Skip to content

Critical Q&A #213

The weekly show where I answer viewer questions left for me in the comment sections of my Q&A videos or sent to me by email at AskChrisShelton@gmail.com. This week, the questions I answer are:

(1) One book which I have found to be a great resource is ‘The New Believers’ (subtitled ‘Sects, ‘cults’ and alternative religions) by David V. Barrett. I wonder if you are familiar with it? He strives to be painstakingly fair-minded with all the organisations he writes about. Even so, the more wacky and dangerous ideas & practices of, for example, the Flying Saucer Cults, the Nation of Islam and, of course, Scientology, come across loud and clear. Having learned so much from you about what really goes on though, I do wonder about his use of a quote from Lorraine Bulger, who he says has reached OT 8. Have you heard of her? He seems to suggest that, because Hubbard’s ‘History of Man’ does not have to be taken literally, then a more ‘metaphorical’ approach to the OT materials (notably OT 3) would also be perfectly acceptable. The quote from Bulger reads,”Many religions have legends and scriptures which, taken out of context, can appear strange and misrepresentative….” This puzzles me. I have detected no hint whatsoever of a move towards a move liberal reading of the core texts. In fact, top-level Scientologists aren’t supposed to hint at their contents at all, right?  Has the author perhaps got a little sidetracked here and managed to find some relatively easygoing Independent Scientologists as sources? Maybe he is being a little too fair-minded?! Your thoughts?

(2) My question is about the Communications Course as I have heard many ex-Scientologists saying that it is a great course and they are still grateful for it. So, what is the Communications Course about? And is it highlighting an emotional vulnerability that makes people fall for Scientology?
AND
I have been reading about people who say the one thing they got something out of from Scientology is the Communication Course. It seems to be the course most people try out first. I found myself drawn to it for personal reasons but I would not venture in to a Scientology church to take the course. However I found that they offer the course online for free so I signed up with an e-mail address I only use if I expect someone to send me junk mail. I had a problem right away with the first page and that is what my question is about. The online course is in my own language so I hope I translate the terms correctly. It is about “duplication.” According to the text it is a vital part of communication. The definition is to make an exact copy of something. This sounds like their idea of the Communication Course is basically about how to get others to duplicate or copy what you tell them. Is this a first step in to the indoctrination from their part to get people to accept duplicating or copying what they are told? Also I object to lots of stuff they say about communication like that it is a particle to move from one place to an other. Surely I can not be the only one objecting to stuff they are told so how are people that object to things said handled in courses? Are they just told to be quiet and accept what is being said? Is it open for discussion or are people in general just accepting things said in course?

(3) I am a retired military intelligence officer so thank goodness, Scientology won’t be asking me to join – whew! However, I am working in Stuttgart, Germany, for the US military and the local base newspaper has been running large ads from Scientology saying all the common things they say – come let us help you be a better person, free counseling, testing, etc.  They provide the Stuttgart Scientology office contact info and address.

It appears to me that there may have been a change in philosophy in Scientology and they appear to be targeting US military and family members.  The Scientology organization is structured on the military model and it may be appealing to some military members who have no knowledge of their practices, especially young enlisted personnel. This is a little frightening. If they are successful in recruiting someone senior, either enlisted or officer, there is a distinct possibility of coercion by that individual to have people under him or her join Scientology. I experienced this first hand as a young LT. I was a reservist at the time and my Commanding Officer was a Commander. I was invited to his house for a dinner, which turned into high pressure event, complete with other sales persons, for Amway at the time – many, many years ago. That was a difficult and awkward situation and extracting myself without saying yes was not easy, but I did it. This could happen with Scientology and the senior/junior scenario. It would be completely illegal and if reported would have dire consequences for the senior, but if your goal is to clear the planet at all cost and you are that senior, it might be something you would try. I have seen other Scientology HQ in Germany, Berlin, Munich and there is a van promoting Scientology that is parked in our neighborhood from time to time as advertising I believe. Just wondered what you thought.

(4) I’m sure when you first left the church, you had to learn how to communicate with the normal world. My question is how often nowadays do you find yourself slipping into Scientology speak?

(5) What is the earliest stage that one might encounter sec-checking? What was the earliest instance that you’re aware of and what brought it on? A somewhat related question: we have seen innumberable examples of Scientology violating priest-penitent privilege. This seems like a major legal exposure for them that could result in a cascade of  fairly easily winnable cases as all that would be required would be to prove that anyone other than the parishioner’s personal auditor(s) had access to any confidential folder. Is the sole thing holding this back the fact that Scientology cries bigotry in order to prevent the folders from being entered into evidence or is there more to it?

(6) In a recent interview, Tom Cruise said he loves sugar but he never eats it. Do you believe anything that Tom Cruise says?

(7) Do you think LRH’s sci-fi writings influenced Stephen King?  I had never considered that idea.

(8) I know that Hubbard said that the people of the “Galactic Confederacy” looked a whole lot like the people of Earth during the 1950s but did he ever describe the appearance of Xenu (or Xemu)? Did this intergalactic dictator look like a presidential JFK-type or more like the alien creature depicted in South Park?

Tags:

1 thought on “Critical Q&A #213”

  1. Does David Miscavige actually believe the teachings of Scientology or is he laughing all the way to the bank? Even though he/CoS tells the followers not to read anything negative about CoS, he has access to everything and has to know how absurd and dangerous some of the teachings are. If he does actually believe, who audits him? Who has access to his files? If he is a true believer but doesn’t get auditing because of his status, guaranteeing no one has access to his dirty little secrets, how does he justify not getting audited?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.