3,49 €
Niedrigster Preis in 30 Tagen: 3,49 €
Niedrigster Preis in 30 Tagen: 3,49 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: PI-Verlag
- Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
- Sprache: Englisch
- Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018
Scientology: A topic that has been mired in controversy for many years in Germany.Why is it that Scientology is recognised as a religion in many countries, whereas in Germany, it has only been generating harsh discussions since the 1970s?What lies behind this?An unvarnished account of the history of Scientology in German-speaking countries. Exclusive insight into the hitherto confidential documents of the Federal Government of Germanymade accessible only afteryears of litigation, and made public, for the very first time, in this book.Facts instead of opinions are what make this book a must-read for anyone interestedin this topic.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Seitenzahl: 432
Ähnliche
© 2017 PI-Verlag, Wissen und Leben GmbH
Published by
PI-Verlag
Wissen und Leben GmbH
Postfach
6102 Malters
Switzerland
www.wissenundleben.ch
ISBN 9783965445512
Peter Schulte
The Scientology File
The Secret Documents
of Germany’s Federal Government
Introduction
Spring 2017. “Sect alert” sounded at Munich’s Haus der Kunst (House of Art Museum). The state-level counterpart of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency—the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV)1—in Bavaria is investigating whether Scientology has infiltrated the museum. Specifically, the work of a long-standing employee, who has been responsible for personnel management since 1995. He was allegedly not even a permanent employee of the museum. His specific offence: He is an avowed member of Scientology. Although he has only been doing his job till then, his religious orientation has suddenly become his undoing. The Bavarian Minister of the Arts, Ludwig Spaenle (CSU), who is also the chairman of the supervisory board at the Haus der Kunst, is said to be aware of this since 2015 and speaks of “grossly improper acts”.2 Meanwhile, employees were called upon across the board to issue statements affirming that they “have nothing to do with Scientology”. However, most of them ignored this request. Instead, they showed solidarity with the colleague in question and collected signatures against this action. By now, the Bavarian state domestic intelligence agency has been called in and an external human resources consultant tasked with investigating the administration of the museum and making “recommendations for reorganisation”. The Museum Director, Okwui Enwezor, considers the tumult in Munich to be exaggerated and even speaks of a “smear campaign” against the Haus der Kunst.3 Scientology, however, views the events as state-initiated snooping on people’s convictions and gross violation of human rights.4 The employee in question has since been dismissed and has filed a lawsuit against the parent company of the Haus der Kunst with the Labour Court in Munich.
November 2015. A small town somewhere in Germany. A special event is taking place in the evening, in this middle-of-nowhere town: In a panel discussion at the community centre, the question being taken up is: how dangerous is Scientology? For a medium-sized municipality, an unusually large gathering of prominent locals and external speakers has been announced. In addition to a member of the state parliament, “well-known” sect experts and a filmmaker, who has made a name for himself on public television as a sect critic, are expected to attend. A “high-ranking former Scientologist”, as stated in the invitation, is also expected to be on the panel. At the beginning, the filmmaker will present his latest film, and later on the panelists will analyse and evaluate Scientology. No representative of the “sect” has been invited. People prefer to keep to themselves and mutually validate what they already know and have always said. What had really happened? The background to this event is as follows: The son (43) of a local entrepreneur has been a professed Scientologist for about two years. Lately, there have been repeated disputes between father and son, because the son had joined Scientology and attended their courses and seminars. However, the relationship between the son and the father, who is known to be extremely dominant, has already been extremely tense for many years now. The son, himself a father of four school-age children, claims that using the knowledge he gained from Scientology, he had meanwhile patched up his relationship with his parents to the extent that they had even spent their holidays together. Soon thereafter a rift occurred again because the father had by chance learned of the son’s membership and insisted that the son renounce the “sect”. Discussions to resolve the situation came to naught. Since then, there is radio silence between them.
From the point of view of the parents, Scientology is to blame for all the misery. A letter to their son’s parents-in-law says that their beloved son has “been a slave of the sect” for some time now. Scientology has made their child so “compliant” that he no longer has any control over himself. The same has also been confirmed to them by the domestic intelligence agency. Moreover, suicide is the order of the day in Scientology, with marriages breaking up and people losing everything. Their son is now in a stage “from which he cannot escape on his own”. The parents are equally concerned about the grandchildren, who have also been “dragged in”. They say only pressure would lead to success, and they are exercising it abundantly. They are threatening to terminate the son’s shareholding in the company in order to “dry him out financially”. The inheritance will be organised in such a way that he will not have access even to the compulsory share (Pflichtteil) of the estate. However, that is not enough: They will notify the employer of their son’s wife that she is a sympathiser and follower of the sect, and also inform the school of the children of the couple about the sect’s influence on her. In short: bring about economic and social isolation in order to force them to abandon their religious beliefs; public and private authorities would additionally be notified of the alleged “machinations of the sect”. The fact that their son does not seem overly impressed gives the whole thing a special impact. A dialogue is no longer possible. It is obvious that his parents want him to renounce Scientology when they write to him: “One small step and your whole life would be free from worries”.
Is this a one-off story—or the frequently observed result of complex interactions associated with Scientology that could happen anywhere in Germany?
Anyone who, as a social scientist, deals with new religious movements (of which Scientology is definitely one), colloquially also called “sects”, repeatedly runs into a brick wall. It towers over you like a warning, not to proceed any further. I sometimes have the impression that it is not desirable to get to the heart of the matter, to the crux, but this is precisely what is needed in order to analyse, as objectively as possible, all the factors that could be considered significant in this context. And that is quite a lot. Even the mere mention of the name Scientology in a smaller group usually leads to animated discussions, which quickly become loud and intense. Everyone seems to be an expert in Scientology, even if he or she has never had any contact with this community.
However, anyone who does have contact with Scientology, or is actually a member, has a hard time in Germany, both in their private and in their professional lives. As soon as anyone reveals that they are a Scientologist, they are suddenly looked at with different eyes: Everything they do is suddenly perceived and interpreted differently, because “it is well known” that Scientology seeks to conquer, rule over and change the whole world. By what means? That should not be our concern at this point, because the self-appointed “experts” on television explain this to us time and again in an impressive manner. What a German needs is a concrete image of the enemy that can be described in simple words, something that gives him the certainty of being on the “right” side and being “normal”—not one of the nutcases of this “psycho-sect”, who dare to declare publicly that they have been wronged and who defend themselves by legal means against the insolent “sect fighters”. A German cannot tolerate other people shaking his world view and presenting their own alternative interpretation of events. Is this possibly the cause of the “bite reflex” we see in some sect experts—lashing out instantaneously and rejecting opinions or persons due to their own prejudices or partisan viewpoints—which is triggered when they are reminded that they are not God?
Perhaps the truth is not so easy to explain, and perhaps there are several explanations for the same facts, depending on which side we are on.
If we look at the discussions on Scientology over the past forty years, we can see—at least that is the impression I have—that a judgement on this religious community of American origin has been carved in stone. The verdict is: evil! They say Scientology is not a true religion, but only pretends to be one; its true goal is to rip people off. Therefore, it is important to warn people against Scientology and take action to stop it from spreading further.
This was also done on a grand scale and with a harshness reminiscent of the Middle Ages, when people were deprived of their rights, persecuted and killed simply because they belonged to a particular religion. The state and the church formed an alliance against undesirable dissenters or religious misfits. Together they sprayed the poison of the Inquisition, using torture to force dissenters to renounce their gods/ their religion or burned the most steadfast of these dissenters at the stake.
Today, the Inquisition is a thing of the past, the torture chambers are closed and the fires at the stakes have been extinguished. The Enlightenment brought about many changes in people’s thinking, despite all the resistance of the state church. Nevertheless, the spectre of the Inquisition lives on: in anonymous forums on the internet, in the mass media, in evening lectures on Scientology, in television talk shows and, of course, in the offices of those who provide “insights” into sects, who are plentiful in the German-speaking world. These opinion makers—and not just them—have shaped and solidified the image of Scientology, and nothing could be further from their intentions than to question this image—their image, their actions and their methods—and state specifically the real motive behind their work: simply to say how many Scientologists who actually want to leave and how many alleged victims of Scientology are really in their care.
To this day they have not done it, which says a lot about their true motives; they themselves are subsisting on Scientology. Without Scientology, their livelihoods would have disappeared and they would have to create new bogeymen. Nowadays, there are not many new religions for them to fight against: the “Moonies” (formerly the Unification Church) and the Hare Krishna Movement, Bhagwan (Osho) and even Jehovah’s Witnesses are no longer a part of their core business; one can no longer attract attention with these new religions. However, one can still entertain the public with a living and vital “sect” like Scientology, which is drawing attention to itself, even today and more than ever, with its campaigns—this is indeed a very daring and provocative proposition.
This book is about Scientology, to be more precise, it is about the history and development of a controversial religious community in Germany and the difficulties in its social institutionalisation. My statements are based exclusively on my own research, personal experiences and observations. From 1998 to 2010, I was a commissioner for religious and ideological questions in the federal state of Tirol. For twelve years, I ran an information and counselling centre on religious and ideological questions, had telephonic or in-person contact with clients almost daily—sometimes more, sometimes less, and often only for a short time. I know which “customers” turn to a sect commissioner and with what concerns.
This book seeks to present the facts—established, not regurgitated facts. It wants to invite readers to participate in the process of Scientology’s development in Germany, and to learn about the influencing factors that have shaped the image of Scientology in Germany to date. It is addressed to interested readers of all professions who do not let themselves be fobbed off with two or three sentences about the nature and work of Scientology, but would rather like to deal with this topic seriously. This book also addresses those interested in history, because it deals with the beginnings of Scientology: Who joined Scientology and why? What was and what is so exciting about this community, what is its self-image and what has it given to the people personally?
At the same time, the book also lists facts that impressively prove that the state and the church have worked hand in hand against Scientology and continue to do so even today. Since 1997, Scientology has been watched by the Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV - the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution), but there is nothing, absolutely nothing, that indicates there is any kind of danger to the state. Then why is Scientology still regarded an alleged threat to the state?
For everything that has been researched for this book I have tried to provide evidence that is as extensive as possible: in the form of documents, expert opinions, decisions, trial records, data and, of course, my own observations. Thus, every reader is invited to form his or her own impression of Scientology.
Purpose of this book
Virtually no other country in the world has proceeded against Scientology with the gloves off and persecuted it to the extent seen in Germany. The release of internal government files has shed a poor light on the campaign against Scientology, which has been running for decades. According to these documents, there are no substantiated findings that can justify the horror scenarios spread about Scientology. In fact, the opposite is the case. The relevant political authorities were apparently well aware of the public deception concomitant with this concealment of facts. This also seems to have been an open secret within the competent authorities for a long time.
Driven by the fight against sects—originally fuelled primarily by the official churches—numerous government agencies have been participating in a massive campaign for the social exclusion of Scientology since the beginning of the 1990s, for instance, in the form of secret service surveillance by the BfV. These constitutionally questionable encroachments on freedom of religion and belief were justified by the alleged danger of infiltration by Scientology into politics and the economy as well as society as a whole.
However, these accusations do not even begin to stand up to scrutiny, as the President of the state-level counterpart of the BfV in Hamburg openly admitted to the press in February 2013 (see Chapter 4, section “Historical Development”). This can now also be read in the relevant government files that have recently been released for viewing. The release of these documents was secured after many years of litigation. The documents show that the key departments within the police and law enforcement agencies had given an all-clear signal to Scientology from the outset. According to their findings, there was not even an initial suspicion for criminal investigations and no unconstitutional activities could be found in the period since 1997, when surveillance began. Nevertheless, they were urged to continue for many years on the instructions of politicians—with the apparently intended effect that the general suspicion against Scientologists due to their alleged dangerousness was kept alive in the public.
Why is that so? What led to the creation of outrageous legends about Scientology?
To understand the background of this development, a retrospect of the early days of Scientology will be helpful. Anyone, who researches into the root causes will find themselves plunging into a world full of contradictions and inconsistencies, into a system of militant sect fighters and their accomplices, into a world of half-truths and intrigues. At first, it was the individual sect commissioners of the Evangelical Church in Germany, the parents’ initiatives they established or had links with who acted against Scientology; later on, representatives of the Catholic Church and some politicians took on this task. It was clear to the media: Scientology is always worth a headline.
In the meantime, Scientology has become a topic in its own right, with the result that it is hardly possible to analyse cause and effect. For those fighting Scientology, only one thing counts: The lights in the Churches of Scientology must be put out. Their reasons: Scientology presents a “threat”, its adherents “strive for world domination”, they “infiltrate the economy and politics” and tie their members to the community through a “perfidious form of psychomanipulation”. As “proof” they cite, for instance, former Scientologists, who, though few in number, do have a strong signalling effect.
The BfV has been watching Scientology since 1997, without being able to present any evidence of an alleged threat. Sect counselling centres and parents’ initiatives point to an increasing demand for counselling and care, allegedly due to Scientology. However, no information on the quantity and quality of such requests is provided; queries referring to this are not answered. Hence, the question arises: what problem do these institutions have with their transparency or why can’t these institutions make their advisory activities more transparent? (see chapter 5, Current Survey 2015).
Sect commissioners of the official churches, individual politicians who are often involved in the official church and certain sections of the media thus determine what we are supposed to think about Scientology. The consequences of this are well-known: Scientology was declared to be a public enemy of Germany; its religion was declared to be a “cover for economic activities” and its entire behaviour was “revealed as a deliberate deceptive manoeuvre”. The official churches and the state thus laid the foundations for the persecution and ostracism of Scientology in Germany. Surveillance by the domestic intelligence service and the public warnings against Scientology had only one goal: “Outlawing” Scientology, as a politician from Stuttgart formulated the objective at an event as early as June 1992, according to a report in the magazine “Evangelische Verantwortung” (Evangelical Responsibility).
A brief look into the history of the official churches, however, shows that they themselves have what they accuse Scientology and other new religious movements of having: fantasies of world domination, psychological manipulation of their members, economic exploitation, violence, sexual abuse, infiltration of the economy and society, the way in which critics from within their own ranks are treated, etc. It seems as if a psychological transference mechanism has been set in motion here to blame their own structural deficits on other religious communities.
The real scandal, however, is that they are using Scientology to define themselves as significant and worthy of support.
This book intends to answer current and unanswered questions related to Scientology—questions that are not asked in any panel discussions or in “sect literature”—such as: How and why was the topic of Scientology politically communicated? How have the German Federal Government, the interior ministers of the federal states, the Federal Criminal Police Office, the BfV and law enforcement agencies dealt with this issue? What prompted some of them to declare Scientology a public enemy? What were the political interests behind this? What interest groups have persuaded politicians to take action against Scientology?
In addition, the book goes into the whys and wherefores: Why has Scientology been under surveillance in Germany for almost twenty years by the BfV, while it is recognised by the state in the USA, its country of origin, and many other countries of the western world, including those in Europe? How and on what basis did this come about? Why has the surveillance not stopped given that there is no evidence of Scientology’s anti-constitutional activities? What are the reasons for maintaining this enemy image?
The causes of the stigmatisation and ostracism of Scientology also need to be investigated: On what understandable basis has Scientology been declared a social threat? What were the causes of these actions? Which institutions, persons or other actors were significantly involved in this? What means did they use to make Scientology appear dangerous?
To answer these questions, this book presents previously unpublished documents that have recently been published by the German Federal Government and are available to the author of this book. The release of these documents was secured after many years of litigation. The documents convey a shocking picture of the political approach in Germany towards what is, from my point of view, a harmless American religious community. Based on these documents it can be impressively shown how the state has been instrumentalised for furthering the interests of the official churches and apologists and their adherents. The facts, which the state refers to, are vague and speculative, but make a strong impression on the public: anyone who fights against a “sect” that strives for “world domination” and seeks to “infiltrate the German economy and society” will certainly be applauded—regardless of whether or not this is actually the truth.
Nevertheless, allow me to ask the question at this point: If Scientology were truly aspiring to world domination, why is there no evidence of this, even in the countries where Scientology is recognised? Also, if Scientology were really in a position to psychologically indoctrinate people and use them for its own purposes, why were and why are its members able to leave at any time, which they did and still do, even in times when the aforementioned social ostracism did not exist to the degree it does today? After all, it is almost fifty years since Scientology established itself in Germany. The ruling dated 13th December 2001 (case no. VG 27 A 260/98), obtained by the Church of Scientology in the Administrative Court of Berlin against the domestic intelligence agency’s Berlin office, had actually already cleared up this rumour by stating that:
“In the report of the domestic intelligence agency’s federal and state working group on ‘Scientology’ ... the term ‘Clear Planet’ is translated as ‘world domination’ without any further explanation.”
In point of fact, Scientology associates the term “Clear Planet” with a completely apolitical notion in the sense of an enlightened humanity without war, crime and other forms of insanity. The idea is directed at the multitude of individuals with the aim of their spiritual enlightenment and ethical perfection. The said ruling will be discussed in more detail at a later point in this book.
In order to understand the described cause-effect-relationships in their full scope, let us go back to the beginnings of Scientology in Germany. The media hype at the beginning of the 1970s had a background different from that of the media hype today. Scientology was one among the many new religions that came to Germany seeking to establish themselves. Society generally regarded new religious movements with mistrust. There are many reasons for this and it cannot be attributed only to the world view of the respective religious movement, but is also reflected in the fact that the rejection of all that is foreign is and always has been a characteristic of German society. Without making sweeping generalisations here that the sect commissioners of the official churches deliberately condemned these groups, it should be pointed out that they had already been commissioned at that time,
to draw up “expert opinions” on the so-called sects. Thus, the official trips to the countries of origin of these religious groups were a welcome change for these commissioners and an enrichment of their knowledge and extension of their horizons (even if they claim the opposite today).
At this point, however, we are looking into the motives and intentions of Scientologists for establishing their religion in Germany; for this reason, we will be asking questions at the beginning of this book about the situation they found in Germany in the early 1970s. At this point the book seeks to clarify how and under what circumstances Scientology came to Germany. What motives did its adherents have to establish and expand Scientology? How was Scientology organised? What socio-political situation did they find? What resistance did they have to contend with? How do Scientologists assess their current situation with regard to social discrimination and how do they deal with this?
In order to understand the full complexity of the phenomenon of the social discrimination against Scientology in Germany, I will be presenting the sociological, psychological and socio-psychological influencing factors that I assume to be most important in justifying and preserving the image of Scientology as a “public enemy”. Also, it is necessary to clarify who the originators and accomplices of this enemy image are, and what their motives are. What are the conclusions scientific investigations have come to? What answers do researchers give to the question of how dangerous Scientology is, and on the generation of enemy images in general? Is this a German phenomenon?
Chapter 1: Scientology in the Year 2017
Scientology – a Rapprochement
When I first met a Scientologist—I think it was in 2001—I was terribly afraid. I knew about Scientology only from books or narratives by sect commissioners, about what all the Scientologists had done to innocent people, and how they had changed these people suddenly. These “experts” described Scientology as a virus against which people should protect themselves, or else they would become spineless zombies. On the sect counselling scene there were discussions whether one should talk or listen to a Scientologist at all. After all, the Scientologists would all say the same thing anyway. I even got to know people who were afraid to shake hands with a Scientologist because they feared that their personality would suddenly change.
All these reports do leave an imprint on you; and when you are overwhelmed with negative statements about Scientology, you begin to internalise them, and it becomes difficult to reconsider your opinion. This is actually the real indoctrination that everyone is talking about when it comes to the subject of “sects”. It could also be called “brainwashing through disinformation”.
It was only when I started reflecting on my thoughts and actions that I realised the extent of the manipulation that had already taken place. With the help of supervision I tried to analyse counselling cases from my daily professional practice and to grasp the deeper dimension of the counselling requests. I tried to explore the deeper meaning of the questions that were put to me and to fathom out and figure out what answers I could give.
Over time, I realised that I was increasingly becoming a tool for various interest groups and that questions about the causes and backgrounds of various counselling requests were fading into the background. I was supposed to become a fighter against the “sects”, the one who fearlessly opposes evil, no matter if this is justified or not. For politicians, what really counted was to demonstrate to the outside world that there was a place, that concerned parents, grandparents, relatives, friends and acquaintances could turn to with questions about “sects”. I was an important contact person not only for opinion leaders such as teachers and educators, but also for the judiciary and police. I didn’t need to have a ready answer to all the questions—it sufficed to pretend to have one. The worst thing for me were the panel discussions on the topic of “sects”. Their only aim was to reaffirm preconceived opinions. They wanted to be entertained with a superficial means of appeasement—the proverbial “bread and circuses”—and with some culprits to pass a judgement on. At some point I pulled the ripcord. My self-respect was more important to me than a life full of lies. My attitude changed when I overcame all my misgivings and did what was the most natural thing in the world for a sociologist field researcher to do: I got a first-hand impression of the situation. I no longer asked whether something was morally right or wrong, but wanted to investigate into the causes: Why is the image of Scientology the way it is?
My first encounter with Scientology was a visit to a Scientology facility. The country, city, facility or name are not important here. I had a pleasant conversation with the facility manager, and the openness towards me was more than disarming. Afterwards I visited a larger church and found that Scientologists are also only human with individual approaches and intentions. Behind their religion—as in any other religion—there were people with feelings and very personal life stories. This may sound a bit clichéd and corny today, but readers should keep reminding themselves that Scientology is still demonised to this day, and that there are groups who have an interest in keeping this image alive.
Be that as it may, my encounters with functionaries and followers of Scientology put me right on my image of the “sect”. I realised: Whoops! These are people with whom I can have a good conversation, people with class and culture, people who are interested in the difficulties of others and want to help them. I could converse better with them than with some of those superannuated sect commissioners and above all: when dealing with Scientologists, I was able to ask questions, which they also answered, treating me as an equal. This was rarely the case with the sect commissioners. They judged my actions as genuflection before the sect and my conversations with Scientologists as betrayal of their guild.
Later on, when I tried to address the topic of “sects” and also of Scientology in Austria in a survey, I received cynical answers, especially from some people, whose institution distinguishes itself through a special form of love for neighbours—or at least that is what they claim. But that is another story.
In the actual, everyday counselling work, the topic of Scientology was rather under-represented, but it lent itself well to discussions in schools. Normally, no student is interested in what a “sect” is doing, just as hardly any student is interested in the topic of religion. However, with a “psycho sect” and a “sect boss” who belongs to it, a 45-minute class period can easily be structured, at the very least, if you just lecture on Scientology for ten minutes, and then spend the rest of the time, again dealing with topics, besides Scientology, like the “secret sects”, the Satanists, and the compulsory favourite topic of all sect commissioners: “ouija boards”. Rehashing is like a comforting one-pot beef stew that almost everyone loves, especially when it is warmed up again.
In the personal counselling sessions I conducted, the topic of Scientology reached unimagined dimensions. I occasionally had the impression that there are people who are looking for an exorcist who casts out demons and devils—not out of them, of course, but out of their unruly relatives. Contrary to their opinion, the latter were not members of Scientology, but were mostly on an alternative, esoteric path. But it’s always good to put a label on things. It creates certainty and has a calming effect, at least for a while. The wildest queries pertained to Scientology’s links in the context of science fiction and world conspiracy theories. I addressed some of these queries in my last book; they need not be repeated here.5
When anyone who wants to find out more about Scientology on the Internet enters the keyword “Scientology” into a search engine like Google, they will get around 8,520,000 search results or hits (as of 10 April 2016). Thus, a hitherto uninformed reader is confronted with an almost infinite amount of information that is nearly impossible to cope with: self-portrayals and portrayals of others, media reports, blogs about Scientology, reports on disaffiliation from Scientology, lists of famous members, etc. With a few exceptions, the image of Scientology in the German-speaking world is downright negative. You also get the impression that there is an invisible hand at work trying to maintain the negative image of Scientology. What is published at some time on the Internet first disappears into the infinite vastness of the virtual world. At some point, however, it appears again in a slightly modified form on public forums or blogs operated by opponents of Scientology who have perfectly mastered the art of copy and paste.
From my own experience as a commissioner for religious and ideological questions, I know that the image of Scientology is, in many cases, a socially constructed one. Despite the weak factual basis, the image projected to the general public connotes dangerousness, and this attracts attention. The same was the case in the response to the mad cow disease, the “fugitive” bear (called Bruno the bear in the German press) or bird flu. Yesterday, there were warnings about “rotten meat”, genetically modified corn, Muslims with beards and “bankrupt Greeks”, and today the focus is on combating the “flood of asylum seekers” and “uncontrolled immigration”. What will it be tomorrow? What or whom will we be warned about in the future? Yesterday’s news seems to be forgotten today; day-to-day business demands fresh meat and new sensations. What counts today is uninteresting tomorrow. The speed of these sensations is a challenge for the human brain. Is true processing still possible? Or do we only experience media stimulus? Despite all the bad news and sensational reports: Every politician and journalist knows that today’s news will already be a thing of the past tomorrow—unless it is repeatedly regurgitated, as is the case with Scientology. For over forty years, we have been hearing the same news on the subject. How and more importantly, why is this possible?
One proposition certainly is that some sections of the media, sect counselling centres, parents’ initiatives, and busy book writers have a vivid interest in demonising Scientology. They need an active and vibrant “sect” in order to assert their own interests. That’s why they make Scientology a myth. They know that Germans long for myths, just like they long for fairies, shallow narratives and entertainment—romance and intrigue, exotic locations, high drama and happy endings—if the long-running success of the German versions of The Bachelor and The Love Boat is anything to go by. As is well known, you don’t sink in shallow waters.
Many who publicly warn against Scientology do not know a single Scientologist, let alone their essential and binding doctrinal statements. Their knowledge of Scientology is often not based on their own experience but comes from the newspapers. I know “sect experts” who believe every word the newspaper says—especially the negative coverage. This information is exchanged at conferences, symposia and on secret networks created specially for this purpose. There is no limit to their spin and propaganda. But they work very well for “cheap propaganda” against Scientology. If one receives information material from Scientology in the form of books or DVDs, it is usually interpreted as an attempt to indoctrinate. First-hand information is not taken seriously.
One thing that has always struck me in my work is that: for some “sect commissioners”, even engaging in a conversation with Scientologists amounted to treachery. They insistently or subtly demand that they as “experts” be informed about this beforehand. A justification for this demand is that it will “prevent” possible attempts by Scientology to influence or manipulate. A significant experience I have had is this: It is not Scientology which should determine how you should think about it; on the contrary: it is the “sect experts”, who would like nothing more than to decide how you should think about Scientology. From their point of view there is only one truth: their own. If you still dare to have your own opinion, every so often you will have a creeping feeling in their presence that you are doing something wrong or that you are being too uncritical of Scientology. Censorship takes place already in the mind. An ancient psychological mechanism devised by crafty founding fathers of the church emerges here; something we already know relating to the threat of hell and purgatory.
I received the following drawing when I was working as a commissioner for religious and ideological questions. It tellingly illustrates what it is really about.6
Image 1: Drawing “Evil must go. Who’s going to light the fire?”
What is Scientology?
Understanding Scientology means dealing with it, asking questions and finding a satisfying answer for yourself. A scientist and researcher seeks answers to the causes and effects of complex issues that are the subject of controversial public debate. This is also true of Scientology, a religious community—according to my own scientific conviction—which is apparently not one according to common stereotypes, and whose beliefs and religious practices are said to be nothing more than the “pretence of false facts”—at least that is what the critics of Scientology claim. “Money-making under the guise of a religion” is probably the most common stereotype about Scientology presently, if you believe the published opinion.
But if you are not content with such stereotypes and are looking for more plausible explanations for the question about the essence of Scientology, you will not be able to avoid asking questions and dealing with the topic in greater depth. Looking for the source means doing more than jumping into a raging river and letting yourself be carried away by the current. Hysteria is best countered with accurate information; the same also applies to Scientology. The madness quickly loses its horror when one tries to understand it—by that I do not mean Scientology, but rather what is reported about it. There is a whole lot of it, if we look at the period of the past forty years.
If one asks Scientologists about the nature of their religion, one usually gets a concrete answer. It is also easy to find the answer to the question why, that is, why is anyone at all interested in Scientology? As a listener, I did not have the impression at all as if I were asking something ambiguous or unclear, because I got a concrete answer to every question. It is evident that involvement with Scientology has brought about a spiritual experience and unfolding in its adherents and has reinforced their holistic development. Quite a few Scientologists responded to the question of what Scientology had offered them, from which they were able to benefit in all respects. They said they joined Scientology because they were looking for answers to the question about the meaning of life or because there was something problematic they had to deal with in their lives: in the family, among friends, at work or elsewhere. Those who had been Scientologists for many years reported of basic anxieties in life, such as shyness or difficulties in building relationships, which they conquered with the help of auditing (Scientology’s pastoral care or spiritual counselling).
In order to understand Scientology or its religious orientation, it is recommended to talk to the members of the community. It is amazing how openly and honestly they answer questions from outsiders. I never had the impression that something strange was afoot here. Scientologists are convinced of what they do, and you will hear this in an actual conversation with them.
In my search for the essence of Scientology, I met some Scientologists who were willing to tell me more about why they were a part of Scientology, for instance, and what its teachings meant to them personally. According to them, Scientology is a New Religious Movement based on the spiritual wisdom of Asia, especially the Vedas and Buddhism. At the same time, it contains aspects of Hinduism, Taoism and Confucianism. Scientology assumes that Man is a spiritual and immortal being and exists in the material world. According to Scientology’s understanding, humans do not possess a soul, but rather the human being itself is the soul or Thetan (a Greek term for thought or soul). What humans possess is their body and mind. Like Buddhism, Scientology assumes that human beings can develop and acquire new spiritual insights and capabilities. For this purpose, Scientology has methods of cognition, which lead to a higherspiritual consciousness. The conscious being is something spiritual that resides in a physical body. The soul does not go anywhere, like the Christian concepts of afterlife believe, but the person himself or herself is the soul.
As far as their concept of Man is concerned, Scientologists believe that Man is basically good and that there is a way to awaken this innate goodness in Man. Sometimes it may be buried, but through self-knowledge it can be dug up again. Scientology follows the old saying of Socrates: “Know thyself”. In order to reach this realisation, people need pastoral care or spiritual counselling, which is a main practice in Scientology, and is also known as “auditing”, which basically means listening. Auditing gives people the opportunity to look within themselves to ultimately recognise the relationship between cause and effect. To be specific, auditing involves uncovering one’s own and other people’s mistakes, which can be a first step towards positive change. By questioning one’s own self, one attains self-knowledge.
According to some Scientologists, indigenous peoples such as the Aborigines in Australia have not lost contact with the spiritual world as much as the people of the Western world have. The former would also be more likely to understand, that it is a part of the Scientology faith to want to improve the world. For many of its adherents, Scientology is a path to a better understanding of the world, the universe, other human beings, and one’s own self. This understanding provides a basis for improving or changing things. Ultimately, Scientology is a practical religion that also provides answers to life situations.
Scientology is not a religion of revelation, but rather a religion of knowledge in the sense that humans are given a tool or a technology to help them find out something about themselves and other people. In this way, they can not only solve their own difficulties, but also help other people. According to the statement by the founder of Scientology, people should only believe what they see for themselves as being true and what seems plausible to them, not things that have been written down somewhere. It is always about knowing oneself and finding meaning in gaining knowledge. From these experiences, people can then derive options for action in their personal lives.
According to Scientology teachings, there is not only life after death, but also life before the present life. Man is repeatedly reborn into new existences, with a consciousness that advances through time. In this respect, Scientology sees itself in the Buddhist tradition of the eternal circle of death and rebirth, from which liberation is to be attained. According to Scientology teachings, one acquires higher levels of consciousness from the study of its teachings—internally known as “training”—and auditing. Man is not reborn as an animal or another being but continues to exist as a certain non-material being, which is endowed with consciousness. According to Scientologists, there is an unambiguous doctrine related to this; but everyone must fathom out this truth for themselves through experience and knowledge. This means that Scientology not only allows a lot of personal leeway in the interpretation of experiences and interpretations of the afterlife, but in fact also calls for a self-determined interpretation.
Scientology says that it is fundamentally open and positive towards other religions; according to its self-concept, concurrent membership or affiliation to another religion in the tradition of Eastern religions is entirely possible. Scientology does not prescribe what a person must blindly believe or should perceive; what a person eventually perceives is subjective and specific to that person. Having doubts about the teachings of Scientology is also not a criterion for exclusion from it. Scientology, with its wisdom, presents itself as a way for each person to find his or her own personal path and truth through his or her own search.
It is a typically Western misunderstanding that knowledge or science and religion do not correspond with each other; in Eastern religions this is not the case, Scientology says. Spirituality is much more pronounced in Eastern doctrines than in Western doctrines. More than 1500 years ago in China, there was unity between sciences such as astronomy and religion. Anyone who wanted to study science at that time went to a monastery. Interestingly, there are small groups of scientists in Germany or the USA who combine Eastern teachings with the phenomena of modern atomic physics. For example, vibration phenomena in nuclear science are associated with teachings from the origins of Buddhism. On the spiritual plane, there can be laws of nature that have causal relationships similar to that in gravitation. In contrast, Western science has hardly concerned itself with such phenomena. Scientology tries to point out and utilise the laws of nature on the spiritual plane. According to Scientology, ultimately, it is about knowledge; knowledge and realisation belong together. Through realisation, humans achieve knowledge and ultimately certainty.
The question of the attainment of certainty was answered by L. Ron Hubbard (the founder of Scientology) using a scientific method; in this respect, there is a commonality between science and religion. Scientology does not reject scientific methodology and insights, on the contrary: Scientology claims to combine scientific methodology and spirituality. However, this is not about scientific questions but about proof of the existence of God or souls. Such questions can ultimately only be answered in the religious context. Rather, it is about attainment of certainty, which can be achieved by using a technology (understood as a methodology here), namely, auditing. Thus, Scientology can be practised directly, with a view to achieving self-realisation and personal development, as well as to solve the social problems of this world. Scientologists believe that L. Ron Hubbard had discovered certain phenomena or laws of spiritual life and developed them in the form of auditing as an inward-looking path to questioning one’s own self and thereby attaining realisation. Grief and pain can be located and overcome in this way.
One of the central messages of Scientology is: Man is a spiritual and immortal being entangled in the material universe, from which he can be liberated. Spiritual freedom can be attained without having to renounce life. This view of life can be found in Buddhism and Lamaism as well as in Catholicism.
In addition to this, there are statements from Scientology, which can certainly be regarded also as doctrines for spiritual seekers: You are not your body, you are your own soul; you can be free; you can free yourself, for example, from stress, constraints and inhibitions. Spiritual freedom also means having rights, such as human rights. Scientology helps you to be free.
According to Scientologists, they do not have a political agenda. Rather, they are more concerned with the personal and spiritual growth of the individual, which ultimately also brings with it a positive social change. This process of spiritual growth, according to Scientology’s self-concept, involves a development away from egocentricity or self-centredness, into greater spheres of responsibility for the family, other people and all of humanity, even for the animal and plant world, the material environment, the spiritual world and eternity—known as the “dynamics of survival” in Scientology. Out of this religious motivation arises a social responsibility, which manifests itself in the various social and humanitarian programmes that are set up and sponsored by Scientology.
In light of the foregoing, the Church of Scientology is a religious community not only according to the self-concept of its teachings and practice, but also according to the criteria of religious studies. Since this publication repeatedly refers to the very widespread assertion that Scientology is not a religion, and is actually pursuing commercial objectives, the chapter “What is Scientology?” addresses the question of its legal status in order to avoid repetitions or clarifications later.
The fact that the teachings of Scientology constitute a religious creed according to elements of the legal definition within the meaning of Article 4 of Germany’s Grundgesetz (Basic Law) was affirmed by a judgement of the Hamburg State Administrative Court of Appeal dated 17 June 2004 (case no. 1 Bf 198/00) in a lawsuit filed by a member of Scientology against the city of Hamburg; the central statements of faith of Scientology were summarised in the following words:
“The plaintiff can claim protection of Article 4(1) of the German Basic Law [freedom of faith and of conscience, and freedom to profess a religious or philosophical creed] for her belief in the doctrine or philosophy of Scientology. According to Article 4(1) of the German Basic Law, freedom of faith, of conscience and the freedom of the religious and philosophical understanding [undoubtedly: ‘creed’] are inviolable.
The volume of ideas of the Scientology organisation deals with transcendental contents and the position and meaning of Man in the world. If the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard about the immortal soul as the carrier of a life energy (THETA), and about the THETAN, and its relation to the material universe, designated as MEST, and about the path of the soul transformed through innumerable lifetimes, are believed, and if the path to higher levels of existence (CLEAR and [OPERATING] THETAN), which remind one of the levels of salvation, are identified with, then this constitutes a religious or philosophical creed.”
The Federal Supreme Administrative Court upheld the above decision in its final non-appealable judgement dated 15 December 2005 (7 C 20.04, NJW) 18/2006, 1303), in which the Court held that:
“For her practice as a Scientologist, the plaintiff may claim the protection of a religious or philosophical creed according to Article 4, paragraph 1 of the German Basic Law.
The (Hamburg) State Administrative Court of Appeal has correctly assumed that such statements in the teachings of Scientology are appropriate to satisfy the definition of faith or philosophy”.
The above judgement will be referred to again later in this book, in a different context. The judgement ultimately confirmed that members of Scientology can rely on the protection of freedom of faith within the meaning of Article 4 of the German Basic Law and can thus legally defend themselves against discrimination by the state based on their religious convictions.
The assertion spread since the 1980s by declared opponents of Scientology that its communities are in reality pursuing commercial interests, coupled with the accusation made since the early 1990s that its religious doctrine serves only as a pretext for pursuing precisely these commercial interests, has also been espoused by the state authorities in Germany, due to the political influence of the sect commissioners of the official church and their political promoters. This led to numerous legal proceedings in which the Scientology communities have had to defend themselves against official orders to revoke their status as an association. The lawsuits brought against this by the Scientologists initially between 1985 and 1989 in Bavaria led to several judicial victories. However, other federal states did not ease up and they forced the Scientologists to take further legal action. In the mid-1990s, the Administrative Court of Baden-Württemberg also ruled in favour of a small Scientology mission in the state and recognised its status as a religious community, but the court allowed appeal (on the point of law) on the question of the extent to which Article 4 of the Basic Law protects the status of Scientology as an association “despite commercial activity”. A landmark judgement by the Federal Supreme Administrative Court dated 6 November 1997 (case no. 1 C 18/95) cleared the misconceptions about this question by stating:
“The Federal Supreme Administrative Court has ruled that an idealistic association does not conduct a commercial activity if it offers its members services by means of which the association membership is realised and which cannot be provided by other service providers independent of the membership relationship. In such case, no commercial activity of an entrepreneur exists.”
On the basis of this landmark judgement, final decisions were made by the Administrative Courts of Appeal in Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria. They refute the allegations quoted above, but this fact does not seem to have penetrated public awareness with the same ubiquitous coverage as the allegations that were made in the first place.
The judgement by the Administrative Court of Mannheim of 12 December 2003 (case no. 4 B 99.2582, NVwZ-RR 2004, 904) was the first to do away with this anti-Scientology stereotype:
