Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1998, page 31
reform program, mind-control mitigates an individual‘s moral responsibility, although it does
not remove it entirely and (3) there is no conflict between biblical theology and the reality
of mind-control.1 For us, theological considerations inform our understanding of the
sociological and psychological destruction caused by cults, although others hold similar
positions without considering theological issues. Cults distort one‘s perceptions both of
natural reality (sociological and psychological) and spiritual reality. In the Christian
tradition, the former is supposed to reveal the latter therefore, those interested in spiritual
issues must address both sides in order to minister adequately to former cult members.
The Passantinos misstate the fundamental concepts of mind-control, then imply that many
countercult workers do not support the mind-control theory, and finally argue that the
mind-control concept is counter to or incompatible with biblical Christianity. Whether or not
all, most, or only a few countercult workers support a mind-control model is irrelevant to
our critique of the Passantinos‘ misrepresentations. Certainly, experience with models of
psychotherapy has shown that different models can be applied with equal effectiveness to
similar situations. Therefore, there is room for disagreement about which theoretical model
is most internally consistent, parsimonious, and consistent with empirical data. We do not
claim that current mind-control models are the end-all and be-all of countercult thinking.
Indeed, we believe that this field needs newer theoretical models that are more amenable to
empirical testing. We are not so much defending the mind-control model as we are refuting
the Passantinos‘ misleading interpretation of that model. If the model is to be criticized, let
it be criticized for what it really says, not for misrepresentations of what it says. We use the
term ―mind-control,‖ despite its sometimes being used in a sensationalized way, because we
believe it expresses in simple language what this dispute is about, namely, the control
(which doesn‘t necessarily mean ―total control‖) of the mind by forces outside that mind.
Exit Counseling and Postcult Treatment
The Passantinos‘ article begins with a description of a concerned parent seeking help. The
authors cite former Unificationist and current exit counselor Steve Hassan as stating that
the average fee for exit counseling is $3,000 plus expenses for about four days of exit
counseling. That is probably not too far off the mark. In spite of the authors‘ insinuation
that exit counselors make good money, few have a gross annual income of more than
$35,000. Because of the nature of their work, exit counselors have to be on call virtually 24
hours a day, like firemen and paramedics. The $3,000 to $4,000 is not much, given that an
average of one case a month is about all that is possible --many exit counselors do not
even do that many cases. Many counselors spend much time in research and preparation,
and they have to be willing to go where circumstances demand. Considering the work
involved in a thorough exit counseling, we believe that the Passantinos‘ reaction to exit
counselors‘ fees is unwarranted.
The Passantinos‘ implied criticism of the fees for postcult residential treatment
demonstrates their complete ignorance of the overhead and staffing costs in maintaining a
center such as the Wellspring Retreat and Resource Center, where we work. If Wellspring
were making as much money as the Passantinos insinuate, it wouldn‘t have a history of
financial crises, as had all other postcult rehabilitation centers, of which Wellspring is the
only survivor. Wellspring‘s weekly fee for room, board, and a highly individualized treatment
program (we rarely have more than three clients at one time) is lower than that of some
specialized psychiatric inpatient facilities.
The Passantinos write, ―Of course, there were no guarantees: some ex-cultists needed
additional in-patient counseling at a special ‗recovery center‘‖ (p. 31). This statement
implies that exit counseling is unreliable. It also ignores the reality of postcult psychological
distress that calls for professional treatment. Research (Martin, Langone, Dole, &Wiltrout,
1992) on the psychological state of cult members before and after exit counseling
reform program, mind-control mitigates an individual‘s moral responsibility, although it does
not remove it entirely and (3) there is no conflict between biblical theology and the reality
of mind-control.1 For us, theological considerations inform our understanding of the
sociological and psychological destruction caused by cults, although others hold similar
positions without considering theological issues. Cults distort one‘s perceptions both of
natural reality (sociological and psychological) and spiritual reality. In the Christian
tradition, the former is supposed to reveal the latter therefore, those interested in spiritual
issues must address both sides in order to minister adequately to former cult members.
The Passantinos misstate the fundamental concepts of mind-control, then imply that many
countercult workers do not support the mind-control theory, and finally argue that the
mind-control concept is counter to or incompatible with biblical Christianity. Whether or not
all, most, or only a few countercult workers support a mind-control model is irrelevant to
our critique of the Passantinos‘ misrepresentations. Certainly, experience with models of
psychotherapy has shown that different models can be applied with equal effectiveness to
similar situations. Therefore, there is room for disagreement about which theoretical model
is most internally consistent, parsimonious, and consistent with empirical data. We do not
claim that current mind-control models are the end-all and be-all of countercult thinking.
Indeed, we believe that this field needs newer theoretical models that are more amenable to
empirical testing. We are not so much defending the mind-control model as we are refuting
the Passantinos‘ misleading interpretation of that model. If the model is to be criticized, let
it be criticized for what it really says, not for misrepresentations of what it says. We use the
term ―mind-control,‖ despite its sometimes being used in a sensationalized way, because we
believe it expresses in simple language what this dispute is about, namely, the control
(which doesn‘t necessarily mean ―total control‖) of the mind by forces outside that mind.
Exit Counseling and Postcult Treatment
The Passantinos‘ article begins with a description of a concerned parent seeking help. The
authors cite former Unificationist and current exit counselor Steve Hassan as stating that
the average fee for exit counseling is $3,000 plus expenses for about four days of exit
counseling. That is probably not too far off the mark. In spite of the authors‘ insinuation
that exit counselors make good money, few have a gross annual income of more than
$35,000. Because of the nature of their work, exit counselors have to be on call virtually 24
hours a day, like firemen and paramedics. The $3,000 to $4,000 is not much, given that an
average of one case a month is about all that is possible --many exit counselors do not
even do that many cases. Many counselors spend much time in research and preparation,
and they have to be willing to go where circumstances demand. Considering the work
involved in a thorough exit counseling, we believe that the Passantinos‘ reaction to exit
counselors‘ fees is unwarranted.
The Passantinos‘ implied criticism of the fees for postcult residential treatment
demonstrates their complete ignorance of the overhead and staffing costs in maintaining a
center such as the Wellspring Retreat and Resource Center, where we work. If Wellspring
were making as much money as the Passantinos insinuate, it wouldn‘t have a history of
financial crises, as had all other postcult rehabilitation centers, of which Wellspring is the
only survivor. Wellspring‘s weekly fee for room, board, and a highly individualized treatment
program (we rarely have more than three clients at one time) is lower than that of some
specialized psychiatric inpatient facilities.
The Passantinos write, ―Of course, there were no guarantees: some ex-cultists needed
additional in-patient counseling at a special ‗recovery center‘‖ (p. 31). This statement
implies that exit counseling is unreliable. It also ignores the reality of postcult psychological
distress that calls for professional treatment. Research (Martin, Langone, Dole, &Wiltrout,
1992) on the psychological state of cult members before and after exit counseling
