Why cults are bad
From Tom Saekville Sir: Many people who have been tricked into joining pseudo-religious cults, and their families, will have been appalled by Damian Thompson's eccentric reaction to the Archbishop of Canterbury's withdrawal of his patronage of Inform (`The stink from Lambeth Palace', 22 May). This influential LSE-based cull-watching organisation has, for reasons which have never been clear, provided tacit support for cult leaders for years by persistently refusing to criticise even their worst excesses. It was for this reason that as Home Office minister I suspended Inform's grant.
Unfortunately, through the networking skills of its persuasive director Professor Barker. Inform remains the principal source of advice on cult matters to several Churches and branches of government. The total lack of official action to restrict or discourage the activities of cults, or to warn students and others of the dangers of becoming involved, owes much to this connection. While the French and others have in recent years sought ways to protect their citizens, cults operate in Britain with growing freedom and confidence.
Damian Thompson uses 'anti-cult' as a term of abuse, aimed at among others Fair, the support organisation for cult victims and their families which I chair. I believe most people would be 'anti' anyone who bullies, exploits and damages young people. The Archbishop should be congratulated for demonstrating a normal human reaction.
Tom Sackville
London SW4
From Christopher Smith Sir: Damian Thompson's eloquent tirade about the decision of Archbishop Rowan Williams not to take up patronage of Inform carries a number of misunderstandings about the nature of patronage and about the particular case of Inform.
Inform, like a large number of organisations, asked Dr Williams to consider becoming patron when he took up office. He declined their request. They asked him to reconsider; he did reconsider and then he declined their request for a second time.
Inform was not unique in this respect — over half of the bodies who asked for patronage, even ones which had Lord Carey as patron, have not had their requests met. A declined request is not a judgment on the merits of an organisation and, in the case of Inform, the Archbishop's support is demonstrated concretely in the form of a discretionary grant which will continue, an interest in Inform's work and a direct responsibility for the nomination of one of Dr Thompson's fellow governors.
Dr Williams intends to engage broadly in the field of new religious movements and the Church's response to them; Inform will undoubtedly be a key factor in this but it will not represent the limit of his response, nor can it be wholly representative of the nature or direction of his involvement.
Christopher Smith
Chief of Staff, Lambeth Palace, SE1
Previous page
