Needs2know: Certainly, the Church of Latter-day Saints is a bit cultish, and it might not be appropriate to group them in with Christianity, Hinduism, etc., it’s also not appropriate to group the Latter-Day Saints with Scientology. The principle book of the Mormons, outlining all of the tenets and practices of the Church, is freely available in libraries, bookstores, etc. Heck, they’ll even send you a copy for free, if you ask. The principle book of Scientology, by contrast, allegedly only has one copy, and is hidden away in some secret location because if a non-Clear reads it he’ll go insane. In any legitimate religion, any member of the religion will be glad to tell you whatever they know, and if they don’t know the answer to a question, they’ll be happy to refer you to someone who does, and who is also willing to talk. In Scientology, however, the few people who actually know the high-level beliefs of the organization are only willing to talk if you’re willing to shell out millions.
Some of you folks just get upset when you hear the word “cult”, don’t you? Do any of you have any actual experience with a cult (besides SingleDad)? Or is it just the ingrained reaction of established church members?
FWIW, I grew up in a church called “cult” by just about everyone not a member. Not Scientology, but another of the multitude of California “new age” religions. I’ve got a little bit of experience with this subject first hand.
I don’t see the Scientologists as being cultish. Wacko yes. Greedy, surely. But cult? Not with this definition anyways.
HorseloverFat: I agree with almost everything in your last post, except that $cientologists do have a jihad of sorts. It is standard practice for them to try to silence their critics with frivolous lawsuits. They believe that their critics can be lied to, and about, and this is not wrong. They have tried to get anti-$cientology websites shut down, with mixed success. Other sites and bulliten boards have been hacked into and sabotaged (A common tactic on BBS’s has been a program that scrambles the messages in anti-$ci threads, leaving meaningless gibberish). There have been several allegations of serious crimes, like robbery, witness intimidation, assault, and even murder being used to deal with dis-enchanted $ci $uckers who threatened to go public. The only impression I have is that you get involved with these people at your own risk.
Aenea: We’ve been waiting for a cult member. How would you define a “cult”?
A cult is all about one person or small elite trying to control a larger group for their own ends. Belief systems have no bearing. Cultism can be treated as a form of temporary insanity, much like we treated brainwashing victims after Vietnam. In fact, they are exactly like brainwashing victims, simply because they have been brainwashed. Scientology is a cult. Why? Here you go:
Characteristics of a Destructive Cult
[list]
[li]Authoritarian pyramid structure with authority at the top. (Ed: Very prevelent in Scientology.)[/li][li]Charismatic or messianic leader(s) (Messianic meaning they either say they are God OR that they alone can interpret the scriptures the way God intended…the leaders are self-appointed. (Ed: Elron and his elite.)[/li][li]Deception in recruitment and/or fund raising. (Ed: They don’t tell you about Xemu, nor do they say how your millions will be used.)[/li][li]Isolation from society – not necessarily physical isolation like on some compound in Waco, but this can be psychological isolation – the rest of the world is not saved, not Christian, not transformed (whatever) – the only valid source of feedback and information is the group (Ed: This occurs in the level of secrecy, maintained harshly by various extra-legal means.)[/li][li]Use of mind control techniques (we use Dr. Robert Jay Lifton’s criteria from chapter 22 of his book Thought Reform & the Psychology of Totalism to compare whether the eight psychological and social methods he lists are present in the group at question)[/li] 1.Mileu Control: Control of the environment and communication within the environment (Ed: Their secrecy, again.)
2.Mystical Manipulation: Seeks to promote specific patterns of behavior and emotion in such a way that it appears to have arisen spontaneously from within the environment, while it actually has been orchestrated totalist leaders claim to be agents chosen by God, history, or some supernatural force, to carry out the mystical imperative the “principles” (God-centered or otherwise) can be put forcibly and claimed exclusively, so that the cult and its beliefs become the only true path to salvation (or enlightenment) (Ed: How often would you work for no pay at an awful job just to be ‘ethical’?)
3.Demand for Purity: The world becomes sharply divided into the pure and the impure, the absolutely good (the group/ideology) and the absolutely evil (everything outside the group) one must continually change or conform to the group “norm”; tendencies towards guilt and shame are used as emotional levers for the group’s controlling and manipulative influences (Ed: Church v. Government. Church v. ‘Copyright Infringers’. Church v. Psychotherapy. Need I go on?)
4.Confession: Cultic confession is carried beyond its ordinary religious, legal and therapeutic expressions to the point of becoming a cult in itself sessions in which one confesses to one’s sin are accompanied by patterns of criticism and self-criticism, generally transpiring within small groups with an active and dynamic thrust toward personal change (Ed: How one becomes clear is by a very strange and revealing series of questions.)
5.Sacred Science: The totalist milieu maintains an aura of sacredness around its basic doctrine or ideology, holding it as an ultimate moral vision for the ordering of human existence questioning or criticizing those basic assumptions is prohibited a reverence is demanded for the ideology/doctrine, the originators of the ideology/doctrine, the present bearers of the ideology/doctrine offers considerable security to young people because it greatly simplifies the world and answers a contemporary need to combine a sacred set of dogmatic principles with a claim to a science embodying the truth about human behavior and human psychology (Ed: Read Dianetics. Must I go on?)
6.Loading the Language: Words are given new meanings – the outside world does not use the words or phrases in the same way – it becomes a “group” word or phrase (Ed: Well, what does ‘clear’ mean to you?)
7.Doctrine Over Person: If one questions the beliefs of the group or the leaders of the group, one is made to feel that there is something inherently wrong with them to even question – it is always “turned around” on them and the questioner/criticizer is questioned rather than the questions answered directly the underlying assumption is that doctrine/ideology is ultimately more valid, true and real than any aspect of actual human character or human experience and one must subject one’s experience to that “truth” the experience of contradiction can be immediately associated with guilt one is made to feel that doubts are reflections of one’s own evil when doubt arises, conflicts become intense (Ed: Question and the Church wipes its hands of the consequences.)
8.Dispensing of Existence: Since the group has an absolute or totalist vision of truth, those who are not in the group are bound up in evil, are not enlightened, are not saved, and do not have the right to exist; impediments to legitimate being must be pushed away or destroyed one outside the group may always receive their right of existence by joining the group; fear manipulation – if one leaves this group, one leaves God or loses their salvation/transformation, or something bad will happen to them; the group is the “elite”, outsiders are “of the world”, “evil”, “unenlightened”, etc. (Ed: The Not-Clear do not know how to think. Therefore, they must not be right in anything. Thetans rule the Not-Clear.)
That list, minus my ‘Ed’ (editorial) remarks, is available right here:
http://www.csj.org/studyindex/studycult/study_whatisdescult.htm
I think that sums up my position on why Scientology is a destructive cult.
Back up a little here. I am not a cult member, just happened to grow up in that environment. Personally I think it sucked and left when I could.
I could discuss what that was like, but cannot tell you what it’s like to purposely join a cult. Still want to talk? My mom is still a member of said new age religion, although not as active.
I can see where most people would see Scientology as a cult, but don’t personally agree with that. Cults do isolate people. Scienos aren’t isolated from mainstream life. They hold jobs, or act, or whatever they do.
Also, most of these Scientology teachings are available to the average joe, if he cares to look them up, or buy the book, or stop by a local Scientology place. I realize that Scienos charge money to do individual teaching, but IMHO that just means they are expensive and greedy - it doesn’t say to me that they are a cult.
As for the several other of the points mentioned about cults it seems that they apply to many of the older organized religions too.
Look, I’m no Great Debater. This is just my $.02 here.
I never thought you were a cultist. I just thought that the people here needed a refresher on what constitutes a cult. I added my own parenthetacal remarks to show people where I was coming from when I attacked Scientology. Personally, I think leaving a cult of one’s own free will takes more courage than many people ever dream of having. I’m just happy that I can debate with a rational person instead of a machine.
Sorry. I was just wondering that, since you have more experience with cults than most of us, what your definition of a “cult” would be?
BTW: I almost never go into Great Debates either. Or the BBQ Pit.
AENEA says:
But is this true? I mean, it sort of begs Astorian’s original question, doesn’t it: What do Scientologists believe? I have “cared to look it up,” admittedly only very cursorily, but I have been largely unable to determine the tenets of this particular “faith” in any detail. My understanding is that if you want to know the details of Scientology, you have to pay for that privilege. If this is incorrect, someone let me know. But it certainly is not as easy to determine what Scientologists believe, using the Internet, as it is to determine the tenets of most mainstream faiths. Personally, it’s the “pay as you go” aspect of it that I find most offensive, regardless of whether it meets the definition of a “cult” or not.
Amazon tells me this is out of print, but it’s a handy reference with 2-5 pages on all major and most minor and miniscule religions:
The Spiritual Seekers Guide : The Complete Source for Religions and Spiritual Groups of the World (Steven S. Sadleir)
I was just looking at the Scientology section recently and though it doesn’t exactly give you great detail, it is very objective, almost to an annoying degree. You kind of want the guy to grab you by the throat and go, “this is EVIL!! Evil! Run away, as fast as you can, and never open any mail from them!”
I didn’t want to have to do this but…
Why I think the Catholic Church is a destructive cult according to Derleth’s definition.
Here you go:
Characteristics of a Destructive Cult
[list]
[li]Authoritarian pyramid structure with authority at the top. (The Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, etc.)[/li][li]Charismatic or messianic leader(s) (Messianic meaning they either say they are God OR that they alone can interpret the scriptures the way God intended…the leaders are self-appointed. (Jesus.)[/li][li]Deception in recruitment and/or fund raising. (Crying icons.)[/li][li]Isolation from society – not necessarily physical isolation like on some compound in Waco, but this can be psychological isolation – the rest of the world is not saved, not Christian, not transformed (whatever) – the only valid source of feedback and information is the group (Try marrying a non-catholic in a catholic church.)[/li][li]Use of mind control techniques (we use Dr. Robert Jay Lifton’s criteria from chapter 22 of his book Thought Reform & the Psychology of Totalism to compare whether the eight psychological and social methods he lists are present in the group at question)[/li]
Catholics may not use all the mind control techniques in Derleth’s list but they are pretty big on purity and confession. Also Papal Infallibilty seems to fit pretty well in the Doctrine Over person category.
All of this is part of the church today, I’m not even going to use the Spanish Inquisition as a reason why the Catholic Church is a destructive cult.
I think that sums up my position on why the Catholic Church is a destructive cult.
jodih says:
I’m letting you know that this is incorrect. I have, in fact pointed out that this statement is incorrect in almost every one of my posts in this thread. The CoS offers a bunch of courses about Scientology. You do have to pay to take these courses. However, you can get the course descriptions for free. Some courses have prerequisites. Therefore it might cost you a bunch of money to get to take the course that you want, but you can find out all about the courses for free. None of the courses are about space aliens.
I’m a little tired of defending Scientology, but I feel I must do my part to stamp out ignorance. About six years ago, I was bored and had nothing better to do so I thought I’d check out the CoS. I looked them up in the phonebook and called them. They were happy to tell me all about themselves, and invited me to come to see them for some free auditing. After I thoroughly questioned the woman about what auditing entailed, I agreed to come down. While at the church I took some silly personality test and then I was audited. This basicly consisted of me telling this guy about a childhood injury over and over again. As I was leaving they tried to get me to sign up for a bunch of crappy courses that seemed like a huge waste of time. (e.g. Self Analysis and the Hubbard Dianetic Auditor Course) I told them that I didn’t really think it was something I’d be interested in. I thanked them for their time and went on my way. They did follow up with two mailings (which I threw out) and exactly one phone call. I told them over the phone that I wasn’t interested, and they never called back. I learned a great deal about Scientology for the cost of one phone call, a little gas for my car, and my time. They weren’t evil people, just a little too flaky for my taste.
I have previously pointed out that according to ex-scientologists, your statements are incorrect. Some classes do mention aliens. See the Operating Thetan 3 level class.
These classes are supposedly only intended for “high-level” scientologists, so would not be mentioned to the general public (still according to ex-scientologists.)
First off I can’t begin to tell you how wrong it is to use events that are hundred of years old to defend the current actions of Scientologists. We have modern ethics, we can easily see the fault of inquisition but that doesn’t mean inquisition-like thinking is a realistic view of religion today nor a proper yardstick to measure the CoS. I suggest you read my last post addressing your same flawed defense for refrence.
Again, if we were to take your analysis of Catholism seriously than ALL major religions would be considered destructive cults, blurring the line between cult and religion. Sorry, there is a real distinction and I’d say its near obvious to the objective viewer. Your game if semantics is not convincing.
As to Scientology not having a strong sci-fi theme, there is plenty of documentation that Operating Thetan level III and beyond is all about the ‘evil galactive overlord.’ Scientology itself fought long and hard to protect its copyrights of this material which is a good reason to believe they are authentic. In fact, the documents are hosted in the Netherlands to avoid lawsuits.
Sorry but your limited run in with Scientology isn’t nearly as convincing as the people who run sites like http://www.xenu.net, who have been collecing data and info on the real behavior from medium to high level ex-Scientologists.
Your account is like hearing some college Freshman ‘know’ that so-and-so fraternity was cool because everyone was so friendly during pledge week.
Thread Hijack
Mr. Cranky’s Review of Battlefield Earth
I really love the quote:
Save me the aisle seat!
I hesitate to start regurgitating stuff I’ve said over and over again on this very board. All I can recommend is that people continue to educate themselves about the $cienos’ many documented misdeeds before confusing the subject by foolishly mingling the subject together with their established opinions against certain religions … If you want to bitch about the Granny Smith apples, then start a thread about the goddam Granny Smith apples: this discussion is about Golden Delicious apples.
http://www.xenu.net - and the other fine sites dedicated to seeing the criminal acts of $ci management exposed in our time - have MANY hours of reading linked from them. Within all that stuff is everything you wanted to know about the $cientologists but was afraid to ask. their most mundane and basic teachings, their secret teachings, their recruitment practices, their counter-intelligence, all the court cases, etc. etc. are all out there to be found.
The problem, for those with short attention spans, is that there’s a lot of material to read … If you are really interested, you have to actually read it.
I’ll give you a PRIME example of this phenomenon: $cientologists in training are compulsed to perfectly memorize a very extensive glossary of $cientology terms. Here is the link to the glossary. Reading it gives one a very in-depth perspective on the daily experience of the everyday $cientologist (particularly staff).
http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282/terms.htm
Sometimes it is funny, sometimes it is frightening, but it is always insightful. It’s long, though - I wonder who will bother?
/end rant
['nother hijack]
I’ve pretty much come to the conclusion that Needs2Know knows very little about the Mormon church…
That ain’t true. Tithing is a standard practice among that group, but they hardly force you to pay it. If you don’t pay your tithing, they shrug it off with a grin and the weekly meetings continue. Weekly FREE meetings.
And you don’t have to pay a cent to learn about the LDS church. In fact, THEY pay to teach YOU. And take two years out of their lives to do it. Missionaries, anyone? Those dudes in suits and nametags walking around (or occasionally on bikes)? It all comes voluntarily out of their own pocket… or if they can’t afford it, the LDS church will pay for their expenses.
As much as I dislike telling someone that they’re plain wrong about something… sorry, pal, but you are.
[/hijack]
Oh yes I know they’ll come to your home on one of their “missons” and tell you a little something about themselves. One thing they told me was that Mormons are more successful financially than an other religion. More Mormon kids go to college than other kids, not sure where they get these statistics. Tithing for an active Mormon is very important so don’t play it down. Tithing is very important for many other Christian groups too, I know I’ve listened to the sermons. Why don’t you take your GROSS pay, not NET and figure up 10%, good little chunk of change ain’t it? And in most churches the Mormon church included you “pledge” this 10% it’s simply deducted every payday electronically. I’m sure the churches around our nation love that little bit of modern technology.
No and I did not say that the LDS church makes people pay to here their doctrines. They hook you in with other ways. One way they keep people invested in the faith is through their missions. Young men go out for two years, some to foregin countries and often live under deplorable conditions. They are often harrassed by the mission leaders and required to bring back quotas. By the time one of these young men returns home he has invested a great deal of time and emotional currency into this faith.
I won’t go into this anymore. I have seen enough to realize that the people who are devoted to this faith are devoted to a lie. This “religion” was started by a con-man, just like Scientology was started by a con-man. Now I would also concede that if you buy into any faith you might simply be practicing wishful thinking, but these belief systems are authoritarian and controlling beyond anything normal for modern times.
Needs2know
there aren’t enough of them in this thread.
HLF wrote:
Thanks for quoting me saying that I wasn’t using the Spanish Inquisition as a reason why the Catholic Church was a destructive cult, and then telling me me that the Spanish Inquisition is not to be used a reason why the Catholic Church is a destructive cult. Incredibly insightful as always. On a side note, what is the statute of limitations on destructive cult activity? How recent does a cult-like incident have to take place for a religion to be a cult?
The point of my exercise about the destructive cult-like behavior of the Catholic Church was that I have yet to see a definition of cult or destructive cult that excludes the major religions. I still haven’t.
HLF continues:
Lance Turbo paraphrases:
Horselover, feel free to present an unambiguous non-arbitrary definition of destructive cult that would include Scientology and exclude the Catholic Church.
That brings us to xenu.net. As I stated earlier, the FAQ of that site admits that it is biased. I’m not going to say that there isn’t any good information there. I will say, as I have said earlier, that this should not be your one and only source of information on the Church of Scientology. If I posted information on any other thread on this board that came from one biased site, you guys would rip me a new one.
Finally, space aliens. Every site that mentions aliens and Scientology seems to be directly quoting The Road to Xenu by Margery Wakefield. One site about The Road to Xenu has this to say about Margery:
http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/xenu.html
Another site, that contains the full text of Margery Wakefield’s autobiography, Testimony, reveals that Margery was diagnosed a schizophrenic and bullimic before she ever heard of Scientology. It details the many bouts of dementia and hallucinations she had before she set foot in the Church of Scientology.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/wakefield/testimony.html
I personally don’t believe that the Church of Scientology believes in space aliens. I will believe it if someone shows me some convincing evidence, but I will not believe it on the word of a fictionalized schizophrenic prone to hallucinations. Even if the CoS does believe that space aliens are part human history/evolution or whatever, that still does not make the CoS a cult. It would make them a hell of a lot more flaky in my opinion. It is also possible that Hubbard wrote about Xenu, this doesn’t in itself prove anything. He was a science fiction writer. However, that in itself does not prove that aliens are taught as part of Scientology. I will happily change my opinion on this matter if someone can provide proof.
One more thing, in every other thread in this forum, posters demand other posters to back up their claims. Citing a biased source is like hanging a sign on yourself that says flame me. Anecdotal evidence is scoffed at. Why is this thread any different? My whole point of posting to this thread in the first place was to state that if you want to know what Scientology teaches, ask a Scientologist. I used and anecdote myself (about myself) to back up the fact that this was not a dangerous course of action. In this thread, many posters have decided to look up the most inflamatory things they could find on the net and post them here as fact without considering the source. This doesn’t happen all that often in other threads, and when it does happen other posters let the orginal poster know. I think I’ll post a link to an alternative physics site that purports the existence of ether to one of the many physics threads in this forum. I could use the new orifice that Chronos, JonF, or many other posters would gladly provide.
They’ll be the ones which start with:
“I’m not a Scientologisy, first off”…
and end with
“and that’s why you should go talk to a Scientologist at your regional field office and have them explain what scientology can do for you.”
Perhaps they are here already!!
This is not fighting ignorance, it’s adding to it. Please stop it. Knee jerk reactions are a sign of an uniformed person, and add no value to the conversation. If you want to have a rational discussion about this subject, please join in.