i. PROFESSIONALBACKGROUND

I received my B.A. cum laude(1964) in philosophy and politicalscience from Concordia College,Moorhead, Minnesota, USA. MyS.T.B. cum laude (1967) in theologyis from Harvard Divinity School,Harvard University, Cambridge,Massachusetts, USA. My M.A.(1972) and Ph.D. distinction (1976)in Special Religious Studies are from

the Institute of Christian Thought,University of St. Michael’s College inthe University of Toronto, inOntario, Canada. My dissertationwas entitled “History and Escha-tology in Jonathan Edwards: ACritique of the Heimert Thesis.”

I have taught at ConcordiaCollege, Moorhead, Minnesota(Summer, 1966), Waterloo LutheranUniversity, Waterloo, Ontario (1967-1969), University of Windsor,Windsor, Ontario (Summer, 1972,

177

A P P E N D I X F I V E

Scientology■

An Analysis and Reviewof a New Religion

M. Darrol Bryant, Ph.D.Professor of Religion and Culture

Renison College, University of WaterlooWaterloo, Ontario, Canada

1973), University of Toronto, Extension,Toronto, Ontario (1972), and RenisonCollege, University of Waterloo,Waterloo, Ontario, since 1973. I hold anappointment as a Professor of Religionand Culture at Renison College,University of Waterloo, where I amalso an Associate Professor of SocialDevelopment Studies. Since 1982 Ihave been part of the SupportingFaculty for the Consortium inReformation History of the Universityof Waterloo and the University ofGuelph. I served as the Chair of theDepartment of Religious Studies atthe University of Waterloo (1987-1993) and I am currently theGraduate Officer for the M.A. inReligious Studies at the University ofWaterloo.

I have also been a Visiting Scholarat Cambridge University, Cambridge,U.K., (1980), the Indian Institute ofIslamic Studies, New Delhi, India(1986), the Dr. S. RadhakrishnanInstitute for Advanced Studies inPhilosophy, University of Madras,Madras, India (1987), HamdardUniversity, New Delhi, India (1993),and Nairobi University, Nairobi,Kenya (1994). I have lectured atnumerous universities in Asia, Africa,Latin America and Europe.

I am the author of four volumes inthe study of religion: To Whom It MayConcern: Poverty, Humanity, Commu-nity (Philadelphia, 1969), A WorldBroken By Unshared Bread (Geneva,1970), Religion in a New Key (NewDelhi, 1992) and Jonathan Edwards’Grammar of Time, Self and Society(Lewiston, NY, 1993). I have alsoedited (singly or jointly) twelve fur-

ther volumes in the field of religiousstudies including Exploring UnificationTheology (New York, 1978), God: TheContemporary Discussion (New York,1982), The Many Faces of Religion andSociety (New York, 1985), EugenRosenstock-Huessy: Studies in His Lifeand Thought (Lewiston, NY, 1986),Interreligious Dialogue: Voices for a NewFrontier (New York, 1989) andPluralism, Tolerance and Dialogue(Waterloo, 1989). I have compiledwith Doris Jakobsh A CanadianInterfaith Directory (Waterloo, 1993). Ihave published more than forty schol-arly articles including “Faith andHistory in Grant’s Lament,” “MediaEthics,” “Cinema, Religion andPopular Culture,” “Sin and Society,”“The Consolations of Philosophy,”“New Religions: Issues and Questions,”“Towards a Grammar of the Spirit inSociety,” “Interreligious Dialogue andUnderstanding,” “The Purposes ofChrist: Towards the Recovery of aTrinitarian Perspective,” “From ‘De’ to‘Re’ or Does the ‘Future ofOntotheology’ Require the Recovery ofthe Experience/Sense of Transcen-dence?”, “The Kumbha Mela: AFestival of Renewal,” and “To Hear theStars Speak: Ontology in the Study ofReligion.” My publications range acrossthe broad area of religion and culturebut can be broken down into the fol-lowing areas: I. Theology and Ethics, II.Religion in North America, III. NewReligious Movements, and IV.Interreligious Dialogue.

I have been teaching in ReligiousStudies for more than twenty-five years.At Renison College, University ofWaterloo, I regularly teach courses on theReligious Quest, The Study of Religion,

Churchof Scientology

178

The History of Christian Thought andInterreligious Encounter and Dialogue thatemploy the comparative, historical andsociological methods common to the acad-emic study of religion. I also teach coursesfrom time to time on Religion and Politics,Religion and Literature, Religion and Filmand I have lectured in the course on Sects,Cults and New Religious Movements. Ihave also taught graduate courses onChristianity and World Religions.

I am a long-standing member of theCanadian Society for the Study ofReligion, the American Academy ofReligion, the Canadian TheologicalSociety, the Society for Values in HigherEducation, the Royal Asiatic Society andthe Society for Buddhist ChristianStudies. I have served as a Consultant tomajor international and interreligiousconferences including the Assembly of theWorld’s Religions (1985, 1990, 1992).

As a scholar of religion and culture, Ihave been engaged in the study of new reli-gious movements since the mid-1970s. Ihave been interested to understand the ori-gins, beliefs, practices and the relationshipsof these new movements to the wider cul-ture. (Many of the new religions are not“new” in any profound sense, but are simplynew to North American society.) I have alsobeen interested in, and somewhat amusedby, the intense, often hysterical, reaction ofsectors of the public to the new religiousmovements. I have done extensive fieldwork with several new religious communi-ties in Canada, the United States and India.

In relation to the Church ofScientology, I first became aware of thisnew religious community in the mid-1970s. Then I met members of the Churchof Scientology in Toronto and Kitchener,

Ontario. I was able to participate in somemeetings in the late 1970s and early 1980sthat brought together members of theChurch of Scientology and scholars of reli-gion to discuss the basic beliefs and prac-tices of Scientology. I have met somemembers of American and British branches of the Church. I have hadextended conversations with churchmembers concerning their experience ofScientology and its impact on their lives. Ihave maintained a limited contact withsome Canadian church members down tothe present day. I have visited ScientologyCenters in Kitchener and on Yonge Streetin Toronto. Since the mid-1970s I haveread many of the major publications of theChurch of Scientology includingDianetics: The Modern Science of MentalHealth, The Volunteer Minister’s Handbook,What Is Scientology?, and The ScientologyReligion. I have also read Church publica-tions that address current social issuesincluding drug abuse, mental health prac-tices and religious liberty. I have readscholarly articles and books, mainly bysociologists of religion, on the Church ofScientology.

ii. THE ASSIGNMENT

I have been asked to share my opinion,as a scholar of religion, on two questions.1. Is Scientology a “religion?” and 2. AreScientology churches “places of worship?”It is further my understanding that thesequestions are germane to questions per-taining to the exemption of Church ofScientology organizations from taxationin certain jurisdictions. In approachingthese questions, I provide some back-ground in the study of new religiousmovements and then turn to directlyaddress the above questions. My analysis

Appendix Five

179

and response to the questions are basedonly on my status as a scholar of religionand not on any expertise in any legal oradministrative field.

iii. THE “NEW RELIGIONS’’ AND THE STUDY OF RELIGION

The second half of this century hasseen the emergence of a host of “new reli-gions” in North America and Europe. Inthe public media they were often called“the cults” and included such groups asHare Krishna, 3HO, the UnificationChurch, Transcendental Meditation andScientology. When the “new religions”attracted the attention of the publicmedia it was usually in relation to sensa-tional claims that members of the newreligious communities were not there bychoice but had been “programmed” or“brainwashed.” Such claims have been thesubject of scholarly investigation (EileenBarker, The Making of a Moonie, Oxford,1984) as well as a number of governmen-tal inquiries (Hill Report on “Mind-Development Groups, Sects and Cults inOntario,” 1980). Such responsible schol-arly and governmental inquiries havefound no grounds for such charges, butsuch prejudicial images still persist.

When scholars of religion turned to the study of the “new religious communities” in the 1960s and 70s, theymade several observations that are worthnoting here. These studies continued intothe 1980s and 90s and extended the inves-tigations to other parts of the world.

Many of the “new religions” were notreally “new” but just new to NorthAmerica. For example, the HareKrishna movement is often regarded as a

“new religion/cult,” but it was in factonly “new” in North America. It is acommunity of long standing in Indiaand has its origins in the life and work ofthe 15th century Hindu reformer,Caitanya. It has been a continuous pres-ence in India since that time, but onlycame to North America in the 1960s.The same is the case for a number ofother new religious movements thathave their origins in Eastern Hindu,Buddhist and Sikh traditions.

A smaller number of the “new reli-gions” have their origins in the recovery offorgotten or neglected aspects of olderreligious traditions, often the mystical andmeditative dimensions of the Muslim,Jewish and Christian faiths. For example,Canada’s first “deprogramming” caseinvolved a young woman, a graduate ofthe University of Waterloo, who hadjoined a Catholic charismatic communityin Orangeville, Ontario.

Many of the “new religions” haveemerged from the encounter of missionaryChristianity or missionary Islam withindigenous traditions in Africa and Asia.When these groups have come to propa-gate their faith in North America, this hasbeen viewed with alarm since many of thebeliefs of the newer communities are con-sidered “heretical” to the older denomina-tions.

Some of these synthetic movements,like the Unification Church, have theirorigins in the Christian missionary worldbut incorporate elements of the indige-nous or traditional religions as well as“new revelations.” An analogous case isthe Bahai tradition which emerges out ofthe Islamic tradition but incorporates a“new revelation.”

Churchof Scientology

180

Some of the new religions were gen-erally “new,” for example, Scientologyand the Prosperos. (See Robert Ellwood,Jr., Religious and Spiritual Groups inModern America, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,1973.) Yet we find, even in these cases, arejection of absolute novelty when, forexample, L. Ron Hubbard declares thatScientology is “a direct extension of thework of Gautama Siddhartha Buddha.”(Volunteer Minister’s Handbook) Thus,even in these cases, there are elements ofbelief, practice, inspiration or ritual thathave antecedents or parallels in olderand/or other traditions.

Historians of religion remind us that“new religious movements” are alwaysemerging. For example, historians point-ed to 19th century America as a centuryin which “new religious movements”sprang up all across the country or to20th century Japan especially after WWII where a similar phenomenon wasobserved. Most of the 19th centuryAmerican cases were variant readings ofChristianity, but “new” nonetheless.(See Mary Farrell Bednarowski, NewReligions and the Theological Imaginationin America, Bloomington, IN, 1989.)There were Shakers and Quakers,Mormons and New Lights, Oneidiansand New Harmonians and a thousandothers. In the Japanese case, most of thenew religious movements had their rootsin Buddhism, the most well known isSokka Gakkai. This led these same his-torians to make the following correla-tions: (i) that while new religious move-ments are continually emerging, theygenerally have a very short life.Emerging around a charismatic orprophetic or revelatory figure, they oftendisappeared within 2-3 years. And (ii)the some few that did endure came to be

recognized as fully legitimate religioustraditions. Consider, for example, theMormons, Church of Christ, Scientistsand Seventh-Day Adventists, all ofwhom were widely attacked when theyemerged in the 19th century, but arenow considered “legitimate” religiouscommunities. The Bahai community is anon-North American example of thissame phenomenon as is Sokka Gakkaiin Japan with its Buddhist roots.

Sociologists of religion also made animportant observation when theyobserved that one of the differencesbetween earlier new religious movementsand those of the later 20th century inNorth America was their social location.New religious movements typicallyemerge among the most marginalized anddisadvantaged sectors of society. Thisphenomenon one would easily recognizeif one were to walk through the ghettos ofurban America (or the favelas of LatinAmerica or the squatter towns that ringthe cities of Africa) or visit the rural poor:there one would discover a host of reli-gious groupings that are not familiar. Butin these social locations, not much atten-tion is given to them. The new elementin the religious movements of the late20th century is that they attracted a dif-ferent social class: youth from middle andupper-middle classes. (See Bryan Wilson,The Social Impact of New ReligiousMovements, New York, 1981.) It is easy toimagine middle or upper-class parentsbecoming distressed when they learnedthat their 25-year-old son who had grad-uated from Harvard was now following aKorean messiah or that their 24-year-olddaughter who had graduated from theUniversity of Toronto was now singingand chanting “Hare Krishnan” at the airport. But we know historically — e.g.,

Appendix Five

181

Churchof Scientology

182

St. Thomas’ parents held him captive fora year when he wanted to become aDominican, then a new religious order —that such responses often occurred whenadult children embrace new or uncon-ventional religious traditions. The youngadults attracted to the popular new reli-gions of the 1960s and 70s were neitherpoor nor marginalized. Theywere from the middle andupper-middle classes. More-over, these movements wereusually much smaller thanmedia accounts suggested. InCanada, for example, mem-berships in many of the newreligious communities num-bered in the hundreds orthousands rather than thetens or hundreds of thousandsoften alleged by opponents ofthese newer communities.Some groups in Canada, how-ever, had larger memberships.

The “new religions” pre-sented phenomena to thescholar of religion that chal-lenged some conventionalacademic notions, but noscholar of religion, to myknowledge, had any doubtthat in the “new religions” wewere dealing with religiousphenomena. Whether or notit was “good religion” or “bad religion”was often a matter of considerable publicdebate, but scholars of religion neverdoubted that it was religious phenomenathat we were encountering here. (See J.Gordon Melton, Encyclopedic Handbookof Cults in America, New York, 1986 andThe Encyclopedia of America Religions,Detroit, 1989, which includes the “newreligions.”)

iv. IS SCIENTOLOGYA RELIGION?

The modern academic study of reli-gion that emerged in the 19th and 20thcenturies must be distinguished from theclassical disciplines of theology. Whilethe task of theology was the exposition of

the faith of a particular com-munity (Christian, Jewish,Muslim, Hindu, etc.) — thismost commonly meant theChristian faith in the West— the academic study ofreligion was concerned tooffer a scientific descriptionand analysis of all religiousphenomena. Thus one ofthe first tasks of the moderndiscipline of the study ofreligion was to free the defi-nition of religion from its typical identificationwith Christianity. Standarddictionary definitions of religion still reflect this ten-dency to identify religion ingeneral with the characteris-tics of especially Christianityand other monotheisticfaiths. Those definitionsoften indicate that the soleor central characteristic ofreligion is “belief in aSupreme Being.” But schol-

ars of religion knew of great and ancientreligions that had no such “belief in aSupreme Being.” The principal exampleswere Buddhism, especially in itsTheravadin forms where such a beliefwas explicitly rejected, and Jainism,which also explicitly rejected this belief.Yet these religions were more than 2,000years old. Moreover, the Confucian traditions minimized the emphasis on

The “new religions”

presented phenomena to the scholar of religion that

challenged someconventional

academic notions,but no scholar ofreligion, to myknowledge, had

any doubt that inthe “new

religions” we were dealing with

religious phenomena.

the Transcendent and maximizedemphasis on proper human relations.And in Hinduism one encounteredmany gods and goddesses and not just asingle “Supreme Being.” Moreover, thevery mystical traditions of the monothe-istic faiths of the West were often criticalof the very notion of God as a “SupremeBeing” and insisted that the Reality ofGod transcended such conceptions.Thus it was seen as essential to have adefinition or understanding of religionthat was adequate to the wide variety ofreligious traditions found among humanbeings throughout history.

At the same time, there was a recog-nition that in the religious traditions ofhumankind there was a dimension thattranscended the mundane. However,that dimension or reality was named in awide variety of ways. While Christiansmight strive for “union with God,” orMuslims seek “submission to Allah,”Buddhists were more bent on achieving“inner enlightenment or satori,” Hindusmore directed to realizing the “eternalatman or Self,” and Jains strove to culti-vate a “good mind.” Thus the definitionof religion that emerged in the modernstudy of religion included some recogni-tion of “a Beyond” understood broadlyenough to include those religions thateither did not have a notion of a“Supreme Being” or explicitly rejectedsuch an idea in the name of another con-ception of the Ultimate. While everyreligion identifies a sacred dimension oflife, not every religion identifies thesacred with a “Supreme Being.”

While Western Protestant Christianitymay have especially emphasized belief ascentral to religion, other strands of reli-gious life, Christian and non-Christian,put more emphasis on practice. In

Buddhism, for example, the issue is prac-tice: the practice of the Eight-Fold Pathas the Way to overcome suffering. InHinduism one encounters a whole Wayto the Ultimate where the whole life isone of practice (rajyoga) or work (kar-mayoga). But practice is not just medita-tion or contemplation or action, it is alsoprayer, ethical behaviour, familial rela-tions and a host of other practices. In allreligious traditions, though in varyingdegrees, there is a whole life that is to belived in conformity to the ideal of thereligion and that is a life exemplified inpractice. Thus, practice in conformity tothe ideals and the ethical guidelines of agiven religious way was seen as a furtherdimension to the understanding of whatreligion is. Moreover, the practice weobserve in religious communities andtraditions is often ritual practice.

Thus, the modern study of religionwas led to acknowledge a further dimen-sion of religious life, namely, the ritualdimension. Rites and rituals are struc-tured acts of the religious community tofacilitate communion with the Ultimatedimensions of life. In some of theChinese traditions, rites were consideredessential to maintain the order of thecosmos and were elaborate eventsspreading over several days. Some reli-gious traditions downplay the role of rit-ual, e.g., Quaker Christians, but evenhere they would consider the “gatheringin silence” to be essential to their com-munity. Though the ritual dimensionvaries greatly from tradition to tradition— and even within a given tradition as iswitnessed in the ritual splendor ofOrthodox Christianity and the ritual sim-plicity of the Mennonite meeting house— it is a dimension present to the reli-gious life of humankind.

Appendix Five

183

Churchof Scientology

184

These elements of belief, practice andritual do not stand in splendid isolationbut come together in the life of religiouscommunity to create its distinctive way oflife or culture. Hindus, then, are peoplewho share a complex of beliefs, practicesand rites that serve to facilitate their wayof life, a way that has both mundane andsupramundane dimensions. The Latinroot of the term religion, religare, means“to bind together,” and here we can seethe two-fold meaning of that “bindingtogether.” There is the “binding together”of “the human and the divine” through areligion, and the “binding together” ofhuman beings in a religious community.

It is in the light of these considerationsthat there has emerged in the modernstudy of religion an understanding of religion as a community of men and womenbound together by a complex of beliefs, practices, behaviours and rituals that seek,through this Way, to relate human tosacred/divine life. It is essential, however, tounderstand that each dimension of thisdefinition of religion — community,belief, practice, behaviour, ritual, Way anddivine — will be understood (a) withinthe specific terms of a given religious tra-dition and (b) with relatively moreemphasis to some rather than other elements in a given tradition. Thus, forexample, the “community” dimension ofreligion might receive more emphasis inOrthodox Judaism than it does in Taoismor even in other strands of Judaism.Likewise, the divine might be understoodas a Transcendent Reality as in Judaism oras an immanent, though unrealized, Self,as it is in many Hindu schools. But suchvariations do not invalidate the definitionof religion, but simply reflect the variety ofreligious phenomena that must be coveredby a modern academic account of religion.

It is in the light of the above that wecan then ask whether or not Scientologyis a religion. The brief answer is “yes, itis.” We can make this clearer if we nowtake the above understanding of religionand look at the case of Scientology.

In the Church of Scientology, do weencounter a distinctive set of religiousbeliefs concerning the meaning and ultimate end of human life? Even themost cursory familiarity with theScientology community and its literaturewill lead one to answer in the affirmative.

According to their own literature,Scientology is “an applied religious phi-losophy and technology resolving prob-lems of the spirit, life and thought.”Those “problems of the spirit, life andthought” are not permanent but can beovercome, according to Scientology.That overcoming of the “problems of thespirit, life and thought” is centered, inScientology, in awareness and knowl-edge. Central to that awareness andknowledge are the thetan and the EightDynamics. Each requires a brief clarifica-tion in order to indicate some centralaspects of Scientology belief.

According to Scientology, ourhumanity is composed of different parts:the body, the mind and the thetan. Thethetan in Scientology is analogous to thesoul in Christianity and the spirit inHinduism. Part of the problem of life isthat human beings have lost an aware-ness of their true nature. In Scientology,this means an awareness of themselves asthetans. Yet awareness and knowledge ofoneself as a thetan is essential to well-being and survival. Human beings oftenconfuse their deepest reality with thebody or the mind, or see themselves as

Appendix Five

185

only body and/or mind. But forScientology it is essential that humanbeings recover and recognize their spiri-tual nature, that, in the language ofScientology, “one is a thetan.” Asthetans, human beings are “spiritual,immortal and ‘virtually indestructable.’”

Since the awareness of oneself asthetan has been obscured by “engrams” orlost in the confusions of thetan with thebody and/or the mind, a chief religioustask is to recover one’s spirituality. It isessential since “the thetan is the source ofall creation and is life itself.” This aware-ness then is the first stage in the practiceof a religious way that will lead us tobecome, in Scientology terms, Clear. Ashuman beings become aware of their truenature, according to Scientology, and ofthe concentric circles of reality, then,Scientologists believe, they can proceed,freely and creatively, through life’s EightDynamics. (See What Is Scientology?, 1992edition.)

The basic message of life, according toScientology, is survival across the EightDynamics. The First Dynamic is “Self,” orthe dynamic of life to survive as an indi-vidual. This First Dynamic exists withinever larger circles of existence that extendto the Eighth Dynamic or Infinity. Sincethe delineation of the Eight Dynamics isfundamental to Scientology, it is appropri-ate to outline each “dynamic” briefly. Asindicated, the Dynamics begin with theindividual existence or “Self” and its driveto survive and proceed through theSecond Dynamic which Scientology calls“creativity” or “making things for thefuture,” and includes the family and therearing of children. The Third Dynamic is“Group Survival,” that compartment oflife that involves voluntary communities,

friends, companies, nations and races. TheFourth Dynamic is “the species ofhumankind” or the “urge toward survivalthrough humankind and as allhumankind.” The Fifth Dynamic is “lifeforms” or the “urge of all living things”towards survival. The Sixth Dynamic isthe “physical universe.” The SeventhDynamic is the “spiritual dynamic” or theurge “for life itself to survive.” The EighthDynamic is “the urge toward existence asInfinity,” or what others call “a SupremeBeing or Creator.” “A knowledge of theDynamics allows one to more easilyinspect and understand any aspect of life.”(What Is Scientology? 1992 edition, p.149.) It is within life as a whole, or acrossthe Eight Dynamics in Scientology terms,that the religious journey and task unfolds.

It is particularly within the EighthDynamic that one encounters theScientology affirmation of “what otherscall” the Supreme Being or Creator. ButScientology prefers the term “Infinity” tospeak of “the allness of all.” The reticenceof Scientology in relation to “Infinity” hasits parallels in other traditions. Before theUltimate Mystery, mystics of all traditionscounsel restraint, even silence.

Scientology beliefs concerning thethetan have parallels in other religious tra-ditions, as does their belief in the EightDynamics and the ultimate spiritualnature of things. The religious quest inScientology is more analogous to Easternprocesses of enlightenment and realizationthan it is to Western versions of the reli-gious quest which tend to emphasize con-formity to the Divine Will. Some scholarseven suggest that in Scientology we havea version of “technologized Buddhism”(See F. Flinn in J. Fichter, ed., Alternativesto American Mainline Churches, New York,

Churchof Scientology

186

Appendix Five

187

1983), while others emphasize its parallelsto Eastern mind development practices.But one can also see in their belief in theEight Dynamics a parallel with themedieval vision of the Soul’s Journey toGod which culminates in identificationwith the Ultimate Mystery, God.

Like some other religious traditions,Scientology sees the religious quest inlargely religio-therapeutic terms, that is,the process of addressing the humanproblem is a process of actualizing a lostor hidden human spiritual power ordimension of life. In Buddhism theproblem and process is to move fromunenlightened to enlightened and inChristianity from sinful to redeemed,while in Scientology, it is to move from“preclear” to “Clear” and beyond. Herethe state of Clear is understood as anawareness of one’s spiritual nature andrealized spiritual freedom, freed fromthe burdens of past experiences andcapable of living a rational, moral exis-tence. This in Scientology is the natureof the religious quest, the goal of reli-gious striving. This quest does not endin the state of Clear, however, but con-tinues on to higher levels of spiritualawareness and ability on the upper or“Operating Thetan” levels. At theseupper levels of achievement, one is ableto control oneself and environment, or,as Scientology doctrine puts it, to be “atcause over life, thought, matter, energy,space and time.”

Coupled then with the beliefs outlinedabove is a religious practice and way. Thisdimension of Scientology is often describedin their terms as “technology,” or the meth-ods of applying the principles. Central tothe religious practice in Scientology is thephenomenon of auditing, regarded as a

sacrament by Scientologists. This is aprocess by which one becomes aware of thehidden spiritual barriers that keep one frombecoming aware of one’s essential spiritualnature as a thetan and from properly exer-cising that nature. These obstacles to afully functioning or realized life are called“engrams.” A religious artifact known asthe “E-meter” is used in auditing to assistparishioners or Scientology adherents torecognize and overcome these negativeblocks on the way to Clear. (See L. RonHubbard, The Volunteer Minister’sHandbook, Los Angeles, 1976.) The audit-ing process unfolds between a religious spe-cialist — an auditor who is a minister orminister-in-training in the Church ofScientology — and a person receivingauditing, a preclear. Following set proce-dures and questions, the auditing process isdesigned to enable the preclear to becomeaware of what he or she is and to developtheir abilities to live more effectively.Scientologists believe that such a practicewill allow a person to move from “a condi-tion of spiritual blindness to the brilliantjoy of spiritual existence.”

Such practices have parallels in thespiritual disciplines of other traditionsthat likewise seek to awaken one’s innerspiritual nature. While the technology ofthe E-meter in Scientology is unique toour century, the idea behind it is not. It isanalogous to the roles of mandalas in someBuddhist traditions, or meditation withthe aid of external means in other Easterntraditions.

Moreover, it is precisely the belief ofScientologists that L. Ron Hubbard hasboth achieved insight into the nature ofreality and a practical technology for therecovery of humanity’s true nature. Thewritings of Hubbard serve as authoritative

texts within the Scientology communityin ways analogous to the sacred litera-tures of other traditions: the Vedas inHinduism, the Sutras of Buddhism, etc.But the insights of Hubbard are not,Scientologists claim, a matter of merebelief, since they are open to confirma-tion in experience through the practiceof the religious way that Hubbard hasdevised. This also echoes the ancientBuddhist wisdom which gives priority toexperience.

The practice of Scientologistsextends beyond this central religioustechnology and way since, as onemoves towards the state of Clear andbeyond, all one’s action becomes morefree, dynamic, and significant. On theway to that end, Scientologists readtheir texts, test their beliefs, act in thewider society, develop their inner life,marry, and in all their actions andbehaviour seek to realize the ideals oftheir faith. In Scientology literatureone finds numerous references to“Codes of Conduct” and other ethicalguidelines that should shape the life ofScientologists.

Religion is not just a set of beliefs,rites, and practices, it is also a commu-nity of people joined together by suchbeliefs, practices, and rites. InScientology we also find this dimensionof religious life. In many parts of theworld we find groups of Scientologistsregularly gathering as a religious com-munity. There one finds sermons, read-ing from Scientology Scripture, listen-ing to L. Ron Hubbard’s recorded lec-tures, etc., acts meant to deepen one’scommitment to the faith and to extendknowledge of that faith to others. Thecommunity is composed of those who

have found in Scientology answers andtechnologies that address the funda-mental questions of life. (See EileenBarker, New Religious Movements, APractical Introduction, London, 1989.)

Conclusion: In the light of thisreview of Scientology in relation to theelements of the modern scientific defin-ition of religion, it is apparent thatScientology is a religion. It has its owndistinctive beliefs in and account of anunseen, spiritual order, its own distinc-tive religious practice and ritual life, ithas its own authoritative texts and com-munity-building activity.

v. IS SCIENTOLOGY AWORSHIPPING COMMUNITY?

Just as the modern academic defini-tion of religion has found it necessaryto open its definition to include typesof religious behaviour, practice andbelief that move beyond the bound-aries of the Western monotheistic traditions, so too in its understandingof “worship,” modern academic definitions have had to move beyondthe Western context and include thepractices of Eastern traditions of religious and spiritual life.

Viewed historically and globally, thestudent of religion encounters a widerange of “worshipping behaviour andaction.” Cosmic religious traditions ofindigenous peoples tuned their worship-ping activities to the cosmic rhythms ofnature and the Creator. Virtually everyact of the community — from huntingto planting, from birth to death — waspreceded by ritual or worshipping activity. In the historical religious

Churchof Scientology

188

traditions of the West, prayer and ritualwere central acts of the worshippingcommunity. Here worship ranged fromremembering Allah in five daily acts ofprayer, to recalling the Covenant withYahweh on the holy days, and elevatingthe “Body of Christ” in the daily massesof the Roman Catholic faith. In the tra-ditions of the East, worshipmight be the act of silentmeditation of a yogi in thesolitude of the Himalayas orthe repetitious chanting ofsky-clad Jains before theimage of a “realized soul” orthe elaborate Shinto ritualsin the presence of the“kami” that are present toevery drop of water or leafon a tree, or the week-longservices of “chant andprayer” by Tibetan Buddhistswho reject the notion of aCreator god. Worship, ingeneral, came to be seen, bymodern students of religion,as religious actions thatfacilitate communion with, or alignment to, the unseen Sacred.Viewed globally and historically, itinvolves a wide range of action andbehaviour.

Within the Church of Scientologywe find a wide range of worshippingactivity, actions designed to facilitatecommunion with, and alignment with,the Sacred. It is to be found in theirauditing activity (described above) andin their training. Auditing is the practicethat moves one from “preclear” to“Clear” and beyond; it is theScientology way of facilitating aware-ness of oneself as an immortal spiritualbeing, the “thetan,” that unseen dimen-

sion that is the subject of the religiouslife. But of equal importance inScientology is the practice of training.In auditing, one becomes free; throughtraining, one stays free and learns “toaccomplish the purpose of improvingconditions in life.”

As we already indicated,the forms of worship withina given religious traditionaccord with their experi-ence of what is sacred and/orultimate. For Scientology,training is the activitywhich enables one to movethrough the Eight Dynamicstowards the EighthDynamic, Infinity. Trainingis neither random nor mere“learning” in Scientology. Itis rather a moving through aprecise sequence — at one’sown speed and according toa “checksheet” — in orderto acquire essential knowl-edge and the ability to apply

that knowledge in everyday life. Thereare a variety of training courses offeredin Scientology, ranging from introduc-tory to those that contain “knowledgeabout the ultimate capabilities of thethetan.”

More familiar forms of worshippingactivity are to be found in the communal rituals that occur whenScientologists gather for rites and obser-vances. The literature of Scientologycontains rites and rituals that markmajor events in the life cycle: birth,naming, marriage, and death. Theserites and rituals link these life events tothe sacred depths of life as seen by theScientology community. (See L. Ron

Appendix Five

189

In the lightof this review ofScientology inrelation to theelements of the

modern scientificdefinition ofreligion, it isapparent that

Scientology is areligion.

Hubbard, The Scientology Religion,London, 1950 for descriptions of someof the rites and rituals.) These life-cyclerituals of Scientology find their analogsin virtually every other religious tradi-tion. Such rituals enact the convictionthat human life is linked to unseen, spiritual dimensions that must be recog-nized and acknowledged ifhuman life is to achieve itswholeness and fulfillment.

Acts of worship can beindividual as well as communal. This is probablymost obvious in relation toprayer, but it is also true inrelation to meditational actsand spiritual disciplines.Whether it is a Sufi prayingalone or joined with othersin a whirling dance prayer,one is engaged in worship-ping activity. Whether it isthe Buddhist alone on the hillside deep in medita-tion or joined with others inchanting a sutra, one isencountering acts of worship.

In Scientology one encounters boththe individual and communal acts ofworship. But in Scientology, like therealization traditions of the East, indi-vidual effort is central. This process ofrealization or movement towards totalspiritual freedom involves auditing and training within Scientology. Theanalogy is the “guru-disciple” relation-ship within Eastern traditions. In the“guru-disciple” relationship the princi-pal acts of worship are interior actswhich facilitate, in Hinduism, move-ments towards the realization of atman,the soul, which is also the Ultimate.

These inward movements may belinked with certain outward actions likeyogic postures or breathing techniquesor even certain inward actions like visu-alizing an image. These inward spiritualmovements can unfold over shorter orlonger periods of time and are part ofthe worshipping activity of the devotee.

In many Eastern traditions,the ascetic and meditativeacts of training and disci-pline of an individual forgrowth in the spiritual lifemay unfold over manymonths or years or in essen-tial solitude once directionis given by the master.Though the practice is car-ried out in solitude, it is stilllinked to the life of a com-munity through shared con-victions, beliefs, and sharedacts. In Scientology, this isthe proper context for audit-ing and training where the relationship betweenthe religious counselor andthe individual initiate is pivotal. Again, the analog isthere with the spiritual direc-

tor in Christian monastic traditions, thepastor in the Protestant traditions, theguru in the Hindu traditions, the Lamain Tibetan Buddhist traditions.

In Scientology, these inward andspiritual acts associated with auditingand training to facilitate the unfoldingof one’s spiritual nature are also linkedwith growth in religious knowledge andeducation. In the Scientology contextthis means primarily the study of thewritings and recorded lectures of L. RonHubbard on Dianetics and Scientology.(But it also includes the courses which

Churchof Scientology

190

[I]n Scientology, likethe realization

traditions of theEast, individualeffort is central.This process ofrealization or

movementtowards total

spiritual freedominvolves auditing

and trainingwithin

Scientology.

he constructed and films that he wroteand directed.) Again, this linkage ofspiritual practice and scriptural study isfound across tradition. The classicalHindu yogi simultaneously practices theausterities and reads his Vedas. Thedevout Muslim reads his Quran andobserves the month of daylight fasting.These activities are seen to reinforceone another on the spiritual path.

Conclusion: In the light of thisreview of Scientology practice andactivity, I conclude that Scientologydoes engage in worshipping activity, asworship is understood in the modernstudy of religion, in their places of wor-ship. The activities of Scientologists intheir places of worship fall into therange of patterns and practices foundwithin the religious life of humankind.

Appendix Five

191

M. Darrol Bryant

About the Author

M. Darrol Bryant is Professor of Religion andCulture at Renison College, University of Waterloo,Ontario, Canada. He has taught religious studies at theUniversity for more than three decades; from 1987 to1993, served as Chairman of the Department ofReligious Studies.

Professor Bryant has been a Visiting Scholar atCambridge University in the United Kingdom; theIndian Institute of Islamic Studies, New Delhi, India;

the Dr. S. Radhakrishnan Institute for AdvancedStudies in Philosophy, University of Madras, Madras,India; Hamdard University, New Delhi, India; andNairobi University, Nairobi, Kenya.

Author of four volumes on the study of religion, heis a long-standing member of the Canadian Society forthe Study of Religion, the American Academy ofReligion, the Canadian Theological Society and theRoyal Asiatic Society. He has served as a consultant tomajor international and interreligious conferencesincluding the Assembly of the World’s Religions.