Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1 1988 Page 55
Becoming a Candidate for Deviance
A member can become a candidate for the deviance label by either receiving literature from a
non-member or talking with a non-member. If members engage in such activity, they are
reported to the sect's leadership. At this point, members also may be placed on ―the list,‖ and
marked as a ―potentially dangerous individual.‖
Another way in which one becomes a candidate for deviance is simply to begin to think about and
evaluate what is taking place within the sect. One may not need to get information from the
outside, but simply begin to notice contradictions and unethical practices from within. Usually,
this process happens to those who have ―passed the tests‖ of loyalty and devotion and have been
recognized as leaders. These members are then allowed to develop relationships with the sects
inner leadership and structure. They are given access to the private leadership meetings, the
national elders' conferences, as well as admission into the classification priesthood. Over 50
elders, administrators, editors, media and public relations executives, and business partners have
left the sect and have been placed on ―the most dangerous fist.‖ A few have been officially labeled
as factious, but most of them have been labeled as ―victims‖ of a handful of despicably evil
individuals who continually are mentioned when defections occur.
Members can become potential candidates for excommunication by simply asking what the sect
calls ―fingerprint questions.‖ These questions are, in a sense, classified, and may indicate that the
member has waded through the surface ―PR‖ and has grasped the significance of the underlying
issues and norms of the group.
Possible responses of the sect to this problem are: removal from leadership positions (―stepping
down‖), enforced sabbaticals (―exile‖), secret investigations (―marking‖), and inquisitions (―gang-
ups‖). The actual response to a specific situation depends entirely upon the target's response to
the information or the questions that he has. If members keep it to themselves and are not seen
by others, they can continue undetected in their regular role. If members share the information
with the leadership, they are subjected to intensive ―reeducation‖ campaigns where the questions
are skirted and the member is exhorted about violating communicational norms. This example is
appropos:
[Dave] At DC '86, ...[one of the sects apostles] taught on submission. His talk
really bothered me. Actually there were a lot of things at DC '86 that really
bothered me. One of the main things was his talk on loyalty. We had some
questions we wanted to ask him. We weren't sure that we agreed with him. After
the talk we went and talked to him about a couple of the points about loyalty and
leadership. Basically, he just told us, ―We shouldn't even be asking him these
things. We should just accept them on his authority.‖ And when that was explained
to me I thought, ―You've got to be kidding.‖ How can you just accept that because
he says so? He just said that we were too critical a lot of times and we have to
learn how to be ―in our place.‖
If the member continues to share his information, questions, or concerns after he approaches the
leadership, the sect‘s inquisition process is often set in motion. Depending upon the seriousness
of the information and the status of the individual, the inquisition can go on subtly and secretly
for years, or it can be accomplished in a matter of days or even hours.
It is important to note here that the only way someone is not ―marked‖ is by suppressing normal
communicational and rational mental processes after hearing a ―negative report,‖ or training
himself to actually block out, negotiate, or reinterpret what he sees and hears.
Deviance in a Non-falsifiable System
Members are subjected to strict guidelines regarding the receipt of information. ―Negative‖
information about leaders and the group is always slander and an evil report. Members are also
Becoming a Candidate for Deviance
A member can become a candidate for the deviance label by either receiving literature from a
non-member or talking with a non-member. If members engage in such activity, they are
reported to the sect's leadership. At this point, members also may be placed on ―the list,‖ and
marked as a ―potentially dangerous individual.‖
Another way in which one becomes a candidate for deviance is simply to begin to think about and
evaluate what is taking place within the sect. One may not need to get information from the
outside, but simply begin to notice contradictions and unethical practices from within. Usually,
this process happens to those who have ―passed the tests‖ of loyalty and devotion and have been
recognized as leaders. These members are then allowed to develop relationships with the sects
inner leadership and structure. They are given access to the private leadership meetings, the
national elders' conferences, as well as admission into the classification priesthood. Over 50
elders, administrators, editors, media and public relations executives, and business partners have
left the sect and have been placed on ―the most dangerous fist.‖ A few have been officially labeled
as factious, but most of them have been labeled as ―victims‖ of a handful of despicably evil
individuals who continually are mentioned when defections occur.
Members can become potential candidates for excommunication by simply asking what the sect
calls ―fingerprint questions.‖ These questions are, in a sense, classified, and may indicate that the
member has waded through the surface ―PR‖ and has grasped the significance of the underlying
issues and norms of the group.
Possible responses of the sect to this problem are: removal from leadership positions (―stepping
down‖), enforced sabbaticals (―exile‖), secret investigations (―marking‖), and inquisitions (―gang-
ups‖). The actual response to a specific situation depends entirely upon the target's response to
the information or the questions that he has. If members keep it to themselves and are not seen
by others, they can continue undetected in their regular role. If members share the information
with the leadership, they are subjected to intensive ―reeducation‖ campaigns where the questions
are skirted and the member is exhorted about violating communicational norms. This example is
appropos:
[Dave] At DC '86, ...[one of the sects apostles] taught on submission. His talk
really bothered me. Actually there were a lot of things at DC '86 that really
bothered me. One of the main things was his talk on loyalty. We had some
questions we wanted to ask him. We weren't sure that we agreed with him. After
the talk we went and talked to him about a couple of the points about loyalty and
leadership. Basically, he just told us, ―We shouldn't even be asking him these
things. We should just accept them on his authority.‖ And when that was explained
to me I thought, ―You've got to be kidding.‖ How can you just accept that because
he says so? He just said that we were too critical a lot of times and we have to
learn how to be ―in our place.‖
If the member continues to share his information, questions, or concerns after he approaches the
leadership, the sect‘s inquisition process is often set in motion. Depending upon the seriousness
of the information and the status of the individual, the inquisition can go on subtly and secretly
for years, or it can be accomplished in a matter of days or even hours.
It is important to note here that the only way someone is not ―marked‖ is by suppressing normal
communicational and rational mental processes after hearing a ―negative report,‖ or training
himself to actually block out, negotiate, or reinterpret what he sees and hears.
Deviance in a Non-falsifiable System
Members are subjected to strict guidelines regarding the receipt of information. ―Negative‖
information about leaders and the group is always slander and an evil report. Members are also
