Sacro-Egotism and Cult Leadership

At the 2007 Association of Sociology of Religion conference in New York City, a member in the audience hearing my explanation of Sacro-Egoism (wherein individual authority and power vastly outweighs institutional or established authority for most religious issues and mores) mentioned that she thought the term, “Sacro-Egoism” (Knox, 2016), was derogatory, and she demanded that I rescind it. I replied that she probably was confusing “egoism” with “egotism.” The former, egoism, is a healthy part of normal human personality; the latter, egotism is a manifestation of neuroses (or worse) that leads to an absurd sense of self-esteem or self-importance. To wit, Webster’s Dictionary (1986) defines the ego as “. . . [T]he self; the individual as aware of himself” and also as “. . . that part of the psyche which experiences the external world through the senses, organizes the though processes rationally, and governs action,” so egoism is not a bad thing; it is part of normal human psychology. Fortunately, she seemed content with my response.

That being said, I began to consider whether or not Sacro-Egoism (i.e.—religious and political individualism) could become even more of an oppressive expression of personal will—both for the individual Christian and in any nearby church communities. If a person’s radical-individualism was hyper-inflated, specifically regarding spiritual beliefs, then that person could become a “Sacro-Egotist,” wherein his or her notion of religion and/or spirituality would be the only option for themselves and could be forced upon others. A person such as this sounds suspiciously like a cult leader.

In fact, the Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology (1983) states that the word,

‘cult,’

. . . most frequently denotes a group, usually religious or pseudo-religious in nature, that exhibits the following characteristics: it deviates sharply from and strongly rejects the prevailing culture; it is dominated by a highly charismatic leader who often proclaims him- or herself to be divine or to have special access to the divinity.

This approach would take the main characteristics of Sacro-Egoism (on the part of the leader) and passive compliance (on the part of the followers) and would transform them into something much more intense and excessive (and likely harmful) than nominal religious expression.

Thus, with a Sacro-Egotist cult leader established in a position of power and influence in a fringe religious community, his or her followers would completely acquiesce to his religious demands. Clear examples of Sacro-Egotism/cults are evident in history—Jim Jones of the People’s Temple, David Koresh of the Branch Davidians, and Marshall Applewhite of Heaven’s Gate. One could possibly make the case that several post-modern leaders in the Progressive Postmodern Church Movement also lean toward a Sacro-Egotistical understanding of salvation, biblical canon, and Christian ethos—i.e., Bell’s “Love wins,” which suggests counter-biblical claims of universalism and lawlessness.

Each of the aforementioned cult leaders took their own sense of religious individualism to an extreme level, providing empowerment for themselves and submission for their followers, which is ironic, considering that Sacro-Egoism embraces the antagonism AND ambivalence to institutionalism that the Sacro-Egotistical commander will not allow. The personal/pragmatic commitment to the spiritual journey was replaced with a rigid, sacrificial commitment to the spiritual plan of the leader. Jesus and the Bible were integrated into church life where it best served the cult leader. Finally, there was an intolerant condemnation of other religious systems of faith that challenged or contradicted the superiority and authority of the Sacro-Egotist’s understanding of spirituality and/or holistic health.

The historical push (and SCOTUS legalization) of gay “marriage” demonstrates just how much Sacro-Egotism and its embrace have infiltrated American culture. Five non-elected judges attempted to decide an absolute (controversial) moral and religious code for 400 million American citizens. Still, the Bible warns about such a narcissistic approach to spirituality, religiosity, and leadership.

In Ezekiel 34, the prophet states,

Then the word of the Lord came to me saying, “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel. Prophesy and say to those shepherds, ‘Thus says the Lord God, “Woe, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flock? You eat the fat and clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat sheep without feeding the flock.

Jesus also teaches about Sacro-Egotism in Matthew 24, predicting,

“For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.”

In the Epistles, the Apostle Peter writes in 2 Peter 2:

But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories.

And in Jude 1, the writer warns,

For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord . . . These people are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead.

Curiously, not everyone in modern society considers cults to be necessarily negative. European sociologists Furseth and Repstad state,

Health and well-being are often important values in cults, as they are in society at large. The deviant aspect [of cults] lies in the fact that cults are critical of established religion and academic medicine, and that they seek alternative ways of attaining the same goals through healing, alternative medicine, astrology, and self-development (Furseth and Repstad, 2006).

Although the follower may be seeking spiritual improvement, the Sacro-Egotist is still mainly “on the hunt” for spiritual exploitation of adherents—a violation of the main characteristic of good, healthy leaders who use their role to better the lives of those trusting in them. This was true 2,000 years and it is still true today.

Modern American religious culture may tolerate (and affirm through passivity) the radical oppression of Sacro-Egotists, but the biblical message is clear. The Apostle John writes in his second epistle,

Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son.” 

Sacro-Egotism may appeal to the cultural aesthetics of the present age, but it is still a destructive force that needs to be remedied in love and truth. Even more, it needs to be rebuked on a personal and community level for the sake of the Gospel.