Leaving New Religions

Abstract

Early studies of joining and leaving new religious movements (henceforth nrms) exhibited deficiencies found in research on religious conversion in general. These include a tendency to sharply distinguish the preand postconversion identity of nrm members, and to view leaving as a simple process. New religions were compared to established religions, and the vocabulary used to describe nrm members differed from that used for Buddhists or Christians. Terms like “recruit” for “convert,” and “affiliation” and “disaffiliation” for “conversion” and “apostasy” showed that nrms were regarded as social movements or “cults” not “religions” (Richardson 1993: 352–354). Disaffiliation, except in cases of alleged “brainwashing” involving deprogrammers (Melton 2004: 232–235), was rarely of interest. From the 1980s the study of joining and leaving nrms became more nuanced; it is evident that people leave for a range of reasons. All leavers (like all joiners) are not identical; some retain faith while abandoning membership, while others abandon both. David Bromley has posited three exit roles for leavers departing organisations: Defector, Whistle-blower, and Apostate (Bromley 1998a: 145). The status of each leaver depends upon the degree of tension with broader culture that the organisation manifests. The majority of leavers do not engage in public airing of grievances, loss of faith, or dispute with religious organisations, but experience departure as an “uncontested leave-taking” (Bromley 1998a: 146). Whistle-blowers and apostates have more difficult exits; they are perceived as disloyal and may be voluble critics of their former religion. Apostates may receive threats and even go into hiding. Because nrms are, in Bromley’s terms, “subversive,” exhibiting a high degree of tension with society, apostate roles are prominent for ex-members (Bromley 1998a: 153). There is also doubt about the use of ex-member testimonies. Benjamin D. Zablocki posited “believer,” “apostate,” and “ethnographer” sources in research on nrms. He argued “there is very little difference between the reliability (that is, stability across time) of accounts from believers and ex-believers (or apostates)” (cited in Carter 1998: 222). The validity of ex-member accounts is harder to ascertain, given believers