Is Mormonism a Cult?

The word “cult” usually brings to mind the most destructive examples of control, where people lose their freedom, identity, or even their lives. That harm is real and should never be minimized. But the psychology behind those groups does not appear only in the extremes. 

The same methods of influence exist in more common institutions too, but often differ in intensity. Religion, politics, and corporate systems all use similar tools to shape belief and loyalty. Mormonism belongs on that spectrum, not because it is as harmful as the worst examples, but because it relies on many of the same patterns of authority and conformity.

One way to see this clearly is through the BITE Model of Authoritarian Control. The model, created by Steven Hassan, outlines how groups shape members through four areas of influence:

Behavior

Information

Thought

Emotion. 

Each form of control helps a system maintain stability by shaping how people act and think. When we apply the model to Mormonism, the pattern becomes easy to see.

Behavior Control

Behavior control limits how people act in everyday life. The Mormon Church does this openly. Members are told what they can eat and drink, with strict rules against coffee, tea, alcohol, and tobacco. They are expected to wear modest clothing and, after temple rites, sacred garments under their clothes. The garments act as a constant physical reminder of the commitment to the Church. Dating and marriage are regulated, and only those who meet specific worthiness standards can enter the temple.

Finances are also controlled. Members are expected to pay ten percent of their income as tithing before they can enter temples or hold certain callings. The Church connects obedience with spiritual privilege. The message is simple: to remain in good standing, every aspect of your life must align with Church standards. That kind of structure is a form of behavioral control because it ties spiritual identity to conformity.

Information Control

Information control manages what members can learn and trust. The Church limits access to materials that could create doubt. It promotes official websites, manuals, and talks as the only reliable sources of truth. Independent sources that question doctrine or history are labeled as “anti-Mormon.”

For most of its history, the Church avoided open discussion of difficult topics like Joseph Smith’s use of seer stones or his secret plural marriages. Even today, while the Gospel Topics Essays exist, most members are unaware of them or are discouraged from reading them without “proper context.” This selective flow of information creates a closed system where the Church defines reality.

Modern tools add another layer. Seminary and institute systems track attendance and progress. Online Church accounts monitor tithing and service participation. Social pressure within wards reinforces what information is acceptable. The Church does not need to ban books outright when it can teach members that seeking them is spiritually dangerous.

Thought Control

Thought control goes deeper than restricting information. It shapes how members interpret the world. Mormonism builds mental patterns that classify ideas as faithful or dangerous. Members are taught to see doubt as weakness and to avoid “negative” voices. When someone struggles with belief, they are told to “pray for a testimony” or “doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith.” This trains people to turn skepticism inward instead of using it to question authority.

Prophets and apostles are framed as infallible spiritual guides. When their words conflict with history or moral reasoning, the faithful response is to trust the leader and assume misunderstanding. This kind of thought conditioning keeps members from fully developing independent belief. It replaces moral reasoning with obedience.

Emotional Control

Emotional control ties everything together. It works by creating guilt, fear, and dependency. Mormon teachings often link obedience with worthiness and disobedience with personal failure. Members are taught that sin drives away the Holy Ghost, leaving them spiritually alone. This emotional threat keeps people tied to the system, afraid to think or act outside it.

Sexual purity culture amplifies the effect. Youth are told that sexual sin is “next to murder.” Confession to a male bishop becomes the path to forgiveness, which can cause deep shame and emotional reliance on Church authority. For women, modesty lessons often suggest that their clothing choices affect men’s thoughts, placing moral responsibility for others on their shoulders.

Family bonds become emotional anchors. The teaching that families are eternal only if everyone remains faithful keeps people from leaving. A person who doubts risks not only social rejection but eternal separation from loved ones. That emotional leverage is one of the strongest forms of control the Church uses.

Where Mormonism Fits on the Spectrum

Under the BITE Model, Mormonism checks boxes in every area. It does not isolate members physically or use direct violence. It does, however, control information, reward conformity, and punish deviation through guilt, exclusion, and fear of loss. Its control is polished, structured, and socially acceptable, which makes it more effective. People obey because they believe it is for their eternal good.

If that sounds familiar, it should. The same mechanisms appear in other systems. Corporations use slogans and loyalty programs to create identity. Political groups shape thought through repetition and emotional language. Even social media platforms manipulate behavior by rewarding attention and punishing silence. The machinery of belief and belonging is universal.

So yes, Mormonism is a cult, but so are many things that shape how we think and live. 

What really matters is not whether a group is labeled a cult but how much control it claims over the individual, and how much control that individual is okay with. The healthiest systems allow people to question and leave without fear. The unhealthiest make questioning itself a sin.

Mormonism, like many modern institutions, falls somewhere in the middle.