Transcripts

SPEAKER 1: I think it is a very difficult distinction to draw. And oftentimes, the distinction is one which has more to do with attitudes on the part of the person drawing the distinction than it does with any objectively verifiable difference between the two. So it's often not a matter of simply putting two-- comparing two religious practices or religious beliefs under a microscope, as it were, and saying, well, this one's obviously a religion, and this one's obviously a cult.

It's a term of judgment, I think, about the acceptability of the practices and doctrines which are involved in the particular religious view.

SPEAKER 2: Well, how can you out a good religion, if you will, from a bad religion?

SPEAKER 1: Yeah, so that's the ultimate question, I suppose. It's a question which involves matters of judgment on the part of the person investigating the question. As we know, religion is a matter of considerable personal and communal import for a lot of people. And that means that their particular views, which are shaped by the communities in which they live-- become very strongly held.

So they feel almost as though they are objective, and that any sort of sane person looking in on it would obviously be able to tell that there is a difference between two particular points of view. But I think-- it obviously doesn't look that way from someone else's point of view-- someone from inside the compound down in Waco, Texas. No doubt there are a number of people who are convinced that their way is "the way."

And, of course, the negotiators seem to have recognized this very early on and are working with them under those kinds of assumptions. It's not enough, of course, just to say to the people, well, what you're engaged in is a cult. Don't you see that?

Because obviously they don't see it as a fringe movement or as something which is societally unacceptable. They see it as the appropriate way, and the negotiators have to take that into account, I think, when they're trying to work with people who are operating from that mindset.

SPEAKER 2: Would it be fair to say that all of these people are-- they have been led astray in some way? That they are-- well, they're-- wacky in some way?

SPEAKER 1: Well, I would certainly make the judgment that they've been led astray. That is to say, they are operating under a particularly distorted understanding of Christianity. They're making use of biblical texts, which are part of the Christian canon of texts. And using them in ways which, I would certainly argue, are inappropriate, are misreadings, as it were, of the texts.

But that's, again, a judgment that I make and that I would attempt to persuade others of. But that I might have a difficult time persuading someone inside that compound of that point of view, if you see what I mean. They've been so carefully formed to read those texts under a particular set of assumptions that it's going to be difficult for someone like me to come in and say, well, you see, you're reading it wrong, although that's what I'd want to argue in general.

SPEAKER 2: Would freedom of movement play any role in the definition of what we would normally think of as a cult? That is to say, the ability for members to come and go of their own free will?

SPEAKER 1: Well, I think that in our political circumstances in this country, we generally think of religion as something which must be practiced freely. And therefore, I think for political rather than religious reasons, one might make that distinction. I'm not sure that it's a distinction that holds within religious practice itself. That is-- a number of rather mainstream religious practices would require a certain degree of discipline on the part of its members.

Now, you're right, it remains voluntary for the most part. That is to say, people can come and go as they want, but it's always very difficult to assess that. In the sense that, you might ask someone, well, are you here of your own free will? They might very well say, yes. But we also have to recognize that will is shaped and formed by their membership in a group.

And in the same way that I might say that when you ask me, are you a Christian? Yes. Are you a Christian of your own free will? Yes. But someone from the outside might look at me and say, well, that's just because let's say, for instance, a Muslim, would look at my life and say, well, this person just doesn't understand the teachings of Islam very well. That's why he's a Christian.

He thinks he's a Christian of his own free will, but perhaps he hasn't looked widely enough. And I think that's always the question that we end up boiling things down to-- how free is the free will by which we choose our religious beliefs and practices?