Scientology lessening the Disconnection madness? Our readers are skeptical
Yesterday’s dispatch from one of our correspondents turned out to be pretty controversial with our ex-Scientologist readers, and they let us know it.
According to our source, a recent briefing at an unnamed Scientology facility seemed to indicate a possible softening of one of the church’s harshest policies, Disconnection, which rips apart families between those in the organization and those considered outsiders or enemies.
Our correspondent suggested that it was so surprising to see a senior technical official encouraging members to reach out to non-Scientology family members, and to do so regularly, that it might suggest an actual change in policy coming from church leader David Miscavige himself.
We emphasized that this was only one data point coming from one source, and the ex-Scientologists in our audience let us know that they were pretty skeptical about a conclusion that would indicate a softening of the policy by Miscavige. They let us know it in the comments at the dot org site and in emails directly to us.
So we thought we’d post a few of those comments to show you what we heard.
Phil Jones: I remember once at an event, Miscavige said something along the lines of, "We're not moralists." And we thought maybe the sec-checks would ease off a bit. No such luck. And even if this disconnection thing is eased off I don't see it lasting. In Scientology the evil will always rise to the top.
And so far we've heard nothing from the kids, or my brother, or my sister. In fact, we're going to a memorial in a few weeks for a dear family member. My brother asked their spouse to contact me and tell me not to talk to him (my brother) if he goes to it and I'm there also. (Weird Scientology behavior 101). Because this person refused to put strange Scientology stuff into such a solemn event my brother and sister aren't going. Disconnection still reigns supreme in Scientology.
Techie: Depending on the venue, this may not be anything new. We were often told to keep in touch with our relatives, encouraged to write letters etc. at the Int Base. Not because anyone in management wanted us to reconnect, just to cut down on the wellness check requests. Once in a while, a frantic parent decides to write to the one in charge and somehow gets through. Then we all get told to send more maddeningly vague “good roads, good weather” letters to the folks. Always reminded me of summer camp. How to make your parents absolutely certain you are in a cult — send a letter that says nothing about you or your spouse and rattles on about stuff nobody actually cares about. We will know something is up if Marc Headley ever hears from his sister, or Mike from his daughter. In reality they would be a lot better off if they simply discovered an extra semicolon in the disconnection policy and dumped it in the trash. I think, going from memory, that it even says "This mainly applies to people on the fringes of Scientology, not to the average person" or some such. Hubbard always contradicted himself, and it is not like Islam where the latest version always applies. Dave could fix the issue with the stroke of a pen and the ring of a phone if he wanted to. But in his fantasy world the ones who left are the evildoers, deserving all blame for his mistakes. He cannot soften his approach without shattering it.
Former Sea Org member: There are those good eggs in the “church” who don’t like the policy, and while they wouldn’t dare speak out against Scientology policy they use their pulpit to help those with ex- or non-Scientologists as family or friends to lure them in or back in. Not ex-Sea Org, though. Never. They know too much. And of course, no SPs get such treatment. My thought is that is what this was. However, it could also be an attempt to keep staff in place by appearing to relax such rules. I’ve seen and heard it both ways.
A reader: They are looking for new public. They hope to reg their families.
Another reader: Just because one person encourages family connections means nothing. Maybe that one person realized that disconnection does not make people happy or more able and just decided on his own. Maybe he believes LRH saying that “communication is the universal solvent” is more important than disconnection. After all, Hubbard never specifically said to disconnect from non-Scientology family. He only said 2 percent of people were SPs so all Scientologists having very little contact with their non-Scientology families does not make sense. Except for a short time early in my membership in the cult, I always stayed in touch with my non-Scientology family. Maybe this one person was just smarter than most staff and realized that disconnection is rarely very workable. I feel quite certain DM would not agree with this as he seems to be a horrible person who loves to destroy people and families.
What is probably true is most public Scientologists would like for disconnection to be cancelled but they don't talk about it except in rare circumstances.
Chris Shugart: This could very well be a legitimate concern, but maybe not for the reasons you might think. Back in their hey-day, the COS had a steady inflow of new public, as well as a solid constituency of loyal members. They simply applied their “handle or disconnect” policy towards antagonistic family members, and did so with dispassionate ease. You’d win a few, you’d lose a few, and you’d move on without an ounce of regret.
Today is much different. With a membership whose numbers are shaky at best, they need all the friends they can get. I suspect that these days, they’re less willing to waste a few “antagos,” while risking potential PTS/SP scenarios within their own ranks. Of course, the bad PR that often follows is always a concern, but I think there’s a basic numbers game in play here.
Bonus items from our tipsters
Trying to pull more money from Scientologist wallets? You can’t go wrong with a Tom Cruise theme…
Want to help?
Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special material for subscribers. Or, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com.
Thank you for reading today’s story here at Substack. For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:
Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history
Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea
Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time
Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology
Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain
Here’s the link to today’s post at tonyortega.org
And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.
Paid subscribers get access to a special podcast series…
Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars on the week’s news
I located the policy that I referred to in my comment. It is HCOPL 27 Oct 64R "Policies on Physical Healing, Insanity and Sources of Trouble". This is the one that lists the types of PTS from A to J. https://www.suppressiveperson.org/1964/10/27/hcopl-policies-on-physical-healing-insanity-and-sources-of-trouble/ Made confusing by the fact that there are also PTS conditions from i. to iii.
It is very clear in my memory from the experience of sitting in the Ethics office at San Francisco Org, 414 Mason St, and being told that I was PTS type A and C. A because my father objected to me blowing my cash on Scientology and C because my brother called a radio station call-in program. And threatened to take them to small claims court for the $25 useless Communications Course. 1975-ish.
Reading through the issue, I saw the line: "So these policies refer to nonScientology persons in the main or persons who appear on the outer fringes and push toward us." The Ethics Officer was not amused and told me to get on with my "handling". I was eventually thrown out of Scientology by the Guardian's Office based on this issue, but when they needed an E-Meter engineer in 1979 I got sucked back in. Always had a soft spot for odd electronic things like Blue Boxes and E-Meters.
The full quote:
"To summarize sources of trouble, the policy in general is to cut communication, as the longer it is extended the more trouble they are. I know of no case where the types of persons listed above were handled by auditing or instruction.
I know of many cases where they were handled by firm legal stands, by ignoring them until they changed their minds, or just turning one’s back.
In applying such a policy of cut-communication, one must also use judgment as there are exceptions in all things, and to fail to handle a person’s momentary upset in life or with us can be quite fatal. So these policies refer to nonScientology persons in the main or persons who appear on the outer fringes and push toward us. When such a person bears any of the above designations, we and the many are better off to ignore them. " The "above descriptions" are the A to J classifications.
Skepticism is very much warranted on this trial balloon. If indeed it is a balloon. I do hope some on the big list of the disconnected at the Bunker get contact with their family members. But I don't see Mike Rinder or Phil and Willie Jones ever hearing from their $cieno children. Being a public detractor of the Clampire will always result in an SP declare and/or some unfair game. That is just the way Miscavige rolls.