Paul Haggis vs. the Church of Scientology

by leavingwt 13 Replies latest jw friends

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    In the latest issue of The New Yorker, Paul Haggis opens up about his split with the Church of Scientology. It is a very lengthy article, and I've quoted some of it, below. Click the link at the bottom for the entire article.

    The Apostate

    Paul Haggis vs. the Church of Scientology

    . . .

    One day in 1975, when he was twenty-two, Haggis was walking to a record store. When he arrived at the corner of Dundas and Waterloo Streets, a young man pressed a book into his hands. “You have a mind,” the man said. “This is the owner’s manual.” The man, whose name was Jim Logan, added, “Give me two dollars.” The book was “Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health,” by L. Ron Hubbard, which was published in 1950. By the time Haggis began reading it, “Dianetics” had sold about two and a half million copies. Today, according to the church, that figure has reached more than twenty-one million.

    Haggis opened the book and saw a page stamped with the words “Church of Scientology.”

    “Take me there,” Haggis said to Logan.

    Haggis had heard about Scientology a couple of months earlier, from a friend who had called it a cult. The thought that he might be entering a cult didn’t bother him. In fact, he said, “it drew my interest. I tend to run toward things I don’t understand.” When he arrived at the church’s headquarters, he recalled, “it didn’t look like a cult. Two guys in a small office above Woolworth’s.”

    At the time, Haggis and Gettas were having arguments; the Scientologists told him that taking church courses would improve the relationship. “It was pitched to me as applied philosophy,” Haggis says. He and Gettas took a course together and, shortly afterward, became Hubbard Qualified Scientologists, one of the first levels in what the church calls the Bridge to Total Freedom.

    The Church of Scientology says that its purpose is to transform individual lives and the world. “A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology,” Hubbard wrote. Scientology postulates that every person is a Thetan—an immortal spiritual being that lives through countless lifetimes. Scientologists believe that Hubbard discovered the fundamental truths of existence, and they revere him as “the source” of the religion. Hubbard’s writings offer a “technology” of spiritual advancement and self-betterment that provides “the means to attain true spiritual freedom and immortality.” A church publication declares, “Scientology works 100 percent of the time when it is properly applied to a person who sincerely desires to improve his life.” Proof of this efficacy, the church says, can be measured by the accomplishments of its adherents. “As Scientologists in all walks of life will attest, they have enjoyed greater success in their relationships, family life, jobs and professions. They take an active, vital role in life and leading roles in their communities. And participation in Scientology brings to many a broader social consciousness, manifested through meaningful contribution to charitable and social reform activities.”

    . . .

    During our conversations, we spoke about some events that had stained the reputation of the church while he was a member. For example, there was the death of Lisa McPherson, a Scientologist who died after a mental breakdown, in 1995. She had rear-ended a car in Clearwater, Florida—where Scientology has its spiritual headquarters—and then stripped off her clothes and wandered naked down the street. She was taken to a hospital, but, in the company of several other Scientologists, she checked out, against doctors’ advice. (The church considers psychiatry an evil profession.) McPherson spent the next seventeen days being subjected to church remedies, such as doses of vitamins and attempts to feed her with a turkey baster. She became comatose, and she died of a pulmonary embolism before church members finally brought her to the hospital. The medical examiner in the case, Joan Wood, initially ruled that the cause of death was undetermined, but she told a reporter, “This is the most severe case of dehydration I’ve ever seen.” The State of Florida filed charges against the church. In February, 2000, under withering questioning from experts hired by the church, Wood declared that the death was “accidental.” The charges were dropped and Wood resigned.

    Haggis said that, at the time, he had chosen not to learn the details of McPherson’s death. “I had such a lack of curiosity when I was inside,” Haggis said. “It’s stunning to me, because I’m such a curious person.” He said that he had been “somewhere between uninterested in looking and afraid of looking.” His life was comfortable, he liked his circle of friends, and he didn’t want to upset the balance. It was also easy to dismiss people who quit the church. As he put it, “There’s always disgruntled folks who say all sorts of things.” He was now ashamed of this willed myopia, which, he noted, clashed with what he understood to be the ethic of Scientology: “Hubbard says that there is a relationship between knowledge, responsibility, and control, and as soon as you know something you have a responsibility to act. And, if you don’t, shame on you.”

    Since resigning, Haggis had been wondering why it took him so long to leave. In an e-mail exchange, I noted that higher-level Scientologists are supposed to be free of neuroses and allergies, and resistant to the common cold. “Dianetics” also promises heightened powers of intelligence and perception. Haggis had told me that he fell far short of this goal. “Did you feel it was your fault?” I asked. Haggis responded that, because the auditing took place over a number of years, it was easy to believe that he might actually be smarter and wiser because of it, just as that might be true after years of therapy. “It is all so subjective, how is one supposed to know?” he wrote. “How does it feel to be smarter today than you were two months ago? . . . But yes, I always felt false.”

    He noted that a Scientologist hearing this would feel, with some justification, that he had misled his auditors about his progress. But, after hundreds of hours of auditing sessions, he said, “I remember feeling I just wanted it over. I felt it wasn’t working, and figured that could be my fault, but did not want the hours of ‘repair auditing’ that they would tell me I needed to fix it. So I just went along, to my shame. I did what was easy . . . without asking them, or myself, any hard questions.”

    . . .

    Recruits had a sense of boundless possibility. Mystical powers were forecast; out-of-body experiences were to be expected; fundamental secrets were to be revealed. Hubbard had boasted that Scientology had raised some people’s I.Q. one point for every hour of auditing. “Our most spectacular feat was raising a boy from 83 I.Q. to 212,” he told the Saturday Evening Post, in 1964.

    At the Manor Hotel, Haggis went “Clear.” The concept comes from “Dianetics”; it is where you start if you want to ascend to the upper peaks of Scientology. A person who becomes Clear is “adaptable to and able to change his environment,” Hubbard writes. “His ethical and moral standards are high, his ability to seek and experience pleasure is great. His personality is heightened and he is creative and constructive.” Someone who is Clear is less susceptible to disease and is free of neuroses, compulsions, repressions, and psychosomatic illnesses. “The dianetic Clear is to a current normal individual as the current normal is to the severely insane.”

    Going Clear “was not life-changing,” Haggis says. “It wasn’t, like, ‘Oh, my God, I can fly!’ ” At every level of advancement, he was encouraged to write a “success story” saying how effective his training had been. He had read many such stories by other Scientologists, and they felt “overly effusive, done in part to convince yourself, but also slanted toward giving somebody upstairs approval for you to go on to the next level.”

    . . .

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_wright

  • Gayle
    Gayle

    thanks 'leavingwt',,so interesting,, easy to pick up the mind-control process of Scientology. Easy to the similarity of the mind-control process for JWs. The psychological catch and hook is so similar. The 'hook' of a higher 'truth,' some higher 'enlightenment,' a 'clear' runs a common vein in cults. To better our life is one thing, but to give us that we are so much better, without question, than all others, is quite another. It is hard to come down from that false pedestal. A pride thing,,the reason why many will not face the reality.

  • james_woods
    james_woods

    There are many such stories. The Scientology is very much like a new-age science fiction JW organization, except that they are about a half a century younger and are still in their "Judge Rutherford" phase after the original founder (Hubbard) died and it was taken over by an interloper.

    It is also the reason I ended up here on JWN five years ago - a work colleague had left the Scientologists about the same time I left the JWs (late 1970s) and we both searched the internet for cult awareness websites. That is how I found JWN.

    BTW - just as a caution - the Scientologists have a website that pretends to be an anti-cult site but which is actually a recruitment effort for Scientology.

  • Will Power
    Will Power

    there is also an audio as an introduction - good talk about "what an apostate is" and how they are viewed

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/2011/02/14/110214on_audio_wright

  • poppers
    poppers

    marked

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    Will Power: Thank you for posting the audio introduction link.

    On his blog, today, PZ Meyers asks,

    "Will Scientology be defeated?"

    Once upon a time, everyone trembled in fear at the thought of antagonizing the Church of $cientology. Everyone knew their response to any criticism would be heavy-handed and unconscionable, and that they'd harrass you persistently if you ended up on their enemies list. That's changing, though, and the stupidity and viciousness of the cult is seeing more and more exposure. The latest is Lawrence Wright's big exposé in the New Yorker and upcoming book on the subject. The article is well worth reading, all 28 online pages of it.

    I hope the book casts a wider net, though. The New Yorker article focuses almost entirely on Paul Haggis, the recent apostate from the cult, and the impression I got from the article was that he is a flighty flibbertigibbet, a gullible enthusiast who's been insulated from the consequences of bad decisions by an overpaid career as a Hollywood fantasist. I came away from it really disliking Haggis, and almost feeling like he deserved to be sucked into an all-devouring celebrity religion.

    Which is really unfair…$cientology is being investigated for brain-washing and human trafficking, and these techniques do destroy human lives.

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/will_scientology_be_defeated.php

  • scotsman
    scotsman

    It is an interesting account and its the unthinking acceptance that Haggis went along with that resonated with me.

  • joannadandy
    joannadandy

    really interesting read - I enjoyed it a lot.

  • besty
    besty

    it would be cool if someone would dissect the common themes between $cientology and WT$ and which could then be linked to this and the St Petersburg articles...

    I think many JW's reading these articles could miss the commonalities as $cientology is much further along the wackiness continuum....

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    Entire article link (no having to page through it):

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_wright?currentPage=all

    Also, Great Idea Besty.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit