Cults and New Religious Movements

Cults and New Religious Movements

Leaving New Religious Movements

Introduction

Many researchers have studied NRMs since the 1960s

Much has been devoted to how and why people join but not how or why they leave

The Ebaughs

Helen Rose and Stuart Wright Ebaugh have studied the process of exiting religious groups, including:– Catholic women– Children of God– Moonies (Unification Church)– Hare Krishnas

Conceptualizing Defection

Disaffection = Affective– Emotional Withdrawal– Deterioration of emotional bonds

Disillusionment = Cognitive– Disbelief, doubt– Withdrawal of moral authority of leaders

Disaffiliation = Social Organization– Severance of ties of membership

Methodological Issues

3 major issues impact the validity of the accounts people offer of their experience in a NRM– Retrospective reporting– Social and organizational factors

influencing reconstruction– Temporal variability of accounts

Methodological Issues, Continued

Retrospective Reporting– One’s past is constantly being reconstructed

• Retrospective accounts may be inaccurate

Social and organizational factors in reconstruction– Example #1

• A departing nun may say she left because: “The Church was not responsive to demands for change.”

• Participation in a support group after leaving may lead her to conclude that: “I needed space to grow”

– Example #2• Those leaving a high demand NRM may conclude: “I didn’t

have the stuff it takes to be a truly committed member”• An ex-member who was with exit counselors might

conclude: “I was manipulated and pressured to make commitments that were not in my interests but, rather, in the interest of leaders whose motives were less than pure.”

In both examples the individual is drawing perspective and interpretation from organizations and individuals with whom he or she is interacting

Temporal Variability– Time may alter the way an ex-member feels

about the group– Time may also alter one’s perception about

how one felt at the time they left– Those who can’t get on with their lives are

more likely to harbor resentment and blame the group for their current situation

Theoretical Issues

Several theories have been offered to explain how and why people exit an NRM

Role theory– Defection as role exiting– Embracing an ex-status

• Disengaging from a formally meaningful role• Reestablishing identity in a new role

– Role residual– “Hangover identity”– “Guilt” for having abandoned a commitment– Societal Reactions– Shifting friendship networks

Causal Process Model– Crisis

• (e.g. breakdown of isolation from outside, hypocrisy of leadership, etc.)

– Review and reflection– Disaffection– Withdrawal– Cognitive transformation– Cognitive reorganization

Psychosocial Disruption– Expulsion

• Insubordination

• Rule violations

• Individual as burden to the group– Incapacity to care for self

– A real nerd

– Extraction• Involuntarily removed

• Voluntarily removed

“Brainwashing” and the process of deprogramming– Involuntary (coercive)

• Member is abducted and taken to an isolated location – Usually under false pretenses

• Member is interrogated non-stop

• Deprogrammer defames the group, the leadership, its beliefs, etc.

• The goal is to force the member to renounce the group, leader, and beliefs

Voluntary (non-coercive)– Member agrees to participate– Member may “talk” about h/her faith

rather than listen to deprogrammer the whole time

Deprogramming still occurs but courts have ruled on behalf of NRMs lately– Members who were forcibly abducted and

then returned sometimes sued their abductors for kidnapping

Empirical Knowledge

So what do we know about people who leave NRMs?– The brainwashing model suggests

• Leaving is difficult• Successful exits require deprogramming• Psychological scars are generally inevitable

– The brainwashing model lacks empirical evidence– In fact, what we know is:

• Most people who join an NRM leave; most leave within 2 years

• Most leave by their own choice• Wright found that about 67% felt “wiser for the

experience”

How one leaves can have ramifications for how they adjust later– James Lewis studied 154 people who left

NRMs• They left by different paths

– Involuntary exit counseling

– Voluntary exit counseling

– On their own (no exit counseling)