Catholic Church vs. Modern Religion Scientology
Filed under: News | By: Peter Chubb
Posted on: April 2, 2008 | 203 Comments
I am not a religious man; however I do not go a day without someone talking about The Church of Scientology or the Catholic Church. The funny thing is most people also dismiss something or criticize something before they have learned anything about it, and I am guilty of that like a number of you are.
I have always made fun of the Church of Scientology assuming it to be some sort of cult, but naive people do that. Trust me I am never going to become religious, but when you look deeper into the workings of this new modern religion it gets you thinking that it is not that bad after all.
The thing is when you join the Catholic Church you are joining a huge organization, one of the richest in fast. But are you just a number to them, I don’t know, however when you want to join the Church of Scientology you work with people one-on-one to help to give you a better life. Well that is what is says in L. Ron Hubbard’s book Dianetics.
As with any religion there are always good and bad points, if you was going to choose a new faith would it be the old Catholic Church or the new modern religion The Church of Scientology.
Source - Live News
CLICK HERE to keep updated with the latest news, share a comment or problems with products and services. Follow us on twitter or read more Catholic Church, Church of Scientology, cult, faith, religion news.
Janelle, I visited one about a year ago and that is the very reason I side with Anonymous.
bgodly, you still manage to say a whole lot of nothing. If you want to be a good writer, you have to learn to pack each sentence with actual meaning and discard anything that is redundant or not vital to the story or message.
Now, I have read Dianetics and some of the other material recommended by Scientologists, and although there are some interesting insights and ideas, none of it justifies the abuses of the CoS.
Anonymous takes issue with the abuses, not the belief, bgodly. Quit trying to divert people’s attention to something that isn’t even the issue.
The Freezone practices Scientology and Anonymous has NO problem with the Freezone
I feel quite strongly that the sinister reputation of “Church” of Scientology is absolutely detrimental to any of the positive contributions that Scientology itself may offer.
Correction:
bgodly, I meant “effective” writer, “good” is entirely subjective.
Scientologists are, to quote Cruise, “The authorities on the mind.”
Bold statement. Any backup to that? Oh, right–the extensive research done by Hubbard.
Scientology is ACTIVELY seeking to DESTROY psychology and psychiatry because they believe that their ‘authority’ status on matters of the mind and medicine means that there are no other valid paths. I will admit that these sciences are less fully-understood by doctors, but the understanding is growing daily, as the practice evolves and learns daily.
Scientology’s data is utterly static: Hubbard was “Source” and altering or building on his work is “squirreling”–blasphemy.
Their own beliefs are fine; I don’t care if they think hooking themselves up to electrodes and yelling at ashtrays will make them better. That’s their own business and freedom.
I DO care that they actively lobby and seek to deprive ME of my right to treatment by mental health professionals.
I’d consider Scientology treatment…if there were third party double-blind studies conducted on the efficacy of it. There aren’t. Nor, I expect, will there be one–and by “third party” I don’t mean “by another scientology front group” like CCHR, ABLE, Narconon, etc.
So basically, the only reassurances that the methods that the CoS seeks to replace modern professional mental health care actually work, are the books we have to pay for, the word of scientology staffers who get commission for the book sales…and that’s it. No notes, no research papers, no peer reviewed studies, no FDA/APA/other licensed medical professional board approval, zero independent verification.
The Freedoms of Speech, Religion, and Expression are core to the values of the United States–and most other free cultures. They all have a limitation though, and I can sum it up like this:
“The right to swing my fist stops at the tip of the other man’s nose.”
Quit hitting other people’s noses, CoS, and I’ll stop (actively) exposing your lies.
First off let me apologize for my typos and mistakes in my earlier post - their, there thing pretty silly really.
Suz,
You say I say a whole lot of nothing. Well, you most certainly have a right to your opinion. I guess you find the whole religion, spiritual topic to be dull. We will just have to leave it up to others to see how much “nothing” there is in my communication.
In addition, I do not profess to be a good writer, I only communicate as I feel.
I took issue with the philosophy aspect because that is what Chuck Beatty did in his post. I guess you missed that.
This all proves the contradiction among critics, anonymous etc. Often you say one thing but do another.
I personally believe it is in an effort to have your actions, statements appear as benign or benevolent as possible while at the same time trying to incite as much antagonism towards the church as you can.
Qoute: “James Lightfield - Scientology is all denominational. It does not dictate how to view / pray / have a personal relationship with God.”
Its funny you would say that… then 10 years later when the person reaches OT-8, you tell them that Jesus was a pedophile. Way to go.
Maybe you do that to confuse them some more so they can pay for more auditing.
Charles Manson was a Scientologist.
Manson took 150 hours of auditing. Co$ taught him to “Be Godly”. Manson claimed, he completed all courses from 64′ to 68′while in jail & was theta clear. He visited the celebrity center in Hollywood and purchased books and a Emeter. Then he left the church and took his newly twisted reality and a Emeter to go create his own flock. When they caught these brainwashed hippies, Manson had Co$ books and a Emeter at the Death Valley ranch.
Makes since. Hang out with the crooks to learn how to be crooked. How many other dangerous people did scientology create and unleash on the world?
Rick A,
You bring up a good point in the Church’s attitude towards psychiatry.
Scientologists hold that psychiatry is not a real science. Usually baseless, useless and often destructive.
There are many reasons for this. You can visit
http://www.cchr.org
for more information.
I will tell you that chief among the reasons is the harm that is actually done in the name of help. We can see the evidence of this. The kids put on meds who commit suicide or commit homicide as in all those school shootings. The individuals who found not only no help from their counseling but trouble.
I can recall a time when my mother took my family when I was young to a family therapist after my dad died because we had some strife in the family. In that session the therapist had my mother in tears because she was being blamed for stuff that I later realized I and my brothers were responsible for.
This person didn’t have a clue about what they were doing. That person was GUESSING. He had years of “training” and it amounted to a best guess scenario.
I would wager you a thousand bucks that if I took someone into 3 seperate psychiatric offices for some type of complaint I would get 3 different diagnosis. The main reason is that mental diseases are voted upon my a majority at the APA meetings. That is how they get indoctrinated into our society. There is not one single medical test for mental illness or insanity.
At the 2005 and 2006 APA conventions, psychiatrists admitted on video that they did not know what causes mental illnes or how to cure it. The chemical imbalance theory is exactly that a theory.
What we are often fed with is “studies suggest” , “experts think” generalities but no proof. We are offered “treatment” but no cures. We are told that “advances are being made”, “insights are being developed” etc.
But no forward motion only PR statements.
Vitamin C can cure Scurvy. All real medical doctors can fix a broken arm with near 100% effectiveness. However, psychiatry offers us nothing even close to the workabilty of those medical sciences.
With as much money and time that the field has been given we should have seen a reduction in depression not a rise. We should have seen real world results not more reasons why we need to keep feeding the machine.
With all the kids put on psych meds in school, we should have seen a reduction in school violence not an increase. If the counseling worked we should have seen a reduction in the need and use of meds not an increase. On and on.
The biggest problem that faces us is not our ability to put time and attention on a problem, it is finding out what the problem is and confronting what does and doesn’t work.
There are double blind studies coming out now that show that meds are ineffective and often make things worse.
I mean for goodness sake it took groups like Scientology sponsered CCHR to get black box labeling on drugs that are known to have side effects of suicide. Again, SUICIDE, not dry mouth, not nausea, SUICIDE.
I could go on and on. You suggest Scientology is preventing people from getting the help of psychiatric counseling and drugging. I agree with you, this is very true. However, our contention though is that it is a good thing.
bgodly, again “good” is subjective. I am not one to judge whether you are any “good” at it, just whether you are being effective in your communication. People can learn about the philosophy on scientology website, in fact, I encourage it. That is where I feel that your arguments on the topic tend to be redundant.
Mr. Beatty is expressing his own experience with the belief system, and you are expressing your own experience with it, and that is subjective.
I still think you are trying to divert attention away from the real issues. People ask specific questions and making comments that are not a matter of subjectiveness, yet you go on and on about the philosophy of the religion and ignore valid concerns.
Also, who cares about typos as long as you get your point across.
I can haz spel chek?
To the red bgodley post.
I find it pretty funny that you are still pretending to me as a Scientologist turned non-Scientologist. I see you are still up to some of your old tricks.
I think it shows everyone else exactly what type of person we are often dealing with in this anti-scientology community. I think your underhanded actions only act to prove my contentions.
Secondly, to Sue.
You keep mentioning I am diverting. I am not. The problem with your assertions is that you are asking me to prove The Church is not criminal. This is hard to due only in that it is hard to prove that someone is, not anything. I call it trying to prove a non-negative.
I could easily say to you, “prove to me right now that you are not a thief.” You couldn’t do it. You could bring out a laundry list of things saying that my accusations are unfounded, you could show all the good things you do, you could tell me all about the things you didn’t steal but in the end I could just sit back and say, “well that still doesn’t prove you are not a thief or haven’t ever stolen anything.”
That is why the burden of proof of a claim is always on the accuser. You must prove you accusations of criminal behavior. The problem is you can’t. Often critics refer to anti-Scientology websites as “evidence” or “research” or “proof”. However, these sites contain 99% opinion including testimony of some highly suspicious characters.
There is only one known case where a few Scientology staff were ever convicted of a crime and in that case, over 30 years ago, the bulk of Scientologists including Hubbard, didn’t know what they were up to. This fact being confirmed by the actual prosecutor in the case. That group WAS unethical, they DID do bad things but they were summarily kicked out for this behavior.
Possibly it is from this case that others developed some suspicion of other bad activity of the church. However, any of these accusations or inuendos would fall under the heading of conjecture.
The rest of this stuff is all hypothesis and fantasy. Even some of the few ex-Scientologists who cry up a storm about how bad they were treated have never brought a criminal charge against the church. NOT A SINGLE ONE!!!
The only reasons for this would be that either they couldn’t because there was no criminal activity in the first place or that no district attorney would file the case. Either way it makes these claims, highly, highly suspicious too.
It’s already been proven. Repeatedly. In many courts.
Judicial statements regarding the Nature of Scientology
“Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill… (Scientology is) the world’s largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy.”
–Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia
“The government is satisfied that Scientology is socially harmful. It alienates members of families from each other and attributes squalid and disgraceful motives to all who oppose it; its authoritarian principles and practice are a potential menace to the personality and well being of those so deluded as to become followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health of those who submit to them… There is no power under existing law to prohibit the practice of Scientology; but the government has concluded that it is so objectionable that it would be right to take all steps within its power to curb its growth.”
–Kenneth Robinson, British Minister of Health
“The crime committed by these defendants is of a breadth and scope previously unheard of. No building, office, desk, or file was safe from their snooping and prying. No individual or organization was free from their despicable conspiratorial minds. The tools of their trade were miniature transmitters, lock picks, secret codes, forged credentials and any other device they found necessary to carry out their conspiratorial schemes.”
–Federal prosecutor’s memorandum to the judge urging stiff jail sentences for 9 top leaders of Scientology who had pleaded guilty to criminal charges
“Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious…It is corrupt sinister and dangerous. It is corrupt because it is based on lies and deceit and has its real objective money and power for Mr. Hubbard… It is sinister because it indulges in infamous practices both to its adherents who do not toe the line unquestionly and to those who criticize it or oppose it. It is dangerous because it is out to capture people and to indoctrinate and brainwash them so they become the unquestioning captives and tools of the cult, withdrawn from ordinary thought, living, and relationships with others.”
–Justice Latey, ruling in the High Court of London
“[The court record is] replete with evidence [that Scientology] is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories… and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with their sect…. The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard.”
–Judge Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court
“In addition to violating and abusing its own members’ civil rights, the organization over the years with its ‘fair game’ doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the church whom it perceives as enemies.”
–Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Paul Breckenridge, June 1984, in the Gerry Armstrong case
“In January 1980, fearing a raid by law enforcement agencies, Hubbard’s representatives ordered the shredding of all documents showing that Hubbard controlled Scientology organizations, finances, personnel, or the property at Gilman Hot Springs. In a two week period, approximately one million pages were shredded pursuant to this order.”
–California appellate court, 2nd. district, 3rd. division, July 29, 1991, B025920 & B038975, Super. Ct. No. C 420153
“It is common knowledge among senior executives of the organization and it is the policy of CSC that members of the Boards of Directors are mere figureheads, without authority or control, not for internal corporate reasons, but rather to vest control in Mr. Hubbard. I have personal knowledge that in order to carry out this corporate fraud, organizational executives have engaged in the various unethical practices including backdating phony Board minutes and forging signatures.”
–Affidavit of Gerry Armstrong , former member
“When a person is subjected to coercive persuasion [as in Scientology] without his knowledge or consent …[he may] develop serious and sometimes irreversible physical and psychiatric disorders, up to and including schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and suicide.”
–California Supreme Court, United States v. Lee [455 U.S. 252,257,258 (1982)]
“Substantial evidence supports the conclusion Scientology leaders made the deliberate decision to ruin Wollersheim economically and possible psychologically….We do not mean to suggest Scientology’s retributive program… represented a full scale modern day ‘inquisition.’ Nevertheless there are some parallels in purpose and effect. ‘Fair game,’ like the ‘inquisition,’ targeted heretics. “Other testimony established Scientology is a hierarchal organization which exhibits near paranoid attitudes toward certain institutions and individuals — in particular the government, mental health professions, disaffected members, and others who criticize the organization or its leadership… During trial, Wollersheim’s experts testified Scientology’s ‘auditing’ and ‘disconnect’ practices constituted ‘brainwashing’ and ‘thought reform’ akin to what the Chinese and North Koreans practiced on American prisoners of war… “Using its position as religious leader, the church and its agents coerced Wollersheim into continuing auditing even though his sanity was repeatedly threatened by this practice… Thus there is adequate proof the religious practice in this instance caused real harm to the individual and the appellant’s outrageous conduct caused that harm…
Church practices conducted in a coercive environment are not qualified to be voluntary religious practices entitled to first amendment religious freedom guarantees… “We hold that the state has a compelling interest in allowing its citizens to recover for serious emotional injuries they suffer through religious practices they are coerced into accepting. Such conduct is too outrageous to be protected under the constitution and too unworthy to be privileged under the law of torts.”
-California appellate court, 2nd district, 7th division, Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California, Civ. No. B023193 Cal. Super. (1986)