Scientology: Cult or Religion?

[RedRackham]

I've had personal experiences with Scientology, having gone to their main church in East Grinstead, UK to interview their press officer for a documentary.

It's argued that it has some of the same properties of a religion, but there are those who also criticise it and call it a cult. Is Scientology a "religion" in the same way that other similarly structured institutions are? Where does the distinction lie between a cynically motivated cult and a publicly accepted religious institution?

[Ingenious]

I'm sure Hubbard created Scientology for a laugh. I mean come on, Xenu?

[Autolykos]

It's a cult.

- Rob

[RickSp]

Cult or religion? You mean there is a difference? Just kidding, (I think.)

Scientolgy is definately a cult. They make the Jesuits look like white bread Methodists. Sadly Scientologists have literally taken over the town of Clearwater Florida. Really sad. Clearwater was a lovely town.

Scientology's Assault on Clearwater Florida

[Samildanach]

I did find this part interesting

We are all fallen gods, according to Scientology, and the goal is to be returned to that state.

I have wondered that from time to time myself.

[phoenix_fire]

A man who imagines himself to be a god is one that I would not turn my back on except in disgust.

[Boetie]

L Ron Hubbard was a failed science fiction writer. He decided to make up a religion called Scientology because it would be easier to make money that way.

[Technosoul]

I would call it a religion and although they do not hold to the same belief systems as most Christains they none the less have things to learn about, and many find that they have workable means to a better life. They have a few movie stars that have promoted the idea that they have greatly benifited by those teachings and readings.

Perhaps mainstream religions just use the word "cult" for any religion they think is off the wall because it does not promote the same ideas they teach. The word cult sounds like occult and that sounds like something that is non-christian or even "evilish". Like a devils cult.

A cult is normally classed as a group that uses mind control methodologies to basically brainwash their following so they will not stray from the flock, they teach isolationism and often make people think that their parents and other relations are evil and should be avoided. They keep you as busy as possible from the time you get up til you go to bed - doing church stuff. They expect you to become totally dependant on the leader of the group and you often must give up your personal wealth to join, or donate it to the "cause". Always "the cause" which is most of the time has to do with preparing for a doomsday or the life here-after. They often employ a strong system of rewards and punishments. And sometimes they break the norms of sexual relationships.

Cults create mindless robots and zombies out of what otherwise would be a thinking person.

Where as our standard religions are both social events and they offer a time for worship or bible study.
So you work all week, deal with your family, hobbies and other entertainments. And once or twice a week you go to the church for a little inspiration, entertainment, and to learn about things in the Bible. So it is not a full time, all consuming addiction.

Although L Ron Hubbard is very intelligent and he might employ a few of the cult tricks at his gatherings he at least has something to offer. A science fiction writer, new ager and motivational speaker, he was able to tap into a new generation of people seeking a religion that seemed to offer more then what the normal churches were providing.

And so... religion yes, cult no - why insult thousands of people with such name-calling?

http://www.lronhubbard.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Ron_Hubbard

[Clarence]

failed?

I've read most fiction written by L.Ron but not a word of his religious work. I'm inclined to believe it is a joke. I can't figure out why he would do such a sadistic thing but the things I hear about scientology all seem to be satired (one way or another) in one of his books. People who take insane procedures as part of religion. Celebrities becoming publicly religious. Group think and similarities to cults. It's aIl covered in his fiction works as a 'bad' thing. I just don't buy it. Does anyone feel like they know an author after reading an abundance of their work? Anyone know Stephen King? Plenty.

Can anyone else tell when Richard Bachman is writing? The differences between beteen Bachman and King are brilliant. Getting of topic.

Anyway, I did most of my L.ron reading before I even knew there was something called scientology and a book called Dianetics. I don't want to believe it plus it just doesn't add up.

[Mia]

Can anyone else tell when Richard Bachman is writing? The differences between beteen Bachman and King are brilliant.

Don't you think? I loved the Bachman books.

[Mia]

Quote by: Technosoul I would call it a religion and although they do not hold to the same belief systems as most Christains they none the less have things to learn about, and many find that they have workable means to a better life. They have a few movie stars that have promoted the idea that they have greatly benifited by those teachings and readings. Perhaps mainstream religions just use the word "cult" for any religion they think is off the wall because it does not promote the same ideas they teach. The word cult sounds like occult and that sounds like something that is non-christian or even "evilish". Like a devils cult. A cult is normally classed as a group that uses mind control methodologies to basically brainwash their following so they will not stray from the flock, they teach isolationism and often make people think that their parents and other relations are evil and should be avoided. They keep you as busy as possible from the time you get up til you go to bed - doing church stuff. They expect you to become totally dependant on the leader of the group and you often must give up your personal wealth to join, or donate it to the "cause". Always "the cause" which is most of the time has to do with preparing for a doomsday or the life here-after. They often employ a strong system of rewards and punishments. And sometimes they break the norms of sexual relationships. Cults create mindless robots and zombies out of what otherwise would be a thinking person. Where as our standard religions are both social events and they offer a time for worship or bible study. So you work all week, deal with your family, hobbies and other entertainments. And once or twice a week you go to the church for a little inspiration, entertainment, and to learn about things in the Bible. So it is not a full time, all consuming addiction. Although L Ron Hubbard is very intelligent and he might employ a few of the cult tricks at his gatherings he at least has something to offer. A science fiction writer, new ager and motivational speaker, he was able to tap into a new generation of people seeking a religion that seemed to offer more then what the normal churches were providing. And so... religion yes, cult no - why insult thousands of people with such name-calling? http://www.lronhubbard.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Ron_Hubbard

I think people also use the term cult to address 'false' religions. I know, athiests are going to say all religions are false, and some people think everyone else's are false but theirs, but there are degrees, if you will.

For instance, most recognize Christianity, Judaism, and Islam as legitimate religions, whether they agree with them or not. Scientology, Mormanism, etc. are considered cults by manny because their founders are known con-artists, with an ulterior motive.

[Autolykos]

Quote by: Clarence failed? I've read most fiction written by L.Ron but not a word of his religious work. I'm inclined to believe it is a joke. I can't figure out why he would do such a sadistic thing but the things I hear about scientology all seem to be satired (one way or another) in one of his books. People who take insane procedures as part of religion. Celebrities becoming publicly religious. Group think and similarities to cults. It's aIl covered in his fiction works as a 'bad' thing. I just don't buy it. Does anyone feel like they know an author after reading an abundance of their work? Anyone know Stephen King? Plenty. Can anyone else tell when Richard Bachman is writing? The differences between beteen Bachman and King are brilliant. Getting of topic. Anyway, I did most of my L.ron reading before I even knew there was something called scientology and a book called Dianetics. I don't want to believe it plus it just doesn't add up.

Did you happen to read the interview I linked to above, Clarence? Mr. Hubbard (Sr.) was certainly a sadistic man. The whole point of dianetics and "auditing", to my knowledge, is to gather as much information about a person as possible in order to threaten him with blackmail later on. Scientology and other cults have more in common with pyramid schemes than with actual religions.

- Rob

[Zhavric]

Quote by: phoenix_fire A man who imagines himself to be a god is one that I would not turn my back on except in disgust.

I'm always tickled when the followers of the well entrenched / established cult try to talk smack about the upstart cult. The cacophony of clangs as pots impact kettles is nearly deafening.

[Clarence]

Few things about the article.

It comes out swinging and with the idea that Penthouse is the only magazine with enough balls to do it. True or untrue it's easy to believe because only a genius could be that demented. I have no reason to doubt what the man's son says. But in the interest of good journalism...

Because of the seriousness of Mr. DeWolf's charges and because his father has affected the lives of thousands, if not millions, of people, Penthouse will be launching an independent investigation of these charges. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue.

wouldn't you want to investigate before you do the article? moving on. I'm sure they are working under the best intentions...

Penthouse: Before you filed your lawsuit and began speaking openly about Scientology, there was very little news of it in the media. Why do you think there has been so little investigation of Scientology? Hubbard: it's very simple. Scientology has always had a "fair-game doctrine"--a policy of doing absolutely anything to stop an investigation or publication of a critical article in a magazine or newspaper. They have run some incredible operations on the several people who have tried to write books about Scientology. It was almost like a terror campaign. First they'd try throwing every possible lawsuit at the reporter or newspaper. We had a team of attorneys to do just that. The goal was to destroy the enemy. So the solution was always to attack, full-bore, with every possible resource, from every angle, instantaneously it can certainly be overwhelming. A guy would get slapped with twenty-seven lawsuits, and our lawyers would start depositioning absolutely anybody who ever knew the man, digging up dirt while at the same time putting together an operation that would get him into further trouble. I know of one case, concerning Paulette Cooper, who wrote a book called The Scandal of Scientology, in which they spent almost $500.000 trying to destroy her...You go to court to harass, to delay, to exhaust the enemy financially, physically, mentally.

It's funny that he paints this scandle exactly in a book. Cronies of Delbert John Rockecenter, lawyers Swindle and Crouch do this very same thing against the hero and the good team. The idea is cast in a bad light. Swindle and Crouch also happen to represent IG Pharben...who happens to be the company selling amphetamines to a man who's selling them to high officials in the Voltar gov't to get them addicted. I wander...

Penthouse: What exactly is Scientology? Hubbard: Scientology is a power-and-money-and-intelligence-gathering game. To use common, everyday English, Scientology says that you and I and everybody else willed ourselves into being hundreds of trillions of years ago --just by deciding to be. We willed ourselves into being ourselves. Through wild space games, interaction, fights, and wars in the grand science-fiction tradition, we created this universe --all the matter, energy, space, and time of this universe. And so through these trillions of years, we have become the effect of our own cause and we now find ourselves trapped in bodies. So the idea of Scientology "auditing" or "counseling" or "processing" is to free yourself from your body and to return you to the original godlike state or, in Scientology jargon, an operating Thetan --O.T. We are all fallen gods, according to Scientology, and the goal is to be returned to that state.

The first part is his son's opinion, the rest is a description of the religion using 'common everyday language'. This is, no doubt, what the cult believes. What I've been doubting is whether l.Ron believed it or not.

Penthouse: And what is the Church of Scientology? Hubbard: It's one of my father's many organizations. It was formed in 1953, basically to avoid the harassment of my father by the medical profession and the IRS. The idea of Scientology didn't really exist before that point as a religion, but my father hit upon turning it into a church after he started feeling pressured.

He started the church because the pressure from the IRS and medical industry? What pressure? lawsuit pressure and heavy handed tax threats?

Penthouse: So you think the press was intimidated? Hubbard: Oh, absolutely. All the way through, since the fifties. I found this very sad. It seemed very much like Germany in the thirties. The freedom of the press seemed buried. They got scared. They thought. "Well, who wants to go through ten years of lawsuits, just because we printed the name L. Ron Hubbard?" I'm delighted to see that Penthouse has the balls to print this interview.

This guy of all people should know that press (before the term MSM) hadn't been too free
for anyone opposing the true heavyweights for some time. There were only two networks in the fiftees and sixties as far as I know. You think some measly sci-fi writer poses a court threat to them and thier gov't cronies. I don't know. I've never even heard of this stuff with his family before but I was only 2 in 1983. I'm just reading out loud.

Now, L.Ron was indeed somewhat wealthy. It takes money to strongarm. But think of the moneypits he was supposedly strongarming. Any questions? Oh yeah, and Penthouse rocks for having balls!!

Penthouse: Didn't your father have any interest in helping people? Hubbard: No. Penthouse: Never? Hubbard: My father started out as a broke science-fiction writer. He was always broke in the late 1940s. He told me and a lot of other people that the way to make a million was to start a religion. Then he wrote the book Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health while he was in Bayhead, New Jersey. When we later visited Bayhead, in about 1953, we were walking around and reminiscing --he told me that he had written the book in one month.

...I don't know what I'm getting at...to say L.Ron could only think of one way to become a millionair is retarded. I've read at least a thousand ways in his own books. Both evil and noble means. He gives the impression (in stories) that if you fight for what's right, you get what you need. Where do you think I got the idea? Well, I guess it's not the first place I ran across that attitude... So far it seems to hold true if you look around.

I took the initiative to read up on scientology as we know it. further doubts. Aperently the C of S is a tightly controlled religion and some of the more outrageous claims can be attributed to the Free Zone and not the actual church created by L. Ron back in 1953.

Hubbard: They would say that the cancer and its cure are just incidental to the main problem of one's "spiritual development." And according to Dianetics and Scientology, the explanation for cancer is basically that you have a sex problem?

It's beyond my ability to explain. This is such a trip. I guess that the only options for me are:

A.) L.Ron tried to influence the world in a positive way through fiction. or

B.) L.Ron was the villians he created and the heroes were the only thing fiction about it...

I'm done thinking about this. :rolleyes:


:somebody order (it's the only way you can get it) Mission Earth dekalogy. It was his last work before he died. If one of y'all pick em up you'll thank me. I'd bet anything. It's a five thousand page satire and both hilarious and troubling in what it points out about our society. It's right freakin on'. Adventure, lawyers, hookers, heroes, heroin, United Nations, Oil industry, Pharmacuetical industries. These books have some of the most detailed character profiles. Other times someone is portrayed in the wildest most bizarre charicature (sp). Do it. just to make me happy

[orgaelin]

I'm probably the most experienced non-scientologist here, having visited both East Grinstead and other places, and spent many years studying their "Tech". I'm also the only one who can answer you without any bias, because I have no religion of my own that I prefer over Scientology, as with certain others who have responded above. My analysis is entirely objective.

First off, Hubbard was actually a very succesful science fiction writer, not a failed one. But of course, that's totally irrelevant.

Before Hubbard wrote Dianetics, a movement was growing that talked about something called Engrams. That's right - Hubbard didn't invent them, he just developed the idea. I think it was actually in the 30's the first book about Engrams came out.

The idea behind engrams is very simple, and the methods Hubbard and his associates developed for ridding yourself of them is, quite simply, genius.

An engram, irrespective of Hubbard and his ideas, is a memory stored in your unconscious memory instead of your conscious memory. Being in your unconscious, it can affect you without you realising, and it is this mechanism behind such silly things as, say, a phobia of birds.

When a stage hypnotist takes puts you into a trance and plants a command in your memory he is effectively using a mental backdoor for the creation of engrams. He makes a statement like "When I say 'pink', you'll act like a flamingo". Then when the person is conscious again and the hypnotist says the trigger word, the person acts and/or feels as his unconscious mind instructs him to.

Now the problem is that there is more than one way of accessing the unconscious mind in this way. People think of being either unconscious or conscious, with no in-between. But in fact consciousness is, to an extent, a variable state. You are less conscious when you are very busy, such as driving a car (and you arrive with little memory of the journey), or when you are very stressed, tired, or hungry, or afraid, or in pain.

What we don't generally realise is that the brain is always recording, even when we are fully unconscious. Now if you get hit by your husband so hard he knocks you out, everything he says while you're unconscious is going to be recorded, and will come back to haunt you if ever that memory is later restimulated. So let's say you were washing up, taps still running, huband comes in shouting, hits you, and you drop a plate as you fall to the ground. He then starts shouting at you that you're stupid, clumsy, worthless, etc.

Everything gets mixed together in one big unconscious memory called an engram. Again, so far this is not Hubbards ideas, this was all discovered before Hubbard took over it. Now anything from that memory can restimulate the entirety of that engram. Years later Jane has left her husband, she's washing up and she accidentally drops a plate. Suddenly her head starts to hurt (where he hit her) and she doesn't know why. She starts to fail like a clumsy worthless idiot, and again has no idea why.

So this is where Hubbard comes in. He created Dianetics as a therapy to rid people of their engrams. It basically involved a very lightly relaxed state in which a person is made to re-experience memories. They start at the beginning, and watch it through, recounting everything to the therapist. Then they go back to the beginning, and each time they do so, the memory kind of brightens up and you can recall more with each repetition. And as you do so, you release the power of that unconscious memory because what you are doing is moving it from your unconscious memory to your conscious one, where it is just like any other memory.

Dianetics is a very precise and effective science of the mind, and would have probably taken over the field of psychiatry had it not been for Hubbard’s next action. He basically took the entire thing and recategorised it, moving it into the realm of religion and faith.

Officially, the reason for this is that as they went further and further back through peoples’ memories, they eventually went back into actual past lives. From that moment, Dianetics was doomed to always being regarded as even less than ‘fringe science’.

The new package was named Scientology, which basically believes that you are not a body with a soul, you’re a soul with a body. Also, however, the various layers of engrams and other difficulties prevent you from utilising or even knowing the full extent of your apparently unlimited abilities. Thus Scientology is in fact a process, it is more something you do than something you believe.

They also believe that when your body dies your soul exteriorises and, after a period of time in which all memories of the former lifetime are removed, you return to earth to procure a new body for a new lifetime.

The Scientology religious worldview thus incorporates faith, since it is required of a person to believe what he is learning. It is also worthy of the label ‘religion’ for one more, very controversial reason: all religions have their crazy myths. Why? Because some people need them.

Look at Christianity: they believe a single guy created everything, including all living things, and that when they made him angry he wiped them all out, nearly. He then splits himself into three and sends one part of himself to impregnate a virgin who bears the child of God. That child then manages to walk on water, and raise people from the dead, including even himself.

Now Scientology has some equally absurd myths. They believe that trillions of years ago there was an over-population problem in the galaxy, and that an evil overlord rounded up billions of people and blew them up on Earth. The result was that people become clustered into groups of souls inescapably bound together. After Scientology processes, however, the idea is that you cast off these ‘hangers-on’ and become a totally free soul, able to leave your body at will and be in full control of matter, energy, space and time.

I’ll grant that Scientology’s ideas are a little more modern, with more than just a hint of sci-fi feel to them, but they are no more unlikely than those of any other faith. They are there to serve a purpose – to fill a need for certain types of religious people that depend on such myths.

Now, in terms of the actual church and its activities. Like every successful institution, Scientology has the primary purpose of survival, and its behaviour can easily be likened to an actual living entity in this respect. It was very carefully designed to grow by gaining new members, and keeping those members. Thus its recruitment methods are aggressive, and highly effective, even if not entirely moral. After all, survival comes first.

When you read Hubbard’s earliest writings on the subject of his church you can see a clear and honest intent to create something special. He actually states in the Dianetics book that if any institution arose to deliver Dianetics and charged for it, such an institution would be corrupt and should not be trusted!

So the church today is not what Hubbard had originally intended. The tactics that were a requirement to get the whole thing off the ground in the early days are now the tactics that remove it from moral acceptability. The church is in huge need of reform. It needs a thorough inward look at its purpose and the best ways to achieve that.

It also needs to open itself to further development of the techniques Hubbard developed, rather than deifying him and his words as incorruptible scripture. Many Scientologists in the Freezone are aware of flaws that could be ironed out, and of new techniques that could improve on the old ones, but the church is as open to new ideas as the Pope himself.

My final analysis: Dianetics is a brilliant science, lost to the fringe. Scientology has/had the potential to be a fantastic modern religion, but is constrained and misdirected by the very rules that initially made it strong. It will continue to survive, but without reform it will never flourish.

[Kite]

Defineatly a cult. You have to pay to get in, and theres aliens. If this isn't a cult, nothing is.

[Autolykos]

Not only do you pay to get in, they then keep you there. In other words, there's no (painless) way out once you join.

Hubbard was not a successful science-fiction writer by most people's standards, including mine. From what I understand, the man was obsessed with making money. Selling science-fiction stories was not going to give him the lifestyle that he wanted. So he "came up" with the idea of starting his own religion, which incorporated science-fiction elements.

The fact that his new "religion" was so wildly successful is really a testament to how much people are willing to sacrifice to someone if they promise to make them feel better about themselves.

- Rob

[orgaelin]

Autolykos I see your reasoning, but it fails to measure up when you really think it through. You said that as you understand it Hubbard was obsessed with making money. As you understand it? What access did you ever have to Hubbard in order to form such an informed understanding? Or is it more along the lines of 'as I read on an anti-Scientology website'?

Furthermore, if it were true, why did he not stop when he'd become successful, and live it up as you suggest? I mean, in East Grinstead he built his own castle, and it's beautiful! Why the hell did he not just retire if his goal was to amass wealth? What he really did was work and work and work like a religious fanatic (and let's face it, this is exactly what he was) untill his death.

You came again to his success as a sci-fi writer, stating that he was not successful by most peoples' standards including yours. How is it that you have a standard for measuring author's success? Are you a publisher? Or do you mean that by your *preference* he was not a very good sci-fi author? And if so, you surely don't need me to point out that your opinion is, well, YOUR opinion. Also, who are the "most people" to whom you refer? Have you asked most people about Hubbard's fiction? I wasn't even aware "most people" had read it.

You also said, "The fact that his new "religion" was so wildly successful is really a testament to how much people are willing to sacrifice to someone if they promise to make them feel better about themselves."

From another perspective, you could say it is a testament to the unhappy state of the world psyche. After all, a civilisation that is not lacking in something will not want for that something. If Hubbard and his religion is successful it is because he offers something that is missing, AND because it actually provides that too. Sure some people have left with lots of bad things to say, but what of the majority who haven't left, who've been doing it for years, and will happily tell you everything Scientology has done for them? There's simply is no denying that on some level Scientology delivers what it promises. Yes it makes money, obscene and often unfair amounts of it. So does Catholicism, but all they offer is forgiveness from a paedophile priest with the supposed authority of God Himself.

Is it a cult? A science? A religion? The only honest answer is yes! It has aspects of all these things. But having cult-like aspects does not mean it cannot be a religion, just as having religious aspects does not mean it cannot also be about science.

Now I'm probably going to get accused of actually being a one because I've defended it so strongly! My stance on this 'movement', for want of a better word, is that it is a great idea but largely corrupted by misguided or power-hungry higher management. If it ever reforms, I'll sign up immediately. But untill it does I am just a keen observer. I genuinely believe this could be the first religion to really live up to the main point: making the world a better place. Just not any time soon.

I don't believe all that whacky sci-fi stuff either. It couldn't be more clearly the product of Hubbard's mind. This is why more research needs to be done, to determine the location of the fine line that seperates recollection from creative recollection.

[brien]

I know nothing of this thing but It seems to be a cult. My exposure is Tom Cruise and his ranting and ravings about it. "Oh yeah, oh yeah. " :rolleyes: Religions are usually defined by the worship of a God. Does Scientology have a God?

[orgaelin]

Scientology acknowledges a god, but also acknowledges that it doesn't know much about it! This is part of what makes Scientology supposedly appropriate for people of all faiths - Scientology leaves a blank space, a bit like 'Insert the name of your god here'.

A religion isn't defined by the worship of a god. That's one aspect of it. If it were that simple to label something religion or otherwise then it wouldn't take years of investigations, et al.

Tom Cruise is the perfect example of a Scientologist who is so happy that it freaks people out. A lot of Scientologists are just like him - their eyes are wide and vibrant, their smile irrepressible, and just a general manner that makes the likes of you and I wonder what they've been taking! Which of course would be nothing because they are seriously against recreational drug use.

This makes it very strange when you visit a Scientology church, called an Org. (no significance to my name!) You are very quickly greeted and made to feel welcome. You kind of feel like these people think you're wonderful and can't get enough of your presence. And that's going to appeal to you of course. Be extremely nice to people, shower them with compliments, and they're going to like you.

The key thing you have to determine though is motive. You can stab a guy with intent to kill, or you can accidentally stab him as he runs into a knife you're holding, for example. The latter is not wrong. Now with Scientologists it's the latter - they greet you in this way because they really are like this - living on a high all the time. They really do want you to join their cause that they may help you and you them. This is their religion - the belief that what they do saves people.

And it's not all about money, because they encourage you to join with someone else and learn the tech with each other, applying it to each other as you learn it. That way you're not paying crazy fees, you just buy a book or tape and work from it.

I've been to Saint Hill, the castle in East Grinstead, UK, a couple of times. There were big events on both occasions, huge celebrations, a live band - incredibly live, fireballs on stage and all! Everyone there is like Tom Cruise. It's like being on another planet!

You don't feel like this is a cult. Cults tend to be on a much smaller, disorganised scale. Everything here is grand. The organisation is made up of hundreds of sub-organisations, many of them charities for helping those unable to help themselves. One of them is the Citizens Commision on Human Rights, which produces an investigative magazine exposing human rights abuses throughout the world.

Still sound like a cult?