Serious reservations with the anti-cult movement

By Massimo Introvigne. These are the conclusions of Introvigne, an author of an encyclopedia of religion, in his article on Opus Dei and the Anti-cult Movement

The secularist anti-cult movement arose as having non-Catholic religious movements for its primary objective.

· The movement against Opus Dei started —especially within liberal Catholic circles— without any connection whatsoever with the polemic against "cults".

· In the first half of the 1980's, however, a part of the anti-cult movement extended its activity against its original enemies to cover other groups —Opus Dei among them.

· On the other hand, some Opus Dei adversaries within the Catholic ranks —typical examples of which are Fr Jacques Trouslard in France and Michael Walsh in England— realised that the anti-cult movement could offer them an ideological framework which suited their continued campaign, and provide them with powerful allies and greater resources. Initially, perhaps, the connection between the two movements arose from extrinsic and, at least partly, political reasons. But the anti-cult movement and the adversaries of Opus Dei within the Church did have in common a similar view of the world and of the role of religion which helped their mutual collaboration.

From all this one can make a further interesting and important observation. The secularist anti-cult position and the religious counter-cult position differ as to their objective reasons but do not necessarily present different subjective characteristics on the part of those who support such positions. Thus, for instance, if it is difficult to find militant atheists in the religious counter-cult movements, in the secular anti-cult movements one does find, on a personal level, people who declare themselves to be believers.

I have on other occasions pointed out how, in the anti-cult movements of the United States, mainly directed by atheistic or agnostic "secular humanists", are found well-known figures of the different North American Hebrew communities. This fact was explained by Hebrew members of the anti-cult movement as a characteristic feature of Hebraism, which is not a missionary religion, and which is suspicious of any conversion attempt. Alongside these representatives of the Jewish world some Protestants may be found —really very few— and finally a few Catholic priests and religious —occasionally also some lay people— who are few in number but very active.

One could well ask, why would a Catholic —and even more so if he is a priest or a religious— join in the activities of anti-cult movements, whose ideology, as soon as one gets to know or study it, is evidently hostile to religion in general, or at least hostile to the social relevance of religion, which should be especially dear to a Catholic. It is considered by some that the collaboration of certain Catholics with the anti-cult movement may be explained by their annoyance with "cults" which leads them to choose —wrongly, for they make the mistake of using a violent tone where a strong objective criticism would suffice— the hardest and most decisive line against new religious movements.

However, the history of the attacks against Opus Dei shows that such an explanation would only be valid for a very small number of Catholics whose naivety is as great as their lack of capacity to understand the complex reality of new religious movements and the anti-cult movement. But as for those Catholics who have opted for collaborating with the anti-cult movement, their choice shows a much more ominous way of thinking. They are, in fact, Catholics who know perfectly well the secularist ideology of the anti-cult movement but seek to make use of it as a weapon with which to attack, above all, their inter-ecclesial adversaries, by labelling them as "cults".

It is certainly possible that some Catholics who today are actively involved in the anti-cult movement, may have discovered a late vocation to confront the new religious movements. But it is also true that, many years before they showed any concern for Jehovah's Witnesses or for Hare Krishna, some of them were already actively engaged in attacking Opus Dei. How can one therefore avoid thinking that the reason why "liberal" Catholics have joined the secularist anti-cult movement is not because they have recently discovered the "threat of the cults", but because they are eager to find powerful and wealthy allies, of similar ideologies, in their polemics against Opus Dei and other Catholic entities who wish to remain orthodox and faithful to the Magisterium? Even if one wanted to leave this question open, there are many signs that lead to an affirmative answer. What is more, we have abundant facts that justify the most serious reservations and the most well-founded doubts about the anti-cult movement and about the Catholics, who, with greater or lesser awareness, collaborate with the movement.

All this confirms the need for Roman Catholics to be interested in new religious movements, and even when necessary to enter into discussions about them. But this must be done from a Catholic point of view and according to specifically Catholic standards, which are very different to those of the secularist anti-cult movement, with which any form of collaboration by Catholics —as has become abundantly clear— is not only useless but indeed harmful and blameworthy.