Conversion: Toward a Holistic Model of
Religious Change
Lewis R. Rambo
The remarkable and unexpected religious resurgence of the last
two decades has triggered much discussion and dismay. For therapists,
social scientists, and clergy, no topic has created more controversy
than the nature of the conversion and recruitment processes
employed by various religious leaders, organizations, and their agents.
At the same time, disciplinary myopia has presented a major obstacle
to quality scholarship. This paper provides a model which can serve
as a framework in which the nature of the conversion process can be
seen more adequately. Systematic, careful, and rigorous comparison
and assessment of the dynamics of conversion is mandatory before a
sophisticated theory of conversion can be developed.
A viable model of conversion is possible only when it takes into account
the religious system's paradigm or model of conversion, appreciates
the metaphors and images of the transformation envisioned,
and delineates the methods and techniques utilized by the religious
community to accomplish its goals. Furthermore, any assessment of a
scholarly model of conversion must carefully examine the strengths
and limitations of the underlying disciplinary assumptions and models,
the guiding metaphors and images which shape the interpretation,
and the research methods which influence the modes of understanding
of the phenomenon. Many studies of conversion have
been severely limited because their general orientation was restricted
to one disciplinary perspective, one religious tradition or subgroup
within a tradition, and one guiding set of assumptions (Ikenga-Metuh,
1985; Richardson, 1985; Kilbourne & Richardson, 1988).
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Harvard University Center for
Study of World Religions, May 13, 1989. Professors Lamin Sanneh and Sharon Parks
deserve special thanks for their comments and support. Dorothy Wall's editorial skills
and encouragement are deeply appreciated.
Pastoral Psychology, Vol. 38(1), Fall 1989
© 1989 Human Sciences Press 47
48 Pastoral Psychology
Definitions of conversion abound. Some restrict conversion to sudden,
drastic changes in beliefs, behaviors, and affiliations, while others
include gradual and less inclusive forms of alterations. The debates
about the precise nature of conversion engage both scholars and
believers. It is my view that no single, pure form of conversion exists,
but that conversion is a malleable phenomenon, subject to the
structural, ideological, and personality demands of the potential converts,
proselytizers, and circumstances. "Genuine" conversion is defined
and elicited by a particular group's set of normative prescriptions
and proscriptions. The scholarly enterprise, therefore, should be
descriptive rather than normative. Scholars should observe, understand,
interpret, and explain conversion as it is actually advocated
and practiced. The debates about whether or not conversion is sudden
or gradual, total or partial, active or passive, internal or external, can
be put in perspective in two ways. One is to approach the topic descriptively.
Another is to see the processes involved as actually occurring
on a continuum between the polarities advocated by different
factions (Scroggs & Douglas, 1967; Travisano, 1970; Lofland &
Skonovd, 1981).
A major theme of this paper will be that conversion is a process of
religious change that takes place in a dynamic force field of people,
events, ideologies, institutions, expectations, and experiences. It is assumed
that (a) conversion is a process, rather than a single event; (b)
conversion is contextual and cannot be extricated from the fabric of
relationships, processes, and ideologies which provide the matrix of
religious change; and (c) factors involved in the conversion process
are multiple, interactive, and cumulative. While there are unique aspects
of particular conversions, it is also assumed that there can be
broad descriptions of conversion that are useful in the comparison
and assessment of conversion theories. There is no one cause of conversion
and no one simple consequence of the process.
Holistic Model
The model proposed here is a heuristic framework, enabling a student
of the phenomenon to ask a wide range of questions and explore
various problems. Through a survey of literature, interviews with
converts, and participant-observation research, I have sought to outline
a range of issues that should be considered in the analysis and
assessment of conversion.
Lewis R. Rambo 49
Four Features of the Model
Conversion is a process of change that takes place in a dynamic
force field. No model can be totally inclusive of the whole of reality,
but I would suggest that the study of conversion must include, at the
very least, the following components: cultural, social, personality,
and religious systems. For conversion to be understood in all its richness,
variety, and complexity, the domains of anthropology, sociology,
psychology, and religious studies must be taken into account.
Cultural, social, personal, and religious domains carry different
value or weight according to the particular situation. In some instances,
the social mechanisms of group control may be so effective
that they overpower the influence of culture, person, and religion. In
other situations, the religious sphere is the dominant force and thus
overwhelms the others. In the study of conversion, therefore, all these
dimensions must be given serious consideration, but one must be
aware of the variable relevance and potency of each domain. Researchers
from particular disciplines tend, even when they are open
to the influence of other factors, to give undue weight to their own
point of view. Psychologists focus primarily on the individual convert,
sociologists generally see conversion as the result of forces mobilized
and shaped by social institutions, and religious persons emphasize
the dominant influence of God and minimize the impact of other factors.
Anthropologists are the least likely to be so limited by one narrow
perspective. As a holistic human science, anthropology may
sometimes serve as a model to those of us immersed in disciplines
which demand loyalty to one point of view.
In examining these four components--culture, society, individual
person, and religion--the following questions need to be considered:
what relative weight should be given to each component, given the
particular conversion under consideration? In what ways do these factors
interact with one another? What significance does the convert attribute
to these elements? What significance does the observer give to
each component? If these assessments are different, explore the divergence.
Which theoretical orientation should one utilize within anthropology,
sociology, psychology, and religious studies/theology?
What are the methods used in the studies under consideration? What
are the goals of the scholars (denigration, advocacy, or trivializing of
the phenomenon of conversion)?
The role of religion in conversion often poses a special problem.
50 Pastoral Psychology
Reading much of the literature on conversion in psychology, sociology,
and anthropology, one would scarcely know that conversion was
a religious experience. The religious dimension of conversion is often
ignored for several reasons. First, exploring the role of religion is
simply difficult methodologically. How can we understand, predict,
and control that which is generally invisible to the outsider, mysterious
and sacred to the insider, and ridiculed or trivialized by outsiders?
Second, many of us do not want to give serious consideration to the
religious factor. It would mean that we might have to reconsider our
own world-view and lifestyle, and confront the possibility that we are
limited creatures dependent upon a deity who requires moral responsibility.
No one, especially a secular intellectual, wants to be subject
to the authority of a transcendent being.
Despite these reasons to avoid consideration of religion as a part of
the conversion process, I would argue that in order to be phenomenologically
true to the conversion experience, we must take the religious
sphere seriously. I do not urge that we capitulate to a theological
point of view, but I do encourage us to find ways of taking religion
seriously. Otherwise, our examinations of conversion will remain
one-dimensional. If nothing else, we should take into account the religious
ideology that shapes the conversion process, the religious imagery
that influences the consciousness of the convert, and the religious
institutions which are often the matrix in which the conversion
takes place. Taking religion seriously does not require belief, but it
does require that we confront the reality that conversion is a process
which involves a rich web of religious people, forces, ideas, institutions,
rituals, myths, and symbols (Garrett, 1974).
Historical Dimension
Psychology, anthropology, and sociology are generally synchronic
disciplines (focusing on a particular time without reference to antecedents)
rather than longitudinal studies. Diachronic approaches,
like history, are concerned with changes over time. Historians have
demonstrated conclusively that conversion, even within a specific tradition,
is different in various times and places. Bulliet (1979) and
MacMullen (1984), among others, have shown persuasively that converts
have variable motives at different times in a historical context.
For instance, the initial converts to a new movement are different
from those who convert when a movement is successful and prominent.
In other words, conversion is phenomenologically and motiva-
Lewis R. Rambo 51
tionally different depending on whether it is an innovative movement
or an established movement which is given respect and authority in a
society. Such assertions are not designed to question the validity,
value, and sincerity of particular conversions, but to point to the specific
contours of the process in different times and places in history.
Some argue that the morphology of conversion is universal, but the
consequences vary with particular locations and times. Brauer (1978)
avers that conversion among Puritans in England triggered dissent
and disengagement from the political system, whereas conversion in
New England was a requirement for political and legal status. The
former was revolutionary while the latter induced acceptance and
conformity. This assessment is at least partially true in terms of consequences,
but I would question that the motivations, morphology,
and methods of conversion would be identical. Some historians argue,
and I tend to agree, that the conversion process itself is shaped by
historical circumstances (Cohen, 1986; Murphey, 1979).
Stage Model
The model I am proposing must not only be multidimensional and
historical, it must be process-oriented--seen as a series of elements
that are multiple, interactive, and cumulative over time. No single
process or stage model has been articulated that is agreeable to everyone,
but the work of Lofland and Stark (1956) and Tippett (1977)
provide useful heuristic tools. I advocate an adaptation of their stage
models as a strategy for organizing complex data, not as universal or
invariant (see Rambo, 1987). A model is a tool which should be suggestive
and organizational, not limiting. I would also argue that the
stages are not to be seen as always occurring in the same order. Reality
is far more complex, and conversion often is characterized by a
spiraling effect--a going back and forth between the stages--and
thus not a unidirectional movement. It should be noted that extensive
debate has surrounded the Lofland and Stark model (see Bankston, et
al., 1981; Griel & Rudy, 1984; Snow & Phillips, 1980). Gerlach and
Hine (1970) believe that the first stage is really Stage Four, the Encounter.
They claim it is only then that the potential convert is aware
of options or is given words with which to express dissatisfaction thus
making possible movement to new alternatives.
Despite these potential limitations, I present the stage model here
as a way to organize more systematically some of the issues which
emerge in the study of conversion.
52 Pastoral Psychology
Stage 1: Context
The context is not merely a stage, but the total environment in
which converting takes place. I have already discussed the dimensions
of culture, society, individual person, and religion. In the context,
these factors must be specifically taken into account. The range
of issues to be considered in the context include: What is the precise
nature of the macrocontext, mesocontext, and microcontext? What
are their interrelationships? Do they facilitate one another? Do they
hinder one another? To what degree is there integration and coordination
within these domains?
The macrocontext includes the world environment, political systerns,
religious organizations, relevant ecological considerations,
transnational corporations, economic systems, etc. These forces can
work to facilitate conversion, or can be powerful obstacles.
The mesocontext includes those aspects of the context which mediate
between the macro- and microcontexts. Examples are local government,
regional politics and economics, demographic patterns, and
religious institutions and spheres of influence. The microcontext focuses
upon the more personal world of the individual, such as family,
friendship and kinship networks, vocation, and other aspects of a person's
life which have a direct impact on the person's thoughts, feelings,
and actions.
Because the context provides the avenues of communication, the
range of options available to a person or community, and a person's
mobility, flexibility, resources, and opportunities, the precise nature
of these forces can have a direct impact on whether or not someone
converts. Each domain of the context has different powers of access,
support, control, and repression. A person or persons can be induced,
encouraged, prevented, and forced to either accept or reject conversion
on the bases of factors which are largely external to the person.
These practical considerations and their complexity are rarely delineated
in studies of conversion, but I believe it is imperative for students
of the topic to be more systematic in detailing the contours of
the context so that these patterns, themes, and issues can be made
explicit.
Stage 2: Crisis
Most scholars of conversion claim that some form of disequilibrium
or crisis is an important element in the conversion process (compare
Lewis R. Rambo ~53
Heirich, 1977). The crisis stage must also be assessed carefully. What
is the nature, duration, intensity, and scope of the crisis? Seeing the
crisis as existing along a continuum is preferable to viewing it as an
absolute, either/or state. The reality is that there are many different
types of crises. Much of the human science literature has emphasized
social disintegration, political oppression, or something very dramatic
as the instigator of crisis. But the crisis also can be brought on by the
response of a person to powerful preaching that "convicts him/her of
sin" and begins a process of self-exploration and search for a way to
salvation (see Harding, 1987).
Other questions which need to be examined are: Is the crisis internally
or externally caused? Does the crisis destroy the old so that
something new is required (i.e., is there continuity or discontinuity
with one's previous life)?
The degree of flexibility, resilience, and creativity of the context of
the crisis also needs to be considered. Some cultures, societies, persons,
and religions are able to withstand a severe crisis and adapt to
it in a productive manner. Others are more fragile, and may be rendered
vulnerable and malleable to outside influence.
Stage 3: Quest
The quest stage encompasses different ways in which people respond
to crisis and/or the way in which people orient themselves to
life, especially the religious life. Three sets of factors can be examined
to help us understand the quest stage: response style, structural
availability, and movitational patterns. Response style describes
whether a person responds actively or passively to conversion. Debates
rage among scholars of conversion concerning the degree to
which persons are active or passive in their conversion process. The
debate has been particularly harsh between the so-called anti-cult
movement and those who reject the arguments for "brainwashing"
and "coercive persuasion" as forms of conversion to new religious
movements (see Cushman, 1986; Ofshe & Singer, 1986; Richardson,
1985; Robbins, 1984; Conway & Siegelman, 1977; Straus, 1976, 1979).
Structural availability describes the capacity of a person or persons
to move from previous structural, emotional, intellectual, and religious
institutions, commitments, obligations, and involvements into
new options. The various networks which shape our lives--family,
job, friendship, religious organizations, etc.--are often effective in
preventing change. Hence, a person may find the new option inappro-
54 Pastoral Psychology
priate. The degree of a person's involvement and engagement with
previous orientations may influence the person's possible move to
new options (Snow et al., 1980).
Another way of examining the degree of a person's active quest or
passive vulnerability is to assess motivational structures. Epstein
(1985) believes that there are four basic motivations: the need to acquire
pleasure and avoid pain; the need for a conceptual system; the
need to enhance self-esteem; and the need to establish and maintain
relationships. The order and intensity of these motivations will vary
among people as well as within an individual at different times.
Thus, "availability" for conversion may be shaped, to some degree, by
the motivational system of a person at a particular time and place.
A person yearning for relationships may find a proselytizer's friendship
a wonderful balm; this friendship could then be the beginning of
the conversion process. However, countervailing forces often work
against these motivations. Most people, in fact, say no to conversion.
The powerful forces of entropy, resistance, rejection, and sheer fear of
novelty can often negate the desire to convert.
Stage 4: Encounter
The encounter stage describes the contact between the potential
convert and the advocate/proselytizer. The mode of contact can influence
the conversion process. A different dynamic is operative when
an active searcher comes to a person who represents a new option
than when the advocate searches out a potential convert. The power
relationship in each of these cases is different, and can affect the dynamics
of change.
Most studies of conversion tend to focus almost exclusively on the
convert. This is a fundamental mistake. Conversion is shaped, to
some degree, by the interaction of the converter and the potential
convert. The convert's experience can be powerfully influenced (some
might even aver that it is created by the advocate (Hassan, 1988;
Straus, 1981; Downton, 1979, 1980; Cushman, 1986; and Ofshe &
Singer, 1986). This view does not imply that the process is necessarily
imposed on the convert, but it is imperative to take the interactive
nature of the encounter seriously (see Kaplan, 1986, to appreciate
how the advocate is influenced by the potential converts).
Missionary strategy or the methods of persuasion and influence advocates
use, like everything else we have thus far seen in conversion
processes, exists on a continuum (see Beidelman, 1974). Several ele-
Lewis R. Rambo 55
ments of missionary strategy can be examined. The first is the degree
to which a religious movement is seeking to incorporate new members.
Some religious groups are inclusive and some are exclusive.
Ethnic churches, such as the Syrian Orthodox Church, have little
interest in converts. Other groups, such as the Southern Baptist Convention,
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and Assemblies
of God, emphasize activities geared to the intentional and systematic
recruitment, training, and retention of new members.
In addition to the degree of commitment to proselytizing, one
should consider the overall strategic style of the proselytizing. Several
dimensions are important. For instance, the style can be diffuse
or concentrated (Heise, 1967). In diffuse (or systems-oriented) strategy
the advocate circulates widely within a community and seeks to
persuade large numbers of people, especially community leaders, and
thus convert the whole community or village. The concentrated (or
personalistic) style tends to focus upon individuals who for one reason
or another are marginal to their community.
A third strategic consideration is the actual mode of contact with
people. Is the contact public or private? Is the contact personal or impersonal?
Snow, Zurcher, and Ekland-Olson (1980) have explored
these questions in a very helpful manner. It is not possible in this paper
to explore all the nuances of missionary strategy, but it should be
mentioned that the advocate can be flexible and innovative in finding
effective modes of proselytizing (Rochford, 1982). Presentation of the
religious option can vary in both content and form, and specific audiences
targeted. Different personnel can be used for the purpose of locating,
cultivating, persuading, indoctrinating, and ultimately converting
people to a new religious option.
The type and degree of benefit the religious community, ideology,
and/or way of life provides to the potential convert is another important
aspect influencing the encounter. First, the religious option may
offer the convert a comprehensive, coherent, and compelling cognitive
framework. Second, the religious option can offer a range of emotional
gratifications, such as a sense of belonging or community, relief of
guilt, development of new relationships, and--something seldom
mentioned in studies of conversion--excitement and stimulation. A
third set of attractions presented by a religious community is what
has been called "techniques for living" (Needleman, 1970). The new
option provides the person with methods and techniques for the religious
life and, sometimes, for life in general. A fourth attraction is
leadership. The leader can function in many ways; but more often
56 Pastoral Psychology
than not, the leader embodies the virtues and powers which are articulated
by the religious ideology, or has accomplished particular feats,
or has extraordinary powers of discernment and persuasion (see
Rambo, 1982b).
A fifth attraction is power. One theme that emerges in many conversions
is that the convert feels filled with power, has access to
power, or is somehow connected with either an external source of
power or an internal sense of power often perceived as divine (see
Beckford, 1983).
The focus of the last few pages has been the advocate's strategy,
and the motivations and attractions offered by the religious option.
Lack of space does not permit an exploration of the interaction between
the advocate and the convert, but let me simply outline how
this could be accomplished. One way to interpret the interaction of
the advocate and the potential convert is to see the connections, continuities,
and discontinuities between the elements outlined in stages
three and four. Given my basic assumption that conversion is a process
of religious change that takes place in a dynamic force field of
people, ideas, institutions, etc., it is clear that the majority of people,
except in very unusual situations (such as when subjected to coercive
measures), reject new religious options. Enmeshment with the previous
community and family rarely allows for movement to the new
(Ejiju, 1987). Therefore, what enables the conversion process to transpire
is a complex process in which a receptive potential convert
comes into contact, under proper circumstances and at a crucial time,
with the appropriate advocate and community. The trajectories of the
potential convert and the advocate generally do not meet in such a
way that the conversion process can germinate. Of course, the process
of interaction is far more complex than this brief discussion can indicate
(see Kaplan, 1986).
Stage 5: Interaction
The fifth stage moves beyond the mere contact between advocate
and potential convert. In this stage, the potential convert either
chooses to continue the contact and become more involved or the advocate
is able to sustain the interaction in order to persuade the person
to become a convert. Once again we must examine the degree of
passivity and activity of the potential convert and the degree of manipulation
and persuasion used by the advocate. Some groups, such
as Orthodox Jews, do not encourage converts, and the potential con-
Lewis R. Rambo 57
vert must be very direct and assertive in seeking a Rabbi willing to
provide courses in Judaism. Many Rabbis discourage the potential
convert. Other groups, such as Southern Baptists or the Unification
Church, are eager to bring in new members (although they are not
indiscriminate) and will seek ways of persuading and encouraging
the potential convert.
To understand the interaction stage it is important to examine the
methods used by a group to persuade. Crucial issues to consider are
the modes and patterns of communication, and the role of encapsulation
strategies. In other words, to what degree is the potential convert
isolated or restricted from communication with outsiders and alternative
ideologies? There are various forms of encapsulation: physical,
social, and ideological (Greil & Rudy, 1983, 1984). Every group uses
some form of encapsulation, so the issue is not use but degree and
kind.
Some groups achieve physical encapsulation by taking people into
remote areas or to areas where communications can be controlled so
that no outside sources of information are available to the potential
convert.
Social encapsulation means directing the potential convert into social
patterns which limit contact with others. An example would be
churches which expect people to spend all of their discretionary time
in prescribed activities, such as Bible study, worship, prayer, and
other social events at the church. Some groups foster social encapsulation
by the wearing of distinctive clothing which serves as an obvious
barrier to social contact and/or a reminder to the followers and to
outsiders of the member's role.
Ideological encapsulation involves the use of a world-view, belief
system, and ideology that "innoculates" the person from alternative,
competitive systems of belief. The members and potential converts
are reminded of the purity and sacredness of their beliefs and the perniciousness
of the beliefs of the outside world. In some cases, people
are trained explicitly to criticize the assumptions, methods, and values
of the "enemy" ideology.
In addition to exploring the degree and type of encapsulation, another
way to assess the nature of the interaction is to describe the extent
of personal modification expected of the convert. Ziller (1971)
proposed a theory of personality change that encompassed different
levels of the personality: self, roles, behaviors, values, and attitudes.
These components are arranged in order of importance; the self being
the most powerful and least directly accessible.
58 Pastoral Psychology
Ziller's model is useful in identifying the possible elements required
to change in conversion processes. Some groups expect total
rejection of the former self and the creation of a new self. Previous
roles, behaviors, values, and attitudes must also be jettisoned, and
new components, in accordance with the group's ideology, must be
embraced and enacted by the potential convert. Many religions emphasize
the radical nature of change in conversion, but not all actually
specify the changes explicitly or require modifications in the totality
of a person's life. The question has to be asked: to what extent
and how quickly are elements of a person's life to be modified in order
to be acceptable to a normative community?
Stage 6: Commitment
The sixth stage is a crucial juncture for most converts. In this stage
a decision is required and, in many cases, some sort of public demonstration
of the status change is expected. Not all groups have such requirements,
but some groups require compliance with extensive rules
when the convert makes a decision to remain in a group (Gartrell &
Shannon, 1985; Tremmel, 1971).
From the institution's point of view, commitment methods are designed
to create and sustain loyalty to the group (see Kanter, 1968).
From the convert's point of view, commitment rituals provide public
affirmation of the consummation of a process.
A common method for publicly displaying commitment is the personal
testimony (see Beckford, 1978a; Taylor, 1976, 1978). Some
groups use testimony as an opportunity to discern the person's appropriateness
for membership. If the convert is attuned to this, the conversion
experience can, to some degree, be molded in the image of the
group's requirements. A person eagerly seeking membership may
consciously or unconsciously generate, emphasize, and/or select for
testimony experiences and metaphors that conform to the group's requirements
(Straus, 1979, 1981; Metzner, 1986).
Another crucial set of expectations are the rituals in which the convert
must participate. Many traditions utilize various rituals of rejection,
transition, and incorporation. These rituals are powerful in that
they not only shape a person's experience of the conversion process,
but also provide a powerful means by which to consolidate a person's
beliefs and involvement in a group (see Morinis, 1985; Stromberg,
1985). Rituals both express a person's transformation and allow the
person to participate in that transformation. Systematic description,
Lewis R. Rambo 59
analysis, and interpretation of the variety of these rituals and their
precise settings, metaphors, and methods will enable scholars to better
understand conversion.
Stage 7: Consequences
This stage examines the results of conversion. Three levels of analysis
are important: the convert's perception of the consequences, the
group's evaluations of valid conversions, and the scholar's interpretations
of results.
The convert makes assessments of the effects of conversion throughout
the process. The convert is aware of the results of his or her experiences,
and the assessments of these results play an important role
in facilitating or obstructing the trajectory of conversion. I would
urge that scholars elicit, when possible, the convert's own assessment
of the consequences (Downton, 1979).
Second, the religious community has its own set of prescriptions
and proscriptions for the authenticity of a conversion. It is important
to articulate these as clearly as possible and make an assessment of
the person's conversion based on the internal criteria developed by
the group. Such an undertaking will highlight the fact that this process
is, after all, within a religious community and tradition.
Third, from the scholar's point of view, it is impossible to provide
any ultimate evaluation of conversion, but we can assess the consequences
of a particular conversion. It should be mentioned immediately
that evaluations, whether from theological orientations or from
the human sciences, are normative. Assessments of conversion are
from a particular perspective in which values are present, either explicitly
or implicitly. No perspective is purely "objective." In the field
of conversion studies, evaluations are always made from a value ori-
entation.
I propose that scholars of conversion make as explicit as possible
their own biases (Wilber, 1980; Conway & Siegelman, 1978). Important
questions to ask are: Am I religious or not? Am I religious in the
same or similar way as the person I am assessing? If I am not religious,
what is my personal response to the nature of the religious conversion
I am studying? Am I repulsed or attracted? What is my fundamental
agenda in studying such phenomena?
In addition, the scholar should articulate as explicitly as possible
the criteria by which his/her own discipline operates. What would
constitute mental health in psychology? To what degree does the con-
60 Pastoral Psychology
version promote mental health--from the scholar's point of view? I
think it is important for the scholar to recognize the cultural values
which shape particular orientations to mental health within the disciplines
of psychology and psychiatry. The scholar should also recognize
that assessments on the basis of an external value system may
not be adequate to the task, but being explicit and candid about values
and biases can help make the assessments as fair as possible.
Given the above caveats, let me propose some questions for assess-
ment:
Is the conversion progressive or regressive from a particular frame of
reference (Salzman, 1953)?
What is the degree and direction of change?
What intellectual, moral, emotional, and religious changes have taken
place (Conn, 1986)?
To what extent does the person conform to the group's norms?
To what extent does the person perceive change?
What has been the impact of the change on the person's network of kinship
and friendship ties?
What is the person's degree of involvement in the new group? total/
partial; depth/surface; and compliance/new self?
This paper has proposed a complex set of variables which need to
be considered by the scholar of conversion. Conversion is a complex,
multifaceted process in a dynamic force field engaging people, events,
ideas, and institutions. The goal of the paper has been to outline
some of the contours of a holistic model of conversion. I would hope
that scholars from different disciplines would not only be more open
to, but give systematic consideration to issues beyond their own specialty.
Moreover, I would hope that scholars in the human sciences
would become more interested in the religious dimensions of conversion
and that theologically oriented students of conversion would
take more seriously the rich particulars, complexities, and varieties
of the process of human transformation.
References
Bankston, W. B., Floyd,H. H., Jr., & Forsyth, C. J. (1981).Towarda general modelof
the processofradical conversion.Qualitative Sociology, 4, 279-297.
Beckford,J, A. (1978). Accountingfor conversion.British Journal of Sociology, 29,
249-262.
Beckford,J. A. (1983).The restoration of'power'to the sociologyofreligion.Sociological
Analysis, 44, 11- 32.
Lewis R. Rambo 61
Beidelman, T. O. (1974). Social theory and the study of Christian missions in Africa.
Africa, 44,235-249.
Brauer, J. C. (1978). Conversion: From Puritanism to revivalism. Journal of Religion,
58, 227-243.
Bulliet, R. W. (1979). Conversion to Islam in the medieval period. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Cohen, C. L. (1986). God's Caress: The psychology of Puritan religious experience. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Conn, W. (1986). Christian conversion: A developmental interpretation of autonomy and
surrender. New York: Paulist Press.
Conway, F. & Siegelman, J. (1978). Snapping: America's epidemic of sudden personality
change. New York: J. B. Lippincott.
Cushman, P. (1986). The self besieged: Recruitment-indoctrination processes in restrictive
groups. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 16, 1-32.
Downton, J. V., Jr. (1979). Sacred journeys: The conversion of young Americans to Divine
Light Mission. New York: Columbia University Press.
Downton, J. V., Jr. (1980). An evolutionary theory of spiritual conversion and commitment:
The case of Divine Light Mission. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,
19, 381-396.
Ejiju, C. I. (1987). Endurance of conviction: The persistence of the traditional worldview
in Igbo Christian converts. Neue Zeitschrifl fur Missionswissenschaft, 43,
125-135.
Epstein, S. (1985). The implications of cognitive-experiential self-theory for research in
social psychology and personality. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 15,
283-310.
Garrett, W. R. (1974). Troublesome transcendence: The supernatural in the scientific
study of religion. Sociological Analysis, 35, 167-180.
Gartrell, C. D. & Shannon, Z. K. (1985). Contacts, cognitions, and conversion: A rational
choice approach. Review of Religious Research, 27, 32-48.
Gerlach, L. P. & Hine, V. H. (1970). People, power, change: Movements of social transformation.
Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
Greil, A. L. & Rudy, D. R. (1983). Conversion to the world view of Alcoholics Anonymous:
A refinement of conversion theory. Qualitative Sociology, 6, 5-28.
Greil, A. L. & Rudy, D. R. (1984). Social cocoons: Encapsulation and identity transformation
organizations. Sociological Inquiry, 54, 260-278.
Greil, A. L. & Rudy, D. R. (1984). What have we learned from process models of conversion?
An examination of ten case studies. Sociological Focus, 17, 305-324.
Harding, S. F. (1987). Convicted by the Holy Spirit: The rhetoric of fundamental Baptist
conversion. American Ethnologist, 14, 167-181.
Hassan, S. (1988). Combating cult mind control. Boston: Park Street Press.
Heirich, M. (1977). Change of heart: A test of some widely held theories about religious
conversion. American Sociological Review, 83, 653-680.
Heise, D. R. (1967). Prefatory findings in the sociology of missions. Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, 6, 49-58.
Ikenga-Metuh, E. (1985). The shattered microcosm: A critical survey of explanations of
conversion. Neue Zeitschrift fur Missionswissenschaft, 41,241-254.
Kanter, R. M. (1968). Commitment and social organization: A study of commitment
mechanisms in utopian communities. American Sociological Review, 33, 499-517.
Kaplan, S. (1986). The Africanization of missionary Christianity: History and typology.
Journal of Religion in Africa, 16, 166-186.
Kilbourne, B. & Richardson, J. T. (1988). Paradigm conflict, types of conversion and
conversion theories. Sociological Analysis, 20, 1-21.
Lofland, J. (1977). 'Becoming a world-saver' revisted. American Behavioral Scientist,
20, 805-818.
62 Pastoral Psychology
Lofland, J. & Skonovd, N. (1981). Conversion motifs. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, 20, 373-385.
Lofland, J. & Stark, R. (1965). Becoming a world-saver: A theory of conversion to deviant
perspective. American Sociological Review, 30, 862-875.
MacMullen, R. (1984). Christianizing the Roman Empire (A.D. 100-400). New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Metzner, R. (1986). Opening to inner light: The transformation of human nature and
consciousness. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc.
Morinis, A. (1985). The ritual experience: Pain and the transformation of consciousness
in ordeals of initiation. Ethos, 13, 150-174.
Murphey, M. G. (1979). The psychodynamics of Puritan conversion. American Quarterly,
31,135-147.
Needleman, J. (1970). The new religions. Garden City: Doubleday.
Ofshe, R. & Singer, M. T. (1986). Attacks on peripheral versus central elements of self
and the impact of thought reforming techniques. The Cultic Studies Journal, 3,
3-24.
Rambo, L. R. (1982). Current research on religious conversion. Religious Studies Review,
8, 146-159.
Rambo, L. R. (1982). Charisma and conversion. Pastoral Psychology, 31, 96-108.
Rambo, L. R. (1987). Conversion. In M. Eliade (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Religion Vol.
4 (pp. 73-79). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Richardson, J. T. (1985). The active vs. passive convert: Paradigm conflict in conversion/recruitment
research. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 24, 163-
179.
Robbins, T. (1984). Constructing cultist 'mind control.' Sociological Analysis, 45, 241-
256.
Rochford, E. B., Jr. (1982). Recruitment strategies, ideology, and organization in the
Hare Krishna movement. Social Problems, 29, 399-410.
Salzman, L. (1953). The psychology of religious and ideological conversion. Psychiatry,
16, 177-187.
Sarbin, T. R. & Adler, N. (1970). Self-reconstitutions processes: A preliminary report.
Psychoanalytic Review, 57, 599-616.
Scroggs, J. R. & Douglas, W. G. T. (1967). Issues in the psychology of religious conversion.
Journal of Religion and Health, 6, 204-216.
Snow, D. A. & Machalek, R. (1983). The convert as a social type. In R. Collins (Ed.), Sociological
Theory 1983 (pp. 259-289). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Snow, D. A. & Machalek, R. (1984). The sociology of conversion. Annual Review of Sociology
1984, 10, 167-190.
Snow, D. A. & Phillips, C. A. (1980). The Lofland-Stark conversion model: A critical reassessment.
Social Problems, 27, 430-447.
Snow, D. A., Zurcher, L. A., & Ekland-Olson, S. (1980). Social networks and social
movements: A microstructural approach to differential recruitment. American Sociological
Review, 45, 787-801.
Stark, R. & Bainbridge, W. A. (1980). Networks of faith; Interpersonal bonds and recuitment
to cults and sects. American Journal of Sociology, 85, 1376-1395.
Straus, R. (1976). Changing oneself: Seekers and the creative transformation of life experience.
In J. Lofland, Doing social life (pp. 252-273). New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Straus, R. (1979). Religious conversion as a personal and collective accomplishment.
Sociological Analysis, 40, 158-165.
Straus, R. (1981). The social-psychology of religious experience: A naturalistic approach.
Sociological Analysis, 42, 57-67.
Stromberg, P. G. (1985). The impression point: Synthesis of symbol and self. Ethos, 13,
56-74.
Lewis R. Rambo 63
Taylor, B. (1976). Conversion and cognition: An area for empirical study in the microsociology
of religious knowledge. Social Compass, 23, 5-22.
Taylor, B. (1978). Recollection and membership: Converts' talk and the ratiocination of
commonality. Sociology, 12, 316-324.
Tippett, A. R. (1976). Conversion as a dynamic process in Christian mission. Missiology,
5, 203-221.
Travisano, R. V. (1970). Alternation and conversion as qualitatively different transformations.
In G. P. Stone and H. A. Barberman (Eds.), Social psychology through
symbolic interaction (pp. 594-606). Boston: Ginn Blaisdell.
Tremmel, W. C. (1971). The converting choice. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,
10, 17-25.
Ullman, C. (1982). Cognitive and emotional antecedents of religious conversion. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 183-192.
Ullman, C. (1988). Psychological well-being among converts in traditional and nontraditional
religious groups. Psychiatry, 51,312-322.
Wilber, K. (1980). The pre/trans fallacy. ReVision, 3, 51-72.
Ziller, R. C. (1971). A helical theory of personal change. Journal for the Theory of Social
Behavior, 1, 33-73.