reFOCUS: Recovering Former Cultists' Support Network

Toxic Faith or Thought Reform?

by Paul R. Martin, PhD

Wellspring Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, Summer 1999

Introduction 

In recent years terms like "spiritual abuse" and "toxic faith" have become relatively familiar among those of us who are concerned about cults, both inside the Christian Church and outside of it. These terms refer to the same phenomenon, namely abuse in the name of religion. There are no hard figures regarding the numbers of people suffering from spiritual abuse or toxic faith. Reports are vague, like "growing numbers, many," and "an illness more widespread than we think." The cult problem also exists in fairly extensive amount. Recent estimates by cult researchers suggest there may be as many as 10,000 cultic groups in America today. In addition, there are perhaps some 5,000,000 to 10,000,000 current members of destructive cults. In the thirteen years of Wellspring's history of counseling cult survivors we have seen more than abundant evidence that destructive cult affiliation is characterized by the same earmarks found in thought reform programs involving captive American soldiers during the Korean War and various political dissidents arrested shortly after the communist take-over of China. Yet in spite of the rather extensive numbers involved in destructive cults, the Church as a whole has remained largely silent regarding this grave issue. Ronald Enroth, a noted evangelical expert on cults and professor of sociology at Westmont College, Santa Barbara, California, has amply documented the Church's deaf and mute response to the cult problem.

In startling contrast, there is a virtual flood of books and articles pouring from the evangelical press popularizing new faddish "Christian diseases." Hence we now have "co-dependents," "adult children of evangelicals," and "toxic faith." Why the deafening roar about the toxins and dysfunctions, but only a still, small voice concerning cultism and totalism? Do we think the latter does not exist? Do we contend such harm does not happen? Or do we choose to ignore?

 In this article I will address these issues and argue that the problem of cultism and thought reform do indeed exist and are similar, though not identical, to other familiar concepts like church dysfunction and toxic religious systems. Further, I will compare and contrast identifying characteristics of ex-members of cults and victims of toxic religious systems. I will also outline methods of luring, recruiting, and retaining members of cults and toxic religious systems. I contend that a subtle form of "victim blaming" can and does occur among some who have attempted to treat these former members. This article will also present the stages of recovery former members of toxic systems undergo, and will address the particular needs they often have.

Nature of Cults and Totalistic Systems

Many of us involved with the destructive aspect of cultism have found it extremely helpful to classify a destructive cult according to the eight characteristics that Robert J. Lifton observed among "brainwashing" victims in Red China and later at Walter Reed Army Hospital among returning American prisoners of war in the early 1950s. Frank J. MacHovec in his book Cults and Personality has identified similar characteristics of destructive cults. These points, seen side-by-side in rough approximation, are:

 In Stephen Arterbum and Jack Felton's excellent book Toxic Faith, they list the following ten characteristics of a toxic faith system:

1.  Special Claims: Members of such a toxic system claim they have some special knowledge, secrets, abilities, or wisdom that makes them unique or special.

2.  Authoritarianism: The leader is dictatorial, authoritarian, undemocratic and beyond question.

3.  An "Us versus Them" Mentality: Members are opposed to outsiders, protect their own domain, and set themselves in sharp contrast to other religious movements.

4.  Punitive Nature: Public confession of private sins; strict rules; isolation and labeling of “sinners”; isolating critics and those who question.

5.  Overwhelming Service: Members of addictive religious systems are asked to give arduous service, to sacrifice, to be totally committed, etc.

6.  Followers in Pain: Members are often physically ill, emotionally troubled, and spiritually dead.

7.  Closed Communication: Communication within the group is controlled at the top leadership level and moves down. Communication goes only one way. There is no outside communication or even communication from within.

8.  Legalism: The system is based on rules which distort God's purposes and thwart meaningful relationship with God.

9.  No Objective Accountability: The system contains no checks and balances to power. The leader asserts, "I am accountable only to God."

10.  Labeling: Labels are used to discount a person who may question or oppose beliefs of toxic faith systems.

David Johnson and Jeff VanVonderen, in their insightful book The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, also list the characteristics of an abusive religious system:

 1.  Power Posturing: Leaders focus on their own authority and power. Such power is not to be questioned.

2.  Performance Preoccupation: Obedience and submission are highly emphasized.

3.  Unspoken Rules: Often members don't know the rules until they break them - harsh consequences follow for breaking such rules.

4.  Lack of Balance: Extreme objectivism, or extreme subjectivism; over- or under-emphasis on education.

5.  Paranoia: Insiders feel outsiders don't understand them or will persecute them; those on outside are viewed as dangerous.

6.  Misplaced Loyalty: "We are right" - severe warnings or threats given by leadership for consequences of leaving; fear of being publicly humiliated by leadership.

7.  Secretive: Insiders are very conscious of image presented to outsiders; typically they hide part of their operations to outsiders or to some on the inside as well.  

The above characteristics of toxic faith or spiritually abusive systems appear to contain within them all eight of Lifton's thought reform characteristics. For example (using the Toxic Faith list): 

           The following charts point out whether a person can show symptoms of spiritual abuse according to their background and according to the type of religious system they are currently members of: toxic and spiritually abusive, or thought reforming and cultic.

                                         TOXIC FAITH/SPIRITUAL ABUSE

 TOXIC FAITH / SPIRITUAL ABUSE

Toxic Faith (Beliefs)

           These charts indicate, first, that one can be religiously addicted and not be in an addictive system, and second, that one can become religiously addicted without prior dysfunctional, co-dependent, traumatic past history. Anyone can become addicted (as Arterburn stated) regardless of history and family of origin. Adult onset spiritual abuse or addiction is dependent on particular intervening variables coming into play in systems in which one becomes involved and in the life of the person. Both of these factors have crucial implications for treatment issues. But more on that later. 

          Now let’s look at the symptoms that are presented by the victims of these abusive systems.

 PSYCHOLOGICAL SYSTEMS

     A close exanimation of the symptoms points out some unique aspects of thought reform programs. For example, some former cultists are highly dependent, appearing a bit too compliant and eager to please others., Other victims of thought reform programs complain of inability to concentrate and extreme indecision and/or display a loss of humor. Some former members may have no self-reported complaints or symptoms but trust the opinion of friends and parents that they should seek evaluation and possibly treatment. In other words, these people don't sense any problems, but those close to them have noted dramatic changes in their behavior and personality. So the client comes for therapy upon the advice of another.

     From what I have seen in the works of authors like Arterburn and Felton and others, I find it likely that some form of thought reform is being practiced by some of the systems they describe. Consequently, I am surprised that little is said about the symptoms of dissociation, poor concentration, and over-dependence typically reported by ex-cult members but apparently not reported of the victims of spiritual abuse. Either these symptoms go unreported by therapists yet are presented by the clients, or such symptoms are not presented because those seeking treatment from therapists with little or no knowledge of cults probably have no prior understanding of the symptoms of ex-cult members. In other words, some prior education about symptoms of ex-cult members may be needed in order for the spiritually abused person to say, "Yes, I have this problem too."  

The other problem is, if the therapist is not trained to recognize the symptoms of cultism, then he or she cannot identify or resonate with a client's description of, for example, inability to concentrate, extreme indecision, spacing out, hallucinations, and various forms of dissociation. Perhaps counselors not trained about the cult problem would identify these symptoms as depression and schizoaffective disorder, and miss the cultic aspect of the client's history and the resultant dissociative disorder that nearly always accompanies an experience in a cultic environment.  

Methods of Luring Members  

This is a complex topic and as varied as the types of people who comprise cults and toxic faith systems. In both Toxic Faith and The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse the authors tend to place the responsibility of recruitment on the individual and his problems and to underplay the dynamics of the group per se, or generally do not clearly communicate that healthy persons can become members of toxic systems. Typically, I see, among former cultists, three classes of individuals who are recruited using strategies specially geared for each individual: 

1.  The seeker: on a quest to find God or serve a worthy cause; lured by the cause or the "vision."

2.  The lonely the hurting: lured by the friendship, the caring, the community.

3.  The "accidental tourist": not looking, not lonely, not particularly hurting, but drawn and caught by the excitement, the pomp and circumstance, and last but not least, by the incredible charisma of the leader.  

Those of us familiar with cults would tend to argue that these groups are, on the surface, a lot more caring, friendly, giving, dedicated, devoted, sincere, and hard working than the average church or religious group. I also reluctantly agree that most abusive leaders or pastors are exceptionally gifted, talented, and dynamic speakers. I do not know how many times I have heard a variation of, "This is where the action is," "No other group is doing so much," "You just gotta listen to our pastor." Indeed, as I listen to the taped messages of various cult leaders, I am singularly impressed by the dynamism and exceptional charisma of these men and women.  

A well-known fundamental Bible-based group in New England was quite successful in recruiting former drug addicts, groupies, "Dead Heads," etc. Typically, I would hear them say that the experience or "buzz" they got from their group was better than what they got at rock concerts or while on drugs. Many called the group meetings "The [name of cult leader) Show."  

Methods of Retaining Members  

Once lured by friendship, and dedication, or of the group experiemce, members continue to because of a variety of Briefly, they tend to because of the group's teachings, activities, structure, and by the continual mystical manipulation practiced by the group. 

Why They Stay  

1.  Group's teaching: "us vs. them" mentality, outsiders are evil, sinful, unsaved, unspiritual, demonic, lukewarm, worldly. Leaving (according to the group's teachings) may cause the member to be punished by God, subject to temptation, attacked by the devil, etc.

2.  Group's activities: members are so busy they have little time to have contact with outside family, friends, books, TV, radio, other religious information; and little time or energy to think for themselves or to have deep, honest discussions with others in the group.

3.  Group's structure: often the group has members paired up as roommates; one's spouse is also a group member; and the group may be physically isolated in a rural, communal setting, or in the impersonal big city.

4.  Mystical manipulation: the doubts, fears, quiet insecurities, sense of failure, and questions are overridden by the group experience -- the singing, the smiles, the hugs, the stimulating messages, the testimonies all tend to wash reason out of the minds of the brightest and best of our young adults. Additionally, these practices do, for a time, produce an unusual sense of euphoria and well-being.  

It is at this fourth point that the addictive process begins in earnest with those who have had no prior addictive habits, and it is continued with those who have a prior history of addictive processes. The "high" is so great that it crushes all pain, memories, thoughts, and doubts in its wake. Such members can sing along with Debbie Boone, "How can it be wrong when it feels so right?" However, in time the feelings wane, and the hard, cold realities of cult life may become apparent.  

Treatment and Recovery Issues  

If my contention is correct that thought reform programs can make religious addicts out of fairly normal people, (and I have treated over 500 such clients in individual therapy) then it would be a grave error to look exclusively for pre-existing problems within the person and not focus on the dynamics of the abusive group itself and see how it produced the addiction. True enough, the toxic system produced denial and it hooked the person, but is the person's background the main or the exclusive reason they joined the abusive church? Emphatically not. Far too often I have received people into treatment who were told by other therapists that the group was an excuse for not facing the problems their past, or told the myth that if the person had been more spiritual or more dedicated, he or she would not have joined in the first place. Sadly, I have encountered a number of myths about who joins these groups, why they join, and the types of pre-existing problems these people may have had. Here are some of the more common myths that I have encountered:  

Myth #1: Ex-cult members do not have psychological problems. Their problems are wholly spiritual.  

Although often believed by both Christians and ex-cultists, myth #1 has little basis in reality. As a result of extensive research with some 3,000 ex-cultists, Dr. Margaret Singer of the University of California at Berkeley observed significant instances of depression, loneliness, anxiety, low self-esteem, over-dependence, confusion, inability to concentrate, somatic (bodily) complaints, and, at times, psychosis. In addition to Singer's authoritative research, there are many other articles and books that describe the psychological distress of ex-cultists. My own experience verifies the findings of Dr. Singer. Lori (a girl I treated after she left an aberrational church group) presents a typical example of the over-dependence and insecurity of many former cultists. She asked me: "Is it okay to have cold cereal for breakfast?" "Can I listen to the radio?" It was as though Lori were a little child needing approval and guidance for her every move. Concerning the spiritual problems experienced by cultists, it is true that these are often present in addition to the emotional distress. These spiritual problems, however, generally originate with the group's un-biblical teachings rather than with the individual's own relationship with God. It has been my experience that almost all former members of religious cults or extremist sects (including those which are doctrinally evangelical) are confused about such things as the grace of God, the character of God, submission to authority, and self-denial. It is noteworthy that groups with widely varying doctrinal stances - from the Hare Krishnas to Jehovah's Witnesses -- uniformly distort the Bible's teaching about God's grace and character.  

Myth #2: Ex-cult members do have psychological disorders. But that's understandable -- they have come from clearly non-Christian type cults.  

Myth #2 really assumes either one of two things. First, it may assume that genuine Christians never have psychological problems. However, many well-known Christian theologians and psychologists have stated that true Christians do suffer psychologically. The late Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, for example, wrote:  

All men since the fall have had some psychological problems. It is utter nonsense, a romanticism that has nothing to do with biblical Christianity, to say that a Christian never has psychological problems. All men have psychological problems. They differ in degree, and they differ in kind, but since the fall all men have more or less a problem psychologically. And dealing with this, too, is part of the present aspect of the Gospel and of the finished work of Christ on Calvary's cross.    

Second, myth #2 may presume that there are only non-Christian cults. Yet my personal experience (which has been verified by the considerable research of others) has been that some Christian groups are cultic in practice, believing, for example, that they have an exclusive comer on a particular biblical truth, or that, while there are other Christians outside the group, theirs is the only one that has God's fullest blessing. Many, if not most, of these groups usually require unquestioning obedience to their leader in virtually every detail of life. This being the case, abusive Christian gr6ups can and frequently do exacerbate previously existing psychological disorders relating to the individual's personality, family, occupation, etc., and can even produce such disorders where they were not already present.  

A number of recent studies have shown that psychological distresses are experienced by members in both Bible-based (and even doctrinally orthodox) groups and non-Bible-based groups. In fact, the psychological problems are similar. Flavil R. Yeakley, Jr., reports that a certain type of group-induced personality distortion has contributed to guilt, low self-esteem, frustration, depression, serious emotional problems, over-dependence and irrational behaviors in a number of well-known religious organizations. Of the groups he studied, the following indicated objectively measured signs of personality distortion: the Boston Church of Christ (now the Inter- national Churches of Christ), the Church of Scientology, the Hare Krishnas, Maranatha Campus Ministries (now defunct), the Children of God (now the Family), the Unification Church, and the Way International. Now, Maranatha and the Boston Church of Christ were essentially Christian Bible-based ministries. Maranatha was a fundamentalist, charismatic sect advocating "dominion theology" or "kingdom theology" that has been criticized frequently for authoritarian excesses, among other things. In November 1989, the senior leadership of Maranatha, including founder Bob Weiner, dissolved the corporate organizational structure of the network of the churches (though leaving intact the campus ministries) following admissions of authoritarian excess, including requiring members to obtain permission for such things as going home for the weekend, what type of job to take, whether to purchase health insurance, and whom to marry. 

Likewise, the International Churches of Christ all over the United States and abroad have been roundly criticized for authoritarianism and coercive persuasion techniques. Both of these groups would probably contain a large number of “born-again” members. What is alarming about these findings is that groups which are at the very least marginally Christian and evangelical are producing psychological harm quite similar to that produced by non-Bible-based cults.  

All of these groups were found to be molding their members into a composite personality that included extroversion and judging (i.e., relating to the world in terms of value judgments). But not all people are by nature extroverts or judger-type personalities. Some people are by nature introverts and perceiver-types (i.e., those who view the world in a more descriptive manner without needing to draw conclusions based on their observations). To attempt an alteration of personality types is to invite disaster in the form of neurosis and other emotional difficulties. 

Yeakly also tested members of the mainline churches of Christ (distinct from the International Churches of Christ) as well as members of the Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches.  In these groups he did not find any evidence of group-induced personality distortion that would lead to psychological distress. 

Unfortunately, biblical orthodoxy by itself is no guarantee that harm will not occur. My own extensive research, along with that of others, indicates that the severity of problems suffered by those in the extremist evangelical sects may be equal to or (in some cases) greater than that experienced by members of the better-known cults. 

Myth #3: Both Christian and non-Christian groups can produce problems, but all of the people involved in the groups must have had prior psychological hang-ups that would have surfaced regardless of what group they joined. 

          I encounter this myth regularly among both Christian and secular psychologists. I suspect that it will achieve a status of psychological orthodoxy. This myth is emerging as part of the “sacred creed” of many mental health professionals. It seems that no amount of contradictory evidence can persuade some that “normal” people can get involved in such groups. 

          Sometimes remind my colleagues about Nazi Germany helps to dispel this myth from their thinking. I ask, “Were all those Germans suffering from individual pathology that made them vulnerable to the Nazi religion?” Or I ask, “How about Iran and the Ayatollah Khomeini? Are all of his followers fanatical, sick people, or were they fairly normal people who became fanatical and sick because of following him?” There are more than a few illustrations from history which underscore the falsity of myth #3. 

          My own clinical research, along with a number of other studies, shows that by no means do all cult members have prior psychological problems. In fact, the proportion of those with prior problems to those without, in some studies, is only slightly above the general population (about 1/3 versus about ¼). 

          In contrast to the above listed myths I have observed that all types of folks (emotionally healthy as well as not so healthy) shop for a church the way they shop for a good used car. 

          Most folks are careful, deliberate, and calculating. Some join abusive groups because well-known, established Christian organizations have unwittingly endorsed abusive systems. The host of the Canadian TV show 100 Huntley Street frequently recommended the Toronto Church of Christ as a good, growing, dynamic, and vibrant church until someone informed him that the church was cultic. Campus Crusade for Christ used to recommend the abusive Parkview Christian Fellowship in Los Angeles County to the staff. 

          As a consequence of poor advice from respected sources, seekers may short-circuit their investigations, but justifiably so – they reason, “Why check it out any more? XYZ Christian organization has recommended it.” Yet, when these people have undergone the trauma of the group – which may entail physical, mental, emotional, sexual, as well as spiritual abuse – they are often blamed for the results. “Oh, they had problems before.” “If they had sought the Lord and not been so proud, this wouldn’t have happened.” Yet if the same individual bought a used car from a dealer on the recommendation of a well-known community or spiritual leader, only to have it blow up in the driveway and the dealer refuse to refund the money, most Christian people would offer the victim sympathy rather than blame. 

          The contrast is obvious. The used car scenario is explained by our knowledge of social psychology. Yet such a simple explanation doesn’t do when it comes to church “cons.” There is always the proverbial “ghost in the machine” phenomenon when we evangelicals go about explaining spiritual issues. I sometimes feel our explanations have a lot in common with the dark age mentality which attributed all diseases to demonic spirits.  Far too often we may spiritualize issues, when a simple understanding of the psychological techniques of influence will be more accurate. 

          One has only to recall the experiments of Milgram to see the power of authority figures. In one study, Milgram found that 65% of the subjects recruited from a variety of backgrounds followed the demands of the experiment to the bitter end. The subjects were told to administer electric shocks to a student each time the latter made an error on a learning task. The stated purpose of the shock was to enhance learning. The shock was to be increased as the director of the experiment so ordered. Unbeknownst to the subjects the “student” was really a confederate of the experimenter who was only faking a reaction to the non-existent shocks. 

          Sixty-five per cent of the subjects continued to shock the confederate (they thought) even after they had reached the 330 volt maximum. At the 330 volt level the confederate went beyond agonizing screams to near-death silence. Yet 65% followed the experimenter’s demands to this point. Prior to the experiment’s start, psychiatrists predicted that only a pathological fringe element of 2% would go along with the demands of the experimenter. In another study, Milgram got a compliance rate of 90% when the responsibility to shock the confederate was less direct.  

          Additionally, we only need to see the history of mass movements such as Nazism or fundamentalist Islam in Iran to see entire nations held in thrall by one powerful leader. Mass movements are not explained by individual psychopathology or by family dysfunction. At this point we must pay attention to the dynamics of the groups and their leaders and see the tremendous sway in recruiting people and then eventually harming them.         

          The basic root of all totalistic systems – be they abusive church systems, political systems like communism, or fundamentalist Islam – is a condition that typifies all of us, especially in the present era as it has experienced the crumbling of the family and religion (in the West), the demise of communism, two world wars, nuclear weapons, regional wars, famines, earthquakes, other natural disasters, drug addiction, epidemics (including AIDS), and rampant crime – and this condition is loneliness. As Hannah Arendt aptly put it in her classic, The Origins of Totalitarianism, “What prepares men for totalitarian domination in the non-totalitarian world is the fact that loneliness, once a borderline experience usually suffered in certain marginal social conditions like old age, has become an everyday experience of the ever-growing masses of our century.” 

          Treatment for victims of spiritual abuse, religious cults, or toxic faith and thought reform must first deal with the system, i.e., what the system did to them, how the system recruited and retained them, how it changed their personalities, what they have lost in consequence, and how they have been abused in the process. The dynamics and results of being in this system are destructive per se, regardless of whether there are pre-existing co-dependency, addiction, or dysfunctional family issues. 

          Trauma as produced in such systems hurts. It hurts whether one was hurting beforehand or not. By was of illustration, it would be utterly foolish to tell a person that the reason his left leg was broken by a car today and now hurts severely is really due to the fact that he broke his right leg two weeks ago. Now, if someone told me that, I would be very angry. True, I may have walked a bit unsteadily after breaking my right leg, but the driver who hit me the second time saw me, I wasn’t in the middle of the street, and he hit me anyway. Doesn’t some responsibility and blame go to the driver? 

          Do we blame women for being raped because of unresolved family problems that made them vulnerable to rapists? Of course not. I feel the better approach is to say all people have their vulnerabilities. Not all people in abusive faith systems are from dysfunctional families. But the toxic faith system lured and recruited them. The system played on the member’s needs and vulnerabilities. (Yet in recovery we must take account of our vulnerabilities and must see that even as victims we often victimized others as well – for these we are responsible, though the responsibility is mitigated to the degree we were manipulated). And the needs and the vulnerabilities of those inside the abusive systems are the same for us all. “There but for the grace of God go I.” This luring and attraction to these groups can be true for the class president, the high school quarterback, and the girl from a model family. They all can join abusive, toxic, and totalistic systems. And yet none of these joiners see such systems for what they are. The abuse is not recognized at first. 

          Are some people who join these groups to be exonerated and the others blamed, or are we to look for a cause in, for example, the high school quarterback, until we manufacture a pathology to explain why he, too, joined? No. I feel the group dynamics must be examined first. And then we can look at the damage the group did. Once this is faced and once any denial is confronted – i.e., “Oh, the group wasn’t so bad, it didn’t affect me, it’s not abusive” – then if there were dysfunctional family issues, they to are addressed.  By this time in therapy most denial is gone and pain from pre-cult life may be re-experienced. So there may be two pains: (1) the cult itself, and (2) the pre-cult life issues which may include co-dependency and other addictive issues. Thus, as recovery from the damage of the toxic system per se occurs, there are often other issues that still must be addressed. 

          In addition to pre-cult issues and lingering cultic issues there are also future plans and social relationships to deal with as well. 

          Finally, there is the role of the church and what the church can do in developing a safe haven for those recovering from a cult or toxic faith system. 

Dispelling the Myths 

          What then is needed to help former members of these extremist groups?  

1.  Find a Good Helper

Most importantly, find a helper who does not subscribe to the myths described above and who knows how to counter them properly. Find someone who knows that these groups can produce harm irrespective of the person’s past. 

2.  Helping Requires Intense and Personal Involvement

Cultic involvement is an intensely personal experience. Correspondingly, recovery must be intense and personal. The therapist, counselor, pastor, and parent must be able to relate to the ex-member’s emotional needs for acceptance, belonging, friendship, and love. Harold Bussell (former chaplain at Gordon College) notes that he seldom saw an evangelical who entered a cultic group for doctrinal reasons. Among the things he describes as factors which make a group attractive is the cult’s emphasis on “group sharing…community and caring…” 

In this connection a few notes of caution should be sounded when working with the ex-member. 

First, the time-honored and effective method of doing a sound intellectual and theological refutation of the group’s teachings is only one of the several crucial elements in the former member’s recovery. 

Second, in addition to theological and intellectual expose, the group’s ethics – e.g., its use of money, its methods of thought reform, and its practice of deception – all need to be thoroughly examined. 

Third, the ethics and theology of the group need to be contextualized with the person’s psychological needs. In recovering from cultic life, the issue that takes longest to resolve is typically the aching search for the love, fellowship, and caring experienced while in the group. 

Fourth, it is extremely important that a trusting relationship be established. The helper must work hard. One study showed that only one-half of cult members who sought help were able to engage in a successful relationship with a counselor. The counselor, pastor, and church must provide warmth and care to the former member, but they should not try to become a substitute or imitation of the intense “social high” experienced by the ex-member in the group. The tremendous fellowship and warmth that the ex-member longs for is often an artificial “high.” Yes, the group experience felt great, but was it true and was it always produced by the Holy Spirit, or was it something more on the order of a drug-induced euphoria? True, the addict maintains there is no greater feeling in the world. But look at the result of drug addiction – a most pitiable condition that wrecks lives, health, careers, and often kills. 

While the group member was on a “high” he may have, at the same time, unknowingly repressed or dissociated emotional pain, doubts, and the tell-tale signs that his health was being neglected. Such “highs” are psychologically and spiritually unhealthy. The experience for the most part produces in the cult a strong sense of dependence on the group and its leaders. Consequently, the counselor must be very careful not to foster dependency towards himself. Dependency conflicts are typically a major concern for the ex-member. Good rehabilitation will seek to achieve a balance between dependency and group support. 

3.  Redirect and Salvage Spiritual Fervor

Most people who join religious cults have a powerful and highly commendable desire to serve God and their fellow man. Sadly, it has been my experience that the cults get the best of our youth. The recovery process must enable these individuals to see the possibility of a life of dedication to God free of cultic confines. Churches need to show these people there are valid, exciting, and stimulating opportunities to serve God in a highly intense, demanding, and yet non-cultic setting. At the appropriate time in their recovery process summer missions programs offered by several different church groups may be just the thing for the ex-member. 

However, some ex-cultists are fairly gun-shy and can react adversely to any program in the church that reminds them of their group. Often these people make valiant attempts to rejoin a church but drop out because the pain and memories are too great. Here churches could establish support groups for ex-cultists and develop a ministry to them. In such a ministry it may be advisable that church attendance and engagement in church activities not be recommended or encouraged initially. These people need reassurance from the pastor and congregation that they need not feel guilty if they do not frequent the confines of a sanctuary. 

4.  Most Ex-Cultists are Actually Victims; They Must Be Treated Accordingly

In attempting to understand what has happened to the ex-cultist it is quite helpful to employ the victim or trauma model. According to this model, victimization and the resulting distress are due to the shattering of three basic assumptions the victim held about the world and himself: “the belief in personal invulnerability, the perception of the world as meaningful, and the perception of oneself as positive.” The ex-cultist has been traumatized, deceived, conned, used, and often emotionally and mentally abused while serving the group and/or the leader of the group. Like other victims (e.g., of criminal acts, war atrocities, rape, and serious illness), ex-cultists often re-experience the painful memories of their group involvement. They also lose interest in the outside world, feel detached from society, and may show limited emotions. 

Therapy must focus on helping these people regain beliefs about the world and themselves that are not so unsettling. Most of the stress symptioms then can be attributed to the victim’s lack of belief in a meaningful world where they see themselves as positive and somewhat invulnerable. The cultic experience is often a “crisis of faith.” At the bottom of many ex-cultists’ beliefs is “I feel like a fool,” or, “How could God allow this to happen to me?” their belief in a “just world” is shattered. They can no longer say, “It won’t happen to me.” A quest for meaning among ex-cultists is paramount. The victim must be helped to regain a belief in self and the world that allows room for “bad things happening to good people.” Also, he may need to talk out and relive the trauma again and again, as do the victims of other types of crises. Sadly, the process of talking about the trauma is sometimes short-circuited by well-intended helpers who view such rumination as “unedifying” or “focusing too much on the past.” 

Effective therapy must be very supportive and reaffirming, as self-esteem needs to be re-built. Victims need to be freed from the view that they were somehow solely responsible for their plight. This task is especially problematic for those who had strongly believed in Word-Faith theology or New Age “create your own reality” philosophy. Nevertheless, meaning and regained trust must be achieved and theological reconstruction is often most helpful if they can see the event in view of a benevolent God who truly loves them. 

5.  Lifestyles Must Be Changed

Behavior change is also very helpful. Pastors or counselors who work with ex-cultists should know that the chances for and speed of the ex-member’s recovery may depend in part on how similar the church’s and pastor’s style are to that of the extremist group. If there is a marked similarity between the former group and the present church then there will be a greater probability the church setting will trigger traumatic memories. Consequently, the ex-member should seriously consider buying a different Bible translation, finding a pastor unlike his past leader in personality or teaching style, and a church or fellowship providing a welcome contrast to the cultic milieu. Far too often ex-cult members drop out of good churches because they  remind them too much of their former group. What is tragic is that these people are sometimes viewed more as “backsliders” than as victims. 

A support group or professional counselor can go a long way in helping by giving the ex-member strategies that will enable him to avoid future victimization by manipulative people. This allows the former member to regain some sense of his own strength and self-esteem. As with other victims, finding and talking with other former members (preferably from the same cultic group) is an essential step to recovery. Often through this process former members become close friends. This is similar to the “war buddies” phenomenon or the plethora of support groups that have arisen in recent years to help those who are victims of drug or alcohol abuse, divorce, cancer, or the like. 

6.  Intensive Rehabilitation is Best

The recovery process takes time. Although many will recover on their won, many more may need professional therapy. I believe that one or two hours per week with a pastor or counselor is not the best approach. There are simply too many issues facing the ex-member than can be dealt with effectively on such a schedule. 

Education and support groups are essential. What has been spelled out in this article hopefully demonstrates the need for special programs designed to aid the recovering member. Dr. Ronald Enroth has emphasized the need for half-way houses or rehabilitation centers to treat the ex-cultists. (This is true for victims of all spiritual abuse.) I can certainly underscore the need for and effectiveness of such programs like the one at Wellspring Retreat and Resource Center in Ohio. 

7.  Rediscover the Gospel

For those coming from aberrational Christian groups it is essential for them to rediscover the New Testament gospel. It is my experience that all aberrational Christian groups distort certain aspects of the gospel. This includes those that call themselves orthodox Christian as well. What is horrifying is that many of these cultic groups could, with a clear conscience, subscribe to a most orthodox and evangelical statement of faith. But phenomenologically and practically they are living a subtle but deadly religion of “works righteousness,” at least in regard to sanctification, if not justification. For this reason it is very liberating for them to study the letter to the Galatians in a step-by-step fashion and contrast St. Paul’s message with their group’s practices. Through the biblical gospel, meaning to life is restored and healthy self-esteem is regained. They can see as Joseph did that “God meant it for good.” It has also been Harold Bussell’s experience that a clear understanding of the gospel is the single most important issue in a cultist’s recovery and future immunity to further cultic involvement. 

In conclusion, cultic/abusive church involvement certainly entails more than theological aberrations. The existing published research demonstrates that psychological harm also occurs and that Christians are not immune. It is likely that there are several hundred thousands to millions of people in churches today who were once members of cults or other extremist organizations. This may be one of the largest unrecognized problems in the church today. It is strongly recommended that specialized programs be established that can more effectively identify and help these individuals. These specialized programs must focus on the dynamics of abusive social systems and the unique symptomatology engendered by being in such an environment. Background issues can only effectively be resolved once the dynamics of abusive systems are understood and the resultant harm is recognized and worked through.  Therapists need to understand that vulnerabilities to such systems are more a sign of the universal human condition (our frail humanity) than a particular sign of prior emotional distress or family dysfunction.  

Endnotes

1.     These figures come from the American Family Foundation, the (former) Cult Awareness Network, the Christian Research Institute, and psychotherapist and cult counselor Madelyn Tobias.

2.     Margaret Thaler Singer and Richard Ofshe, “Thought Reform Programs and the Induction of Psychotic Casualties,” Psychiatric Annals, April 1990, p. 189.

3.     Ibid.

4.     Ronald M. Enroth, “Churches on the Fringe,” Eternity, October 1986; Enroth, Churches that Abuse (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992); Enroth, “The Power Abusers,” Eternity, October 1979; “Voices from the Fringe,” Moody Monthly, October 1989; and Enroth, Recovering from Churches That Abuse (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994).

5.     Robert J. Lifton, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, (New York: W. W. Norton and Co., Inc., 1961, 1963, 1969), especially chapter 22 “Ideological Totalism”

6.     Frank J. MacHovec, Cults and Personality, (Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1989) p.31.

7.     Lifton, op. cit., pp. 419-437.

8.     Ibid. pp. 23-27.

9.     Stephen Arterburn and Jack Felton, Toxic Faith, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1991) p. 159-189.

10.   David Johnson and Jeff VanVonderen, The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1991) 63-79.

11.   Gleaned from literature on spiritual abuse and toxic faith.

12.   Gleaned from liter