Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 8
This fundamental recoding stems from a tolerance that is so absolute it becomes intolerant.
The underlying premise of the recoding is that in the religious world all religions have the
same goals and all are true. Those who disagree with this assumption of absolute tolerance
--those who believe that in the arena of religion, as in other arenas, there is the good and
the bad, the best and the worst --are not tolerated at all. Their critique of religion is
rejected by the proponents of "tolerance" as intolerance. Therefore, they cannot be
tolerated!
The process of religious change, which initially and primarily functions as a cosmological
recoding, is decidedly neither neutral nor objective. It operates in close relationship to the
limited number of converts, who in fact guide the process and function as catalysts. A
comprehensive and popular conversion and the consequent establishment of a Hinduist-
Buddhistic religion in the western world will depend on the progress of the process of
religious change. This progress in turn will depend on the progress of the process of
individual conversion. The two have a reciprocal relationship: more religious change makes
individual conversion easier more conversions make religious change easier. Nevertheless,
the two processes are also independent in that each is also influenced by other, distinct
factors.
Responses to New Religious Movements
To date the progress of religious change has occurred in a consistent and determined way.
This progress results in large part from the inability of the old religion's representatives to
notice it. The progress of religious change also results from the churches' systematically
separating themselves from popular religiosity. Their unwillingness to be the force that
forms popular religiosity enables others to take up the unfulfilled task.
Indeed, popular religiosity has developed a resentment toward the churches which have
abandoned it, and toward Christianity in general. Individuals whose religiosity is free of ties
will inevitably seek a religion which can give their "free-floating" religiosity meaning.
Oriental religion seems able to do this, first and foremost because of its vision of the world,
its cosmology.
This word refers to giving the cosmos an explanation and interpretation that are not
intrinsically present in it. Cosmology is a comprehensive system of symbols which gives
structure and order to the meaning of existence. In order to work, this system requires a
conscious development of rituals and symbols that people can use in their religious search
and experience. This new code for the understanding of the world and human existence is
what people seem to find to some degree in the new religious movements. Even though
these new codes may be contorted and unbelievable, they are nonetheless better than the
disorientation and bewilderment of living without meaning and direction.
That churches currently relate to the present processes of religious change and conversion
with almost total incomprehension and passivity --resentment even --is unfortunate. The
possibility of revitalization, however, presents the churches with an opportunity. They must
first seriously attempt to understand the historical movement of which we are a part.
History moves and we with it. It acts on us whether we like it or not, whether we realize it
or not. We are not able to stop it. But we can at any rate re-act more or less responsibly,
depending upon the clarity of our analysis and interpretation of historical data.
When in the middle of the next century some historian gives an account of the last part of
the twentieth century, one chapter title could well read like this: "The period when the most
decisive religious change took place, without the churches noticing it." But it could also read
like this: "The period when the most decisive religious change took place, and the churches
finally came back to reality."

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 9
Whether or not Christianity successfully meets the challenge of new religious movements
will depend upon how it responds. It must confront the new paradigms directly at the core
credal level, not merely at the superficial behavioral level. Unfortunately, in most western
countries the major criticism of new religious movements comes from secular organizations
that ignore the creedal question.
Many of the people supporting such organizations are relatives of cultists and former
cultists. These organizations understandably tend not to care much for the subtleties
involved in differentiating NRMs.
They also tend to respond negatively to research about NRMs, because researchers,
especially sociologists, do not generally stand up against cults, but "set the truth question
aside."
Parents organizations, however, also tend to set the truth question aside, for they consider
the cults only as arenas of exploitation having no genuine religious characteristics. To ask
the truth question in relation to NRMs would, for them, be as phony as to ask the truth
question in relation to the Mafia.
In fairness to the parents organizations, it should be noted that they do not operate as
religious bodies and do not deal positively with religion as a common option. They have no
alternative stand of their own. So of course they do not ask the truth question, even though
many members are often Christian or Jewish, although some seem to be decidedly anti-
Christian or anti-religion. Parents organizations will say that they do not care about
"creeds," only about "deeds." They will let people believe what they prefer. Only when the
creed is turned into wrong deeds are the parents organizations expected to react.
Although it may be necessary for organizations whose only common ground is the most
elementary standards of human rights to adhere to the "deed-not-the-creed" philosophy,
this view does not hold water intellectually. Should the world not have cared about Hitler's
Mein Kampf because that book was part of his creed? The evil deeds of the concentration
camps were already in the creed, which, consequently, should have been taken seriously.
One has to understand that a creed is a deed. And if one wants to stop evil deeds, one has
to react against evil creeds. But that makes an alternative creed necessary! That is where
the parents organizations get into real trouble. And the best of them are struggling with that
problem, for it is the problem of their own identities. Are they only united because of a
common negation? If so, then there is a serious problem.
First-Amendment Neurosis
In the marketplace the only goal that matters is to "get the organizations roaring along."
Success, and success only, matters. Make money and make more money. The means are
secondary. The only check is the law, and even that can be evaded, for every man has his
price. Ethical standards are considered as relevant for a businessman, including a religious
businessman, as for a bulldozer.
We have now become so accustomed to public-relations manipulations and sales tricks in
even religious matters that very few of us protest the many perversions of religions which
appear and appeal. Even clearly illegal practices are tolerated and critical voices silenced.
The term "permissive society" is normally applied to the sexual state of affairs. It is in fact
even more serious. We have become a permissive society concerning the misuse of other
persons' souls.
Mind-bending and soul-killing take place all over, and yet there are no laws against it.
Under the cover of religious freedom a deadly permissiveness has crept in.