Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.

1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.
So far I have not heard of any excess in this regard re: Pritchard

2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
Belzebuub gives LIVE, weekly Q&A sessions over the internet where he speaks and takes questions from folks around the world. (this really was a pleasant surprise to me). Though, I am sure callers and questions are screened.

3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.
Unlike other religious leaders, I have seen no reports of a fleet of limousines or any sort of ostentatious lifestyle.

4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
All I have heard was one week he complained about being labeled a cult but then a week or so later he noted, "but if you check the dictionary, we are one... as are most religions".... And that is true. I have heard nothing from Pritchard on impending disasters but we know both Samael and Rabolu spoke of it plenty. Given the present 2012 hysteria, this is actually notably absent in his books and talks.

5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
Actually, this Gnostic Movement is the exact opposite of that...they know that most who take up this study will eventually drop out. For them this is a 'normal' expectation.

6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
So far, I have not seen one single, legitimate complaint along these lines.

7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
I have seen nothing at all in this regard. Given that Pritchard has been at this publicly for 20 years, that is phenomenal.

8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".
If anything, from what I see, the followers tend to consider themselves to be moral and upright well beyond common standards, and they are proud of their self-discipline. I do not know enough members to judge if they are being unrealistic. I do know a few ex-members and they left for reasons that I thought left a bit to be desired. They suffered no ill effects from leaving...they simply stopped showing up. No one bothered them about it. (One of them found a new cult almost immediately...;)


9. The group/leader is always right.
That is true for nearly every group I have ever known.

10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.
That is the exact opposite of Gnosis as taught by Belzebuub/Pritchard. Followers are taught to get their own truth within their own selves through their own personal effort. (This is very distressing for those who are hoping to find an overbearing cult leader who removes all personal responsibilty for them and just tells them how to think and act -- this is what a HUGE percentage of humanity is looking for).

TypicalSeeker:

Some of your responses to the points are interesting.

1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

"So far I have not heard of any excess in this regard re: Pritchard."

You offer nothing to explain accountability within the group, e.g. democratric government, a system of checks and balances or oversight.

3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

"Unlike other religious leaders, I have seen no reports of a fleet of limousines or any sort of ostentatious lifestyle."

You offer nothing here other than opinion. What about an independently audited financial statement or budget, which discloses in detail all salaries, compensation and expenses paid out from organizational funds?

6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

"So far, I have not seen one single, legitimate complaint along these lines."

Here you simply have chosen disregard any complaint that you consider that you label not "legitimate."

9. The group/leader is always right.

"That is true for nearly every group I have ever known."

Not true of most organizations or mainstream religious groups. Many have members that disagree or disregard leaders and dissent and disagreement is frequently tolerated.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2010 08:27AM by rrmoderator.

rrm>"You offer nothing to explain accountability within the group, e.g. democratric government, a system of checks and balances or oversight. "

Why should I? I made no claim to that effect.

...?

why should they be democratic? The founders of the USA even said that democracy would become no more than a "Tyranny of the masses".

rrm>"You offer nothing here other than opinion."

False. I merely reported the fact that, ""Unlike other religious leaders, I have seen no reports of a fleet of limousines or any sort of ostentatious lifestyle." ... and that is a true report. Have you heard otherwise?

rrm>"Here you simply have chosen disregard any complaint that you consider that you label not "legitimate."

That is my right to do so... or would you deny me that right?
I expect those who point the accusing finger to substantiate their claims. I have made no accusations against any group here so I have nothing to defend.


rrm>"Not true of most organizations or mainstream religious groups. "

I think you are wrong. Simple disagreement with leadership can get you kicked out of groups from the Knitting Circle or the Glee Club etc. and in many countries in this world simple outspoken disagreement will get you killed.

Thank you rrmoderator that is quite helpful. Now that we a number of much clearer points from TypicalSeeker it will now be easier to deal with his or her responses. Thank you TypicalSeeker for clearing up this situation. If you require clearification or a source (I will only need to reference this forum most likelyas all of these matters have been dealt with before) than just let me know.

"1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.
So far I have not heard of any excess in this regard re: Pritchard"

Really? How about the Never reject a divine master thing? Or his attempts to completely trash all those other followers of " Rabolu". This also goes along with the matter that all other forms of spirituality are the actions of the masters of the Black Lodge. This matter also relates to a few of your other points.


"2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
Belzebuub gives LIVE, weekly Q&A sessions over the internet where he speaks and takes questions from folks around the world. (this really was a pleasant surprise to me). Though, I am sure callers and questions are screened. "

Yes they are heavily screened and the questions are checked ahead of time. If there is a question he doesn't like he doesn't take them. For someone who does nothing else in his life why can he only give a half hour on a Saturday? What is he doing with the rest of the time? What does he give back to the organization that supports him? Further to this there are many accounts of him attacking and critizing people who followed lines of questioning that he did not like. This has taken place in the forums, in person and likely in life chats as well. We have one clear example of that from a post that was later deleted for you to view on a page a good number back.


"3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.
Unlike other religious leaders, I have seen no reports of a fleet of limousines or any sort of ostentatious lifestyle. "

What accounting is there even on a basic level of what he or his wife Edith do for the organization in exchange for the money that goes to them. It is clear that money does go to them as they have no worked for a very long time. I have it on good authority, although I can not source this that the organization even had a donation drive an number of years ago to built their house and every so often they have had to make this move. This is likely why their is now the Belzebuub charity. Like I said when I questions Jordan to find out any level of accountablility for how things are financed or decision are made, he was not able to give any kind of an answer. Either he is kept out of the loop, which I highly doubt as he is a member or he was not willing to disclose what was going on. The interesting thing is that the regular teachers had the centre here leave all the decisions up to Jordan, even giving all the money they have over to him to decide how to use it. So yes the greatest amount of lack of accountablity happens at the top but there are lesser degrees of this problem at lower levels.

"4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
All I have heard was one week he complained about being labeled a cult but then a week or so later he noted, "but if you check the dictionary, we are one... as are most religions".... And that is true. I have heard nothing from Pritchard on impending disasters but we know both Samael and Rabolu spoke of it plenty. Given the present 2012 hysteria, this is actually notably absent in his books and talks."

You have got to be kidding me. Either you have blinders on you really are trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes here. Have you not read Secret Knowledge, Hidden Wisdom? That books is full of this end of the world talk.

As it was taught to me Egos and negative beings have so thoroughly taken over this planet and the beings contained within that destruction is a certainty. Implied in this is the thinking that no one else can really be trusted as they are all influenced by this. This goes along with the idea that all other teachings are either created or encouraged by negative beings (or master of the black lodge) in order to keep people away from "Bezlebuubs" teachings. I have referenced all of this already. Also in regards to cult speach Pritchard gave I have already debunked that, previously in this discussion.

This statement I was not aware of "but if you check the dictionary, we are one... as are most religions"

First of this is rather hypocritical since he has stated before that his teachings are not a religion, he probably sees them as the truth not a religion. He has taught before that when a teaching dies and becomes lifeless than it is a religion. To him religions are dogmatic and fanatical. Sorry I was a good student, I know my stuff.

notanti>"Have you not read Secret Knowledge, Hidden Wisdom? That books is full of this end of the world talk. "

Perhaps you could include a few quotes to substantiate that?
(note; it must be the 'imminent' kind...we all know this is going to end sometime....)

Someone asked on one of the forums if we could all rest easy on the "end -of-the-world-as-we-know-it"scenarios because what would be the point of building Gnostic Retreat Centers if the world is going to undergo cataclysmic disasters...

?

I thought it was a good point.

notanti>"First of this is rather hypocritical since he has stated before that his teachings are not a religion, he probably sees them as the truth not a religion. He has taught before that when a teaching dies and becomes lifeless than it is a religion. To him religions are dogmatic and fanatical."

Again, Notanti, please read carefully and reply to what I actually said.

From what I heard in the podcast that anyone can download, he agreed to the fact that his movement fit the dictionary definition of cult...and he added that most religions do as well. He did NOT say his Movement was a religion, as I recall.

No Hypocrisy there.

maybe elsewhere... but not on that one....

Do try to be fair... if you would please....

To say, "when a teaching dies and becomes lifeless than it is a religion." is a reasonable position.

Wouldn't you do your cause better to focus on the real problems at hand?

5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
Actually, this Gnostic Movement is the exact opposite of that...they know that most who take up this study will eventually drop out. For them this is a 'normal' expectation. "

Again I have talked about this before. Yes they have a culture of expecting people to leave but they are seen as failures and spiritually weaker for doing so. Teachers of the Gnostic Movement even quote the gospel to back up this as being the expected reality of those who follow a devine master. This is why it is stated as "no good reason" not being locked up in chains or that they fight you if you want to leave. If you do leave you are generally considered an outcast or an untouchable.

The very fact that people leave so often, consider the general ease of the practices says that there is something wrong with the organization. The practices and easy but not very good. The culture is rather dark and sad. From my experience the teachers were always fighting and being petty to one another, but this is likely from lack of sleep from the organization keeping them so busy.

6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
So far, I have not seen one single, legitimate complaint along these lines. "

I think the problem with your logic here has been pointed out already. There are many people voicing a concerns in different ways on different websites. It is relatively small organization, with probably less than 500 active people at any one time worldwide.

7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
I have seen nothing at all in this regard. Given that Pritchard has been at this publicly for 20 years, that is phenomenal.

There is all kinds of info here. How about the fact that he was kicked out of the previous organization for Fanaticism? What was really going on when he got thrown in jail for a day or so but than had to be let out? Pritchard is rather vague about this part of his story.

8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".
If anything, from what I see, the followers tend to consider themselves to be moral and upright well beyond common standards, and they are proud of their self-discipline. I do not know enough members to judge if they are being unrealistic. I do know a few ex-members and they left for reasons that I thought left a bit to be desired. They suffered no ill effects from leaving...they simply stopped showing up. No one bothered them about it. (One of them found a new cult almost immediately...;) "

If this was true than why would anyone ever leave? I think that the cases of people going on to other cults, particularly other Samael Aun Weor based ones is normally a situation of a fight within the organization. We have one really well documented case of that here and I have heard of others.

"10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.
That is the exact opposite of Gnosis as taught by Belzebuub/Pritchard. Followers are taught to get their own truth within their own selves through their own personal effort."

I consider this is to a manipulation. If you have already been set with certain expectation of what you are going to find than you have biased what you are looking for. Also if you challenge what the leader has to say you are out. That does not happen in a regular religious community. All you are doing here is repeating the party line and it is nonsense.

It should be stated that some of these area are stronger than others, but the fact that we can touch on all the warning signs is significant.

It is rather interesting how TypicalSeeker first presented themselves rather unassumingly and is now presenting themselves as being experienced and knowledgable about the situation. I am feeling rather cautious about this person.

I have many rebuttals to TypicalSeekers statements above. I will keep it simple.

The Gnostic Movement has an authoritarian structure with authority claimed by Pritchard on the basis that he is a 'divine, awakened being' and the only living master. The structure of the movement is non-democratic and follows a funnel structure, with less information being channeled down to you the lower in the hierachy you are as is evidenced by people's reports of learning more about the darker practices the higher you rise in the ranks, from trainee to teacher and member (and usually back again - sending people back down through the courses is a great technique used to encourage people to fall into line. May I refer you here to Pavlov, Skinner and conditioned responses to stimuli)

No transparency, everything is heavily edited, questions Pritchard answers in Saturday talks are posted on forums before, there is a team of moderators working around the clock on the forums to remove anything that contravenes the exhaustive terms of the site you agree to when you post. Unlike RR, you are penalised for all sorts of things and banned without a warning.

There are no public meetings, no AGMs, no transparent minutes, no budget, no accountability, no one to question 'the master' (Pritchard).

The organisation works on donations and volunteers who donate their life's savings sometimes (if they ever build them up that is), time, energy and all that they have to give to support itself and Mark and Edith, who have not worked for many, many years but enjoy a transcontinental lifestyle and now purportedly own a 6 bedroom mansion that costs just under a million dollars somewhere in Australia I believe?

Most of the people I have spoken to who have left, contrary to your assertions TypicalSeeker, claim a pattern of emotional abuse that closely mirrors that other people have experienced and a pattern of gradually escalating obsession, fanaticism, mind control and psychological totalitarianism.

The reason there is not much press about the movement, is because it is small, people leave faster than they attract new people. People only leave because they have 'failed the spiritual work', 'failed the guardian of the threshold test', 'been attacked by the black lodge' etc. They accept people leaving yes, but there is no valid reason for leaving and it is assumed that if you choose to quit you are spiritually doomed and have chosen the narrower, 'normal life' over the true 'spiritual path'.

Yes - Pritchard assures students that the path is to be walked by each alone and through experience. However you can only experience the path by 'dying to your egos', 'practicing alchemy' (sex without orgasm) and 'sacrificing for humanity'... Pretty big assumptions to just accept wouldn't you say? The other factor is, I know people who have convinced themselves of the veracity of many things by talking themselves into it. Looking at the wards of mental institutions full of people suffering from psychosis, who believe that they are Jesus and the Virgin Mary - sometimes both, I would say that life guided by belief and personal experience alone has the potential to end in eventual, dangerous delusions.

I hope you are here to learn TypicalSeeker - if you are merely a cult apologist then you will find this forum infuriating. Open your mind to learning that does not come from the courses, knowledge that comes from real life and real people.

I did, so many years ago when I first left the movement and it has changed my life.