Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1998, page 35
had little or no control and therefore they need not feel either guilt or shame
because of their experience‖ (Wellspring Messenger, 4(5), p.1.
November/December 1993).
While the Wellspring statement might be slightly overstated, the Passantinos overstate it
further in their summary. By itself, the Wellspring statement could be broadly interpreted,
as the Passantinos have chosen to do. However, the original context is concerned
specifically with joining a cult.2 It was not a blanket statement concerning anything and
everything cult members may have done after they joined. Regardless, our experience in
treating more than 400 former cultists and interviewing hundreds more indicates that most
people who join cults think they‘re joining a good group, a moral group, a healthy group.
But this is largely because they have not been afforded full information about the group
they are joining. We would agree that those who join cults are ―guilty‖ of not asking all the
right questions, of not examining the cult‘s claims thoroughly enough against the records of
history and Scripture, of not adequately applying the rules of logic to the group‘s teachings
and explanations, and of not having an adequate knowledge of coercive persuasion
techniques. In other words, cult recruits are ―guilty‖ of allowing themselves to be deceived.
But is that a sin? Should we rebuke the victim of a con artist for allowing himself to be
victimized? Do we blame the battered wife for falling in love with and marrying a batterer?
We feel it is crucial to distinguish between true guilt and false guilt. Cult members are
constantly made to feel guilty for actions and thoughts which neither society nor the Bible
would consider sinful. In such cases, the guilt is false and one needs to understand and
accept that and move beyond it. (The Passantinos imply as much when they refer later to
―unscriptural feelings of guilt‖ [p. 33].) Where truly sinful, immoral, or illegal actions have
been committed, they need to be acknowledged and owned by the perpetrators. We insist,
however, that to the extent that such actions are committed while under the influence of
mind-control techniques, or a thought-reform program, to that extent the perpetrator must
be held less culpable.
Under mind-control a man may be persuaded to believe or do things that would have
normally violated his conscience. His conscience may tell him that an action or belief is
wrong, but what the cult leader has persuaded him of has so strongly influenced him that it
may override his conscience. He may be led to believe that the promptings of his conscience
are really of his ―lower nature,‖ ―of the flesh,‖ and that the mission of the group is of a
―higher purpose,‖ that the thoughts of his conscience are doubts that show lack of faith or
signs of rebellion. Thus, he may still have a conscience, but through the powerful influence
of the group he has reinterpreted it, or reframed his moral outlook.
The Passantinos seem unable to conceive of noncoercive mind-control that does allow for
some measure of ―free will.‖ No one drags people into a cult. They do join freely most of the
time. When they don‘t, it‘s the rare exception rather than the rule. The point here is not
whether these people are acting as free, volitional, rational beings. The point is they don‘t
join a cult --that is, they don‘t see the group as a cult. They don‘t see the fine print
because in most cases, it is kept from them. The prevalence of such perceptual and
judgmental errors in all areas of life is why we have laws regarding defective products,
―truth in advertising,‖ and fraud. It is also why for centuries the law has recognized the
concept of undue influence. The same principles hold here.
The Passantinos do not seem to realize that human beings operate by certain laws of human
behavior. Consider the case of a Christian college student who goes out and buys a used
car, considering herself to be very responsible. Later, she finds out that the car is not as
―perfect‖ as the salesman told her it was. In fact, it throws a rod on her way to work. She
goes back to try to have the car fixed, but the salesman informs her that the warranty is
also not exactly what he told her when she bought the car. Now, the unfortunate girl is left
had little or no control and therefore they need not feel either guilt or shame
because of their experience‖ (Wellspring Messenger, 4(5), p.1.
November/December 1993).
While the Wellspring statement might be slightly overstated, the Passantinos overstate it
further in their summary. By itself, the Wellspring statement could be broadly interpreted,
as the Passantinos have chosen to do. However, the original context is concerned
specifically with joining a cult.2 It was not a blanket statement concerning anything and
everything cult members may have done after they joined. Regardless, our experience in
treating more than 400 former cultists and interviewing hundreds more indicates that most
people who join cults think they‘re joining a good group, a moral group, a healthy group.
But this is largely because they have not been afforded full information about the group
they are joining. We would agree that those who join cults are ―guilty‖ of not asking all the
right questions, of not examining the cult‘s claims thoroughly enough against the records of
history and Scripture, of not adequately applying the rules of logic to the group‘s teachings
and explanations, and of not having an adequate knowledge of coercive persuasion
techniques. In other words, cult recruits are ―guilty‖ of allowing themselves to be deceived.
But is that a sin? Should we rebuke the victim of a con artist for allowing himself to be
victimized? Do we blame the battered wife for falling in love with and marrying a batterer?
We feel it is crucial to distinguish between true guilt and false guilt. Cult members are
constantly made to feel guilty for actions and thoughts which neither society nor the Bible
would consider sinful. In such cases, the guilt is false and one needs to understand and
accept that and move beyond it. (The Passantinos imply as much when they refer later to
―unscriptural feelings of guilt‖ [p. 33].) Where truly sinful, immoral, or illegal actions have
been committed, they need to be acknowledged and owned by the perpetrators. We insist,
however, that to the extent that such actions are committed while under the influence of
mind-control techniques, or a thought-reform program, to that extent the perpetrator must
be held less culpable.
Under mind-control a man may be persuaded to believe or do things that would have
normally violated his conscience. His conscience may tell him that an action or belief is
wrong, but what the cult leader has persuaded him of has so strongly influenced him that it
may override his conscience. He may be led to believe that the promptings of his conscience
are really of his ―lower nature,‖ ―of the flesh,‖ and that the mission of the group is of a
―higher purpose,‖ that the thoughts of his conscience are doubts that show lack of faith or
signs of rebellion. Thus, he may still have a conscience, but through the powerful influence
of the group he has reinterpreted it, or reframed his moral outlook.
The Passantinos seem unable to conceive of noncoercive mind-control that does allow for
some measure of ―free will.‖ No one drags people into a cult. They do join freely most of the
time. When they don‘t, it‘s the rare exception rather than the rule. The point here is not
whether these people are acting as free, volitional, rational beings. The point is they don‘t
join a cult --that is, they don‘t see the group as a cult. They don‘t see the fine print
because in most cases, it is kept from them. The prevalence of such perceptual and
judgmental errors in all areas of life is why we have laws regarding defective products,
―truth in advertising,‖ and fraud. It is also why for centuries the law has recognized the
concept of undue influence. The same principles hold here.
The Passantinos do not seem to realize that human beings operate by certain laws of human
behavior. Consider the case of a Christian college student who goes out and buys a used
car, considering herself to be very responsible. Later, she finds out that the car is not as
―perfect‖ as the salesman told her it was. In fact, it throws a rod on her way to work. She
goes back to try to have the car fixed, but the salesman informs her that the warranty is
also not exactly what he told her when she bought the car. Now, the unfortunate girl is left
