Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2009, Page 5
Unlike established psychotherapies that enjoy the support of university degrees and
professional licenses, exit counseling by any name has no specific support or professional
validation. Anyone can call himself an exit counselor or deprogrammer because the field has
no enforceable professional standards. Nevertheless, anyone serious about exit counseling
as a vocation should have an educated interest in social psychology, comparative religion,
and family counseling. Perhaps it is ironic that controversial maverick movements attract
maverick remedies. Based on my extensive experience in the field since 1980, my hope with
this paper is to add to a professional and general understanding of what has developed as
the purpose and process of deprogramming. To put this in context, I wish to introduce a
four-point model of what I recognize as harmful enough cult activity for me to agree, as a
deprogrammer, to intervene.
Cults: Healthy and Harmful
Facets of potentially harmful cult activity as a closed system include:
Transpersonal attraction
Exclusive leadership
Circular tension
Exit perils
Before I describe what I mean by an unhealthy cult, note that I believe that being in a cult
can involve healthy devotional activity. Healthier cults remain open to a wider frame of
social moderation and reference. By any definition, a typical Catholic monastery or
cloistered order of nuns qualifies as cultic but as a result of the wider moderation of a less
radical authority, these devotional organizations tend toward stability and have checks and
balances. Moderation for monasteries flows from a presiding bishop and, in the case of
nuns, ―outsider‖ priests as spiritual directors and confessors under the even broader
authorities of the Vatican and the surrounding secular government. Healthy monasteries
abide by local laws. One could argue the same for healthier Buddhist, Sufi, and Hindu orders
based on more intense devotional systems than expressed by the overall religious culture in
which these orders occur.
In healthy cults, the members can appeal to authorities outside of the leader to moderate
the leader‘s power and to dismiss the leader, if necessary. The group‘s transcendental
purpose or organizing principle is not identified with the leader or totally controlled by the
leader for life. For example, in my embattled tradition of Catholicism, the pope, especially
since the Vatican II clarifications four decades ago, is no more essentially holy or ―saved‖
than any other Christian. The tradition reveres many ―saints in heaven‖ who were in life
persecuted by the very Church they served. I view this as a healthy feature of the Catholic
―cult of the pope‖ because common folks share equally with popes in the transcendent
principle as held in the Catholic ―cult of the Eucharist.‖
In secular society, devotional cults form around sports teams, and these cults have some
radical fans. The moderating influence of the team and the surrounding society prevents a
radical fan from controlling the team and most of the other fans. In harmful cults that
operate within self-sealing or closed systems, the moderating influences fade as effective
social and psychological controls over the power and often malignant narcissism of the
leaders [see Figure 5 later in this article for the ―Cult (healthy type)‖ description].
The model I propose borrows heavily from many earlier approaches. For references, I
recommend Bounded Choice (Lalich, 2004), Them and Us (Deikman, 2003), Thought
Reform and the Psychology of Totalism (Lifton, 1989), Cults in Our Midst (Singer with Lalich,
2003), Releasing the Bonds (Hassan, 2000), and Brainwashing (Taylor, 2004). Also,
Zablocki‘s work on ―exit costs‖ and brainwashing in Misunderstanding Cults (Zablocki and
Unlike established psychotherapies that enjoy the support of university degrees and
professional licenses, exit counseling by any name has no specific support or professional
validation. Anyone can call himself an exit counselor or deprogrammer because the field has
no enforceable professional standards. Nevertheless, anyone serious about exit counseling
as a vocation should have an educated interest in social psychology, comparative religion,
and family counseling. Perhaps it is ironic that controversial maverick movements attract
maverick remedies. Based on my extensive experience in the field since 1980, my hope with
this paper is to add to a professional and general understanding of what has developed as
the purpose and process of deprogramming. To put this in context, I wish to introduce a
four-point model of what I recognize as harmful enough cult activity for me to agree, as a
deprogrammer, to intervene.
Cults: Healthy and Harmful
Facets of potentially harmful cult activity as a closed system include:
Transpersonal attraction
Exclusive leadership
Circular tension
Exit perils
Before I describe what I mean by an unhealthy cult, note that I believe that being in a cult
can involve healthy devotional activity. Healthier cults remain open to a wider frame of
social moderation and reference. By any definition, a typical Catholic monastery or
cloistered order of nuns qualifies as cultic but as a result of the wider moderation of a less
radical authority, these devotional organizations tend toward stability and have checks and
balances. Moderation for monasteries flows from a presiding bishop and, in the case of
nuns, ―outsider‖ priests as spiritual directors and confessors under the even broader
authorities of the Vatican and the surrounding secular government. Healthy monasteries
abide by local laws. One could argue the same for healthier Buddhist, Sufi, and Hindu orders
based on more intense devotional systems than expressed by the overall religious culture in
which these orders occur.
In healthy cults, the members can appeal to authorities outside of the leader to moderate
the leader‘s power and to dismiss the leader, if necessary. The group‘s transcendental
purpose or organizing principle is not identified with the leader or totally controlled by the
leader for life. For example, in my embattled tradition of Catholicism, the pope, especially
since the Vatican II clarifications four decades ago, is no more essentially holy or ―saved‖
than any other Christian. The tradition reveres many ―saints in heaven‖ who were in life
persecuted by the very Church they served. I view this as a healthy feature of the Catholic
―cult of the pope‖ because common folks share equally with popes in the transcendent
principle as held in the Catholic ―cult of the Eucharist.‖
In secular society, devotional cults form around sports teams, and these cults have some
radical fans. The moderating influence of the team and the surrounding society prevents a
radical fan from controlling the team and most of the other fans. In harmful cults that
operate within self-sealing or closed systems, the moderating influences fade as effective
social and psychological controls over the power and often malignant narcissism of the
leaders [see Figure 5 later in this article for the ―Cult (healthy type)‖ description].
The model I propose borrows heavily from many earlier approaches. For references, I
recommend Bounded Choice (Lalich, 2004), Them and Us (Deikman, 2003), Thought
Reform and the Psychology of Totalism (Lifton, 1989), Cults in Our Midst (Singer with Lalich,
2003), Releasing the Bonds (Hassan, 2000), and Brainwashing (Taylor, 2004). Also,
Zablocki‘s work on ―exit costs‖ and brainwashing in Misunderstanding Cults (Zablocki and
