For as long as I can remember, and I’ve seen some evidence that this debate dates to the earliest days of Christian Science, there has been a lingering accusation that Christian Science is a cult. Christian Scientists, and even some former Christian Scientists, will adamantly deny that it is, but is it? I’ll let evidence form my opinion on the subject. As someone who spent 41 years in Christian Science, much of the evidence I rely on for this post is my own personal experience and observations.
What is a cult?
- formal religious veneration: worship.
- a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also: its body of adherents.
- a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious…
- a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator (health cults).
This is the first question to answer, and the point where the debate gets clouded, no matter whether you’re religious or not. The definition of what exactly a cult is has always been a somewhat subjective one. Broad definitions like the one at the top of this post, or some parts of the one at the top of this section, would define almost all world religions as cults. Maybe they are. In this post, I’ll just stick with Christian Science. Since most people conventionally view cults through the lens of definition #3 in the Merriam-Webster definition and #2 in the Dictionary.com definition, I’ll look to those as my definition of what a cult is. Otherwise, I could just paint all religions, including Christian Science, as cults right now and be done with it.
Is Christian Science a cult?
There are some mainstream Christians who view any sort of ‘Christian’ sect that deviates from their orthodox interpretation of the Bible as a cult. On that basis, many mainstream Christians assert that Christian Science is a cult. However, this would broadly include groups like the Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and other sects under a definition that most people would not accept. Most of us, when we think of cults, think of groups like the Branch Davidians, the People’s Temple (Jim Jones), or Heaven’s Gate, often referred to as ‘destructive cults’. These tend to be more what I think of when I think of cults.
“An instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing…”
There can be no doubt, to anyone who was ever a Christian Scientist, that Mary Baker Eddy, who is credited with the ‘discovery’ of Christian Science, is deeply venerated. In my own primary class instruction in Christian Science, teachings were shared in which she was considered to be almost co-equal with Jesus–he as a ‘masculine’ she as the ‘feminine’, and that she was the so-called ‘woman in the Apocalypse’ (see Revelation 12). Eddy’s portrait is found in many Christian Science churches and Reading Rooms, and when I worked at The Mother Church in Boston, I often saw her portrait in offices. Whenever her writings are read aloud in church services or at meetings, her name is always announced prominently. Most Christian Scientists consider Mary Baker Eddy to have a unique place not only in history, but in biblical prophecy as well. In this respect, Christian Science does display cult-like qualities.
“a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious…”
Christian Science is certainly viewed by most mainstream Christians, as well as non-religious people, as unorthodox. For one, most Christian Scientists eschew conventional medical treatment. That in and of itself, sets them apart from most of the general population. In the context of orthodox Christian doctrine, the belief that Jesus is not God is a big one, as is the Christian Science view that Heaven and Hell are states of mind rather than localities.
Another aspect of cults that I’ve read about in the past is that they tend to have their own ‘lingo’, or they tend to add their own definitions to everyday words or terms. Christian Science does this. There is an entire chapter in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures that offers Mary Baker Eddy’s definitions of various everyday words, terms, and biblical terms. Still other aspects include unquestioning adherence to the authority in the church or group. Many dedicated Christian Scientists believe loyalty to The Mother Church and its Board of Directors is of paramount importance.
Some of you may ask why I’m not measuring Christian Science against definition #4 from Merriam-Webster. Simple reason is that as I read it, that definition refers more to ‘health cults’ revolving around various ideas of healthy living and that sort of thing, which is not really what Christian Science is all about.
Christian Science in many ways is a cult. There is a strong veneration of its founder (Mary Baker Eddy), it does have its own ‘lingo’ (see my Glossary of Terms page), and it is definitely an unorthodox religion. But, is it a cult? I’d say yes. Is it a ‘destructive cult’ like the ones I’ve mentioned? Ask anyone who grew up in Christian Science who was refused medical treatment as a child, and suffers lasting effects as a result, and they’ll say ‘yes’. My own father professed unquestioning support to The Mother Church and its Board of Directors, as did many other Christian Scientists I knew. I swear some of them would follow the Board of Directors off a cliff like lemmings if the Board chose to. Like many destructive cults, Christian Science has effects on one’s psyche that take a long time to heal.