74

point of reference, origins, values, and goals of two so-called satanic religions may contrast completely. “Satanism” has now been adopted by many as a term of reference for various individuals or groups espousing beliefs in magic, witchcraft, or any of the other belief systems mentioned above. Such application is inaccurate and unproductive. Further, the identification of these groups (or the members thereof) as inherently criminal is a fallacy that will not be perpetuated here. A sweeping generalization regarding unpopular or unconventional belief systems is neither an accurate portrayal nor an effective method for assessing perpetration of ritual crime. Consequently, this report will not examine these many individual belief systems in-depth (please note, however, that the appended reference list will direct interested parties to other sources that do so). Rather, focus will be directed toward criminal activity that may be traceable to particular ritual practices. A broadly used classification scheme has evolved that places adherents of these belief systems into one of four distinct categories. The categories are: 1. Dabblers: Those who exhibit superficial, and usually transitory, interest in a belief system but have neither developed a significant understanding of it nor become substantially committed to it. Alternatively, the dabbler may exhibit superficial interest in the occult generally (as opposed to a single belief system). 2. Self-stylists: Those who exhibit a greater degree of interest in one or more belief systems but have generally not developed a significant knowledge and understanding of the respective systems. Individuals who fall into this category develop personal belief systems encompassing elements of multiple religions, embellished with their own ideas and concepts. 3. Religious Traditionalists: Members of an established church or religion that is legally recognized and does not formally advocate criminal activities. 4. “Cult” Members: Those who adhere to an established belief system and belong to an organization that advocates and encourages certain criminal activities. By necessity their practices are typically covert. Depending upon the particular advocate the category title may differ, though these are the most popular. The accompanying characteristics also may deviate somewhat from one speaker to the next. Again, the definitions provided here approximate those most frequently offered. Persons being characterized in this manner may not fit exclusively into a single category or may cross lines from one to another. For example, dabblers, due to their relative ignorance and lack of commitment, often assume the characteristics of a self-stylist. Nevertheless, a self-stylist is generally regarded as more involved and more dangerous than a dabbler. In fact, some authorities contend that the self-stylist is the most dangerous of the four types because he is wholly unpredictable and may exploit selective elements of various belief systems as justification for violent or criminal conduct. An extreme example of this archetype is viewed by some as possessing severe personality problems and mental instability. The religious traditionalists are labeled as such by virtue of their reliance upon an established religion. Members of this group may or may not belong to a recognized church. They will, however, possess a reasonable level of knowledge about, and commitment to, a given belief system. In either case, their practices are legitimate insofar as they decline to advocate illegal activities. Some authorities on ritual crime contend that members of apparently legitimate religious organizations actually engage in covert criminal conduct contrary to the stated position, but with the sanction, of their church. This scheme of categorizing individuals has a number of drawbacks, not least of which is the implicit delegitimization of any organization placed in the third category (the mere mention of a given belief system in this context tends to lend to it a negative connotation). The focus is Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 75

not on ritual crime per se, but on the belief system.Still, it is used so pervasively in discussions of ritual crime that it demands mention and may actually provide a useful means of differentiating levels of involvement in ritual crime. Important to note, however, is the tendency by some to brand particular religious beliefs as inherently unhealthy. Participation, to whatever degree, in unconventional or minority belief systems is viewed by many as an undesirable event in itself. The mere interest in spiritual beliefs that are not associated with accepted religious norms, particularly in youth, is presumed to lead to dangerous or criminal behavior. Frequently evidence of interest in an unconventional belief system provokes parents or other concerned parties to assert the existence of a causal relationship between delinquent acts and the belief system itself, where none has been established. Various activities that may not even indicate an interest in the occult are also sometimes cited as engendering unhealthy beliefs or thought patterns. Among these are certain musical groups and fantasy or role-playing games. Popular music may contain lyrics that mention occult subjects but which young people enjoy simply for its entertainment value. Likewise, participation in fantasy games (as with any game) most often represents a form of entertainment and nothing more. The few credible studies addressed to research of this topic have failed to point out a causal link between music or games and illegal practices. Allegations Regarding Ritual Crime As already noted, substantial controversy surrounds claims of ritual crime. Contentions concern not only the prevalence of ritual crime but also conceptual frameworks for viewing the topic. The very nature of ritual crime is at issue, spawning disparate and divergent viewpoints as to the existence and intentions of movements and organizations implicated in such activity. It is necessary therefore to identify some of the perspectives that predominate this debate. At one end of the spectrum are those who conclude that ritual crime, in essence, does not exist. Subscribers to this view hold that spiritual motivations generally do not drive criminal conduct and that only isolated incidents of such crime actually occur. They suggest that alleged incidents either did not transpire at all or are susceptible to alternative (more viable) explanations, and that victims of ritual crime are mistaken in their beliefs, misled into false beliefs, or deliberately fabricate stories for their own purposes. At the other end of the spectrum are those who recognize the existence of a broad-based organization, or multiple organizations, engaged in habitual acts of crime (violent or otherwise) premised on tenets of a given belief system. Adherents of this position point to statements of numerous persons across the North American continent claiming personal knowledge of ritual crime. Most often these individuals claim to be victims of powerful cult groups. The lack of physical evidence of ritual crimes is explained by the effectiveness of these groups in destroying or concealing such evidence. Cited crimes include fraud, kidnapping, torture, and murder (often in the form of sacrifice), as well as habitual acts of physical abuse. The perpetration of such acts would constitute a massive criminal conspiracy that is pursued not for the sake of money but in the interest of spiritual fulfillment. Nevertheless, there are some who maintain that the existence of this criminal network is actually motivated by a quest for power and that the spiritual belief system is a subterfuge employed to ensure the continued allegiance of participants and the silence of victims. Often the allegations indicate multigenerational participation in these cults by family members. The third group might be identified as objective observers, or persons who initiate their research without a personal position or interest. These are frequently academics whose goal is to determine the verifiability of claims and the veracity of witnesses, as well as the causes, effects, and relationships associated with the phenomenon of ritual crime. Sociologists and Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 76

mental health researchers populate this group. Also falling into the group, however, are criminal justice and other governmental or public interest entities. Members of this group recognize reason for concern regarding ritual crime simply because allegations are so widespread and therefore demand examination. Unlike members of the first two groups, members of the latter do not possess a uniform position on the prevalence of ritual crime. Depending upon the focus of study, such a determination may not even be an issue. The orientation is on the belief in existence of ritual crime as much as validation of that belief. It is fair to say, however, that both of the extreme positions are frequently rejected as unsubstantiated. Finally, there are those who perceive a threat from unconventional belief systems based upon the clash that those beliefs and values represent to their own religious views. Insofar as purely spiritual bases for these objections are proffered, this group resides outside the focus of this study. The task force takes no position on the preference of one religion over another, or on the legitimacy of religious beliefs or practices except where they encourage behavior that represents a threat to the rights or safety of society or the safety of the practitioner. Numerous advocates across the United States and Canada have offered various perspectives on ritual crime, based upon their particular objectives in examining this subject. Most can be placed in one of the general groups described above. This task force initiated its investigation with the posture of an objective observer. The study focused upon the specific issues outlined in this report; and the methodology adopted by the task force, described earlier, was developed in response to these issues. Surveys, Interviews, and Testimony Surveys In an attempt to quantify and document actual cases of ritual crime in Virginia a broad-based survey of the Commonwealth was conducted. This consisted initially of statewide surveys to three separate segments of the population: law enforcement agencies, public school systems, and licensed practitioners within the various disciplines of the mental health field. All 174 chiefs of police, 87 law enforcement sheriffs, and 145 school district officials in Virginia received a copy of the survey. Additionally, a random sample of 155 licensed mental health practitioners in Virginia, representing all geographical areas of the Commonwealth, was polled. The questionnaires were designed to elicit information relating to the number of reports of ritual activity, the type of activity, the number of participants or perpetrators, the manner in which reports were addressed, and other information concerning the respondent‟s knowledge of, experience with, and concern about ritual crime. Jurisdictions were broken down into regions, utilizing the classification maintained by Virginia State Police. Through compilation of responses to these surveys the task force hoped to provide reliable data for determining the prevalence of ritual crime, in contrast to the widely varying, and typically anecdotal, reports that are so pervasive. That said, a caveat must be interjected. Schools and law enforcement agencies do not generally maintain discrete records of ritualistic crime. Therapists represent only their clientele rather than a specific geographical portion of the general population. Nevertheless, respondents generally exhibited excellent understanding of the information sought by the survey and provided effective responses. Subsequent follow-up interviews further clarified and confirmed the data. Of the 561 surveys distributed, 361 were returned (see Appendix A for compilation of survey data), representing a response rate of 65%. School divisions returned 135 surveys, which means that over 90% of the state‟s schools are represented. The sheriff‟s and police departments returned over 60% of the 250 law enforcement surveys. Mental health professionals returned approximately 30% of the 150 surveys mailed to them.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 77

Of all law enforcement agencies responding to the survey, 57% reported no incidents of ritual crime during the past year. However, approximately the same number reported some incidence of ritual crime during the most recent five-year period. No reports of ritual crime during the entire reporting period had come to the attention of 43% of the respondents. A mere 10% of school divisions reported any incidence of activity that might be associated with ritualistic involvement during the past year, while fewer than 20% indicated such activity during the preceding five years. Twenty-five percent of the mental health practitioners indicated that during the past year clients had been involved in ritual activity, and just over 33% of the respondents indicated clients had been so involved during the past five years. While approximately 40% of law enforcement agencies reported some incidence of ritual crime in their jurisdiction during the past year, the vast majority of these indicated that the number of incidents was fewer than five (53 reported this category, compared to 18 for all other categories combined). Additionally, over 65% of these reports of ritual crime were said to have an unclear association with occult or ritual practices or, alternatively, could have another explanation.

Figure 1 Incidence of ritual activity

School Division Law Enforcement Mental Health

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 78

The types of ritual crimes most often reported involved graffiti, vandalism, and trespassing. Crimes against persons were far less frequently reported. Such crimes typically involved sexual and physical abuse. Reports of homicide were extremely rare. Though relatively few school jurisdictions reported any student behavioral problems that they associated with occult involvement, data from those that did report such activity closely paralleled responses from law enforcement agencies. However, fully 84% of the perpetrators fell into a category of “alleged perpetrators,” while only 6% were adjudicated as such (the others were categorized as victims). Among mental health professionals who reported clients involved in ritual activity, a greater percentage of incidents were said to involve violent crime. As with other surveys, physical assault and sexual assault were by far the most frequent violent crimes. Also consistent with findings of the other surveys was the percentage of property crimes related to offenses of vandalism, graffiti, and trespassing. (Such crimes, again, represented a disproportionate share of the offenses.)

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 79

Figure 2 Ritual crimes against persons

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 80

Figure 3 Other ritual crimes

Questionnaires were also distributed to juvenile detention facilities and to local and regional social service departments. Responses from juvenile detention centers invariably indicated the lack of any significant activity. The survey of social service departments, while requesting information about the level of activity, was focused primarily upon the response taken and suggestions about means of addressing ritual crime, eliciting written responses not susceptible to quantification. Consequently responses from these surveys were not compiled for numerical analysis. Many of the respondents to the social services questionnaire indicated that they had encountered youth expressing some interest in the occult. However, most of these respondents stated that only one or two such cases had come to their attention. Furthermore they suggested that frequently this interest was not associated with ritual crime. When such an association was alleged, animal mutilation was often cited and physical assault of persons was occasionally reported.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 81

Despite the limited ritual crime involvement evidenced by these responses, a number of those answering the questionnaire suggested that the most effective aid for social service workers would be information on evaluating and treating youth who were involved in dangerous occult practices. Interviews The high response rate, as well as the detailed nature of the information provided, was indicative of significant and useful data. To further clarify and verify these data, a number of selected respondents were interviewed via telephone and in person. Geographic locations with high population density and areas that reported significant activity were the primary targets of such interviews. Typically they were one and the same. Though respondents who indicated little or no ritual crime in their jurisdictions were also interviewed, relatively fewer of them were chosen. As might be expected, interviewees reiterated responses they had provided on surveys, but the bases for these positions were not always comparable. The follow-up investigations elicited information falling into two basic groups: well-defined current or recent cases and testimonials of historic or on-going abuse. Generally, law enforcement officers and school officials were able to offer accounts of specific misconduct that they associated with ritualistic practices. Because of the nature of mental health practitioners‟ work, their information on ritual crime was invariably secondhand and did not involve investigation into specific allegations. Rather, accounts by clients constituted the sole basis for their responses. School officials typically referred serious offenses to law enforcement authorities. For less serious offenses, parents or other custodial parties were notified. Verification of occult influence generally was not made by school officials. Law enforcement officers who actually completed the surveys and who were chosen for interviews were those reputed as being experienced in the investigation of ritual crime. In many cases these officers were in possession of indicia of belief systems that they felt linked the crime to the belief system itself. They conceded that in few cases could they conclusively prove such a connection. Though this evidence sometimes indicated a suspect‟s interest in an unconventional belief system, more often than not it failed to substantiate a causal link between those beliefs and commission of the offense in question. Further, because perpetrators were not apprehended in most cases, investigators were unable to definitively assign a motive to the crime. Often they relied upon factors merely suggesting existence of a belief system. The presence of certain graffiti at the crime scene, or of particular clothes, tattoos, or scars on the suspect led law officers to label the offense as a ritual crime. The occurrence of the event on a specific date (one of many listed on a “satanic calendar”) was also a popular basis for assigning ritual crime status, even where no suspect was apprehended and other corroborating evidence was unavailable. Definitive documentation of ritual crime was rare. In no case was there conclusive evidence of homicide in Virginia that could be causally linked to the influence of a spiritual belief system or interest in the occult. Crimes of vandalism, trespassing, and graffiti (those most frequently cited as possessing occult overtones) had the clearest link to occult influence. Even where these crimes were reported, follow-up investigations revealed that an occult influence was often suspected rather than proved.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 82

Results of the follow-up interviews indicated that ritual crime in Virginia, to the degree that it is found to exist, is limited primarily to individuals or very small groups (who might be characterized as dabblers) and consists of trespassing, graffiti, and other vandalism. Follow-up interviews exposed no evidence of any broad conspiracy of ritual crime. Local law enforcement agencies throughout the Commonwealth and experts within the Virginia State Police insisted that their investigations failed to uncover any organized network of crime that could be attributed to the influences of a spiritual belief system. Greater in-depth review of survey responses by members of the mental health field revealed ritual crime claims falling into the second group. Follow-up interviews of these respondents evidenced a substantively different body of information. Generally these claims involved information derived from clients, were anecdotal in nature, and lacked detail concerning dates and locations of alleged offenses. Additionally, they involved incidents that were years or decades old. The nature of such claims makes verification exceedingly difficult, if not impossible. It also suggests an aspect of this phenomenon that is fundamentally different from the more specific allegations provided by law enforcement and social service agencies and schools. Testimony On a number of occasions the task force received testimony involving allegations of ritual crime. Academics, law enforcement officers, and alleged victims came before the task force in public and private hearings (authorized by Section 9-134 of the Code of Virginia), the latter being necessitated both by concern associated with the safety of certain witnesses and the potentially sensitive nature of material relating to on-going criminal enterprises and investigations. Evidence received in such meetings mirrored the conflicting opinions and accounts encountered throughout the study. Disclosures by therapists and self-described victims of ritual crime included allegations of nationwide conspiracies (as described previously in this report). Alleged offenses included kidnapping, murder, and physical and emotional abuse, though witnesses were typically unable to provide specific details as to locations of events, dates on which they occurred, or names of victims other than themselves. Law enforcement officers (from the national, state, and local level) appearing before the task force challenged these claims. While some of these witnesses suggested the possibility of criminal activity between state lines, all rejected as untenable the existence of an organized crime network as pervasive as that being asserted. Citing the lack of physical evidence, missing persons, or other indications of the alleged crimes, these officers disputed the claims of criminal activity and therefore failed to reach the more specific issue of whether such alleged crime had occult influence as its origin. Therapists who claimed experience in treating victims of ritual crime offered contrasting positions on the veracity of a victim‟s testimony. While some expressed the conviction that much of this testimony was accurate, others noted that victims of abuse, as well as those suffering various emotional and psychological conditions, may assert such claims for numerous reasons. In its totality the testimony reaffirmed the need for separate discussion of concerns experienced by law enforcement personnel and those encountered by professionals in the field of mental health. The Mental Health Perspective Based upon the number of claims of ritual abuse emanating from therapists and their clients it is evident that significant concerns exist in this arena. The cumulative research (including interviews with and testimony of numerous licensed mental health practitioners) indicates Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 83

that issues relating to ritual crime in the mental health field possess their own unique series of problems. Because therapists are necessarily concerned with treatment issues, their initial response to clients who report ritual abuses is to seek a determination as to what effect this has had on the client. Ascertaining the validity of the reports may be important in treatment planning, but it is not the objective of the therapist to attain or compile evidence in support of a criminal investigation or prosecution. Indeed, attempts in that regard may tend to impede effective treatment. Where patients allege being subjected to abuse, claims of ritual crime take on a new focus, directed at the victim solely. This impacts directly in two ways. While the nature of inquiry differs, the ultimate objectives are also distinct. The mission of law enforcement is at odds with that of the therapist since, for the therapist, challenging a client‟s story may be inappropriate. It is imperative, however, for law enforcement to establish factual accuracy with regard to alleged criminal offenses. Additionally, the goal for addressing complaints directed to therapists varies from that sought by the criminal justice system. Law enforcement agencies exist to prevent, investigate, and prosecute crime. In the majority of cases the therapist is likely never to seek nor encounter the client‟s victimizer. Typically, only if the patient is the actual perpetrator of the crime will the therapist address this side of the equation. This dichotomy is of particular significance for those attempting to establish the true extent of ritual crime because claims involving the most serious and widespread offenses derive predominantly from the realm of mental health. Often these claims are never reported to law enforcement at all, or only after a therapist has elicited the information. But if the nature of therapists‟ work makes more difficult the verification of claims involving ritual crime, the concerns reflected by such claims remain just as real. Unfortunately, controversy regarding treatment of clients reporting ritual abuse is as intense among therapists as is the subject among the broader general population. Actually, mental health professionals who espouse any opinion about the ritual crime phenomenon tend to fall into one of the three earlier referenced categories. However, while these professionals point to many of the same factors as others in debate over the true extent of ritual crime, the discussion assumes a higher level of complexity. The causes and effects of victims‟ mental conditions, and their impact on claims of ritual crime, add fuel to the fire. The inquiry shifts readily from questions about the victim‟s veracity to issues concerning their beliefs. Just as the therapist‟s role contrasts with that of the law enforcer, so too is the patient‟s role incomparable to that of the average citizen reporting a crime. The patient is there for the specific purpose of seeking treatment and therefore properly views as unique communications within the doctor-patient relationship. These communications are neither directed to, nor intended for, an officer‟s ears. Further, the conditions for which the patient seeks help often affect his or her ability to perceive and process information, which in turn relates to the reliability of information relayed by such a patient. The credibility that a therapist attributes to a patient‟s claims of abuse will depend substantially on the pathology for which the patient is diagnosed. Manifestation of psychosis may evidence distortions of reality apparent on their face, either because they involve inaccuracies with which the therapist is personally familiar or because the reports follow an inherently illogical path. Many claims of ritual abuse appear to be so bizarre that psychosis is assumed. If objective testing does not indicate the presence of such psychosis, however, the therapist might well attribute greater potential credibility to a patient‟s claims of abuse.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 84

Other bases for questioning credibility of patients‟ accounts might include malingering patients or a factitious disorder. In these cases the patient will deliberately fabricate stories to serve an ulterior motive. Lack of sincerity on a patient‟s part makes uncovering discrepancies in the stories less difficult than is the case with other psychological conditions that involve more deeply imbedded memories or beliefs. Increasingly victims of abuse are being diagnosed with dissociative disorders. Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) in particular has come to be viewed as a common manifestation of severe abuse. Substantial debate remains, however, as to the prevalence of MPD. In cases of abuse, MPD would typically manifest itself as an adaptive ego defense mechanism. Alter egos are created to assume various roles in the individual‟s life. Borderline Personality Disorder, which traditionally has been heavily associated with victims of severe habitual abuse, has taken a back seat as a diagnosis in the offices of many therapists who are gaining increased knowledge and understanding of MPD. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition (DSMIII-R), revised in 1987, now recognizes MPD as the essential feature of certain dissociative disorders and as one response to severe abuse. Among mental health professionals, however, there are many who feel that some patients reporting abuse are being misdiagnosed as sufferers of MPD. That some therapists have a high concentration of clients diagnosed as MPD in their caseloads is beyond dispute. There are those who point to this fact as support for their hypothesis. On the other hand, therapists known as experts in dealing with MPD patients tend to receive referrals for these clients, so that they may be expected to have a disproportionate number of such patients. Continued publicity stressing the link between ritual abuse and MPD has popularized the notion that MPD is the result of ritual abuse. In fact, this has not been firmly established. A broadly accepted model, Kluft‟s Four-Factor Theory, suggests that the disorder results from the interrelation of various factors. Unfortunately the converse to the position has also been implied: that all MPD sufferers are in fact victims of ritual abuse. Yet this is only one of many traumas that may precipitate the disorder. Since the introduction of his theory, Kluft has published findings of MPD case studies covering a period of a decade and a half of that indicate that approximately one third of these patients reported ritual abuse (Kluft, 1988). He goes on to say that this third included many of the more complex cases. These findings suggest, however, that the majority of those suffering from MPD did not become so encumbered as the result of ritual abuse. Whether patients are properly diagnosed or not, a problem that may arise from the perception of these individuals as victims of abuse is the tendency to conclude that each such patient necessarily represents one more in a growing throng of ritual crime victims. This potential is enhanced as these diagnoses increase. But because not all MPD patients are victims of ritual abuse, and because there is good reason to question the veracity of the accounts of MPD patients, such a conclusion would be premature (pending other corroborating evidence). An essential component of MPD is the susceptibility to autohypnotic trance experiences. This susceptibility to trance aids therapists in the hypnosis that is often used in abreaction (a method used by therapists to elicit repressed emotions). A number of ramifications ensue from this proclivity toward trance states. Persons under hypnosis are more highly suggestible. Studies affirm that they are also more inclined to accept the accuracy of information that is obtained while in the hypnotic state. Because elements of fantasy are likely to exist to one degree or another in the evolution of the disorder, persons suffering from MPD may, with complete conviction, report events that either did not occur or were distorted by their perceptions.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 85

Also significant is the fact that most MPD patients who report ritual abuse state that they were the object of such abuse at a young age. The limited cognitive functions of young children permit manipulation by adults who may convince the child that a certain series of events occurred when in fact they were contrived (that is, the event in question appeared to be real when it was mere theatrics). Even innocent acts of adults may be distorted in the minds of children. Because adults who recount these childhood experiences view them through children‟s eyes their stories retain such distortions. This factor may help to explain certain accounts of ritual crime that, if accepted at face value, would be physically impossible. While the evidence in support of organized ritual crime is found almost exclusively within the mental health community (in the form of testimony from patients and therapists), there are many practitioners who reject the existence of such a broad-based criminal conspiracy but who do assert experience suggestive of more limited ritual crime. Much of the information in support of their opinions comes not from victims but from perpetrators of what is described as ritual crime. These crimes are most often property crimes of a relatively minor nature, consistent with the information obtained through surveying schools and law enforcement and social services agencies. Patients who report participation in illegal endeavors, and who also demonstrate interest in the occult, may cause therapists to jump to the conclusion that the delinquent acts involve ritual crime when in actuality the belief system plays no part in the criminal acts. There is some evidence, however, that troubled youth experience a disproportionate interest in socalled aberrant belief systems. Clinical studies indicate that youth who turn to occult beliefs reflective of socially ostracized value systems tend to exhibit antisocial behavior generally, and may be self-destructive. Selfesteem is likely to be abnormally low, suggesting the youth‟s attempt to gain greater power, acceptance, and confidence through his participation in the occult and groups who engage in associated practices. Also demonstrated was a high incidence of substance abuse among these individuals. Clinical evidence does not support the conclusion that either drug abuse or a general interest in the occult leads to ritual crime. The research does suggest the possibility that drug abuse and participation in aberrant belief systems can be symptomatic of psychological problems. There is no question that psychotic and sociopathic persons who engage in various atrocities involving loss of human life may be associated with belief systems that rationalize or explain their behavior. Such persons may fit the model of a “self-stylist” who integrates the concepts of other religions into a personal (and self-serving) belief system. In this case it is not a particular belief system that influences their behavior. Rather, the behavior is a result of the interaction between their illness and their personal belief system, and may itself affect that illness and belief system. Clearly there remains substantial debate within the field as to the extent to which ritual crimes occur. Some of this debate is attributable to the same definitional problems that generally plague this area of study. The ritual abuse often cited by therapists, for example, encompasses interfamilial generational abuse. The reason for its characterization as ritual abuse is sometimes due to the bizarre or habitual nature of it, despite the absence of a belief system and associated rituals. Characterization of such abuse as ritual is not incorrect per se. It may, however, convey false images to other professionals and to the public. And it could certainly ignite challenges to proffered statistics of ritual abuse. As greater understanding of physical and sexual abuse of children is gained, it is becoming ever more evident that the proclivity for such abuse is passed from parents to children, from one generation to the next. Thus, that generational abuse within families occurs seems unquestionable. This fact does not establish, nor necessarily make more likely, the existence of organized ritual abuse. The increasing publicity accorded ritual abuse claims, however, Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 86

heightens the likelihood that child abuse will be seen in this light. The added dimension of mental illness, which may lead to distortion of actual events, only aggravates the problem. Recognition of this reality does not require one to reject all claims of ritual abuse but should caution the need for objective evaluation of such claims based upon available facts. Fiscal Impact of Property Damage In attempting to assess the fiscal impact to the Commonwealth of property damage resulting from ritual crime, law enforcement agencies were requested to report the average dollar value of property damage for all ritual crimes investigated by their agency. (See Appendix A for survey results.) The subsequent review of data on ritual crimes provided by law enforcement agencies indicated that many of the incidents reported as ritual crime were not conclusively determined to be so. Consequently the level of property damage reflected by survey responses is somewhat inflated. To accurately reflect damage costs of established ritual crime incidents, the more serious crimes that are not demonstrated to be occult-related should be discounted. Estimates could then properly be limited primarily to cases involving acts of vandalism and graffiti. As such acts are conducted for the most part in or upon abandoned property, fiscal damage would be negligible. Because available data does not permit precise evaluation of property damage within such constraints, survey results are being relied upon to provide a general average figure for damage costs per incident. In a very few cases disproportionately high damage costs were reported, raising the overall average. In most cases the value of damage to property was relatively small. The single figure reported most often was 50 dollars per incident. By far, the greatest number of respondents reported damages as being 200 dollars or less per alleged incident of ritually related crimes against property.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 87

Figure 4 Average dollar value of property damage (See Appendix)

Experiences of Other States Though allegations of ritual crime have been pursued vigorously on the national level and within many states, few states have attempted to systematically assess the actual level of such activity within their jurisdictions. Anecdotal reports of ritual crime appear widely and with some regularity but are accompanied by very little quantitative analysis. California‟s Office of Criminal Justice Planning produced a research effort which is largely descriptive of ritual crime and which presents the various perspectives on it. Their conclusions are that while each of the perspectives may share some truth, they are frequently dominated by “fears, emotion, spiritual beliefs and hearsay” (Office of Criminal Justice Planning, 198990). The Michigan State Police conducted a comprehensive survey of all law enforcement agencies in the state. The survey “broadly defined occult” and requested information relating to any of Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 88

a number of crimes against property and persons. The report concluded that no causal link could be established between occult practices and offenses of homicide or suicide. Consistent with results of the surveys by this task force, the crimes most frequently reported were graffiti and vandalism, while animal mutilations were also frequently reported. Because follow-up interviews were conducted only in cases involving deaths the authors declined to offer a position on the validity of other reports in terms of occult influence. The largest survey to date was recently conducted by the Child Abuse Research Project at the University of Buffalo with the aid of a federal grant. This survey was comprehensive in its geographical scope, covering numerous agencies throughout the nation. It also generated a substantial quantity of information, though its subject matter was limited to crimes against children. The Research Project is in the process of compiling its data and will publish findings within the year. The limited reliable information presently available fails to substantiate any significant incidence of ritual crime in the United States. However, because the available figures are so limited, this information cannot disprove the existence of ritual crime. Some few states have sought to control ritualistic practices through statutory enactments. Criminal laws passed in Idaho, Louisiana, Texas, and Illinois enhance penalties for engaging in specific forms of abuse, mutilation, and cannibalism during ceremonies or in a ritualistic manner as defined by statute, but have had little success in convictions heretofore. The acts proscribed in these statutes are criminal in nature, independent of the ritual element. No state presently possesses a statute that criminalizes conduct premised solely on its ceremonial nature. Legislative memoranda and reports from a number of states detail research that emphasizes the constitutional prohibition against doing so. Analysis Interest in the occult in certain segments of the population, particularly among youth, has become apparent in recent years with the increasing cries of concern about such involvement. Whether this interest is on the rise or whether the prominent attention focused upon it has created greater awareness of such interest is not clear. It is likely that media stories focusing on occult involvement have actually spurred curiosity about occult topics, though this media attention may simply reflect the increased interest. Among young people who do develop some interest in unconventional belief systems the vast majority are “dabblers” who will abandon this fascination in relatively short order. For some it is an innocent diversion; for others it may represent adolescent rebellion. Some few, however, immerse themselves in concepts and value systems that appear to parents to be unhealthy or even dangerous. Insofar as belief systems represent values that run contrary to social norms, they will be looked upon by many with substantial disapproval. Likewise, minority religions by their nature clash with established notions of acceptable worship. When activity that threatens the physical welfare and safety of society is tied to one or more particular belief systems apprehension is inevitable. Much of the examination of ritual crime among writers and lecturers today has as its basis an evaluation of belief systems in terms of their “deviance.” Unfortunately, the standard that is applied for such evaluation is often a subjective one. Challenges to foreign or distasteful ideas are premised in vague assertions of threats that may be unproved or altogether groundless. Because the judgment of another‟s spiritual beliefs is generally anathema to a fundamental proposition on which our society rests, and which has long been established as a pillar of both federal and state constitutions, charges of this nature must be carefully scrutinized for

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 89

substance. Criminal law proscribes conduct; a careful line must be drawn between regulation of behavior and the restriction of beliefs. Certain well-publicized cases of violent crimes, such as those committed by Sean Sellers (who attributed his actions to a belief in Satan) and the Matamoros murders (described by many as satanic sacrifices but in fact were related to an Afro-Caribbean syncretic belief system), are oft-cited examples of the dangers that specific belief systems represent to society. Such belief systems, however, are those of the perpetrators of these heinous offenses, and are personal to them. These are self-stylists who often suffer severe mental illness and who invariably rely upon values that are unrepresentative of established belief systems. Thus, the individual, who happens to claim some allegiance to one or another religion, is actually acting upon personal desires and goals. Regardless of the motive, available evidence suggests that these cases are aberrations. Crimes of this nature are relatively rare and appear to be perpetrated by individuals or small groups acting on their own initiative. Media reports of these crimes often relate incomplete or inaccurate information and cause some people to look for ritual crime where it doesn‟t exist. Even trained professionals may categorize a crime as ritually related without sufficient evidence to support this interpretation. The types of symbols and paraphernalia that are customarily relied upon as evidence of ritual crime represent different things to different people and certainly are not always indicative of unique belief systems. Because of the hyperbole and hysteria, as well as an undue emphasis on belief systems as agents of crime, investigation into ritual crime is often sidetracked, and objective and effective analysis is defeated. Rather than attacking ritual crime based upon presumptions about certain belief systems, effective crime prevention necessitates aggressive action against practices (ritual or otherwise) that have conclusively proved to be criminal in nature or effect. Because mental health professionals are so frequently confronted with claims of ritual crime the potential for being affected by preconceived notions is especially acute. As with other professionals, therapists may accept claims of ritual crime where unwarranted because other elements of the claims are more easily validated. The fact that abuse has occurred does not necessarily confirm allegations of ritual abuse. For treatment purposes this distinction may not be relevant. Indeed it may be important to minimize the distinction in treatment sessions between patient and therapist. But allegations of ritual crime (particularly when evidence fails to support the allegations) can diminish a victim‟s credibility and may discourage a criminal investigation or prosecution where one is appropriate. The differing roles of law enforcement and therapy take on special significance in this regard. Ultimately, continued research in the mental health field may permit a better understanding of how ritual abuse affects victims psychologically and what treatment means are most effective. The apparent link between drug abuse, mental illness, and ritual crime demonstrates the importance of treatment issues. The debate within the mental health community regarding the viability of ritual abuse claims, however, need not influence law enforcement officials in the effective performance of their duties. Investigators should not permit wild accusations to distract them from this objective. At the same time, counselors claiming knowledge of ritual crime, whether they work in social services, schools, or the private sector, as well as alleged victims of ritual abuse, should not be ignored. On the contrary, ritual crime investigations heretofore evidence the need for cooperation among these populations. The role of the state should be to encourage a cooperative effort and to continue to educate people on ritual crime. Successful eradication of ritual crime rests with effective enforcement of existing criminal statutes. To the degree that organized crime exists, concentration on spiritual belief systems as a motivation only diverts resources that could more properly be Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 90

used for deterring such crime. This is particularly true with regard to young people who band together for commission of crimes. Groups of this nature should elicit a response based upon recent efforts and experience in dealing with youth gangs. Debate about the extent and nature of ritual crime is bound to persist. It is hoped that the work of this task force will provide an enhanced basis for evaluating these questions while offering constructive suggestions for resolving problems that they represent. Findings Misconceptions about ritual crime are pervasive. Among the general population and professionals who are in a position to come into contact with perpetrators or victims of ritual crime, there are many inconsistent beliefs and impressions. Misinformation about the values, goals, and activities of various minority belief systems is common and has significant impact on popular perceptions regarding ritual crime Evidence is insufficient to establish the existence of any major conspiracy or organized criminal network based upon an occult or spiritual belief system. The cumulative evidence, derived from a comprehensive investigation of ritual crime in the Commonwealth of Virginia, has not uncovered or indicated any network of ritual crime. Unpopular belief systems are erroneously associated with criminal behavior. Where indicia of unconventional, and particularly less popular, belief systems are uncovered in the possession of one who is accused of a criminal act, this is frequently cited as evidence of ritual crime. More often than not, no direct link is shown to exist between the beliefs and the crime. This reaction results in characterization of certain criminal acts as occult-based when in fact they are not. Criminal activity that might reasonably be associated with belief systems consists primarily of minor property crimes and is committed largely by “dabblers.” In the vast majority of cases where the available evidence is sufficient to establish some link between criminal behavior and a spiritual belief system, the crimes consist of trespassing, graffiti, and vandalism. Generally these crimes are relatively minor and are perpetrated on or against abandoned property, this resulting in low damage costs. Such evidence does not conclusively disprove the existence of more serious crime. Existing criminal statutes in Virginia are adequate to address dangerous conduct that may result from participation in unconventional belief systems. Dangerous activities that are alleged to be associated with or motivated by spiritual belief systems are prohibited by existing criminal statutes in the Commonwealth. Amendment to the criminal code in response to ritual crime is therefore unnecessary. The ritual crime phenomenon has its greatest overt impact in the field of mental health. Whether true or not, there are numerous allegations of ritual crime that evidence real suffering. Many claims of ritual crime apparently have as their basis real, and often severe, abuse (whether ritually related or otherwise). Regardless of the veracity of patients claiming ritual abuse, therapists should be sensitive to such claims while approaching treatment with an objective stance. Recommendations In the interest of addressing widespread concerns regarding the possible dangers of ritualistic crime the task force offers the following recommendations. These recommendations are intended to reflect a rational approach to a real concern. Where hysteria or fanaticism is Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 91

interjected, however, the recommended actions tend to defeat the interests of law enforcement agencies, schools, therapists, and society in general. Recommendation: That the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services develop a model curriculum addressing ritual crime for Virginia’s law enforcement officers. DCJS should develop a standard curriculum in aid of law enforcement officers that could be utilized on a statewide basis to enhance awareness of ritualistic crime and to suggest appropriate responses to it. This would provide a uniform source of information in lieu of the multitude of diverse, often conflicting, and sometimes irrelevant information disseminated by training courses and seminars given throughout the state by numerous organizations and interest groups. Assistance of Crime Commission staff in development of this curriculum should be sought where practical and necessary. Appropriate subjects to be addressed include: *

Constitutional prerogatives relating to the right to assemble and to engage in the peaceful practice of religious beliefs where such beliefs do not abridge neutral criminal statutes.

*

Sections within Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia that address commonly alleged ritual crimes but with which many law enforcement officers may be unfamiliar. (Examples include sections 18.2-403.1(1), 18.2-403.2(3), 3.1-796.113, 3.1-796.122, 18.2-97, 18.2125, 18.2-126, 18.2-127, 18.2-138, 18.2-144, 18.2-323.)

*

The need to maintain normal techniques and standards in the investigation and prosecution of allegations involving ritual crime.

*

The type of specific evidence at crime scenes that may suggest ritual activity.

Recommendation: That the Crime Commission’s continued research on youth gangs be tracked and reviewed for findings and ultimate recommendations. The forming of gangs by young people for purposes of pursuing criminal objectives needs to be addressed in unique fashion. The on-going study on youth gang activity by the Crime Commission should yield recommendations that are equally applicable to criminal behavior by all youth gangs regardless of the motivating philosophy or belief system. Recommendation: That the Virginia Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services coordinate continued research efforts relating to the ramifications of ritual abuse in the mental health field. Continued research into the relationships between psychological illness and participation in dangerous ritualistic practices should be encouraged. The limited clinical research findings presently available, while not substantiating causal links, have established factors that appear to be associated with dangerous practices and that may aid in the treatment of individuals who fall prey to these activities. Such research should focus on development of a clearer understanding of perpetrators of ritualistic practices, evidence of treatable psychological illness (including Multiple Personality Disorder and related conditions), and the roles that various agencies may assume in practical intervention. The Virginia Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services should assume a leading role in coordinating this continued study of the causes, effects, and treatment of ritual abuse. Recommendation: That law enforcement personnel act in cooperation with appropriate agencies in the investigation and prosecution of claims involving ritual abuse of persons. As in any case involving allegations of abuse against children, law enforcement interaction with state and local agencies is necessary. In cases of systematic or on-going abuse effective prosecution demands a cooperative relationship between investigators on the one hand and

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 92

school officials and social services agencies on the other. Jurisdictions having success with prosecutions emphasize this as among the most significant factors in such success. Recommendation: That school personnel and social service workers be provided objective and accurate information on ritual crime. The greatest problem reported by employees in social services and schools who work with young people on a regular basis is the lack of accurate information on ritual crime. Objective information, consistent with the findings of this report, should be made available to persons who deal with youth and are concerned about potential involvement in dangerous cults. The Virginia Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services is the appropriate agency for dissemination of such information. Recommendation: That the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services establish a definitional standard and review development of a separate reporting category for ritual crime. While law enforcement personnel in Virginia (including those officers who are responsible for investigating these types of crimes) oppose implementation of a separate reporting category for ritual crime at present, DCJS should define a standard for crimes that might fall into this category and review the potential usefulness of separate reporting in the future.

References The following list provides citations for sources referenced in the course of this study, including those that were of particular relevance, and those most often cited in the field. News accounts are excluded. Aquino, M. (1989). The church of Satan, 2nd edition. P.O. Box 210082, San Francisco, CA 94121. Bainbridge, W.S. (1978). Satan’s power: A deviant psychotherapy cult. Berkeley: University of California Press. Banner, P.B. (1990). Satanism and overreaction: A volatile mix. All Points Bulletin, 1(1). Barry, R.J. (1987). “Satanism”: The law enforcement response. The National Sheriff, XXXVII(1): 38-42. Bourget, D., Gagnon, A., & Bradford, J.M.W. (1988). Satanism in a psychiatric adolescent population. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 33: 197-202. Braun, B.G., Goodwin, J., Gould, C., Hammond, D.C., Kluft, R.P., Sachs, R., Summit, R.C., & Young, W.C. Ritual child abuse: A professional overview. Video, Cavalcade Productions, 7360 Potter Valley Road, Ukiah, CA 95482. Brown, E.F., & Hendee, W.R. (1989). Adolescents and their music: Insight into the health of adolescents. Journal of the American Medical Association, 262(12): 1659-1663. California Office of Criminal Justice Planning. (1989-90). Occult crime: A law enforcement primer. Special Edition, Vol. 1, No. 6. Carlson, S., & Larue, G. (1989). CSER: Satanism in America. Buffalo, NY. Finkelhor, D., Williams, L., & Burns, N. (1988). Sexual abuse in daycare: A national study. Durham, NH: University of New Hampshire. Ganaway, G.K., M.D. (1989). Historical versus narrative truth: Clarifying the role of exogenous trauma in the etiology of MPD and its variants. Dissociation, Vol. II, No. 4. Griffis, D.W. (1985). A law enforcement primer on cults. Tiffin, OH: Dale W. Griffis. Gould, C. (1987). Satanic ritualistic abuse: Child victims, adult survivors, system response. California Psychologist, 22(3), 1. Hicks, R.D. (1991). In pursuit of Satan: The police and the occult. New York: Prometheus. Johnston, J. (1989). The edge of evil. World Publishing.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 93

Jorgensen, D.L., & Jorgensen, L. (1982). Social means of the occult. The Sociologist Quarterly, 23: 373-389. Kahaner, L. (1988). Cults that kill. New York: Warner Books. Kelley, S.J. (1988). Ritualistic abuse of children: Dynamics and impact. Cultic Studies Journal, 5(2): 228-236. Kluft, R.P. (1985). Childhood antecedents of multiple personality. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press. Kluft, R.P. (1988). The phenomenology and treatment of extremely complex Multiple Personality Disorder. Dissociation, Vol. I, No. 4: December. Landers, S. (1988). Sex, drugs-n-rock: Relation not casual. American Psychological Association Monitor, 19(7). Langone, M.D., & Blood, L.O. (1990). Satanism and occult-related violence: What you should know. American Family Foundation, P.O. Box 336, Weston, MA 02193. Lanning, K. (1989). Child sex rings: A behavioral analysis. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Los Angeles County Commission for Women. (1989). Ritual abuse: Report of the Ritual Abuse Task Force. Lyons, A. (1988). Satan wants you: The cult of devil worship in America. New York: Mysterious Press. Michigan State Police, Investigative Service Bureau, Investigative Resources Unit. (1990). Occult survey. Moody, E.J. (1974). Magical therapy: An anthropological investigation of contemporary Satanism. In I. Zaretsky & M. Leone (Eds.), Religious movements in contemporary America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Olsson, P.A., M.D. Adolescent involvement with the supernatural and cults: Some psychoanalytic considerations. Prinsky, L.E., & Rosenbaum, J.L. (1987). “Leerics” or lyrics: Teenage impression of rock-nroll. Youth and Society, 18(4): 384-397. Richardson, J.T., Best, J., & Bromley, D. (1991). The Satanism scare. Hawthorn Books. Story, D.W. (1989). Ritualistic crime: More awareness training needed. Law and Order, 37(6): 56. Tennant-Clark, C.M., Fritz, J., & Beauvois, F. (1989). Occult participation: Its impact on adolescent development. Adolescence, 24(96): 757-772. Terry, M. (1987). The ultimate evil. New York: Doubleday. Thorne, S.B., & Himelstein, P. (1984). The role of suggestion in the perception of satanic messages in rock-and-roll recordings. The Journal of Psychology, 116: 245-248. Trostle, L.C. (1987). The stoners: Drugs, demons and delinquency: A descriptive and empirical analysis of delinquent behavior. Dissertation Abstracts International, (DA 8619089). Truzzi, M. (1974). Towards a sociology of the occult: Notes on modern witchcraft. In I. Zaretsky & M. Leone (Eds.), Religious movements in contemporary America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Vokey, J.R., & Read, J.D. (1985). Subliminal messages: Between the devil and the media. American Psychological Association, Inc., 40(11): 1231-1239. Warnke, M. (1972). The Satan seller. NJ: Logos International. Wedge, T.W., & Powers, R.L. (1988). The Satan hunter. OH: Daring Books. Wheeler, B.R., & Hutch, R.J. (in press). Psychopathology of adolescents involved in Satanism. Social Casework. Wheeler, B.R., Wood, S., & Hutch, R.J. (1988). Assessment and intervention with adolescents involved in Satanism. Journal of Social Work, 33(6): 547-550.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 94

Appendix A: Survey Results Law Enforcement Survey Responses Of 261 surveys disseminated by the Virginia State Crime Commission to law enforcement agencies in Virginia, 164 were completed and returned. The information provided below represents a compilation of these responses. Because not all responses were quantifiable, some survey questions may not be reflected here. Table 1 Number of law enforcement agencies receiving reports of ritual activity

Frequency of reports

During the past year

During the past five years

None

93

72

1-5

53

51

6-10

11

17

11-15

1

10

16-25

3

7

Over 25

3

7

No involvement

93

72

Some involvement

71

92

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 95

Table 2 Law enforcement determination of report’s actual link to ritual activity

Status of report

Percentage of total reports

Report was linked to ritual activity

34.92%

Activity had alternative motive

16.53%

Motive of alleged activity unclear

48.55%

Table 3 Number of reports, distributed between property crimes and crimes against persons Frequency of reports

Agencies reporting crimes against

Agencies reporting crimes against property

persons None

130

79

1-5

31

53

6-10

2

14

11-15

1

7

16-25

0

6

Over 25

0

5

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 96

Table 4 Distribution of reports (over types of crimes) of crimes against persons Crime category

Number of agencies reporting

Sexual abuse

13

Other physical abuse

12

Homicide

3

Suicide

8

Kidnapping

4

Other

6

Table 5 Table 5 Distribution of reports (over types of crime) of other crimes Crime category

Number of agencies reporting

Graffiti

73

Vandalism

70

Arson

14

Grave desecration

33

Animal mutilation

38

Trespassing

50

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 97

Table 6 Agencies reporting officers’ attendance at professional workshops/seminars on ritual crime Workshop participation

Number of agencies reporting

None

52

Some

96

Table 7 Agencies reporting special policies addressing complaints associated with ritual crimes Special policies

Number of agencies reporting

None

127

Some

22

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 98

Table 8 Survey respondents’ reports of ritual crime broken down by region during one-year period* Region

Number of agencies reporting ritual crime

Number of agencies reporting no ritual crime

Henrico

11

18

Culpeper

7

10

Appomattox

6

12

Wythe

14

21

Chesapeake

12

13

Roanoke

12

12

8

3

Fairfax

* Regions are based on the Virginia State Police regional system.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 99

Table 9 Survey respondents’ reports of ritual crime broken down by region during five-year period* Region

Number of agencies reporting ritual crime

Number of agencies reporting no ritual crime

Henrico

15

14

Culpeper

11

6

Appomattox

10

8

Wythe

18

17

Chesapeake

13

12

Roanoke

15

9

9

2

Fairfax

* Regions are based on the Virginia State Police regional system.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 100

School Division Survey Responses Of 145 surveys disseminated by the Virginia State Crime Commission to public school divisions in Virginia, 135 were completed and returned. The information provided below represents a compilation of those responses. Because not all responses were quantifiable, some survey questions may not be reflected here. Table 1 Number of school divisions reporting incidents of ritual activity

During the past year

During past five years

None

121

108

1-5

14

23

6-10

0

4

11-15

0

0

16-25

0

0

Over 25

0

0

121

108

14

27

Frequency of reports

No involvement Some involvement

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 101

Table 2 School officials’ determination of incident’s actual link to ritual activity

Status of individual

Percentage of total reports

Alleged perpetrators

84%

Adjudicated perpetrators Victims

5% 17%

Both*

4%

* Denotes individuals who were subjected to but also perpetrated ritual crime. Percentages exceed 100 since some respondents reported in more than one category. Table 3 Number of reports, distributed between property crimes and crimes against persons

Frequency of reports

Divisions reporting crimes against persons

Divisions reporting crimes against property

None

30

29

1-5

0

1

6-10

0

0

11-15

0

0

16-25

0

0

Over 25

0

0

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 102

Table 4 Distribution of reports (over types of crime) of crimes against persons

Crime category

Number of divisions reporting

Sexual abuse

4

Other physical abuse

4

Homicide

0

Suicide

3

Kidnapping

0

Other

3

Table 5 Distribution of reports (over types of crime) of other crimes

Crime category

Number of divisions reporting

Trespassing, graffiti, vandalism

15

Arson

1

Defacing church sites/graves

8

Animal mutilation

8

Theft

3

Other

3

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 103

Table 6 School response to incidents of ritual activity*

Response

Number of divisions reporting

Contacted parents

19

Contacted juvenile court or agency

13

Contacted law enforcement

18

Provided counseling

14

Suspended student(s)

10

Other

3

* Note that respondents frequently reported in two or more response categories.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 104

Table 7 Survey respondents’ reports of ritual crime broken down by region during one-year period*

Region

Number of divisions reporting ritual crime

Number of divisions reporting no ritual crime

Henrico

2

20

Culpeper

0

13

Appomattox

2

18

Wythe

3

10

Chesapeake

3

18

Roanoke

3

17

Fairfax

1

7

* Regions are based on Virginia State Police regional system.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 105

Table 8 Survey respondents’ reports of ritual crime broken down by region during five-year period*

Region

Number of divisions reporting ritual crime

Number of divisions reporting no ritual crime

Henrico

4

18

Culpeper

2

11

Appomattox

7

13

Wythe

3

10

Chesapeake

4

17

Roanoke

5

15

Fairfax

2

6

* Regions are based on Virginia State Police regional system.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 106

Mental Health Survey Responses Of 155 surveys disseminated by the Virginia State Crime Commission to licensed mental health professionals in Virginia, 62 were returned. The information provided below represents a compilation of those responses. Because not all responses were quantifiable, some survey questions may not be reflected here. Table 1 Number of mental health professionals receiving reports of ritual activity

Frequency of reports

During the past year

During past five years

None

46

41

1-5

13

18

6-10

3

1

11-15

0

2

16-25

0

0

Over 25

0

0

No involvement

46

41

Some involvement

16

21

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 107

Table 2 Status of individuals involved in the ritual activity Status

Number of professionals reporting

Adult perpetrators

6

Adult victims

7

Both (adult) perpetrators and victims

2

Juvenile perpetrators

7

Juvenile victims

11

Both (juvenile) perpetrators and victims

6

Table 3 Number of reports, distributed between property crimes and crimes against persons

Professionals

reports

Professionals reporting crimes against persons

Less than 5

21

22

6-10

0

0

11-15

0

0

Over 15

0

0

Frequency of

reporting crimes against property

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 108

Table 4 Distribution of reports of crimes against persons Crime category

Number of professionals reporting

Sexual abuse

13

Other physical abuse

7

Homicide

4

Suicide

1

Kidnapping

2

Other

6

Table 5 Distribution of reports of other crimes

Crime category

Number of professionals reporting

Trespassing, graffiti, vandalism

10

Arson

1

Defacement of churches/graves

3

Animal mutilation

8

Theft

2

Other

4

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 109

Table 6 Professionals’ responses to incidents of ritual activity* Response

Number of professionals reporting

Contacted parents

7

Contacted law enforcement

4

Provided counseling

16

Other

5

* Note that respondents frequently reported in two or more response categories. Appendix B Members of the Virginia State Crime Commission 1991 From the Senate of Virginia Elmon T. Gray, Chairman Howard P. Anderson Elmo G. Cross, Jr. From The House of Delegates James F. Almand Robert B. Ball, Sr., Vice Chairman V. Thomas Forehand, Jr. Raymond R. Guest, Jr. A. L. Philpott Clifton A. Woodrum Appointments by the Governor Robert C. Bobb Robert F. Horan, Jr. Rev. George F. Ricketts, Sr. Attorney General’s Office H. Lane Kneedler Appendix C Ritual Crime Task Force Membership Crime Commission Members Robert C. Bobb, Richmond City Manager, Chmn. Senator Elmon T. Gray, Sussex Delegate Raymond R. Guest, Jr., Front Royal H. Lane Kneedler, Attorney General‟s Office Speaker A.L. Philpott, Bassett Rev. George F. Ricketts, Sr., Richmond Delegate James F. Almand, Arlington

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 110

Appointed by the Speaker of the House Delegate Robert Tata, Virginia Beach Appointed by Senate P&E Committee Senator Elliot S. Schewel, Lynchburg Appointed by the Crime Commission Leonard G. Holmes, Ph.D. Michael L. Wade, M.S. Janet I. Warren, D.S.W. Isaac K. Wood, M.D. Staff Ritual Crime Task Force Research Staff Michael P. Maddox, Staff Attorney, Lead Researcher D. Robie Ingram, Staff Attorney Susan A. Bass, Research Analyst Rod Belcher, Intern Virginia State Crime Commission Staff Frederick L. Russell, Executive Director Dana G. Schrad, Staff Attorney Sylvia A. Coggins, Executive Assistant Gina L. Ford, Secretary Katie Vawter, Intern Acknowledgments The following individuals offered substantial assistance to the Crime Commission Task Force investigating ritual crime. Numerous other persons also offered advice, expertise, and personal knowledge throughout the task force‟s study, such that not all contributors were able to be listed here. The contents of this report may not represent the view of all those listed below, but do reflect the time and efforts of such persons. The task force sincerely appreciates the contributions of all those who willingly gave time and exhibited the courage and commitment to make this a thorough and exhaustive study. American Family Foundation Dr. Michael D. Langone, Executive Director City of Hamptom Police Department Detective Jon Decker City of Richmond Police Department Detective B.C. Robertson, Jr. City of Virginia Beach Police Department Detective Don Rimer Coalition for Religious Freedom Daniel C. Holdgreiwe, Director Crater Criminal Justice Academy Boyd G. Griggs, Director Federal Bureau of Investigations Special Agent Kenneth Lanning Office of the City Manager, City of Richmond Joyce Smith Wilson Patricia Pulling Kathy K. Snowden Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 111

Town of Vienna Police Department Sergeant Douglas H. Comfort Virginia Commonwealth University Dr. David G. Bromley Dianna Gay Cutchin Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services Stephen E. Squire Virginia House of Delegates, Computer Operations Sharon Crouch, Systems Director Darryl Bareford Marcia Goodwin Jacquelyn Johnson Tim Knappenberger Mary Elizabeth Pemberton Virginia State Police Detective Carl Deavers Detective John Polak Virginia State Sheriffs‟ Association John W. Jones, Executive Director Brenda J. Wagner *************** Michael P. Maddox is a staff attorney at the Virginia State Crime Commission, General Assembly Building, 910 Capitol Street, Suite 915, Richmond, VA 23219. This report is reprinted with permission. This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8, Number 2, pages 191-250. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 112

Book Reviews Tu eres el amor de Dios (You Are The Love of God). Alfredo Silletta. Puntosur, Buenos Aires, 1990. 133 pages. This is a concise collection of eight vignettes describing a few days in the life of a religious sect called Jovenes del Amor en Cristo. The book deals with how the life and teaching of this sect affect those involved and their loved ones. The story follows Andres, a 25-year-old newspaper reporter who is working undercover to learn about the group, and Natalia, an attractive young woman who has run away from home. Both Andres and Natalia join a group of about 30 youngsters who are visiting with the sect for the first time. On their first day at the sect‟s farm, the visitors are greeted by sect members in a room covered with pictures of Padre Sam and Mick Jagger. Music by the Rolling Stones and wine flow freely. At this time the visitors have an opportunity to learn about the group and to tell their own stories. The dialogue reveals typical family problems, such as divorce, from which they have escaped. The young people spend a few days with the group. The men and women sleep in separate rooms; they awake early to cold showers before setting out to accompany members to sell flowers or proselytize. They also have meetings with the group‟s leader, Hermano Lucas, who briefs them on the history of the group and gives them his interpretation of the Bible. The visitors‟ routine also includes therapy sessions, such as the so-called "Celestial," in which the young people enter a padded room after being blindfolded and undressed. Here they alternate between inhaling drugs to get closer to God, reading sensual materials, and listening to music by the Stones and Laurie Anderson. There is some sexual contact among the members. Other therapies that follow in later days last more than three hours and have similar formats and results. For visitors who decide to join the group, such as Natalia, the therapy requires them to fast for 72 hours, while isolated in a room, exposed to pictures, recordings, and the group‟s literature, all the while taking drugs. The group‟s paraphernalia explains that prostituting oneself is equal to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross and, through prostitution, the group will increase its power. The book gradually reveals that Lucas successfully blackmails influential politicians who learn to tolerate the group‟s practices in exchange for not having their sexual behavior with girls from the sect exposed. Natalia‟s preparation ends after three days when she is officially accepted into the group as a new member. From that point on she provides sexual favors to please both Lucas‟s demands and the corrupted politicians‟ desires until -- and due to a twist of events -- losing her place of preference in the group and her own life. Andres, in the meantime, manages to uncover the group‟s corruption, although not early enough to prevent Hermano Lucas‟s successful escape abroad. The structure of the narration into vignettes gives the reader a rapid and concise view of what it is like to be among the members of this sect. Tu eres el amor de Dios could easily be read as a diary written by Andres or any other person who enters this scenario with a touch of skepticism instead of thirst for the ultimate answer to the problems of humanity. The succession of vignettes and their content, moreover, make this one of those fascinating and intriguing books that the reader will not put down before reading it all. Gladys Martin. Berea, Ohio

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 113

Monkey on a Stick. John Hubner & Lindsey Gruson. Penguin, New York, 1990, 462 pages. Who are the real Hare Krishnas? Robed zealots with shaved heads, jumping and chanting to the sound of cymbals. Sincere disciples of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, one of the new religions, persecuted by bigots and anti-cult zealots. Pioneers in fusing Eastern and Western religions, a critical event of the mid-twentieth century. Gentle, saintly men and women dedicated to serving Krishna, living simply and joyfully, abjuring worldly goods and profit with compassion for all creatures. Tens of thousands of devotees engaged in a multimillion-dollar enterprise with over 200 temples and farms in 60 countries. Brainwashed zombies who hustle in airports and shopping malls. Former stoned-out hippies, street people, and college dropouts rescued from personal disintegration. Or, under the religious facade, a spawn of murderers, madmen, child abusers, white slavers, drug users and pushers, arms runners, cyclists, thieves, ex-cons, scam artists, embezzlers, rapists, and exploiters. This latter image is the primary focus of Monkey on a Stick. The 462page paperback is a novelized documentary, a crime thriller about sickening abuses; its pornographic dialogue would offend Jesse Helms. Using hundreds of taped interviews, depositions, and newspaper stories, Hubner and Gruson have assembled a series of vivid, shocking personal portraits to illustrate the fable of the monkey on a stick. On Indian banana plantations, when a monkey is captured stealing fruit, farmers impale the animal on a stick, leaving it to rot as a warning to other monkeys. Thomas Drescher, a devotee of the New Vrindaban temple in West Virginia, murdered Chuck St. Denis, a fringie and pot dealer (the monkey), for alleged rape. The New Vrindaban temple was founded by Keith Ham, now known as Kirtinananda, a disciple of Prabhupada. Prabhupada, an Indian guru who came to the Bowery in 1965 and developed ISKCON as a religious movement, taught his followers: Chant and obey the Krishna principles, principles rooted in Hinduism and the Gita. Krishna, he told them, is God. ISKCON appealed to seekers around the world and flourished. However, when Prabhupada died at age 82 in 1977, Kirtinananda and 10 other gurus were unable to collaborate and abuses multiplied. Sergeant Tom Westfall of the Marshall County, West Virginia, police has collected evidence about devotees at the New Vrindaban temple near Moundsville for more than 20 years: arson, theft, child abuse, drugs, confidence games; children drowned, suffocated, and neglected; women raped, beaten, and humiliated. Sri Galima, former headmaster of boys guru, was wanted by the police for sexually molesting his students. Steve Bryant challenged Kirtinananda and sought to expose his illegal activities; he was murdered in 1986. Thomas Meyers disappeared in 1980. Todd Schenker was murdered in 1988. (All monkeys!) In Germany, guru Hansadutta was accused by the police of collecting 4,000,000 Deutsch marks "for charity" but keeping all for the temple. Guru Kripa, president of ISKCON's Tokyo temple, and his team of devotees stole watches from jewelry stores. In New York, Advaita was busted at JFK airport for smuggling hashish oil. In California a group of ex-cons who sold heroin for Krishna was convicted and jailed. When Hansadutta became president of the Berkeley temple, the self-styled secretary of God, involved with rock-and-roll scams and guns, was frequently arrested for bizarre public behaviors; eventually he entered a drug program. Finally, guru Ravindra (William Deadwyler, Ph.D. in religious studies from Temple University), president of the Philadelphia temple, organized a reform movement. Kirtinananda and Hansadutta were among those expelled. (At the time the book ended, Hansadutta ran a trailer court and Kirtinananda's New Vrindaban continued to be a tourist attraction and to grow prize-winning roses.) Although the corpus of the book reads like an X-rated thriller, Hubner and Gruson substantiate their tale with photographs and detailed notes. They do not consider in depth Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 114

such issues as how the Krishnas convert their followers, the psychological effects of endless chanting, parallels with other new religions which have also strayed from sanctity to savagery, and why ISKCON appeals to certain mainstream theologians, civil libertarians, psychiatrists, and sociologists. The authors remark on the discrepancy between doctrine and practice and the evil of unrestrained religious power. However, they fail to consider carefully some of the true evils of that doctrine, for instance, the paranoid belief that outsiders, karmis, are demons or that transcendental trickery, or any act however destructive, is justified in the name of Lord Krishna. They are sympathetic, perhaps naively, to the reform gurus and to the many sincere devotees. The squeamish may wish to skip Monkey on a Stick. This is much more than a book for thrill seekers, however. For a diverse audience -- teenagers, college-age religious seekers, civil libertarians, theologians intrigued by Eastern religion, social scientists, police officers, and anti-cultists -- there are major messages. Finally, as I write this review in the summer of 1991, according to The Cult Observer (Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991), The leader of the Hare Krishna spin-off community in West Virginia was convicted in late March of authorizing murder, kidnapping, and beating of devotees to protect an illegal, multimillion-dollar enterprise ... A jury found Kirtinananda Swami Bhaktipada, 53, guilty of mail fraud and racketeering, including being part of a conspiracy to murder fringe member Charles St. Denis in 1983. Bhaktipada faces a maximum of 90 years in prison and more than $76 million in fines ... Bhaktipada lieutenant Jerry Sheldon was convicted of racketeering and mail fraud, while Steve Fitzpatrick, another lieutenant, was convicted of mail fraud. Arthur A. Dole, Professor Emeritus Psychology in Education Division Graduate School of Education University of Pennsylvania

Exit Counseling: A Family Intervention. Carol Giambalvo. American Family Foundation, 1991, 33 pages.

Available from the

In the Introduction, the author states that her monograph will dispel the myths and the aura of "magical solutions" surrounding the process of family interventions. Many questions are answered regarding what happens and what is expected during an exit counseling and family intervention. The author's explanation is satisfactory for the generally uninformed family concerned and sometimes bewildered with the experience of having a loved one involved in a destructive cult. The monograph is easy to read, providing many details which will enable a family to draw parallels to their own situation and to prepare for an exit counseling. The author states that each intervention is unique. "Unique" is the appropriate word as it comes from the Latin word "unus," meaning "one." We work with one person and one person's concerns at a time. Families often do not know what questions to ask ahead of time about the intervention process. Giambalvo's booklet provides the general, common-sense details that are helpful to families before an intervention. An intervention, or exit counseling, is the best way for a cult member to make a clean break from a destructive group. The "exiting" process involves coordinating the time and efforts of many people. Glitches will occur. Press on! Keep focused on the goal. It is difficult to prearrange for 3 to 5 days of a cult member's time, which the counselors need to complete the exit counseling process. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 115

Negotiation is a must between families and the cult member. I advise families to "Prepare for the worst, expect the best!" Let the counselors do their work. Giambalvo explains in detail what exit counselors do during the intervention and how exit counseling is accomplished. Under the topic of pre-intervention the author provides advice on what to say and not say, the information gathering process, readings, logistical details (timing, location, travel, etc.), post-cult rehabilitation facilities, and suggestions for presenting the plan to the cultist. The author's philosophy of intervention is based on an educational model with the goal of helping the client re-evaluate his or her commitment to the group. The emphasis is on sharing information at a pace that the client can manage. During the intervention the exit counselors, after establishing the necessary rapport, explore the client's cult background, teach the client about mind control, and help the client understand how mind-control factors influenced his or her own cult experience. The first step in the recovery process is taken when the client makes the decision to leave the group. The author lists a number of issues that must be addressed. She omits, however, a piece of advice that I believe is important: The client should avoid contact with the former group and should have a feeling of being "protected" for a period of time. I believe that Giambalvo is on target, however, when she stresses that follow-up and followthrough are every bit as important as the intervention itself. When the counseling team completes its work there is more for the family and the ex-cult member to do. The ex-cult member needs rehabilitation and counseling to re-enter society and to get re-established in the outside "real" world. Without follow-through the client may feel considerable distress and might regress rather than progress. Care, compassion, and understanding are needed to help the ex-cult member regain self-esteem and become functional in society. If the family does not follow through with the counselor's post-intervention recommendations, there is a higher possibility of a difficult re-entry into society. I recommend this booklet as a handy reference for families to read before entering into an intervention and exit counseling situation. The quick-fix solutions sometimes associated with the term "exit counseling" are illusory. The fact is that exit counseling is hard work, done by families, contact persons, counselors, rehabilitation personnel, and, most important of all, the ex-member of the group. Moreover, communication, education, and planning are key to a successful intervention. When families contact me after an intervention is completed, I ask them for their recommendations to help me better prepare other families to cope while getting ready for an intervention. Sometimes it takes years for a family to call me back and they echo this thought over and over: "Communication, education, and planning helped me get my loved one out of the group." Judy Safransky, President Cult Awareness Network, Tampa Bay

Cults on Campus: Continuing Challenge. Edited by Marcia Rudin. An International Cult Education Program Book published by the American Family Foundation, 1991, 126 pages. This book provides the reader with significant current information regarding the cult phenomenon particularly as it relates to cultic activities on college campuses. Edited by Marcia Rudin, it includes articles by cult experts such as Dr. Gregory S. Blimling, Dr. Michael D. Langone, William and Lorna Goldberg, and the Rev. Robert Watts Thornburg. Their interests, broad in scope, range from such topics as Policy and Legal Issues, and Training and Educating Students to Working with Cult-Affected Families. Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 116

Also timely is the focus of Jane R. Lindley's article, “Cult Recruitment of International Students on American Campuses.” Lindley considers these students easy prey for cult recruiters and states that they should be made aware of available support resources as soon as they enroll at the university. In addition, Rudin contributes a complete and current list of resources and publications, including “Resources on Cults, Psychological Manipulation, and Satanism and Occult Ritual Abuse.” Cults on Campus: Continuing Challenge is a valuable asset to anyone who is involved in higher education, particularly those who interact in the college community. Doris Holloway Abels, Ed.D. Providence, Rhode Island These book reviews are an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8, Number 2, pages 251-257. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 117