Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 65
The magician James Randi (1987), for example, has exposed a number of faith-healing
charlatans who have succeeded in tricking thousands of people into feeling a powerful
―presence of God‖ as they witness what they falsely believe to be ―miracles.‖ Stories of
lecherous ―perfect masters‖ supposedly leading their disciples to advanced states of spiritual
experience in the Hindu and Buddhist traditions are common (Garden, 2003). And the large
group awareness training (LGAT) movement (Langone, 1989) has given millions of persons
a powerful ―spiritual‖ high during an expensive weekend of ―consciousness raising‖
exercises.
The world‘s mainstream religious traditions have long recognized the existence of
charlatans, manipulated conversions, and private ―revelations‖—that is, the need to
separate the ―wheat from the tares‖ (e.g., Vere, 2005). Because people can be fooled,
responsible religious authorities seek ways to sharpen their respective flock‘s capacity to
discern wisely, to see the ―wolf in sheep‘s clothing,‖ to use a Christian metaphor. Most
religions over the centuries have developed an institutional wisdom—perhaps expressed
more in tradition and unwritten ―rules‖ than in explicit warnings—regarding the lure of ―false
prophets‖ and spiritual arrogance. This institutional wisdom, which is woven into the
authority structure of religious traditions, provides a safe zone for spiritual seekers.
When a powerful inner experience or other factor leads seekers away from the safety of a
tradition‘s mainstream authorities, seekers might (a) come under the sway of a cult or sect,
which may or may not be harmful to them (b) enter a private, idiosyncratic spiritual world,
which may be merely different or may be delusional or (c) view their tradition from a
vantage point that enriches the tradition (e.g., people recognized as saints who have
retreated so as to explore their inner vision, but who return with a mission or message that
enlivens their tradition). The third option is quite rare, so movement away from the religious
mainstream may entail an element of personal risk and may sometimes be personally
destructive. This risk is probably magnified in modern, pluralistic societies because the
mainstream religions have not had time to develop and teach discernment skills appropriate
to the deep and rapid cultural changes that have occurred during the past few decades.
One might argue that the term ―conversion‖ doesn‘t apply to movement from the
mainstream to the extreme within a worldview—for example, within a particular religious
tradition. Such change reflects, perhaps, a ―diversion‖ within a tradition, rather than a
―conversion,‖ which involves a fundamental shift in one‘s outlook on self, world, and other.
However, I believe that the incredulous, fearful reactions of parents, such as those Muslim
and Christian parents alluded to above, testify to the radical nature and depth of change
they observe in their children. Moreover, the benign ―born again‖ experience of evangelical
Christianity is often viewed as a genuine conversion, a radical shift in one‘s perceived
relationship to God, even though the born-again individual may remain in the same religious
tradition or even the same church.
The worldview shift of a conversion that occurs within a tradition may be overlooked (except
perhaps by family and other intimates of the convert) because the person still uses the
same language and the same scripture. The meanings associated with the tradition‘s
terminology and concepts, however, may change radically for the convert and may become
intertwined with his or her psychological needs. Thus, a genuine worldview shift, a
conversion, can occur even though on a superficial level little seems to have changed. For
example, before being ―born again‖ a member of a Christian church might say, ―Jesus is my
savior,‖ many times. But after the ―born-again‖ experience that same statement is pregnant
with a depth and breadth of meaning and feeling that are completely new to the person.
Such a born-again experience can occur within a mainstream Christian church or within a
deviant, possibly harmful, sect or cult.

Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 66
When conversion occurs across religious traditions, the depth and breadth of change is
more conspicuous than conversion within a tradition because the convert typically takes on
a new language and new rituals (e.g., a person raised Christian who converts to Vedanta, a
monistic Hindu tradition). Because they are more conspicuous and deviate more from the
norm, such cross-tradition conversions are probably more likely to elicit social concern,
especially from religious authorities. Unfortunately, religious authorities might be less likely
to recognize and become concerned about within-tradition conversions to extreme or
potentially violent variants of the mainstream tradition. Or, if the religious authorities do
recognize the risk, they may not know how to deal with it effectively.
After people experience the fundamental worldview shift of conversion, their behavior,
thinking, and feelings will tend to accommodate to the fundamental assumptions of the new
worldview because of the normal human tendency to seek consonance among one‘s
behaviors, thoughts, and feelings (see Festinger‘s theory of cognitive dissonance—Festinger
&Carlsmith, 1959). Moreover, as time passes and they experience daily life within their new
worldview the converted become more comfortable in it (i.e., ―practice makes perfect‖).
Other group members, sometimes without realizing it, provide rewards and punishments
that tend to strengthen new converts' loyalty to the group. This is the ―acculturation‖ phase
of conversion.
Of course, the process of conversion and acculturation may occur with or without the
manipulative, directive presence of a cultic group.
The term ―backsliding‖ attests to the fact that conversions do not necessarily last, nor do
they maintain their initial level of intensity. The seeker who fervently commits to a religious
system might over time watch the fire within him turn to an ember or die. That is perhaps
the reason why so many religions are social affairs. Seekers need the reinforcement of their
fellows to maintain commitment as the fire of conversion cools. Moreover, the social bonds
people form within an ashram, church, mosque, synagogue, temple, or other group over
time provide new incentives to maintain the seeker‘s commitment to the group, incentives
that may come to be more important than the conversion experience. For people who are
born into a religious tradition and do not have the deepening experience of conversion,
social bonds are probably the primary affiliation motive.
Leaving Groups
Backsliding, paradoxically, is probably more of a problem in high-control cultic groups than
in mainstream traditions. Research (Barker, 1984 Wright, 1987) indicates that high
turnover characterizes cultic groups. Actually, this is not surprising, given the tensions and
conflicts that cultic groups tend to elicit. Because cultic groups are leader-centered and exist
essentially to fulfill the goals of the leader, they tend to place high demands on members‘
time and energy. The group‘s idealistic ideology and a collection of manipulative techniques
(e.g., guilt induction to persuade people to work harder) are used to manage the
interpersonal conflicts that arise in the demanding environment (e.g., ―God wants you to do
this. Don‘t undermine the Body of Christ by being a factious man.‖). Because the group‘s
ideology may have elements of magical thinking or may be based on an at best weakly
coherent worldview (e.g., Christian white supremacists whose racial views rest on a twisted
interpretation of the Bible), the leader must make sure that members are not exposed to
outside criticism of the group‘s worldview and do not have the time or mental energy to
think independently and critically about inconsistencies that they might observe, especially
inconsistencies concerning the leader‘s behavior. Hence, leaders tend to make sure that
their followers are hyperbusy, obsessed with completing projects vital to the salvation of the
world or some such cosmically important goal (Singer, 2003). Their exhausting participation
in the group‘s ―noble‖ efforts makes them feel part of an elite. The price they pay for the