Cult News

In his new book Nothing Is Impossible, Christopher Reeve offers inspiration and hope, but the Hollywood icon also demonstrates his enduring sense of humor.

In a chapter titled Religion, Reeve tells the story of his involvement with Scientology during 1975.

The saga begins outside a supermarket where the actor runs into a Scientologist promoting a “free personality test.” Reeve obliges him and takes the test, curious to find out its results.

The next day in the “plush…inner sanctum of…[Scientology’s] headquarters…suitable for the president or CEO of a major corporation” he is told the bad news. Scientologists warn Reeve that he is carrying “heavy ‘baggage'” and suffers from a litany of personal problems.

But of course they can provide the needed “‘training'” to help him, which they say he should begin immediately.

So the future Superman takes Scientology courses hoping one day he will “go Clear,” which is Scientology jargon for reaching a supposed advanced state of consciousness made possible through their training.

Reeve writes about an exercise called “‘TRO’ (Training Routine Zero)” and explains, “The objective was to empty our minds of extraneous thoughts (‘clutter’)” And “whenever our own clutter tried to come back in, we were…to acknowledge its return and then command it to go away.”

Doesn’t this sound like “brainwashing“?

The actor tells readers that TRO only cost him “a few hundred dollars.” But after that came “auditing,” which he describes as “outrageously expensive.” And Reeve says Scientology wanted “$3,000 in advance” for that service, which was billed at a “$100 an hour in 1975.”

He explains that the “auditor” used an “E-Meter,” which is “a simple box with a window that contained a fluctuating needle and a card with numbers from one to ten. Two wires running out of the box…were attached to tin cans,” which he was asked to hold.

Apparently it didn’t take x-ray vision for Reeve to conclude that the “E-meter was basically a crude lie detector.”

What Reeve subsequently details sounds like an interrogation. The actor was asked to “recall the use of…illegal substances…painkillers…anything stronger than aspirin.” He says, “My drug rundown used up for or five sessions.”

But Reeve had “growing skepticism about Scientology.” So he decided to run his own test.

He told the auditor a long story supposedly about a past life, but he made it all up, based upon a Greek myth.

However, the auditor didn’t detect anything, even with the help of the trusty “E-Meter.”

It was then that the “Man of Steel” decided he was done with Scientology. Reeve writes, “The fact that I got away with a blatant fabrication completely devalued my belief in the process.”

Summing up a religious critique the actor says, “My problem has always been with religious dogma intended to manipulate behavior.”

Elsewhere in the book Reeve recounts exposure to Transcendental Meditation, a run-in with a devotee of Baba Muktanananda, an awareness weekend seminar, Deepak Chopra, “Harmonic Convergence” and “rebirthing.”

But Christopher Reeve never became another movie star devoted to some guru or “cult.” And it’s refreshing to find a celebrity that isn’t another annoying Hollywood cliché, constantly promoting some leader, special mentor or weird group.

Even after life dealt Reeve a tough hand in 1995 through a freak accident that paralyzed his body, he still didn’t grasp for some self-serving, comforting or convenient belief system.

Instead, the actor says God wants us to “do our best” and simply “discern the truth.” And Reeve cites a guiding principle espoused by the pragmatic Abraham Lincoln, “When I do good I feel good. When I do bad I feel bad. And that’s my religion.”

It seems Scientology has more to learn from Superman than he ever could have taken in from its endless courses and “auditing.”

Maybe this movie star should teach some Hollywood Scientologists like Tom Cruise and John Travolta?

Given his current circumstances many might think Christopher Reeve is bitter. But the actor centers much of his life and faith upon the value of hope.

He concludes at the end of his book, “When we have hope, we discover powers, within ourselves we may have never known—the power to make sacrifices, to endure, to heal, and to love. Once we choose hope, everything is possible.”

In Portland, Oregon a coalition of “mainstream religious organizations” has joined the protest against war with Iraq. And that coalition “also includes such fringe religious organizations as the Church of Scientology,” reports The Portland Tribune.

Why is Scientology suddenly so interested in preventing a US war with Iraq?

This looks like a cynical effort by the controversial church to network contacts and curry favor amongst mainstream religious leaders.

Scientology, which only a few years ago acheived religious tax-exempt status and has a history of bad press, is always looking for credibility and some way to burnish its image.

Interestingly, the controversial church plays both sides of the political spectrum. Scientology had close ties to the former Clinton White House ,but now seems friendly with the Bush family and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Does this all sound a bit two-faced?

Never mind, politics Scientology style is apparently a buffet best served cold, devoid of cumbersome commitments based upon a single set of consistent and sincerely held ideals.

The wrongful death suit filed against the Church of Scientology by the family of Lisa McPhearson has once again been postponed, reports the St. Petersburg Times.

McPhearson died while under the care of Scientologists within one of their facilities in Clearwater, Florida.

Scientology’s lawyers have filed an appeal regarding a decision made by the presiding judge, who rejected their bid to remove the plaintiff’s attorney Ken Dandar for misconduct. This was an apparent strategy to reduce the plaintiff’s ability to prosecute the case and/or a simple delaying tactic.

One lawyer familiar with Scientology litigation observed, “I thought the church would either get it knocked out, or they would wear Dandar out, or at the very end they’d settle. I don’t think the church wants what Dandar is going to do in that courtroom.”

While Scientology continues their appeal the judge decided to postpone the trial, which was scheduled to begin in a matter of days. Now it looks like months will pass before another court date is set.

Such stalling and maneuvering is common for Scientology. It is not unusual for a court case to be held up for years through such legal wrangling, or even longer to collect a subsequent judgement.

In one notable case it took a plaintiff 22 years to conclude his case and collect a judgement rendered against Scientology. The controversial church, which has been called a “cult,” ultimately paid that former member $8 million dollars regarding his personal injury claim.

It seems a settlement was in the works, but Dandar said “demands made by the church” kept it from concluding. This probably means Scientology is demanding some kind of “gag order” to keep everyone silent after making a big pay off.

One attorney said the lawsuit should pull in a settlement of about $5 million, but Dandar stated nothing less than $15 million dollars was being considered.

If Scientology was willing to pay $8 million to a former member injured by the church, how much more should they pay the family of a Scientologist who is dead due to their alleged wrongdoing?

It seems that $16 million would be cheap at twice the price they paid through the previous settlement.

Scientologist Lisa McPhearson died tragically in 1995 while under the care and treatment of her Scientology brethren. But it has taken more than seven years for the lawsuit filed by her family to reach a trial date.

Scientology is adept at delaying and/or derailing lawsuits and it seems they have used every strategy and courtroom tactic to keep this case from going to trial.

Scientology frequently employs what can be seen as the “ad hominem attack.” Rather than directly respond to issues raised, they often go after whoever raises them. This may mean pursuing a plaintiff personally, harassing their lawyer or even their family. It doesn’t appear that Scientologists are adverse to almost anything, when attempting to protect church interests.

The recent loss of a libel case in Denmark and another not long ago in England appears to verify this observation. The largest libel judgement ever awarded in Canadian history, was to a lawyer slandered by Scientology. Each case involved a perceived enemy pursued relentlessly by the controversial church.

But despite all its apparent delaying tactics the McPhearson case will finally proceed to trial and a jury will hear the case. And the judge has refused to remove the plaintiff’s lawyer, despite Scientology’s insistence that he is somehow unfit, reports Associated Press.

This means the sad story of Lisa McPhearson, who died allegedly of severe dehydration after 18 days of care within a Scientology facility, will now be heard in court.

That is, unless Scientology makes a last minute settlement with a “gag order,” which the church that has been called a “cult” has done often in the past.

Devout Scientologist Tom Cruise continues to be mentioned in the press regarding his relationship with an heir to Australia’s greatest fortune, reports The New Zealand Herald.

James Packer, son of billionaire Kerry Packer, landed at New Plymouth airport in an executive jet over the weekend to visit the American movie star, now shooting his latest film there.

The two are buddies and persistent reports claim that the friendship prompted Packer to explore Scientology.

It seems like Tom Cruise is effectively chumming the waters “down under” for Scientology by using his star status to catch big fish for the controversial church, which has been called a “cult.”

And he may have caught a whopper for Scientology if Packer has become involved.

However, the “Sci-fi cult” doesn’t always keep its catch.

Nicole Kidman has apparently broken away from Scientology. And both Nicholas Cage and Michael Jackson left hardcore follower Lisa Marie Presley, without becoming deeply involved.

But a billionaire Aussie would certainly be a good swap for Kidman.

Hollywood celebrity appears to be a flashy lure when “cults” cruise for converts.

Scientology has been fined $1,370 and ordered to pay court costs of $17,800 for libeling a Danish journalist and German filmmaker, reports Associated Press.

Danish journalist Joergen Pedersen and German filmmaker Walther Heynowski were trashed in the Scientology magazine “Freedom” after they refused to stop production of a television show critical of the controversial church, which has been called a “cult.”

“Freedom” published a totally false report that claimed Heynowski once worked for Stasi and in turn trained Pederson.

Stasi was a notorious network of informants once used to suppress the citizens of Communist East Germany.

After Scientology suffered the legal defeat in Copenhagen its spokesperson said, “We are quite shocked about this ruling because it stops the freedom of speech.”

What?

Coming from one of the most noted and active litigates that often sues and harasses its critics on the Internet it seems bizarre that a Scientologist would now cry for “freedom of speech.”

It appears this protest is more of a pragmatic pose than anything based upon principles.

Don’t expect to see Scientology lawyers relax their efforts to suppress free speech amongst their perceived enemies anytime soon.

Not content to simply be a movie star, Tom Cruise once again used his celebrity to promote Scientology’s agenda by essentially attacking the mental health profession during an interview, reports The Age.

The devout Scientologist star was interviewed while filming a movie in Australia. Cruise said, “Today in America I know they are so quick to put children on drugs because they are not learning well.” An apparent reference to medications like Ritalin, which are prescribed for children with disabilities.

Cruise was supposedly “helped” regarding his own learning disability through Scientology’s “technology.” However, no objective scientific study has been peer-reviewed and published that substantiates Scientology’s so-called “study tech.”

Instead, the controversial church, which has been called a “cult,” relies upon stars like Cruise that use their celebrity as a vehicle to tout the tech through anecdotal stories.

Kirstie Alley offers similar testimonials regarding her recovery from drug addiction through Narconon, a program based upon Scientology teachings.

Interestingly, Cruise’s former wife Nicole Kidman’s father is a psychologist. But the mental health profession is often maligned by Scientology, which sees itself as the true path to mental health.

It is rumored that Scientology may have been a factor in the Cruise-Kidman divorce. Kidman is a Catholic.

Perhaps Tom Cruise is still “not learning well.” At 40 he has two failed marriages and is apparently planning a third to actress Penelope Cruz, another Catholic.

First the Raelians hand picked Michael Guillen as their “expert” to coordinate DNA testing, which would supposedly prove their cloning claims. Later, Guillen was exposed as Clonaid CEO and Raelian bishop Brigette Boisselier’s “friend.”

Skeptics see Guillen as largely an apologist for paranormal claims. He received a “Pigasus” award (“when pigs fly”) from noted debunker James Randi.

Have the Raelians found another friendly “expert”?

Newsweek recently quoted Susan Palmer, a professor at Dawson College in Montreal and the author of a forthcoming book on the Raelians, in an article about the “cult” called “Spaced Out.”

Palmer described Claude Vorilhon or “Rael,” founder and leader of the Raelians, as a ” a playboy and a sportsman and a social satirist.” And she characterized the group as “benign.”

Palmer is also the author of an article which appeared in the Montreal Gazette titled “No sects – please we’re French.” She essentially attacked the French effort to identify and monitor destructive cults. Palmer prefers the politically correct term “new religious movements” (NRMs).

According to Palmer the “Moonies,” Scientologists, Hare Krishnas and of course the Raelians, are all NRMs. She likes to take her college students on “field trips” to the Hare Krishna temple and to witness Raelian baptisms.

Palmer admits, “If I were a French sociologist…I would be out of a job. I would be called a ‘cult lover.'”

Palmer also has defended an anti-Semitic cult group called the “Twelve Tribes,” which was fined for child labor violations in New York and has been the focus of frequent allegations regarding child abuse.

Professor Palmer appears to be more of a cult apologist than an objective observer or “expert.”

Serious questions have been raised about the research of academics like Palmer.

Benjamin Zablocki a professor of sociology at Rutgers University lamented, “The sociology of religion can no longer avoid the unpleasant ethical question of how to deal with the large sums of money being pumped into the field by the religious groups being studied…in the form of subvention of research expenses, subvention of publications, opportunities to sponsor and attend conferences, or direct fees for services, this money is not insignificant, and its influence on research findings and positions taken on scholarly disputes is largely unknown. This is an issue that is slowly but surely building toward a public scandal.”

How has Professor Palmer’s Raelian research and coming book been funded and/or supported? And what fees, money, expenses and/or sponsorships has she received from groups called “cults”?

Maybe James Randi should consider Susan Palmer for a “Pigasus”?

Some religious scholars don’t like the word “cult” and prefer the more politically correct term “new religious movements” (NRMs), reports ABC News.

ABC said such scholars say “just because a belief system is young doesn’t make it wrong.”

This category of “new religions,” according to the quoted scholars, includes the Raelians and Scientology.

Gordon Melton, director of the “Institute for the Study of American Religions” offered comments for the ABC piece, as did religious studies Professor Frank Flinn.

However, both men have a history of working closely with “cults.” And they can be seen as “cult apologists.”

Flinn has defended Scientology in court.

In one affidavit the professor submitted he stated, “It is my opinion that the spiritual disciplines and practices…of the Church of Scientology are not only not unusual or even strange but characteristic of religion itself when compared with religious practices known around the world. Contrary to the generally second-hand opinions of outsiders and to the claims of disaffected members, whose motives are suspect.”

However, compare Flinn’s “second-hand” analysis to Time Magazine’s “Scientology: The Cult of Greed.”

First-hand accounts from former members are routinely dismissed as “suspect” by academics like Flinn.

But Benjamin Beit-Halami, Professor of Psychology at Haifa University said in his paper “Integrity and Suspicion in the Research of New Religious Movements,” “Statements by ex-members turned out to be more accurate than those of apologists and NRM researchers.”

And given Scientology’s sordid history in court and criminal indictments how could Flinn characterize it as “not unusual or even strange”?

Benjamin Zablocki, Professor of Sociology at Rutgers University concluded, “The sociology of religion can no longer avoid the unpleasant ethical question of how to deal with the large sums of money being pumped into the field by the religious groups being studied…in the form of subvention of research expenses, subvention of publications, opportunities to sponsor and attend conferences, or direct fees for services, this money is not insignificant…This is an issue that is slowly but surely building toward a public scandal.”

Gordon Melton and Frank Flinn have both been the recipients of such funding and fees paid by groups called “cults.”

Melton once flew to Japan to defend Aum, the cult that gassed Tokyo subways killing 12 and sending thousands to hospitals. Aum paid for all of his expenses. Melton’s defense of Aum in retrospect now appears to be part of building “scandal,” referred to by Zablocki.

Gordon Melton comes highly recommended by the Church of Scientology along with other “scholars” that are often referred to as “cult apologists.” He has made a career largely from defending “cults.”

Cult apology has become a substantial source of supplemental income for some academics. Such “religious scholars” and/or “forensic psychologists” work on paid reports or appear as expert witnesses for “new religious movements.”

Perhaps it is actually people like Flinn whose “motives are suspect.”

The expert Raelians hand picked to oversee the validation of their clone claims may just be a “ringer.”

Michael Guillen, who once worked for ABC news as a science reporter, has a history of supporting pseudo-science, reports the Washington Post.

James Randi a noted debunker of fakes and quackery said, “This man has a reputation. He has supported every bit of pseudoscience that’s come along. Scientology was just fine with him. Human cloning by a religious cult is right up his alley, and to put him in charge of this kind of thing is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house.”

The fraud-buster awarded Guillen the “Pigasus” in 1997, which symbolizes the adage “When Pigs Fly.” Randi said the award is “the gold standard of impossibility for…indiscriminate promotion of pseudoscience and quackery.”

Michael Guillen was unavailable for comment and seems to have virtually disappeared in recent days.

What is very clear is that any DNA testing must be rigorously supervised regarding the clone allegedly produced by the Raelians.

This means, from drawing the blood to transporting it for testing, the entire process must be observed second by second in minute detail. And the experts involved must be credible scientists who are impartial, not a friend of the Raelians like Guillen.

It is very doubtful that the Raelians or Clonaid will allow such a meaningful process for conclusive verification to take place. Instead they are far more likely to prove their claims through their own dubious process and questionable standards.

Perhaps it’s time for Randi to get another “Pigasus” ready for Clonaid CEO and Raelian Bishop Brigitte Boisselier. It certainly looks like she has earned one.