Speaking of Cults…
“Cult” is a word we have heard thrown around a great deal in the last couple of years we have spent chronicling the issues of religion and politics as they relate to the candidacy of Mitt Romney. Apparently the word has become the pejorative of choice now. Ross Douthat, whom we have taken exception to in these spaces before, wrote in the NYTimes over the weekend about the defeat of conservatism that was Romney’s withdrawal, and particularly by talk radio’s position in it. (HT: Justin Taylor) Says Douthat:
With their inflexibility, grudge-holding and eagerness to evict heretics rather than seek converts, too many of conservatism’s leaders sound like the custodians of a dwindling religious denomination…
That very much sounds like a “cultic” charge against conservatives to me!
But speaking of cults, I was struck over the weekend by Huckabee’s address to CPAC. Said Byron York in recounting the speech:
I went to see Huckabee speak this morning at CPAC, and he told the crowd he’s in the race until the end. “I know the pundits, and I know what they say: The math doesn’t work out,” Huckabee said. “Well, I didn’t major in math. I majored in miracles, and I still believe in those, too.”
Now this is far from the first time that Huck has claimed divine endorsement, if not intervention, on his behalf in the race.
All this set me to thinking. Way, way back when, I looked at the word “cult” in great detail. One of the innumerable definitions of that word is:
a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader. [emphasis added]
I am struck that such charismatic leadership often claims divine endorsement, ordination, selection and authority. To those of you with visions of a Huckabee Veep shot, think again. Do you honestly think John McCain would sit still for such utterances from his running mate? Given the mathematical impossibility of a Huckabee win, I am wondering if the “living outside of conventional society” thing does not apply here too.
My point? Huckabee and his supporters are behaving in a remarkably cultic fashion. I do believe a “cult of Huckabee” has been born.
Which brings me to the Richard Mouw quote, in a WaPo story, Lowell looked at Saturday.
Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary, a prominent evangelical school in Pasadena, Calif., said some Christian conservatives consider Mormonism not just a questionable faith, but also a rival political force.
This creates a very interesting picture. On the one hand we have a religious group with very cultic origins (apologies to me Mormon friends, but…) that is rapidly moving towards the mainstream of religious behavior. On the other we have a group from within the mainstream that seems to be slipping into cultic behavior. (This happens all the time, it is kind of what the televangelist phenomena is built on) – It is only natural that these paths, one ascending, one descending, are going to intersect, and for at least a period the two groups will be in serious competition over the same territory, both politically and over converts.
I think that we have seen many cultural and religious forces played out as undercurrent in Romney’s candidacy. In Huck’s continued effort, I think we are seeing more. I, for one, will be fascinated to see the next move by the “cult of Huckabee.”
Mid-Day Addendum: Cult leaders are also known for being delusional from time-to-time. Huckabee is rapidly turning into a serious embarrassment.
Late-Day Addendum: Huck was on Larry King tonight, and he repeated the allegation of misconduct in the Washington caucus’ at least six hours after Byron York, above, showed there was nothing to them. Now I am forced to question if he is delusional, or flat-out lying for the sake of playing the underdog fighting the establishment.
Posted in Candidate Qualifications, Political Strategy, Understanding Religion | 5 Comments » | 
Print this post
| 
Email This Post
Recently Posted:
- Some Official Commentary on Mormons, Glenn Beck, Politics, and the Public Square
- When Mormons Disagree, Beck Dominates The Discussion, There is an Election – all that and maybe more
- Civic Religion and How To Lose
- News Of The Week – Romney and The Field, Presidential Religion, Rallies, and more…
- Crossing Weak Bridges and Blaming The Wrong Party
fitzwdarcey on 11 Feb 2008 at 8:33 am #
Christianity itself has very cultist origins. The word has become a pejorative, because that is how it is currently used. Though many cults of personality exist within mainstream Christianity, you would be unlikely I would guess to see many evangelical Christians refer to them as cults. The word has come to mean specifically someone who is not one of them who has what they believe to be a false religion.
coltakashi on 11 Feb 2008 at 4:52 pm #
The picture of a “cult” in the popular definition cited in the blog entry focuses on messianic cults, which center around a leader who is expected to guide the followers to a miraculous outcome. The definition could be applied to the “cult” around the real Messiah, Jesus Christ. Then there are numerous groups who centered on various false Messiahs.
I would argue that, while the LDS Church originated principally through the actions of one person, Joseph Smith, from the beginning of its formal organization in April, 1830, he endeavored to share authority with others. Initially Oliver Cowdery had the same authority as Smith, having been, according to Smith and Cowdery, ordained with Smith by John the Baptist and then by Peter James and John as resurrected persons. In 1831 as more people joined the Church in Kirtland, Ohio, Smith appointed Edward Partridge as the first Bishop of the Church, having authority over financial and material matters. As the membership expanded, more positions of authority were created by Smith, the most significant being the ordination of the twelve apostles in 1835. After Smith and other leaders were arrested during the Missouri militia’s campaign to “exterminate” Mormons, and while he was held in jail over the winter of 1838-39, it was Brigham Young and other apostles who managed the evacuation of Missouri and the gathering of the refugees to Quincy, Illinois. By 1844, before Smith’s death, the largest body of converts to Mormonism were immigrants from Britain, who had been taught and led by various apostles like Young and Heber C. Kimball and Franklin Richards, and had not had any contact with Smith until actually arriving in the city of Nauvoo.
Besides devolving and delegating authority, Smith also lived as a very common member of the community, working at manual labor and engaged in common recreations. He did not own a home of his own until the very last years of his life, in Nauvoo. He did not aggrandize himself with material wealth, indeed far less so than many popular preachers in the more conventional denominations of his day. He did not meet the expectations of many in his day concerning what a prophet should look or act like. He made a point of deflating people’s expectations, insisting that, other than the specific revelatory experiences he had, he was otherwise an ordinary man. He did not dress distinctively, did not have a formal retinue or special vehicle, and lived most of his time in Nauvoo in a log cabin. While he did eventually accept commission as a general for the Nauvoo militia (formally organizaed under state charter), and wore a uniform at drills, he was not the only officer. Smith was accused of “mass hypnotism,” but since almost no one joined the Church in the earliest days who had seen Smith before joiining, it does not serve as an explanation for why people joined the small, unusual church.
Finally, when Smith was murdered by a mob of Illinois militia while peacefully awaiting a bail hearing, the Church continued on under the leadership of Young and the apostles, pretty much as before. Young’s leadership was focused on the practical issue of getting Mormon converts to Utah territory as a place of refuge from the kinds of persecution they had experienced in Missouri and Illinois at the hands of their “Christian” neighbors.
One of the most important ways that Smith took actions that led away from a “cult of personality” was embodying his revelations into printed volumes. This may seem paradoxical, but when a religious leader offers a text that is authoritative, it invites comparison of new revelations to the old, and creates a burden of consistency. Smith began his church having already produced a 500 page text, which had its own charisma independent of Smith, indeed, his own leadership authority was very dependent on what people thought of the text and its invitation to all readers to engage in their own direct revelatory experience, asking God to verify or disconfirm the truth of the book. A few years later, the Church voted to publish Smith’s compiled, dictated revelations as The Doctrine & Covenants, containing most of Smith’s innovative teachings. The elements of the Pearl of Great Price were only published in a limited way in the Nauvoo nespaper prior to Smith’s death at age 38.
Smith also taught the principle that any member of his Church could receive revelation from God, applicable to himself and his own family or his responsibilities in the Church. They were specifically not dependent on Smith as the sole source of guidance, but were specifically enjoined to use their best judgment, informed by scripture.
Within the Book of Mormon, the importance of independent and free choice, as part of God’s grace to mankind, is one of the greatest emphases. Smith, in his sermons and revelations, was explicit that governance in the Church only worked
“through gentleness and meakness and by love unfeigned,” and that coercion within the Church by definition lacked authority from God.
Smith did not claim to be the Messiah in any way, shape or form (and thus was distinct from Mother Ann Lee, founder of the Shakers). He shared authority from the beginning of the Church organization, in more elaborate ways as the membership expanded. Most Mormon converts had never seen Smith before joining. It was not personal charisma but acceptance of a body of written doctrine (including the Book of Mormon) that brought people into the LDS Church and provided an objective standard for belief. He affirmed the freedom of people to disagree with him, and denounced coercion within the Church.
So the proposition that Smith’s original Mormons met even the common, pejorative definition of a “cult” is not at all clear. In many ways, Smith’s leadership was far less a “cult of personality” than the organizations founded and led by various modern televangelists.
Turning to Mike Huckabee: Is he engendering a “cult of personality”? This is a phenomenon that occurred with men like Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung. President Chavez of Venezuela is definitely in that group, as is Fidel Castro. My observation is that Huckabee seems explicitly to rely on “miracles” and other divine intervention to take him to victory, rather than conventional methods like advertising and explaining his views. The internet comments by Huckabee supporters also seem to be predominantly “faith-based”, seeing Huckabee as a divinely-ordained candidate who will “take back America for Jesus” and assert anew God’s dominion over the US Constitution.
This kind of language was nowhere to be seen in Romney’s statements, nor in those of his supporters. He made arguments on his principals and policies and talents, but did not suggest that God wanted him to win. The confidence of Romney supporters was in his resume and accomplishments, not in a belief in divine intervention or that he had a special charisma from God.
Frankly, the Barack Obama candidacy seems to me to be very much the same kind of exercise, where it is his personality rather than any evidence of good judgment or special knowledge or skills that makes him attractive to voters. HIs foreign policy suggestions have bordered on the ludicrous. He has almost no experience in national government. The fact that he exceeded real experienced Senators like Biden and Dodd says a lot about how personality counts more than experience and accomplishments in the Democratic Partry nominating process.
For that matter, the same could be said of Hillary Clinton, who has not demonstrated outstanding characteristics of leadership in her limited period of Senate service, and who is largely running as a celebrity with residual charisma from her husband’s white house term.
Indeed, there were frequent comments about Romney lacking an attractive persona, with the quirkiness that makes one a celebrity, which by and of itself can be a way of earning a living. Romney was the anti-charisma candidate.
4thnephite on 11 Feb 2008 at 5:11 pm #
Have you ever noticed those who cannot or will not talk issues they bring up the word “cult”
JNR on 11 Feb 2008 at 9:53 pm #
Speaking of delusions, the voting count conspiracy was not Huckabee’s first. He actively spread a rumor that Romney bought Hannity and Limbaugh endorsements through Bain connections to their broadcast companies.
kgbudge on 12 Feb 2008 at 5:07 pm #
I don’t believe Huckabee is delusional or a fool. I do think there is some reason to believe Huckabee thinks his own followers are delusional or fools. That’s not an unprecedented pattern for demagogues.