96 International Journal of Coercion, Abuse, and Manipulation ■ Vol. 2, 2021
March 2013), Scientology Cult: “A Time Comes When Silence is
Betrayal” [online at www.scientology-cult.com/debbie
cooksemail.html]). The case is Church of Scientology International
v Debbie Cook. See also “Scientology Defectors Describe
Violence, Humiliation in ‘The Hole’” (12 January 2013) (online at
www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/scientology-
defectorsdescribe- violence-humiliation-in-the-hole/1270047).
Though some of the allegations are quite recent, it is unclear
whether the RPF is still operational see, e.g., Tony Ortega, “Is
Scientology’s Notorious Prison Detail—the ‘RPF—a Thing of the
Past?” The Underground Bunker (online at tonyortega.org/
2017/10/04/is-scientologys-notorious-prison-detailthe-rpf-a-thing-
of-the-past/).
xxxviii L. Ron Hubbard, “Rehabilitation Unit,” Flag Order 1848, 3
March 1969. A flag order is a binding document written by L. Ron
Hubbard, similar to a policy letter.
xxxix Ibid.
xl Art 1378 CCQ. Contracts of adhesion are drawn up by one party,
while contracts of mutual agreement are drawn up jointly.
Contracts of subsequent performance are performed over time,
while contracts of instantaneous performance are performed at a
single time. Consumer contracts may be of various types and are
subject to specific rules which protect consumers. The other
distinctions are unique to or different in civil law jurisdictions.
xli [1923] 2 KB 261 [1925] AC 445.
xlii Phil Lord, “Law and Green Eggs and Ham” (2020) 6:2
Anamorphosis: International Journal of Law and Literature
(forthcoming) (online at SSRN ssrn.com/abstract=3242951).
Although references are omitted in the citation, the paper discusses
at length the nature of formal and informal rules. It finds that a law
is generally defined as a (1) positive and (2) authoritative
statement—of conduct—(3) designed to guide behaviour. This
definition is in line with Kelsen, who thought that
Norms are imputed by other norms. The requirement that a
person who commits theft ought to be punished is a norm. It
does not cease being a norm because the thief is not
punished. (He may not get caught.) The norm that the thief
ought to be punished exists because another norm says so.
Not all norms are laws. There are also moral norms. Legal
norms are coercive moral norms are not (Suri Ratnapala,
Jurisprudence [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2009], at 58.)
The definition is also generally consistent with the Austinian/
Benthamian view of law, see Brian Bix, “John Austin” (24
February 2001), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (online at
plato.stanford.edu/entries/austin-john/#3), and Jeremy Bentham, Of
Laws in General: Principles of Legislation, edited by HLA Hart
(London: Athlone Press, 1970), at 1. HLA Hart, while critical of
the Austinian view, agreed with these core elements, see generally
The Concept of Law, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2012), at 91–95. Even nonpositivist writers would likely agree
with these elements, as the distinction between legal positivism
and other theories hinges mainly on the separation of law and
morality (see, e.g., Alan D Cullison, Morality and the Foundations
of Legal Positivism (1985) 20:1 Val U L Rev 61.) In the paper
cited above, I argue that informal rules of behaviour meet the same
characteristics of law as more formal rules of behaviour.
xliii See Kent, Brainwashing in Scientology’s Rehabilitation Project
Force (RPF), supra note xxxii.
xliv Although the number of Sea Organisation members is a closely
guarded figure and although Scientology may not keep up to date
records of Sea Organisation membership (that is, records excluding
members who have defected or otherwise left the organisation),
there appear to be some 5,000 Sea Organisation members. “What
Is the Sea Organization?” supra note xxvi used to list a number in
that vicinity, but the mention was removed from the page several
years ago. J. Gordon Melton, a religious scholar, suggests that
there were some 7,000 members circa 2000 (“A Contemporary
Ordered Religious Community” in Derrick Davis &Barry
Hankins, eds., New Religious Movements and Religious Liberty in
America [Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2003], 43.)
xlv The word contract has a definition within the mainstream legal
system. There are several situations in which religions use the
word contract to refer to a document that is invalid within the
majority of mainstream legal systems. In these situations, using the
word is arguably inappropriate. It could be argued that the meaning
of the word is not “owned” by any particular legal system. This
point is, however, of no relevance because Scientology does not
have its own definition of the word contract, and the meaning of
the word is generally consistent across legal systems.
xlvi Religious organisations are generally nonprofit organisations.
As nonprofit organisations, they can, like corporations, have
employees (for more on this point, see note l, following).
xlvii There are many examples of such contracts. One example is the
religious marriage contract. These contracts can be valid within the
mainstream legal system if they comply with the legal
requirements regarding the formation and content of contracts see,
e.g., Ghada G. Qaisi, “Religious Marriage Contracts: Judicial
Enforcement of Mahr Agreements in American Courts” (2001) 15
JL &Religion 67.
xlviii I use the phrase “mainstream legal system” to refer to the state
legal system in jurisdictions where Scientology is present. For
other authors using the phrase, see Marylin Holly, “Navajo
Criminal Justice: A Jungian Perspective” in Jeffrey Ian Ross &
Larry Allen Gould, eds., Native Americans and the Criminal
Estevez, Marina Rachofsky &Carla Rodríguez, “Is Perception
of the Mainstream Legal System Homogeneous Across Ethnic
Groups?” (2013) 5:2 European Journal of Psychology Applied to
Legal Context 155.
xlix See Many, supra note xii. In Quebec, employment contracts are
regulated by the Act respecting labour standards, CQLR, c N-1.1. I
use the example of Quebec to demonstrate some of the reasons
why the billion-year contract is not a valid employment contract.
l See, e.g., Act respecting labour standards, ibid, s 40. Although
Scientology provides its Sea Organisation members with room and
board, such benefits are of no relevance to the computation of the
minimum wage see, e.g., Ibid, s 41. This argument is only to show
that the billion-year contract cannot be an employment contract.
Since religions are almost always nonprofit organisations, they can
be the beneficiaries of hours volunteered by their members. That
being said, although this point is beyond the scope of this paper, it
is worth mentioning that the status of Scientology workers in
Quebec is arguably illegal. One is either a volunteer or an
employee (subject to minimum-wage regulations). There cannot be
paid volunteers. After the writing of this article but before its
publication, Quebec’s labour regulator claimed almost one million
(Canadian) dollars from Scientology, arguing the same. The case
was confidentially settled see Gaétan Pouliot, “L’Église de
scientologie a-t-elle payé ses employés?” (6 May 2019), Radio-
Canada (online at ici.radiocanada.ca/nouvelle/1167741/
eglisescientologie-cnesst-entente-amiable-quebec).
Since the billion-year contract is invalid within the mainstream
legal system, there are no legal protections applicable to children
signing the contract. The act of signing the contract has no legal
significance. More generally, children are free to join religions and
religious legal orders, as long as they comply with applicable laws.
These laws tend to regulate the number of years of mandatory
schooling and the nature of work which can be performed by
children. As mentioned in note xxx, many members have joined
March 2013), Scientology Cult: “A Time Comes When Silence is
Betrayal” [online at www.scientology-cult.com/debbie
cooksemail.html]). The case is Church of Scientology International
v Debbie Cook. See also “Scientology Defectors Describe
Violence, Humiliation in ‘The Hole’” (12 January 2013) (online at
www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/scientology-
defectorsdescribe- violence-humiliation-in-the-hole/1270047).
Though some of the allegations are quite recent, it is unclear
whether the RPF is still operational see, e.g., Tony Ortega, “Is
Scientology’s Notorious Prison Detail—the ‘RPF—a Thing of the
Past?” The Underground Bunker (online at tonyortega.org/
2017/10/04/is-scientologys-notorious-prison-detailthe-rpf-a-thing-
of-the-past/).
xxxviii L. Ron Hubbard, “Rehabilitation Unit,” Flag Order 1848, 3
March 1969. A flag order is a binding document written by L. Ron
Hubbard, similar to a policy letter.
xxxix Ibid.
xl Art 1378 CCQ. Contracts of adhesion are drawn up by one party,
while contracts of mutual agreement are drawn up jointly.
Contracts of subsequent performance are performed over time,
while contracts of instantaneous performance are performed at a
single time. Consumer contracts may be of various types and are
subject to specific rules which protect consumers. The other
distinctions are unique to or different in civil law jurisdictions.
xli [1923] 2 KB 261 [1925] AC 445.
xlii Phil Lord, “Law and Green Eggs and Ham” (2020) 6:2
Anamorphosis: International Journal of Law and Literature
(forthcoming) (online at SSRN ssrn.com/abstract=3242951).
Although references are omitted in the citation, the paper discusses
at length the nature of formal and informal rules. It finds that a law
is generally defined as a (1) positive and (2) authoritative
statement—of conduct—(3) designed to guide behaviour. This
definition is in line with Kelsen, who thought that
Norms are imputed by other norms. The requirement that a
person who commits theft ought to be punished is a norm. It
does not cease being a norm because the thief is not
punished. (He may not get caught.) The norm that the thief
ought to be punished exists because another norm says so.
Not all norms are laws. There are also moral norms. Legal
norms are coercive moral norms are not (Suri Ratnapala,
Jurisprudence [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2009], at 58.)
The definition is also generally consistent with the Austinian/
Benthamian view of law, see Brian Bix, “John Austin” (24
February 2001), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (online at
plato.stanford.edu/entries/austin-john/#3), and Jeremy Bentham, Of
Laws in General: Principles of Legislation, edited by HLA Hart
(London: Athlone Press, 1970), at 1. HLA Hart, while critical of
the Austinian view, agreed with these core elements, see generally
The Concept of Law, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2012), at 91–95. Even nonpositivist writers would likely agree
with these elements, as the distinction between legal positivism
and other theories hinges mainly on the separation of law and
morality (see, e.g., Alan D Cullison, Morality and the Foundations
of Legal Positivism (1985) 20:1 Val U L Rev 61.) In the paper
cited above, I argue that informal rules of behaviour meet the same
characteristics of law as more formal rules of behaviour.
xliii See Kent, Brainwashing in Scientology’s Rehabilitation Project
Force (RPF), supra note xxxii.
xliv Although the number of Sea Organisation members is a closely
guarded figure and although Scientology may not keep up to date
records of Sea Organisation membership (that is, records excluding
members who have defected or otherwise left the organisation),
there appear to be some 5,000 Sea Organisation members. “What
Is the Sea Organization?” supra note xxvi used to list a number in
that vicinity, but the mention was removed from the page several
years ago. J. Gordon Melton, a religious scholar, suggests that
there were some 7,000 members circa 2000 (“A Contemporary
Ordered Religious Community” in Derrick Davis &Barry
Hankins, eds., New Religious Movements and Religious Liberty in
America [Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2003], 43.)
xlv The word contract has a definition within the mainstream legal
system. There are several situations in which religions use the
word contract to refer to a document that is invalid within the
majority of mainstream legal systems. In these situations, using the
word is arguably inappropriate. It could be argued that the meaning
of the word is not “owned” by any particular legal system. This
point is, however, of no relevance because Scientology does not
have its own definition of the word contract, and the meaning of
the word is generally consistent across legal systems.
xlvi Religious organisations are generally nonprofit organisations.
As nonprofit organisations, they can, like corporations, have
employees (for more on this point, see note l, following).
xlvii There are many examples of such contracts. One example is the
religious marriage contract. These contracts can be valid within the
mainstream legal system if they comply with the legal
requirements regarding the formation and content of contracts see,
e.g., Ghada G. Qaisi, “Religious Marriage Contracts: Judicial
Enforcement of Mahr Agreements in American Courts” (2001) 15
JL &Religion 67.
xlviii I use the phrase “mainstream legal system” to refer to the state
legal system in jurisdictions where Scientology is present. For
other authors using the phrase, see Marylin Holly, “Navajo
Criminal Justice: A Jungian Perspective” in Jeffrey Ian Ross &
Larry Allen Gould, eds., Native Americans and the Criminal
Estevez, Marina Rachofsky &Carla Rodríguez, “Is Perception
of the Mainstream Legal System Homogeneous Across Ethnic
Groups?” (2013) 5:2 European Journal of Psychology Applied to
Legal Context 155.
xlix See Many, supra note xii. In Quebec, employment contracts are
regulated by the Act respecting labour standards, CQLR, c N-1.1. I
use the example of Quebec to demonstrate some of the reasons
why the billion-year contract is not a valid employment contract.
l See, e.g., Act respecting labour standards, ibid, s 40. Although
Scientology provides its Sea Organisation members with room and
board, such benefits are of no relevance to the computation of the
minimum wage see, e.g., Ibid, s 41. This argument is only to show
that the billion-year contract cannot be an employment contract.
Since religions are almost always nonprofit organisations, they can
be the beneficiaries of hours volunteered by their members. That
being said, although this point is beyond the scope of this paper, it
is worth mentioning that the status of Scientology workers in
Quebec is arguably illegal. One is either a volunteer or an
employee (subject to minimum-wage regulations). There cannot be
paid volunteers. After the writing of this article but before its
publication, Quebec’s labour regulator claimed almost one million
(Canadian) dollars from Scientology, arguing the same. The case
was confidentially settled see Gaétan Pouliot, “L’Église de
scientologie a-t-elle payé ses employés?” (6 May 2019), Radio-
Canada (online at ici.radiocanada.ca/nouvelle/1167741/
eglisescientologie-cnesst-entente-amiable-quebec).
Since the billion-year contract is invalid within the mainstream
legal system, there are no legal protections applicable to children
signing the contract. The act of signing the contract has no legal
significance. More generally, children are free to join religions and
religious legal orders, as long as they comply with applicable laws.
These laws tend to regulate the number of years of mandatory
schooling and the nature of work which can be performed by
children. As mentioned in note xxx, many members have joined
