Friday, February 26, 2010

What Makes A Religious Group A Cult



By Cindy V. Culp

When it comes to cults, there’s an old joke among religious scholars: A cult is a cult is a cult — unless it’s my religious group.

That jest highlights the tendency many people have to treat the identification of cults almost like the pinpointing of pornography. They don’t have a good definition of what makes a cult, but they’re sure they’ll know one when they see it.

Experts’ approach to the subject is far more complex, whether discussing the Amish, the Branch Davidians, the Mormons or Homestead Heritage. Only a few scholars use the word “cult.” Most say it has become too loaded of a word and prefer terms such as “new religious group” or “alternative religious movement.”

Experts also have differing opinions about what puts a group into the question mark category. A few give the label to any religious group that doesn’t hold a specific set of doctrinal beliefs. Others say the only reliable dividing line is whether a group obeys the law. A lot linger somewhere in the middle.

Rick Ross, who heads up a religious research institute in New Jersey, is one expert who sees no problem in using the word cult. To him, there’s no reason not to use the term except for political correctness.

“Whether they call them cults, new religious movements or whatever, you see the same structure in behavior, the same structure in dynamics,” Ross said. “Groups that fit this pattern are very often unstable.”

Ross differs from some cult-watching organizations in that he doesn’t label a group a cult simply because of its theological beliefs. Rather, groups should be judged by their behavior, he said.

One classic sign of a cult is that it is personality-driven, Ross said. That means it has a charismatic leader or group of leaders who hold a tremendous amount of sway over members.

Another common characteristic is isolation, Ross said. Sometimes that isolation is physical, with members’ comings and goings being restricted.

But most often, isolation takes the form of members becoming completely absorbed in the group and its activities, Ross said. If members work, go to school and socialize only with each other, isolation is a real possibility. An especially troubling sign, he said, is when members are asked to cut off contact with family members.

“I call it discordant noise,” he said. “Anyone or anything that would raise troubling questions about the group is marginalized to the extreme, cut off.”

Also common is a persecution complex, he said. Members often have an “us- versus-them” attitude, perceiving simple disagreements as attacks.

“They say criticizing them is to go against God,” Ross said. Another giveaway, he said, is when groups teach that anyone who leaves is flawed. Healthy groups generally believe people can have good reasons for leaving. Not so with cults, he said.

On the opposite side of the spectrum is Tim Miller, a professor of religious studies at the University of Kansas. Not only does he not use the word “cult,” but he takes issue with the characteristics that have been attached to the word.

The problem with them, Miller said, is that they don’t distinguish between good and bad expressions of those characteristics. For example, some of the most successful mainstream religious organizations have charismatic leaders.

The anti-cult movement often acts as if there are easy answers to the question of whether a group is dangerous, Miller said. But things are rarely black and white. Most involve judgment calls and points of view. What may seem sinister to one person may be perfectly normal to another, he said.

“I don’t know where you draw the line, frankly, except at the law,” Miller said.
William Dinges, a professor of religious studies at Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., said one question he asks when evaluating religious groups is what kind of fruit they produce. That’s helpful because while the customs of some groups could be called cultic under the criteria of anti-cult organizations, they don’t truly fit that mold. The Amish are one example, he said.

One term that can be used to describe such groups are “radicalized expressions of religious commitment,” Dinges said. Characteristics include having a distinct boundary between it and others; being demanding of members; being galvanized around a charismatic personality; and having an intensified sense of mission.

Like Miller, Dinges says determining whether such groups are dangerous is subjective. Among the factors to weigh is whether they make it emotionally impossible to leave, whether they maintain members’ dignity, the amount of freedom they give members and whether there is a structure for airing and addressing conflict.

People also must consider how accepted certain behaviors are within that particular religious tradition, Dinges said. For example, becoming a monk may seem strange to many people, but it’s a very accepted part of the Catholic tradition.

Such factors also must be weighed in evaluating the stories of people who have come out of a group, Dinges said. In some cases, people’s horror stories stem from truly bad things that happened to them, he said,

In other instances, though, stories are tainted by a change in ex-members’ viewpoints, Dinges said. People can have mistaken or highly romanticized notions about what life in a particular group will be like, then become bitter when reality doesn’t match expectations.

Sometimes that happens because a group engages in false recruitment activities, he said. Other times it’s because people jump into situations without thoroughly understanding them.

“You have to educate yourself and, in a sense, know yourself. Trust your intuition.” Ron Enroth, a professor of sociology at Westmont College in California, says all the spiritually abusive groups he has studied share common characteristics. They’re so similar that when he talks to ex-members and starts hearing details of their stories, “I almost feel like saying, ‘Stop, let me tell you the rest of the story.’ ”

One feature of such groups, Enroth said, is control-oriented leadership. Communication with outsiders is limited and questioning isn’t allowed inside the group. Sometimes the control extends into intimate areas of followers’ lives, he said. In such cases, members are expected to ask permission to take vacations or switch jobs. Lifestyle rigidity is also common, with some groups having an almost unfathomable list of rules. One he studied outlawed striped running shoes because they supposedly were connected to homosexuality, he said. Another forbid members to use the word “pregnant.” Instead they were commanded to say a woman was “with child.”

Such groups are also spiritual elitists, Enroth said. They use arrogant or high-minded terms to describe themselves and often have disparaging descriptions for other churches, he said.

“They present themselves as the model Christian church or the model Christian organization...and say they provide unparalleled fellowship and superior spirituality,” Enroth said.

In addition, such groups are usually paranoid and perceive any criticism as persecution, Enroth said. They paint people who leave as defectors and say attacks against them are ultimately the work of Satan.

“By describing criticism as slander, they can almost be shielded from criticism,” Enroth said.

Enroth believes the number of spiritually abusive groups is growing due to a spike in the number of independent churches in evangelical and fundamentalist circles. People like them because they are less formal and less hierarchical than traditional churches, he said.

But with that independence also comes the potential for trouble, he said.

“They are, in a sense, spiritual Lone Rangers,” Enroth said. “That’s where the potential for sliding off the cliff comes into play.”



Read These Relative Posts:

Lawyer Brick Township Church Scam

Fellowship Chapel Point Pleasant NJ Money Meeting

Fellowship Chapel President + Con Artist

Fellow$hip Chapel Vice Pre$ident Bergstrom

Murachanian Maranitz Aggravated Assault


Report Church Fraud To FBI

Saturday, February 20, 2010

New Jersey Pastor Pleads Guilty To Medicaid Fraud

The pastor of a Westfield, N.J., church could face five years in prison for admitting to knowingly omitting information on the Medicaid application of a parishioner regarding a property sale where the clergyman benefited financially.

Kevin Clark, 53, the pastor at Bethel Baptist Church, pleaded guilty Jan. 25 to third-degree counts of Medicaid fraud and tampering with public records, according to the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office.

Clark was indicted by a Union County, N.J., grand jury on the counts in November 2009.

In his guilty plea, Clark admitted that on Nov. 17, 2004, he falsely completed, signed and submitted a Medicaid application for an elderly parishioner. That form, official said, required Clark to list the sale of all real property by the parishioner and any cash given away by the applicant within the past three years.

Clark admitted that he failed to provide information that the parishioner had sold a piece of real estate for $138,038 and that he received the cash from the sale.

Sentencing is scheduled for April 9 in Union County Superior Court.


Read These Relative Posts:

Fellowship Chapel Point Pleasant NJ Money Meeting

Fellowship Chapel Vice Pre$ident Berg$trom

Fellowship Chapel President + Con Artist

Lawyer Brick Township Church Scam


Report Church Fraud To FBI

Monday, February 15, 2010

Fellowship Chapel Point Pleasant NJ Money Meeting

For many of you who have attended Fellowship Chapel Point Pleasant NJ you would have noticed that after every Sunday service the pastors and elders would have an elder meeting. They would get together for what appeared to be a meeting to discuss issues regarding the church.

They couldn’t wait to get together as they would quickly congregate to a secluded area led by Fellowship Chapel vice president Richard Bergstrom and Brick Township lawyer from the Ocean County Prosecutor‘s Office Edward Murachanian.

They resembled little kids being let out for recess. For church members it made them proud that their church leaders were so passionate about serving God.

What the church members did not realize was what they believed to be a passion for serving God was actually a passion for serving their own greed, the con artist‘s love for money. At this pretend elder meeting Richard Bergstrom would divy up the cash that was collected from the Sunday offering and distribute it to Pastor Cliff Whitehead, Associated pastor Jim McCombs, President John Emmanuel, Secretary Bill Doolittle and Treasurer John Boyle.

The one thing in common with these men are that they are all long time friends of the secret owner of Fellowship Chapel of Jersey Shore lawyer Brick Township Edward Murachanian.

Click here to view the actual New Jersey state corporation filing for Fellowship Chapel Point Pleasant NJ.


Read These Relative Posts:

Fellowship Chapel President + Con Artist

Fellow$hip Chapel Vice Pre$ident Bergstrom

Murachanian Maranitz Aggravated Assault


Report Church Fraud To FBI

Friday, February 12, 2010

US Attorney Paul Fishman Message To Public Service Employees

The Jersey Journal:

U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman sees a message in today's verdict against suspended Jersey City Deputy Mayor Leona Beldini.

"Public service," he said, "is about something else than enriching yourself and your friends."
He declined to speculate on the jury's thinking in finding Beldini guilty on two counts and not guilty on four but called the verdict a "victory."

Asked about the credibility of key witness Solomon Dwek, and whether it was because of Dwek's criminal past that the jury returned a split verdict, Fishman was undeterred.

"I don't think that you can say they rejected him," he said. "Each of the crimes she was charged with had different elements."

When it comes time for Dwek -- who admitted bilking his family, friends, Jewish community and banks out of millions of dollars -- to be sentenced, it will be up to a judge to decide the appropriate punishment, Fishman said.

Fishman declined to discuss why former Jersey City housing official/school board member Edward Cheatam, who has pleaded guilty in the case, wasn't called to testify as was widely expected.

"At the heart of the case, Ms. Belidini was charged with accepting bribes in exchange for official action," he said. "The jury saw it that way."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Calcagni, who tried the case along with Assistant U.S. Attorney Sandra Moser, agreed.

"I think the jury fairly and carefully considered the evidence and we are gratified with the verdict," he said at the news conference with Fishman.


Read These Relative Posts:

Lawyer Brick Township Church Scam

Ocean County Family Court Legal Kidnapping

Deceased Husband Purchases Mortgage

Dr John Vaccaro Performs Surgery Without Consent Form

Report Ocean County Corruption