A controversial new ministry named "Momentus," while gaining popularity in some charismatic and small group circles, has nevertheless left conflicts, divided churches, and damaged lives in its wake. Depression and hospitalization have been documented results of the seminar, yet glowing testimonies of changed lives abound. Why? What is Momentus?

Some describe Momentus, a training program of Mashiyach Ministries, as a religious cult. While the terms "church," "sect," and "cult" have specific sociological meanings, the media and the public use them in very different ways. The terms "sect" and "cult" invoke emotional responses and discourage meaningful dialogue, and for that reason I will not use the term.

Do Momentus trainers "brainwash" seminar participants, or use "mind control" techniques? The term "brainwashing" was coined in 1951 to explain how American POWs could renounce the United States under intense pressure from Communist captors. It quickly gained popularity as a way to describe how people could be inducted into controversial religious groups.

In recent years, the lack of scientific evidence for "brainwashing," as well as ongoing sociological studies, have led scientists to conclude that it is largely a myth. The idea that a belief system can be irreversibly and completely altered is simply not true. The effects of coercive psychological techniques may be able to temporarily alter a belief system, but once exposed to a different environment, the individual can again change attitudes and beliefs.

As a result, sociologists have largely discarded the terms "brainwashing" and "mind control," though a few continue to use a model that is similar. Terms like "thought reform" and "coercive persuasion" are used by these scholars. Judged according to this model, Large Group Awareness Trainings such as Momentus deliberately use some coercive persuasion techniques, techniques defined by Richard J. Ofshe ("Coercive Persuasion and Attitude Change," Encyclopedia of Sociology) as, among other things:

• the reliance on intense interpersonal and psychological attack to destabilize an individual's sense of self to promote compliance;
• the use of an organized peer group; and
• applying interpersonal pressure to promote conformity.

Whether these techniques can justifiably be characterized as "thought reform" or "coercive persuasion" as Ofshe and others maintain, they are certainly techniques that I find objectionable, and which are characteristic of Momentus. While I may not regard Momentus as a "cult" which "brainwashes" seminar participants, I nevertheless question both its theology and its techniques.

A qualifying word may be appropriate at this point. Many people, some of them personal friends, have taken Momentus trainings and feel that they have personally benefited from them. My intent is not to criticize those who have been subjected to Momentus trainings, but rather to criticize the seminar and its techniques. I have no doubt that some good has come out of this training, though to be honest I believe many of the positive feelings are generated by calculated manipulation, as will be seen below.

In addition to being labeled a "cult," Momentus has also been criticized as "New Age deception," not least of all in David Jeremiah's book Invasion of Other Gods. (David Jeremiah is castigated in a position paper dedicated to his book on Momentus' web site, but surprisingly none of his allegations are answered. The point of the entire paper is to prove that Jeremiah is a false witness because he failed to approach Momentus directly with his criticisms in accordance with Matthew 18:15-17.)

Historically speaking, this charge is not without some merit, but again, loaded labels and vocabulary terms can easily cloud objective judgment. Just because a New Age adherent holds to a belief, for instance, does not automatically make that belief wrong. This is more a tactic of guilt-by-association than a sincere evaluation of a movement's teachings. For that reason, I will again avoid the black-and-white, emotionally-charged rhetoric of the counter-cult movement. Momentus has many roots, and some of those roots do lie in the occult. But what Momentus is today deserves to be judged on its own merits.

The reader is invited to read this section with a discerning and critical eye. Whereas there is definite value in considering the origins and development of the movement that produced Momentus, nevertheless these should not be considered a watertight argument against Momentus. Again, the training deserves to be judged on its own terms. On the other hand, a consideration of its origins and affiliations may address one of its principal arguments, that it is a distinctly Christian organization. This I do not hold to be true. Its techniques are neither the work of the Holy Spirit nor an outworking of historic Christian doctrine. They are simply tested and well-known psychological techniques intended to change thinking patterns.

The idea of groups like Momentus was conceived by Alexander Everett, a member of the Unity Church of Practical Christianity. In 1968 in Fort Worth, Texas, he founded Mind Dynamics, the forerunner of today's human-potential training organizations. Alexander intentionally drew on Edgar Cayce, Theosophy, Rosicrucianism, Egyptology, Silva Mind Control (involving self-hypnosis), and Unity.

The experiential four-day training was soon purchased by William Penn Patrick, the owner of a pyramid sales business called Holiday Magic. Patrick also owned a hard-hitting, confrontational program named Leadership Dynamics. Elements from both Mind Dynamics and Leadership Dynamics have continued on into today's human-potential trainings. Subsequent lawsuits destroyed both Mind Dynamics and Leadership Dynamics, and Holiday Magic was exposed as a pyramid scheme. Penn Patrick subsequently died when he crashed his F-86 at an air show.

With Mind Dynamics and Leadership Dynamics dismantled, former instructors founded a variety of other Large Group Awareness Trainings (LGATs). They include est (later, The Forum), Context Trainings, Personal Dynamics, Lifestream, PSI World Seminars, Actualizations, and Lifespring, founded in 1974.

One Lifespring trainer was Daniel Tochinni, who later founded Momentus. Momentus is essentially Lifespring with a thin Christian veneer: a LGAT that uses psychotherapeutic techniques like Gestalt therapy and primal scream therapy, among others.

The fact that Momentus uses psychotherapeutic techniques does not, however, automatically discredit the organization in my mind. I have long since discarded the black-and-white dichotomy between what is "of God" and what is "of man," therapy techniques that are "according to the Bible" and those which are "of the world." I do not believe that the Bible is a psychology textbook, nor that any form of counseling must be grounded in specific biblical proof-texts, as in Jay Adams' "nouthetic" counseling theory (to which I once subscribed). I myself have adapted secular exercises (like role-playing) into church seminar and education experiences.

Tochinni correctly observes that many who criticize Momentus for using secular techniques do not themselves operate in a black-and-white world. He writes, "the very same accusers use rock and roll in their seeker-sensitive services, icebreaker exercises in their home groups, as well as television and radio to broadcast the gospel around the world. Many employ psychological methods such as personality matrix sorters to identify gifts in their congregations and teach local businessmen how they can use their businesses to advance the kingdom or God. Somehow our accusers just can't make the leap to education" ("Christian Transformation and the Momentus Trainings").

The fact that Momentus' techniques are psychotherapeutic in nature, in other words, does not (in my mind) automatically invalidate them. There are good counseling techniques, and there are bad ones. My point is simply that they are neither uniquely Christian nor the direct work of the Holy Spirit. As with all counseling, God's Spirit may work through a variety of circumstances, including questionable or controversial techniques.

However, it is not appropriate to claim a supernatural basis for a psychotherapeutic technique. Momentus' book, Killing the Victim Before the Victim Kills You, is more honest about this point. It states, "The hope for a radical transformation of heart and character lives in each of us" (p. 177). A footnote on the next page defines "transformation" as a new way of talking about "sanctification." (I prefer the old langauge myself. "Sanctification" implies something about the goal of the "transformation.") Ironically, in a book devoted entirely to sanctification, the Holy Spirit isn't mentioned at all until the appendix.

Prospective seminar participants are promised personal transformation and spiritual liberation through Momentus training. Though forewarned that the training may be stressful and uncomfortable, however, the prospective participant is not exposed up front to the true nature of the training.

Anyone thinking about taking a Momentus training should be advised about what they are getting into. As mentioned in the previous section, it is a human-potential Large Group Awareness Training using various techniques, some of which are very similar to those of psychotherapy. The reader should be aware that trainers are not licensed therapists, so anyone even considering LGAT training may be well advised to consult a mental health care professional familiar with LGATs or Gestalt therapy.

Momentus' basic approach is to tear down the individual through authoritarian and confrontational means, force repressed feelings and assumptions to the surface, and reorient the individual to a different belief system. Humiliation, group pressure, and arbitrary requirements are forced upon the individual to create a great deal of stress, followed by a sudden release. (The very experience of undergoing great stress followed by release can create a feeling of euphoria as the body releases endorphins into the brain. I attribute much of the positive evaluation of the experience to this dynamic.)

The basic belief system forced upon the individual is what the trainers believe is the key to being transformed from a "victim" to a "victor." The key is to help individuals accept personal responsibility (read: blame) for anything bad that has ever happened to them, thereby taking control of their lives and forging their own destinies. Put another way, "whenever we abdicate our God-given place to govern ourselves, we surrender our power to determine our destiny -- our power to be victors" (Killing the Victim Before the Victim Kills You, p. 15. I personally have a problem with this doctrine itself, not just the coercive techniques that are used to teach it.)

Specifically, what happens at a Momentus training? I believe that anyone considering a Momentus seminar should know beforehand exactly what awaits him or her so that an informed decision can be made. To this end, I list below some of the activities and techniques as related by former participants.

The manipulative tactics begin before the training even starts. After having paid a hefty non-refundable fee, the seminar participant is asked to sign an agreement not to hold the trainers or sponsors responsible for any harm (including death) resulting from the experience. The use of a waiver in and of itself is not particularly wrong (though there is some question about its legal force, since its validity is determined partly by how adequately the waiving party has been informed.) However, if the waiver is not signed, the participant must either pay double the seminar fee (in addition to the initial payment) or not take the course and lose the initial payment. If the participant has lingering second thoughts, the prospect of wasting $150 may be just enough motivation to sign the waiver and proceed with the training.

Early in the course, participants are asked to select the least attractive person in the room to be a partner. (The negativity begins early.) Participants are then entrusted with the responsibility of seeing that their partners keep up with, and complete, the training. If a participant drops out of the training before the completion, for instance, the partner is threatened with punishment. Herein lies a second strong technique of manipulation: If the participant is considering leaving or dropping out, the prospect of causing trouble for the partner provides motivation to stay with the program.

A third technique is holding the entire group responsible for the performance of any one individual. For instance, a participant or participants may be judged as not doing good enough on a homework assignment. The trainer will then threaten to cancel the entire training unless the group can "persuade" the errant participant(s) to perform the task correctly. In this way, carefully controlled peer pressure is used to reinforce the homogenous group standard being imposed. (Incidentally, the threat to discontinue the training is always an empty threat. The trainer may make the threat several times in a row, but will not act on it.)

A fourth technique is the establishment of a large number of arbitrary rules, then insisting on total compliance. In order to create the illusion of consensual agreement, the rules are proposed and discussed one at a time until they are all agreed upon. Once established, the rules are strictly enforced. For instance, if a participant is not back in his/her seat quickly enough after a break, he/she can expect to be publicly castigated by the trainer.

Negative feedback and humiliation are essential elements of the training. The negative feedback comes both from the trainer and from the group as prompted by the trainer. For instance, groups are made to provide a negative evaluation of each individual on the basis of first impressions.

Another factor in increasing suggestibility is sleep deprivation. Overly demanding busywork/homework, combined with the stress of the training, can leave participants with only a few hours of sleep a night.

Provoking feelings of shame and guilt is another key technique in LGATs. In the case of Momentus, this takes the form of public confession of sin (regardless of how long ago the sins were committed, whether they have been forgiven, or how satisfactorily they have been resolved). Ironically, Momentus trainers can invoke a well-established Protestant doctrine to justify tearing down participants in this way: the doctrine of total depravity. (See Tochinni's "Christian Transformation and the Momentus Trainings.")

Though personal confession of sin and accountability are valid aspects of Christian life, however, personal boundaries are equally important. For example, some sins and personal struggles are better shared with a confidant or mentor than in front of an entire group of people. But Momentus establishes an artificial intimacy by forcing individuals to be totally open in a group setting.

Another Momentus exercise used to destabilize participants is the Lifeboat exercise, taken straight from the Lifespring training. Participants are asked to imagine that they are on a sinking ship. Each one is given popsickle sticks, and is asked to hand them out to others. Those who end up with the most popsickle sticks are the ones who get to go into the lifeboat; the rest sink.

The degrading part of the exercise is that each participant is forced to make an individual decision about each person of the group, deciding whether they live or die. Those who give away all their sticks are reprimanded for having committed suicide. When the ship "sinks," those who are not in the lifeboat must make speeches about how unworthy they are to live. The entire exercise is demeaning.

I do not doubt that some repressed memories and feelings may be brought to the surface through these LGAT exercises, and perhaps they can even be dealt with. On the other hand, I question whether every participant really needs to beat pillows to work through their anger at their parents, another exercise taken from psychotherapy.

Sociological studies to date seem inconclusive about whether there are real long-term benefits from LGATs. Interestingly, for the most part there appears to be only two reactions to Momentus: very positive and very negative. It seems that no one who takes the training can remain unaffected. That's due to the very nature of the program. Either it succeeds, or it doesn't, and with serious consequences. For most, the calculated application of pressure and stress, followed by the release and sense of vindication for having learned the new thinking pattern, provides a euphoric experience and hence a glowing testimony. For others, however, serious counseling is needed to recover.

The leaders of Momentus are feeling more acute criticism these days, particularly from the counter-cult movement. Both they and their critics speak in terms of black-white, orthodox-heretic, spirit-demon dichotomies. While having strong feelings about Momentus myself, I hope to avoid the level of discourse that has characterized the debate so far.

The case has been made that I am not in a position to criticize Momentus, not having had the training. Tochinni cites Matthew 18:15-17 to the effect that only those with first-hand experience, i.e. actual trainees, can legitimately criticize his organization, and he castigates aggrieved trainees who have not confronted him. However, it seems unrealistic to me that a person recovering from psychological trauma should be required to confront personally the organization's founder himself, particularly when the whole principle of his teaching and organization is that only victims themselves are to blame for their own suffering.

Critics who, like myself, have only second-hand information, based on conversations and written testimonies, are criticized as simply spreading slander, again on the basis of Matthew 18:15-17. But does this passage really speak to the issue of criticizing a public corporation in the first place? Paul did not personally address every one of his ideological rivals before criticizing them and their teachings in his epistles. Public figures and ministries should be open to public criticism.

Objectively evaluating Momentus has been difficult for me, partly because of the intensity of my emotional response on behalf of those who have been hurt by it coupled with the glowing testimonies of close friends. Avoiding charged terms such as "cult," "brainwashing," "mind control," New Age," "heretic," and "demonic," I have tried to evaluate it on the basis of history, sociology, and personal testimonies. I feel that this is the most appropriate level on which to criticize Momentus.

I also feel it is most helpful to criticize Momentus not as a professing Christian ministry, but as part of the larger human-potential movement, as a Large Group Awareness Training. This strips away the supernatural veneer, both positive and negative, and enables dialogue on the basis of the techniques themselves.

Even on this level, I find the teaching and tactics of Momentus to be highly objectionable. I do not regard as heretical those who have been subjected to Momentus training, and I have no desire to create conflict in the body of Christ. I regret the possibility of hurting or offending those friends who feel they have benefited from the training, but I strongly desire to forewarn potential seminar participants about the training's tactics. Momentus may promise an accelerated psychological breakthrough, but the risks are very real. A professional therapist may be a far safer bet.

Watson, Derek M., Tocchini, Daniel L., and Pinci, Larry, Killing the Victim Before the Victim Kills You (Santa Rosa, CA: Mashiyach Press), 1997.