Beautiful Doctrines from Ugly "Cults"

I've always hated the term "cult." After all, today's religious minority is tomorrow's state religion (cf. Christianity). Also, because the definition of "cult" is so broad that it usually just gets thrown around as a weapon. The word "cult" is the contemporary version of the medieval "heretic" and the colonial "witch!"

That being said, I recognize that religious groups can exert a type of control over its followers, threatening them with physical, familial, eternal, spiritual, financial, and societal loss should the believer stray. This is deplorable and should be pointed out time and time again. Having been a part of some small religious groups within a larger religious "family" (i.e. Landmark Missionary Baptists, Oneness Pentecostals), and also part of the mainstream versions (Southern Baptists, Episcopal, Disciples of Christ, United Church of Christ, Presbyterian), this much I know...we all have weird doctrines and sticking points, and we ALL use our brand of community to try to keep people in and people out.  Power, money, control.

So, that brings me to the groups of Christians whose doctrines and/or practices are so glaringly different that it makes it easy to excommunicate them from the "pale of orthodoxy." We've all seen the way that Jehovah's Witnesses have an uncanny knack to make someone feel uncomfortable on their own doorsteps--they're a cult. We know about the secret temple ordinances of the Mormons--cult. The Seventh Day Adventists will wear polyester but won't eat bacon--cult. Oneness Pentecostals deny the Trinity and invalidate all Trinitarian baptisms--cult. The list could go on.

But "cults" don't emerge from vacuums. Remember, Christianity was/is a cult too. And Jesus didn't just show up and start spouting eternal truths that had no real contemporary context. No, there were political and social upheavals, religious evolution, demographic shifts and much more that set the scene for Jesus. Luther didn't just go nail shit to a church door because he had a bee in his bonnet one morning...he nailed that paper to the church door to speak the minds of many more people than just himself.  Religious movements are often a reaction to the institutional church and its excesses and transgressions. And they gain a huge following, not always because they have a really great set of doctrines, but because they speak out against the kind of stuff that many people have been uncomfortable with in polite religious society for some time.

So, the following is a short list of my favorite doctrines from maybe not-so-favorite Christian sects. I realize that these doctrines are taught in other iterations of Christianity and sometimes better...but I find some elegant beauty in these concepts I have found in unlikely contexts. Maybe you do too...don't worry, I won't tell your church...

Christian Science and the doctrine of Atonement

Yes, they're crazy. Other Christians will balk at the language used, and I might use different words. But the important point here is that what Jesus of Nazareth experienced is something that we must enter into and experience ourselves...and isn't confined to ancient language about blood atonement or legal satisfaction theories.

Quotes from Mary Baker Eddy (Founder of Christian Science) from her book "Science and Health With a Key to the Scriptures."

“The efficacy of the Crucifixion lies in the practical affection and goodness it demonstrated for mankind.”

“Wisdom and Love may require many sacrifices of self to save us from sin. One sacrifice, however great, is insufficient to pay the debt of sin. The atonement requires constant self-immolation on the sinner’s part. That God’s wrath should be vented upon His beloved Son, is divinely unnatural. Such a theory is man-made….Its scientific explanation is that suffering is an error of sinful sense which Truth destroys, and that eventually both sin and suffering will fall at the feet of everlasting Love."

I am a little conflicted on word choice at the beginning, but that last phrase about "sin and suffering falling at the feet of everlasting Love"? Exquisite.

Jehovah's Witnesses and the doctrine of Priesthood of the Believer

Yes, they're crazy. And they don't have a corner on the market on this one...but they do express it well...they express it in the negative (a favorite for them), by pointing out the particular weakness of having different classes of callings in a church.

The Watchtower, August 15th 1974 Issue, Page 491:
Christendom's religious architecture distorted truth in yet another way. The interiors of cathedrals and churches were designed in such a way as to separate the priestly or clergy class from the laity. In the special area set aside for them, priests performed ritualistic ceremonies at the altar. Greater sanctity was thus attached to one group of professed Christians than to another. This contradicted the truth that all of God's devoted servants are "holy," all are "brothers."--Matt. 23:8-10.

The next quote I especially like...the JWs, so often called a cult, point out that the clergy/laity distinction present in mainline Christianity leads to idolization of human beings and cult leaders.

The Watchtower, February 15, 1994 Issue, Page 7:
It is precisely because of this close adherence to Bible teachings that the veneration and idolization of human leaders so characteristic of cults today is not to be found among Jehovah's Witnesses. They reject the concept of a clergy-laity distinction. The Encyclopedia of Religion aptly states about Jehovah's Witnesses: "A clergy class and distinctive titles are prohibited."

The Watchtower, July 1st 1958 Issue, Page 409:
Jesus gave no instruction about a clergy and a laity. Hence Jehovah's witnesses recognize no such distinction. Jesus made no room for clergymen, doctors of divinity, or "fathers" as distinguished from the 'common herd' of sheep. In fact he warned against it, as did his apostle Paul. So to be one of Jehovah's witnesses one must be a minister. In the organization of Jehovah's witnesses all are brothers, all are preachers of the good news of God's established kingdom.--Matt. 23:8-12; 1 Pet. 5:3; Matt. 24:14. 

Now, if only they would realize that their shadowy Watchtower organization and its leaders are just as bad as a man in a stole. But that line about no distinguishing of clergymen from the "common herd of sheep"? That's beautiful.

Latter Day Saints (and/or "Mormons") and the Doctrine of Modern Day Revelation

Yes, they're crazy. But whatever you may think about Joseph Smith and his vision and revelations, they teach something really beautiful. The concept is that if you want to know the answer to your questions, you can ask God and God will reveal it to you...personally...through revelation...even if you're just a 14 year old farm boy praying in the woods. So they have a few crazy books, I know (to be fair, so does the Bible) but the doctrinal idea is what I'm talking about--the doctrine of continuing revelation. That God isn't finished writing scripture. Or, as the United Church of Christ puts it "God is still speaking,"

From the Ninth article of Faith:
"We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, and we believe that he will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."

Joseph Smith in History of the Church, 6:308
When we understand the character of God, and know how to come to Him, he begins to unfold the heavens to us, and to tell us all about it. When we are ready to come to him, he is ready to come to us.

I wish the LDS church and movements didn't feel so certain that the revelation is confined to their institution, expressed through their concept of the "priesthood." But who can argue with the beauty of the words "he will yet reveal many great and important things...he is ready to come to us"?

Christianity and the Doctrine of Divine Unfairness

Yes, Christians are all just as crazy as the rest. Yes, I am one. And the doctrine that I think gets expressed so well in the Bible (but not in the church many times) is what I'm calling "Divine unfairness."  Jesus teaches it in parables. A son spits in the face of his father, takes his dad's money and squanders it and the father restores him with all the benefits of his older brother who had been a faithful son. A vineyard owner pays the people who showed up and worked for 30 minutes the same generous wage as the ones who had worked since morning. A shepherd leaves the whole damn flock for one stupid sheep. The doctrine is beautiful because it reminds us that God doesn't work on a system of meting out what's "fair." Because our sense of "fairness" as humans is skewed...and in the end, we don't really desire to get what we "deserve." We really just want to be loved. And God offers that in abundance.

Jesus tells the story of the vineyard owner who said:
"I decided to give to the one who came last the same as you. Can’t I do what I want with my own money? Are you going to get stingy because I am generous?" 

 And Jesus added:
"Here it is again, the Great Reversal: many of the first ending up last, and the last first.” Matthew 20:15-16

So, what can we learn from the ugly "cults" and their beautiful doctrines? I learn a few things. Like, yes, all truth is God's truth and it's beautiful. But I also learn this--just because my particular brand of faith has some beautiful truths, it doesn't mean that the system those truths are housed in is good or right. In one sense, the latter lesson is more important to me. 

 If groups that I can so easily see as harmful, exclusionary, false, and sometimes dangerous, can teach some really beautiful things but are still really ugly...well, maybe my church is just as ugly to people on the outside looking in.  I also learn that no matter how beautiful the "doctrine" may be, the institution will fail to live up to it in some way as well.  

Perhaps followers of Jesus should start breaking those beautiful truths free of the systems and institutions and creeds and traditions and present them to a world seeking all the beauty without all the bullshit. We can hope and pray, right?  Amen.