Investigation into the ADFIs, Part 1

Investigation into the ADFIs

Associations for the defence of the family and the individual (ADFI) and National Union of the ADFIs (UNADFI).

Part 1

The ADFIs bear a pretty, misleading name: association for the defence of the family and of the individual. But their defence is in reality an attack. And numerous families and individuals have had to undergo their assaults and could not say that they were defended. To obtain the ADFIs’ favours, one must indeed be in the “right camp”: that of atheists, secular fundamentalists, even militant Catholics. From their point of view, the rest may be swept away.

The active members of these associations, often very uncultivated as regards spirituality, have initiated a veritable hunt for beliefs in France.

Their displayed refusal of all dialogue and their crusade against all alternative spiritual, educational and therapeutic approaches, without any kind of discernment, no longer deceives many people today. The dossier below brings to light the nature of this state-subsidised association.

A dossier originally published on http://membres.lycos.fr/balisedepaix/perso.infi/adfilasecte.htm

TESTIMONY OF A FORMER MEMBER OF THE A.D.F.I

THE TRUE FACE OF THE A.D.F.I.

THE A.D.F.I. ON CAMPAIGN

THE A.D.F.I. DISMISSED

CONCERNING THE A.D.F.I.

FRANCE AGAINST RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

CULTS and SURVEILLANCE OF THE POPULATION

SPIRITUAL MOVEMENTS The ignorance of the public authorities!

PRACTICAL SHEET FOR DENUNCIATION AND SURVEILLANCE (according to the ADFI)

Stop the right to persecute

A very powerful lobby: the anti-cult lobby

Read a testimony by Janine Tavernier, former president of the UNADFI

TESTIMONY OF A FORMER MEMBER OF THE A.D.F.I.

This testimony is the partial reproduction of a letter written by a former member of a local A.D.F.I. To avoid any reprisals, both against the author of this letter and against its addressee, we shall preserve the anonymity of the one as of the other.

“I am sending you a letter of information about my brief passage within the A.D.F.I. of … Certain points having seemed to me dubious, I take the liberty of informing you of them.

First of all, my first contact was made through a friend who was a member of the A.D.F.I., who proposed that I come and help them in their action.

He therefore proposed that I write to the headquarters of the A.D.F.I. of … A few weeks after sending my letter, I was summoned to the headquarters. I was given a series of documents on cults, and I was questioned about my motivations, my friends, my job, etc.

A few weeks later, I received a second letter summoning me to a meeting, but this time not at the headquarters. After a good hour’s wait, I was received before an assembly of about ten people who questioned me on very varied but always very personal subjects.

A few days later, I received a letter specifying my acceptance into the A.D.F.I. I had access to the file of all the organisations that the A.D.F.I. considered as cults, some having nevertheless been the object of no complaint.

Another thing: although I had been told that the A.D.F.I.’s members belonged to every religion, all those of the A.D.F.I. of … were Catholics, some even embodying the well-known dogma: “Outside the Church, no salvation!”.

The members of the A.D.F.I. of … never gave me their name and still less their telephone number. It was always they who contacted me. It was not rare for me to be advised to return to my home by always different routes, because the A.D.F.I.’s members said they were being followed by cult members.

It is for these reasons that I left the A.D.F.I.: suspicion, paranoia, relentlessness against certain associations despite the lack of proof,…”.

THE TRUE FACE OF THE A.D.F.I.

From “Sectes, religions et libertés publiques” by Christian Paturel

La Pensée Universelle Edition 1996

“Most European “anti-cult” movements are emanations of the A.F.F. (American Family Foundation). The A.D.F.I. moreover figures frequently in “The Advisor”, a publication of the A.F.F. This anti-cult organisation is composed essentially of marginal psychiatrists: Margaret Singer, Jolly West, John Clark, …).

Within this international structure, psychiatrists occupy a leading place. The latter are specialists in the control of the human mind (hypnosis, electroshock, injection of drugs), in techniques of crowd manipulation, in “deprogramming” which, through various and violent practices, aims to restore the “mental health” of the individuals concerned. Among these psychiatrists:

• Ted Patrick: former psychologist of the American army, who adopted the brutal methods of “deprogramming” to bring back onto the straight and narrow the members of “cults” (abduction, unlawful confinement, violence…).

• Dr John Clark: Specialist in mind control and former assistant to Dr Lindemann of the C.I.A. He was penalised by the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine for having forcibly committed a person on account of his religious beliefs. In 1983, he proposed a plan aimed at making the “new religions” disappear. Clark denounces the legal barriers of democratic and liberal societies which stand in the way of his personal conceptions. His works are often cited in the A.D.F.I.’s publications.

• Margaret Singer: She was a military psychologist and had problems with the American courts, which considered that her psychiatric reports were “value judgements disguised in the form of expert opinion”.

• Dr Louis West: He advocated the sterilisation of Blacks and Hispanic Americans to combat criminality. He is often cited in the A.D.F.I.’s publications (e.g.: Bulles).

The theses defended by these psychiatrists arouse the indignation of American psychiatry: they are marginals.

• Dr Robert Lifton: A relentless defender of “deprogramming”, he is the author of an equivocal work on the practices of Nazi doctors in the concentration camps.

The A.D.F.I. was born at Rennes (France) in 1974 on the initiative of Dr Champollion and the Psychiatrist André Badiche. It immediately declares its attachment to the pseudo-scientific theories of the American psychiatrists John Clark, Margaret Singer and Louis West, aimed at the normalisation of society which would be in peril because of cult movements or new religions.

One finds in the A.D.F.I. the ideas which animated the antisemitic and anti-Masonic movements which flourished under the Vichy government: denunciation of an occult minority which would hold the reality of financial power and which would be at the origin of society’s misfortunes. This attitude was brought to light by the C.F.S.D. (4 rue Burq 75018 PARIS). The cults have replaced the Jews and freemasonry, which has become unassailable because of its political power.

The A.D.F.I. is the transmission belt which conveys the totalitarian ideology of the marginal American psychiatrists. It advocates and uses the “deprogramming” methods of Dr Clark, which are similar to those employed by the Soviets in the heyday of communism to “treat” the “dissidents”.

The A.D.F.I. regularly attempts to impose its theses on the public authorities, on the media… It has its entrées in the Ministries. Moreover, it is a member of numerous bodies: the Commission Consultative Nationale des Droits de l’Homme (attached to the Prime Minister, France)!!!

The A.D.F.I. does not hesitate to employ the means it denounces in cults: disinformation, multiplication of repetitive messages, maximum exploitation of dramatic events (Guyana, Waco, the Solar Temple…). It thus engages in a veritable mental intoxication and exploits to the maximum the shaping of minds resulting from a secular domination by the Catholic Church.

The A.D.F.I.’s headquarters is much frequented by the clergy, by Father Trouslard who represents the Vatican there, but also by Mgr Vernette, Father Yvon Lemoine, and the bishop of Tours…). Originally, the A.D.F.I. benefited from premises graciously offered by a Catholic parish.

The A.D.F.I.’s pseudo-scientific foundation is not brought to the knowledge of its members, for the most part sincere. A discourse is disseminated to them. Thanks to an ingenious packaging, the message is rendered credible, attractive, even imbued with altruism. Behind this shop window there is in reality concealed an ideology of exclusion and of hatred.

The A.D.F.I. generally attacks groups carefully selected for their smallness and their pacifism. Its objective is to demonstrate the harmfulness and the extreme dangerousness of the new religious movements, in order to bring the strayed sheep back to the deserted fold of the Church. In fact, it forms part of the Church’s plan of re-evangelisation. It engages in a veritable Crusade.

The A.D.F.I. France is financed by subsidies from the Ministry of Youth and Sports (250,000 F - 38,000 €), the Ministry of Health (200,000 F - 30,000 €) and by numerous communes and departments. Such support is a republican heresy, other countries, for example Germany, refusing that an association of this type be financed by the state.

The A.D.F.I.’s approach is neither scientific, nor logical, nor republican, nor secular, nor altruistic, nor respectful of human rights. It is on the other hand historical, opportunistic and in conformity with a certain tradition of religious discrimination.

C. Paturel points out:

• the existence of a review: BULVAAR, which is a liaison Bulletin for the truth about anti-religious associations. Address: UNVAR, 15 rue des fermiers, 75017 Paris.

• a study by Pierre Barrucand (of the CNRS): “Les sectes antisectes” (The anti-cult cults), in which he sharply criticises the A.D.F.I.,

by the same author, (P. Barrucand), Haines d’hier et d’aujourd’hui, campagnes anti-juifs, anti-francs-maçons, anti-sectes (Hatreds of yesterday and today: anti-Jewish, anti-Freemason, anti-cult campaigns).

The review “Mouvement religieux”, B.P. 733 - 57207 SARREGUEMINES, concerning articles by Bernard Blanche on the A.D.F.I.

THE A.D.F.I. ON CAMPAIGN

Extract from “Haines d’hier et d’aujourd’hui” “Campagne antijuifs, antimaçons, …” by Pierre Barrucand

“When I see a movement like the A.D.F.I. (Association de Défense de la Famille et de l’Individu), I have the impression that one meets there above all people who are in the grip of an obsession, an intoxication. In other words, they undergo exactly the phenomenon they believe they must denounce — without the beginning of a proof — against a certain number of more or less minority religions. If there is mental manipulation, it is the doing of the A.D.F.I., whose members mentally intoxicate themselves.

…But what is absolutely astounding is to see a confidential and quasi-secret movement like the A.D.F.I. taken seriously by certain journalists, indeed certain official circles. It is the central pivot of a disinformation campaign. That is why this association is formidable and perverse. Indeed, it reproduces, almost word for word, the campaigns of the beginning of this century, those of Mgr Jouin, of Father Tourmentin and of many others. It founds its whole action, at best on nasty polemic, at worst on denunciation and disinformation. One finds there almost the accents of the newspaper “Au pilori!”, in the time of the Occupation.

One notes however a serious difference between the A.D.F.I. and the disciples of Mgr Jouin or of Father Tourmentin. This movement has managed to give itself a respectable image and has succeeded in deceiving the press and even sometimes the public authorities. This “cult” — in the most pejorative sense of the term — has thus arrived at a certain power, thus realising in part the shadowy ends it attributes to those it combats, skilfully uniting the atheist rationalism of some and the theological doctrinal intransigence of others, and above all managing to pass itself off as serious and objective.

In the case of the A.D.F.I., I had the impression of people who are truly intoxicated by their mythology and who live in a completely fantasmatic universe. I think that Mgr Jouin, even if he was a worthy priest in other respects, was certainly a character of this kind. I should like to add that the A.D.F.I. is perfect in its role of anti-cult cult: it is a kind of completely frozen structure.

Moreover, are the A.D.F.I.’s activities not in formal contradiction with the anti-racist law in force in France? It is inadmissible that there should be a “two-speed” reading of this law and that the press should agree to repeat the senseless accusations of an “anti-cult cult” composed of monomaniacs.

It is quite obvious that what I am saying could in no case justify the doings of this or that group which might engage in criminal activities. It is simply a question of the right to practise a religion and to express one’s convictions. The press and the public authorities must become aware of the true nature of the A.D.F.I.

A staff member of the A.D.F.I. went so far as to assert that “a member of a cult is not an authentic person”. In this sentence one may replace “member of a cult” by “practising Catholic, free-thinker, Protestant pastor, evangelical deacon, member of a political party…” (delete as inapplicable), without giving it any less veracity, indeed plausibility. And why not “member of the A.D.F.I.”?”

THE A.D.F.I. DISMISSED

On 12 September 1997, the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris dismissed the UNADFI’s action for defamation against Louis Pauwels, writer and editorialist, today deceased, and against the Publication Director of Le Figaro.

The association had deemed itself defamed in the article published in Le Figaro of 24 October 1996 under the title Cults: the spirit of inquisition, by the following passage:

“Since 1975, anti-cult associations have been established which globally accuse their adversaries of destructuring individuals and of threatening families. The most virulent of them is the ADFI (Association pour la Défense de la Famille et de l’Individu). It catalyses, if it does not promote, attacks against non-conforming spiritual groups. I learn that it draws inspiration from a current of American psychiatry aimed at the normalisation of society through the destruction of the new religions. […]

This war against cults reawakens the spirit of inquisition and resembles in many cases the witchcraft trials in which rumour took the place of proof.”

It is henceforth sufficient to accuse a marginal group of captation of the personality and mental manipulation for it to find itself ranked among the cults, and, by that very fact, to mobilise general opinion against it. This new witch hunt benefits from the State’s subsidies and, with rare exceptions, from the unreflecting support of the media.”

The Court held that the article expressed, “on the journalist’s part, a warning against excesses liable to undermine freedom of thought and expression, as well as an appeal for tolerance within the law. Now, in a democratic society, the manifestation of such a point of view must obviously be able to contribute, on the same footing as other positions taken, to the public debate on the cult phenomenon”.

CONCERNING THE A.D.F.I.

From “Les radis de la colère”, by Jean-Pierre Joseph

“Very discreetly, for several years, associations have been constituted in every region which have subsequently grouped together and which today form the very famous ADFI (Association de défense de la famille et de l’individu). This movement receives very substantial subsidies from various ministries and from local authorities. Through its intermediary, it is possible for any person claiming to be the victim of a cult to receive an allowance enabling her to reintegrate into society. It is therefore quite possible that the individuals who come to complain on television sets about the “manipulations” they are supposed to have undergone are those who have just collected subsidies. If such is indeed the case, we find ourselves in the unique and exceptional hypothesis of the witness who has “been to the cash desk” before testifying…

The A.D.F.I. is a reassuring body: a grouping of local associations, it puts forward its volunteer administrators, of a certain age, most often of an advanced age, who, although combating all sectarianism, warmly encourage “reintegration” through prayer within the Church (Catholic, of course). These calm and reassuring people use, without one realising it, the methods they denounce: canvassing, telephone harassment, both of the “victims” and of the “adherents”, encouragement of denunciation, lectures and propaganda speeches, etc.

A woman lawyer of the Paris bar was recently astonished at the presence on the national board of directors, to which she had been invited, of a former colonel of the French army’s secret services. For the A.D.F.I.’s rank-and-file militant, the subsidies received must indeed be justified by identifying a maximum of cults. For the one who subsidises, it seems that the aim is more subtle. Progressively, in the collective unconscious, there makes its way the idea according to which if there exists an association (of a “non-profit” purpose) which hunts down “cults”, then cults must exist and that must represent a real danger. The citizen therefore has no impression at all of being manipulated, since the rank-and-file militant does not himself have that impression. Furthermore, the rank-and-file militant believes he is doing humanitarian work and has no awareness at all of the enormous financial stakes which have led the government to promote his association.

The A.D.F.I. intervenes in an unusual manner with the public services (National Education, most often) to report that such and such a person is part of a “cult”. It intervenes with the courts by sending letters to magistrates, in the name of the defence of individuals. It even suggests, in the name of the defence of the family, that children living with their parents in a “cult” be placed directly in the care of the DASS. Thus, for several years, it has fulfilled its role: public opinion now thinks that there exist in France numerous cults, and above all that these cults are dangerous.”

FRANCE AGAINST RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

After the American State Department and the UN condemned France for its attitude towards spiritual minorities, the OSCE takes to task the “homeland of human rights” for violation of religious freedom. The OSCE — Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe — held in Vienna, on 22 March 1999, a conference on the theme of freedom of religion in Europe. Delegations from all the OSCE countries and more than 100 religious and non-governmental organisations took part. 70 delegations took the floor in this debate devoted to religious pluralism and to violations of religious freedom. On the occasion of this conference, the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights presented its report “Religious discrimination and violations of the Helsinki commitments”. This report shows that European democracies are violating their commitments relating to freedom of religion and religious tolerance. Here is what this report says of the French situation: “Since 1996, a rise in intolerance and discrimination has been observed in France with regard to the new religions”. In January 1996, the National Assembly published the Guyard report, containing a list of 172 cults or religions judged dangerous. This report engendered calumnious press articles about religious minorities, circulated rumours and false information, and constitutes an incitement to religious intolerance. In this context, a multitude of situations and forms of virtual persecution have developed. Religious minorities have been publicly marginalised and stigmatised. The French government established an “Interministerial Mission for the Fight against Cults” — the MILS — headed by Alain Vivien, the figurehead of the anti-cult movement.

While other reports abroad — Sweden and Italy — recommend dialogue with the so-called “cults”, France has chosen open confrontation. This attitude has engendered calumnious press articles, job losses, religious discrimination on the part of the French authorities and the rise of intolerance on the part of civil society towards people from all walks of life on account of their religious beliefs. CESNUR — Centre for Studies on New Religions — thus gives an account of the OSCE conference: “Although Russia, Belgium, Greece, Belarus and Uzbekistan were also criticised, it is above all France, with its policy on “cults”, which found itself in the dock”. Taking the floor on behalf of France, Denis Barthélémy, secretary-general of the Interministerial Mission for the Fight against Cults, in a very emotional speech and in a frankly hysterical tone, declared that all the attacks against France “emanated from Scientology or from the Jehovah’s Witnesses”. This comment appeared ridiculous given that the criticisms of French policy and of the interministerial mission on cults (MILS) came from several governments and independent NGOs. Monsieur Barthélémy displayed the intolerance of MILS circles which not only substitute for discussion and dialogue a paranoid “conspiracist” attitude — all those who criticise the MILS are agents of Scientology! — but propose as France’s official position on religious freedom notions hostile to religion which go back to the anticlericalism of the 19th century.

CULTS and SURVEILLANCE OF THE POPULATION

To counter cults, the minister of justice, madame Élisabeth GIGOU asks the associations specialising in the fight to dig up affairs in greater number.

By the circular to the magistrates and judges of France of 01.12.98, the Keeper of the Seals presents the action of the new interministerial mission on cults while regretting the lack of complaints. There would not be enough denunciation to allow proceedings to be initiated.

To make up for this dearth of affairs, the minister of justice has charged the judges with working in closer collaboration with the ADFI and the CCMM, supposed to collect testimonies for the prosecution. The anti-cult associations are therefore officially mandated to record complaints and denunciations by way of their numerous branches throughout France.

The ADFI did not wait for the official green light, for it has for years been circulating a list of precise criteria making it possible to know whether a person in our circle belongs to an association, a group, a society or a club of any kind. The list of symptoms defined by the ADFI covers most non-conformist and private behaviours: “Change of dress style and of diet, abundant mail and telephone calls, outings and journeys, interest in a new cause, borrowing of money, long periods of reading and meditation…”. These criteria are in a brochure available in public bodies.

It is therefore advised to warn the ADFI or the Renseignements Généraux if one of our relatives presents one of these “symptoms” or a similar trait of non-conformism. When the “diagnosis” is established, the ADFI recommends discreetly watching the friends and relations of the suspected person. Their telephone numbers and addresses must be noted and a daily journal kept of their doings. The CCMM — Centre Against Mental Manipulation — has drawn up the catalogue of practices liable to fall under an offence of cultism. It is a matter of most non-conventional therapeutic methods such as naturopathy, fasting, sophrology, meditation and the techniques issuing from the “New Age”. Doctor ABGRAL, expert to the interministerial mission on cults, adds to it homeopathy: an occult charm without any effectiveness!!!

The ADFI has also identified the areas at risk such as yoga classes, parental therapy, lectures on UFOs and esoteric subjects… but also sensitive businesses such as spiritualist bookshops, vegetarian restaurants and organic produce networks.

How is one to ensure that the complaints collected are not motivated by intolerance, prejudice or malice? This question has not been debated.

History teaches that the French have a rather pronounced civic sense when it comes to denunciation, but it is henceforth lawful to accuse someone of belonging to a cult in order to declare him unfit to receive an inheritance, to cast suspicion on an unpleasant neighbour or a colleague whose post one covets, or to take revenge for a romantic disappointment!!!

After the “suspect parcel”, here we are moving massively to the “suspect man” if he explores non-conformist paths! That is the message France is preparing to bring to the world.

So get this well into your head:

if you change your dress style, your diet;

if you receive abundant mail and telephone calls;

if you make outings and journeys;

if you have an interest in a new cause;

if you have borrowed money;

if you have long periods of reading and/or meditation;

if you are treated by or if you practise the therapies and techniques not officially recognised such as naturopathy, fasting, sophrology, meditation, the “New Age” techniques (who can specify what exactly that is), homeopathy, yoga;

if you take an interest in these subjects or in that of UFOs or in esotericism…

You are suspect!

The message “love one another” is transformed in an innovative manner into “spy on one another”. You can make yourself useful by circulating this information among your friends and to your yoga practitioner, your sophrologist, your homeopath, your naturopath, your organic shop! For your good reflection and hoping that we shall be many in saying NO!

SPIRITUAL MOVEMENTS

The ignorance of the public authorities!

They want to bring everyone under the same yoke, into the same mould. Now, creation, human value live only through a surpassing; it is always the new, the action that ought to be advocated, but we have not enough strength for it and we do not sufficiently understand the interest of spirituality. Author of more than forty works on symbolism, director of several collections, Jean-Pierre Bayard is known for his contribution to the understanding of universal and particular traditions, such as those of freemasonry and of the compagnonnage.

J.L.: You regularly publish books on symbolism and initiatory societies. What is the meaning of your research at present?

Jean-Pierre Bayard: Traditional thought animates all my writings, some forty works. I have always wanted to show, on the basis of symbolic values, the surpassing of the man who is in search of himself. I have written an abecedary of the symbolic expressions which are found in masonry, the compagnonnage, the rosicrucians, celticism and in the thoughts which are at the basis of our spirituality. A work of course always to be completed. I have also undertaken, in the same line of thought, research on the black virgins by questioning the symbolic values which may attach to them.

J. L.: You speak of “traditional thought”. How would you define it?

J.-P. B.: We have only one tradition, unique, universal, from which everything emanates, and each people, each civilisation, each religion draws from it a particular point. Tradition is conveyed by myths, symbols, the art of memory, without being confused with popular customs which are exoteric elements and no longer sacred. That is why one sees many resemblances between all our traditions and why one finds the same symbols adapted to a particular use and to local customs.

J. L.: Your latest work deals with cults and secret societies. What is the definition you give of the cult?

J.-P. B.: At present one most often gives a pejorative connotation to the word “cult” without being able to give a precise definition of it. I would say that it is an assembly of people who think the same thing, who remain in a common thought which is given to them by a teaching, a morality, by external values. All Christians have the same thought about the Church. Another group will have another conception. There exist “New Age” groups claiming a neo-spiritualism, which unfortunately seek to separate the adherents from their circle, from society. Members established for life then profit from the material advantages and provoke ruptures when they ought to advocate only fraternity among all men.

But fortunately not all groups have these structures; most, faced with the void of our industrial civilisation, seek to unite for an improvement of man and to try to work in the best conditions. If they think they have found something worthwhile, they seek to transmit it. I think for example of the Jehovah’s Witnesses who depend on Christianity. They apply the scriptures to the letter and they transmit their message so that we may reach heaven, be among the elect. There is therefore a respect to be had before their beliefs which one is not obliged to share.

J. L.: What would you recommend to someone who wants to take part in one of these groups?

J.-P. B.: One must naturally be careful before committing oneself. But the person must set aside what may be said to her; she must judge for herself. To enter a group is to try to bring one’s spiritual aspiration into conformity with what is going to be given to one. There is therefore an inner study to be made to test the sincerity, the loyalty. One must also try to see what the group one wants to enter has as an external form and what it can transmit. The one who leads must be disinterested, there ought to be no question of money, no enrichment or cult of personality, but only a positive moral repercussion on the group as a whole.

J. L.: What do you think of the way the question of cults is currently approached?

J.-P. B.: Governments want to shelter themselves from the criticisms of public opinion, itself manoeuvred by slogans. They do not consider the groups on the spiritual plane and do not study the groups in the depth of their behaviour. The historian of religions must make studies and comparisons locally and on a world scale, sometimes over a whole lifetime, to penetrate a new spirit. Those who might know and who have studied these different movements are not sufficiently consulted. I think of those professors who are paid by these same governments, in the face of whom politicians will adopt, without much discernment, entirely opposed positions. For example, professors have made sociological studies on Nouvelle Acropole which show that its former members, those who left it, do not consider it a cult, but on the contrary a group which opens onto human fraternity. Yet it is presented in an entirely opposed way. There are many worthwhile works which are not taken into account.

J. L.: What seems to you to be the legitimacy of parliamentary commissions to deal with the question?

J.-P. B.: In France I made myself known to a parliamentary group which worked on this theme. I was answered, with thanks, that the members could get in touch with the people I was suggesting they contact, since they worked only among themselves, in secret. That is regrettable. These parliamentarians most certainly have solid human and political qualities, but they are not specialised in a complex field, difficult to understand. They have not the time for it and it is not their function. It is beyond their competence. They rely on the reports of the Renseignements Généraux, which do not have this mission and whose investigative values are different: the latter cannot be held responsible for judgements of interpretation. To take another example, I think of the Cultural Office of Cluny which was presented as a cult. This group, which is part of the Catholic Church, was not heard by the parliamentary commission, any more than was the Catholic Church. Among many other cases which deserve a more attentive study one may also cite the Golden Rosycross of Haarlem, connected also with the Cathar spirit. Everything which does not correspond to the dominant ideas is placed on the index, whereas we ought to have freedom of thought.

J. L.: What do you think of the parliamentary report in France?

J.-P. B.: The deputies’ report can bring considerable harm to certain groups judged, without real proof, as dangerous. In designating them one creates a movement against them when one was unaware of them and did not speak of them before the report… I myself in my book was embarrassed because I did not know whether I should cite them or give their addresses. Through an organised vindictiveness one arrives at disasters: for example, Nouvelle Acropole was attacked in its offices. Other groups placed on the index undergo the same fate, lose their reputation. All this because no effort is made to understand their real motivation, when our laws ought to suffice to charge them or not.

J. L.: What for you are the consequences of this situation?

J.-P. B.: When one wants to curb a movement without trying to understand its inner value, without being able to analyse it, there is an arbitrary measure and an infringement of individual freedom. Spiritual value and artistic value demand that there be the widest understanding. Artists, who are creators, are ahead of their time and are always placed on the index. Why should one not judge Picasso outside our society if one analyses him in terms of what was done artistically before? Likewise one must be able to judge serenely these “cults” which depart from a habitual mode of reflection.

J.-P. B.: One must hope that this division due to the cult phenomenon will be only of short duration and will have been only a “fashion”, that our civilisation which wishes to defend freedom and human rights will know how to rise above human quarrels in order to take an interest in and merge into the sacred, the true richness of evolved man.

PRACTICAL SHEET FOR DENUNCIATION AND SURVEILLANCE (according to the ADFI)

Warnings

Above all do not feel obliged to take account of the following instructions!

Measures to be taken

-Note the names, addresses and telephone numbers of the people connected with the activities of the suspected person.

-Keep a journal of the events concerning the relations of the suspected person.

-Observe the reading matter, the vocabulary, the timetables, the names and nicknames of those who constitute the environment of the suspected person.

Places to be watched and suspect activities.

Esoteric bookshops, yoga classes, health-food shops, specialised lectures and fairs, homeopaths and alternative medicine, Jungian psychoanalysts, sexologists, personal development, prayer groups, accompaniment of the dying, ufology, organic agriculture, religious communities, private schools, artistic expression classes, oriental spiritualities, the press, independent sociologists and scientists…

If you fall into one or another of these categories, it is urgent that you go and denounce yourself, before the “anti-cult research brigade” of the national gendarmerie summons you to ask you whether “you burn incense or light candles to meditate”. (Interrogation of a young girl denounced by her mother).

Stop the right to persecute

Appendix to the parliamentary report on cults dated 10 January 1996

Some echoes concerning the A.D.F.I.

LIBÉRATION - 5 OCTOBER 1999

The U.N.A.F.D.I. gives up prosecuting «Libération»

The principal anti-cult association, the U.N.A.D.F.I., withdrew on Friday from the case it had brought against Libération, three days before the hearing, scheduled for yesterday in Paris. The Union Nationale des Associations de Défense de la Famille et de l’individu had lodged a complaint with an application to join as a civil party after the publication, on 30 March 1998, of an article «the plot that made Bernard Lempert a guru». Libération showed that this psychotherapist had been classified by mistake in the list of cults after the strange alliance of the U.N.A.D.F.I.’s Breton representatives and an association which brought together child abusers and whose president was a nostalgic of the Waffen SS.

SUD-OUEST - 16 OCTOBER 1999

An anti-cult association convicted

At the request of a mother in the middle of a divorce, the regional president of the A.D.F.I. produced an attestation stipulating that the ex-husband took part in a group with cult tendencies. The two women were convicted.

Thorny and dramatic. One may thus describe the affair which occupied the correctional court of Saintes for a good part of Thursday afternoon. Thorny because the Catholic Church was directly implicated in the proceedings. Dramatic because it sets against each other a couple in the middle of a family conflict.

M. and Mme D. have a daughter, L., today aged 18. Afflicted with a serious nervous disease, she has been undergoing a heavy treatment from her earliest years. The illness upsets the couple’s existence and, without there being any causal link, M. and Mme D. end up divorcing. A separation which does not take place in the best conditions. M. and Mme D. have already appeared before the court: Mme D. had been acquitted (she was then accused of flouting the father’s right of custody).

For their daughter, the couple are ready for anything. M. D. is very devout. He takes part in a prayer group under the direction of the chaplain of the Little Sisters of the Poor. He even consults a healer «because, when traditional medicine fails, one always turns to other forms of medicine».

What of this healer? «I attended the sessions three times, the mother asserts. I was placed at the back of the room and I was accused of being the demon. I was afraid and, on the advice of highly qualified people, I contacted the A.D.F.I.».

The Association de Défense des Familles et des Individus is well known. It has the ear of the parliamentary Commission fighting against the power of cults. Its regional president, Marie-Noëlle Dumas de la Roque Bernard, listens attentively to Mme D.’s remarks. Taking her at her word, she draws up an attestation stipulating that «the group in which M. D. takes part has dérives sectaires and involves a grave danger for L.’s health». It must be said that the A.D.F.I.’s president bases herself on two documents drawn up by a Parisian professor, M. Dulac (who oddly was not called to the bar). The latter observes a deterioration in L.’s state of health when she goes for the weekend to her father’s. The second document specifies that L. declared to the professor that her father prevented her from taking medicines. An assertion fiercely rejected by Maître Moulineau, M. D.’s lawyer: «The child, who has a mental age of only 5, was manipulated by her mother. It is a scandalous attitude. Never did M. D. prevent his daughter from taking medicines. On the contrary. How can one say that of a man who has many times resuscitated his child when she had fallen into a coma».

Me Moulineau then cites article 9 of the European convention on human rights on freedom of worship. «As far as I know, the Catholic church does not figure among the cults listed by the parliamentary Commission. As for the healer, a man whose fees amount to ten francs to buy candles, never did he substitute himself for medicine or prevent the taking of medicines. The only help he brings is prayer. Must one therefore close Lourdes?». Then, Me Moulineau raises the case of the A.D.F.I.’s president. «You were manipulated and you fell into the trap. Your attitude is dangerous». Speaking of the A.D.F.I.’s lack of investigation, the lawyer then mentions a few details: «There is talk of invocation by salt because my client has a 21-kilo sack of salt in his garage. Now, it happens that my client works in the technical services of a town. And salt like that, there are tonnes of it in the warehouses. This salt is used only in case of black ice». For the public prosecutor, Melle Spielmann would side with the civil party. «I am disappointed and angry, for by accusing without proof, you imperil your association’s credibility. It is not because a candle burns permanently at M. D.’s that he takes part in a cult movement». PROOFS Intervening for Mme Dumas de la Roque Bernard, Me Cambar-Vidot would go through the attestation drawn up by her client. «She never said that M. D. was part of a cult but that he took part in a group having dérives sectaires. That is the case. For this group implements means, in this instance prayers, to substitute itself for medicine. I therefore plead acquittal». Likewise for Me Geoffroy, who would rely on professor Dulac’s declarations in intervening on behalf of Mme D.: «Never was this attestation used in the framework of the divorce». In its deliberation, the court would not follow the defence. On the contrary, it would order the two women to pay 5,000 francs, of which 2,000 suspended, to M. D. They would also have to pay him jointly and severally a sum of 1,000 francs and would settle the case costs. After reading out her deliberation, the president of the court, Mme Cochaud-Doutreuwe, would firmly recommend to the A.D.F.I.’s president that she act with less levity and more proof.

A very powerful lobby: the anti-cult lobby. Extract from «Lettre ouverte à la “secte des adversaires des sectes”» (Open letter to the “cult of the adversaries of cults”), by Anne Morelli. One may certainly understand that family tragedies such as the one Roger Ikor lived through with the death of his son should have engendered anti-cult associations (in his case, the C.C.M.M., Centre de documentation, d’éducation et d’action Contre les Manipulations Mentales, also called “Centre Roger Ikor”). But it seems to me suspect that, throughout the world, thousands of people linked together by an international network with multiple ramifications should live for and by the hunt for cults. Their methods are everywhere similar: to cast discredit on all religious groups outside the great classical religions and to sow disinformation on this subject. The “cult of the adversaries of cults” therefore particularly grips the media and the political world, but neither does it neglect the approach to the world of university research. In France, two associations share this “market”, corresponding to the two fundamental options of French society: one is secular (C.C.M.M.) and the other is Catholic (U.N.A.D.F.I.). In Belgium, this international lobby is likewise represented by associations linked to our traditional «pillars». The C.I.G.S. (Contacts et informations sur les groupes sectaires) is of Catholic obedience and has spread into the provinces «Associations for support to families victims of cults». On the other side, the A.D.I.F. (Association de Défense des Intérêts des Familles) is linked to the secular association founded in France by Roger Ikor, to a Luxembourg counterpart (C.D.F.I. Luxembourg) and to the A.D.C.A.M. (Association de Défense Contre les Agressions Mentales). A European Federation of this anti-cult business is moreover likewise established in Brussels (FECRIS-Belgium). On the Dutch-speaking side, the V.V.P.G. (Verdediging Van Persoon en Gezin) is a semi-official body, in contact with the A.D.I.F. The latter is seeking, taking advantage of the recent parliamentary commission, official recognition, the right to bring proceedings in the name of real or supposed victims and — if possible! — subsidies in consequence. It has already succeeded in establishing privileged relations with numerous journalists and has infiltrated Brussels political circles. Thus the leaflet «Sectes à visage découvert», published by the Brussels alderwoman for social affairs, Carine Vyghen, with the inviting subtitle «A prison without bars» and the photo of a menacing bird of prey, advises, no more no less, that in case of a «problem» one should apply to the A.D.I.F.! The additional fatal step would obviously be to recognise this lobby and to support it with taxpayers’ money! Another practice of disinformation carried on by the «cult of the adversaries of cults» is to inflate the figures of adherents to these minority religions. These figures, after twelve years of investigations in these circles, I am more than ever incapable of specifying. In 1981, I had — a sin of youth — put forward the figure of 80,000, but as our work progressed, my certainties vanished. The figure, for its part, has often been taken up. In each religious group, there is a tendency to inflate them (it gives weight to the community and to its beliefs), but curiously, the adversaries of cults also inflate them, for the pertinence of their «struggle» (and therefore the resources they demand) is obviously linked to the potential danger a group represents. The media too, so that their subject should appear important, take part in this overvaluation of the phenomenon. Now, if certain religious communities are numerous, others have 10, 5 or even 3 members. To reveal this minute number would be very devaluing for the “cult of the adversaries of cults”. The anti-cult lobbies also insist on an aspect of «captation of our fine youth», which scarcely corresponds to the reality we were able to verify during our field investigations. Certainly, there are young people in these groups, but not in an «abnormal» manner, and certain groups are rather formed of young couples, of families, of old sixty-eighters or even of people of the third age who form an excellent «target» when they have time, devotion and — which does not spoil things — a little money to share. But the old recipe has proved itself: the new religions or philosophies must always be presented as the captors of youth. Already in Antiquity, at the time of the affirmation of Christianity, pagan authors reproached it essentially with turning youth away from the traditional religion… When a journalist does not submit to the classic anti-cult schema, he is immediately accused of complaisance. Thus, the authors of two Arte documentaries devoted to the Mormons are sharply criticised by «Le Monde». They are said to have presented this religion with too much sympathy… Belgian listeners, accustomed to hearing religious news commented on by the gentle voice of Father Armand Pirard, think they are dreaming when they hear these reproaches. They can hardly imagine that on the occasion, for example, of the Easter blessing or of a papal journey, one of his mawkish commentaries should begin investigating the Vatican’s finances and its dubious operations, or the catastrophic effects of its pro-Croatian diplomacy. But obviously, there are monopolies not to be treated without «complaisance» and rivals whom it is good to crush. One then understands why the «cults» rarely see with pleasure the arrival within their walls of journalists, charged from the outset with bringing back juicy, sensational and above all disturbing «information»…

YOUR COMMENTS (announcement by the authors of the text)

If you wish to share your comments with us or to give your own opinion on the A.D.F.I., you can write to us (on the site indicated at the top of the page). Specify whether you agree that your comments be published in our page Testimonies and comments». Continue to part 2 of the ADFI dossier Read also: An impossible mediation? The tendentious psychology of the ADFIs Read also the dossiers of the association for aid to victims of the ADFI Read a testimony by Janine Tavernier, former president of the UNADFI Read “The UNADFI and the merchants of hope” Read also “Reflection on the anti-cult lobbies”