Editing Church of the SubGenius (section)

===Categorization===
According to Carole M. Cusack, scholars often have difficulty defining the Church.{{sfn|Cusack|2010|p=109}} Commentators generally place the Church in the category of "joke religions", which is often seen as pejorative. Kirby sees this categorization as partially accurate because irony is an essential aspect of the faith.{{sfn|Kirby|2012|p=43}} Other terms used to describe the Church include "faux cult",{{sfn|Callahan|1996}} "[postmodern] cult",{{sfn|Batz|1995}} "satirical pseudoreligion",{{sfn|Stein|1993|p=179}} "sophisticated joke religion",{{sfn|Cusack|2010|p=109}} "anti-religion religion",{{sfn|Scoblionkov|1998}} and "high parody of cultdom".{{sfn|Rea|1985}} Members of the Church, however, have consistently maintained that they practice a religion.{{sfn|Cusack|2010|p=98}} Stang described the group as both "satire and a real stupid religion", and contends that it is more honest about its nature than are other religions.{{sfn|Cusack|2010|p=107}}

Cusack states that the Church "must be accorded the status of a functional equivalent of religion, at the very least, if not 'authentic' religion".{{sfn|Cusack|2010|p=84}} She sees it as "arguably a legitimate path to liberation", citing its culture jamming and activism against commercialism.{{sfn|Cusack|2010|p=84}} Kirby posits that the Church is a religion masquerading as a joke, rather than the reverse: in her view, it is a spiritual manifestation of a cultural shift toward irony.{{sfn|Kirby|2012|p=43}} Alberts believes there is broad agreement that the Church is fundamentally a different type of group than religions that date to antiquity; he prefers to use the term "fake religion" to describe it. He sees it, along with Discordianism, as part of a group of "popular movements that look and feel like religion, but whose apparent excess, irreverence, and arbitrariness seem to mock religion".{{sfn|Alberts|2008|p=126}} Knight characterizes the Church as "at once a postmodern spoof of religion and a viable system in its own right".{{sfn|Knight|2012|p=96}}