Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 76
inner circles they should neither expect nor demand this right. If they can succeed in
establishing a deep communication, they can understand how the youngster sees the world
and might then be able to engage him or her in a dialogue that results in positive change.
Like the therapist, the helpers must oscillate between methodological self-doubt and quiet
deliberation as they move ever closer to deep communication and informed, authentic
dialogue with the youth about whom they are concerned. Some exit counselors, for
example, put much effort into helping families with a cult-involved loved one learn how to
understand and appreciate their loved one‘s worldview. One team even requires families to
list 50 positive things about their child‘s group and his or her relationship to it (Patrick Ryan
and Joseph Kelly, personal communication, October 6, 2006), so as to help families learn
how to suspend their worldview‘s judgmental evaluations of their loved one‘s situation.
Unfortunately, such ―cross worldview communication‖ is difficult and not common. Work in
the cult arena reveals that helpers in contexts that are not overtly psychotherapeutic tend
to be so focused on changing a young person that they unwittingly sabotage their ability to
find out what the young person really thinks, knowledge of which, ironically, would make
the helpers more effective change agents. Clergy, who are well versed in theology, tend to
challenge the youth‘s overtly expressed belief system in terms of the clergy‘s belief system
(e.g., a priest who responds to a youngster‘s atheism with quotations from the Bible, when
the Bible has no more credibility with the young atheist than does Homer‘s Iliad). Teachers,
if they have experience with Socratic Method, might be a bit more inquisitive than clergy,
but still tend to have a predetermined destination toward which their educational endeavors
point. Parents‘ alarm tends to thrust them into a caretaker mode that exacerbates the
normal separation conflicts young people have with their parents. Law enforcement
professionals tend to have a narrow area of concern (Were rules broken?) and think in
terms of rewards and punishments to motivate the youngster to do what adults desire.
These criticisms are not meant to suggest that theological argument, education, emotional
entreaty, or motivational analysis have no role in the goal of helping a youngster (or an
adult) involved in or flirting with a cultic or extremist group. I do believe, however, that
such actions have a better chance of success if they are based on an informed
understanding of how the person in question sees the world. Such understanding requires a
deep communication within a shared worldview or across different worldviews, which in turn
requires the patient courtesy, the methodological self-doubt, the ongoing respect of the
therapeutic process, even though the context of the communication is not overtly
psychotherapeutic.
Recommendation Three
Parents, teachers, clergy, law enforcement personnel and others who seek to
prevent young people or adults from following a path that leads toward cultic
entanglements or extremist violence should learn and cultivate the skills of deep,
respectful communication, which are so central to the process of behavioral and
belief change and communication across worldviews.
Recommendation Four
Cultic studies experts should develop resources and training programs designed to
teach helpers how to achieve the deep communication that underlies any attempt to
understand how others see the world.
Prevention
Kropveld (2004) emphasizes the importance of considering cultural, social, legal, and
political differences among countries in evaluating and designing preventive education
programs concerning cultic groups. Among the factors that must be considered are the
following:
inner circles they should neither expect nor demand this right. If they can succeed in
establishing a deep communication, they can understand how the youngster sees the world
and might then be able to engage him or her in a dialogue that results in positive change.
Like the therapist, the helpers must oscillate between methodological self-doubt and quiet
deliberation as they move ever closer to deep communication and informed, authentic
dialogue with the youth about whom they are concerned. Some exit counselors, for
example, put much effort into helping families with a cult-involved loved one learn how to
understand and appreciate their loved one‘s worldview. One team even requires families to
list 50 positive things about their child‘s group and his or her relationship to it (Patrick Ryan
and Joseph Kelly, personal communication, October 6, 2006), so as to help families learn
how to suspend their worldview‘s judgmental evaluations of their loved one‘s situation.
Unfortunately, such ―cross worldview communication‖ is difficult and not common. Work in
the cult arena reveals that helpers in contexts that are not overtly psychotherapeutic tend
to be so focused on changing a young person that they unwittingly sabotage their ability to
find out what the young person really thinks, knowledge of which, ironically, would make
the helpers more effective change agents. Clergy, who are well versed in theology, tend to
challenge the youth‘s overtly expressed belief system in terms of the clergy‘s belief system
(e.g., a priest who responds to a youngster‘s atheism with quotations from the Bible, when
the Bible has no more credibility with the young atheist than does Homer‘s Iliad). Teachers,
if they have experience with Socratic Method, might be a bit more inquisitive than clergy,
but still tend to have a predetermined destination toward which their educational endeavors
point. Parents‘ alarm tends to thrust them into a caretaker mode that exacerbates the
normal separation conflicts young people have with their parents. Law enforcement
professionals tend to have a narrow area of concern (Were rules broken?) and think in
terms of rewards and punishments to motivate the youngster to do what adults desire.
These criticisms are not meant to suggest that theological argument, education, emotional
entreaty, or motivational analysis have no role in the goal of helping a youngster (or an
adult) involved in or flirting with a cultic or extremist group. I do believe, however, that
such actions have a better chance of success if they are based on an informed
understanding of how the person in question sees the world. Such understanding requires a
deep communication within a shared worldview or across different worldviews, which in turn
requires the patient courtesy, the methodological self-doubt, the ongoing respect of the
therapeutic process, even though the context of the communication is not overtly
psychotherapeutic.
Recommendation Three
Parents, teachers, clergy, law enforcement personnel and others who seek to
prevent young people or adults from following a path that leads toward cultic
entanglements or extremist violence should learn and cultivate the skills of deep,
respectful communication, which are so central to the process of behavioral and
belief change and communication across worldviews.
Recommendation Four
Cultic studies experts should develop resources and training programs designed to
teach helpers how to achieve the deep communication that underlies any attempt to
understand how others see the world.
Prevention
Kropveld (2004) emphasizes the importance of considering cultural, social, legal, and
political differences among countries in evaluating and designing preventive education
programs concerning cultic groups. Among the factors that must be considered are the
following:
