Religious Exemption Proposal

I can remember one such school that claimed accreditation by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself!

Found it: https://www.degreeinfo.com/index.php?threads/all-nations-apostolic-seminary-accredited-by-jesus-christ.42891/

 

Skipped US Dept of Ed and CHEA, Liverpool Sticker, and went right to the top. Well played sir

 

Off topic: I saw a great movie recently called Walter about a man who believed he was the son of God (not Jesus) and that he had to decide if the people he met were going to heaven or hell, which he did with serious expediency.

 

"He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy!"

Oops. Wrong one....

 

I get it! You left out: skipped Canterbury Endorsement and Uni. of Wales validation, too. Those were post- Liverpool IIRC. Memories...

 

There are few risks when it comes to religious degrees. The main I see is the practice of psychology. A person that wants to practice psychology, gets a PhD in Christian Psychology, becomes a certified minister and then offers therapy. This would be OK if the PhD would train the individual but many of these degrees can be just purchased and many come with the ordination certification. In Canada, there is no regulation for the use of a PhD designation. In Ontario, the new psychotherapist regulation forbids unlicensed people to give therapy but the exemption is clergy. In Canada, it is not so easy to become clergy as religious institutions are heavily monitored by the government, also clergy can only provide spiritual counselling but not traditional therapy under the new legislation.

Other than this, unaccredited degrees cannot be used to work for the government and it is not very likely that would make a difference for a regular business job. Regulated professions will normally forbid the use of unaccredited PhDs.

Many of the religious degrees are just used to boost egos. If I am Clergy, and all I can afford is an unaccredited degree but it provides me with some training, I think is valid as long as these degrees use a religious denomination such as DD, DMin, DTh, etc.

 

I agree this is concerning from a consumer protection point of view. Ontario goes overboard on its restriction of the use of "Dr.". As I recall, it is the most restrictive and out of step with historic usage.

There are certification mills (as Steve L.) categorized them that will certify people as things like Licensed Clinical Pastoral Counselors (confusing since it is close to LPC). Licenses are generally issued by government entities. Top that off with a diploma mill PhD in Christian Psychology and they are in business providing therapy. I have even see secular people doing various woo therapies and they note in their bios (footnote) they are ordained....in other words don't come after me for practicing Psychology without a license.

The same person who says people don't need degrees and degrees from accredited seminaries (don't need mans' standards) will earn a cheap and easy substandard degree (from a mill) in order to gain respect from others. So, I would say they are shoveling the bull stuff fast and deep. Which is weird because Christianity has a long history of scholasticism and founded many academically incredible institutions of high learning. But along came certain segments of the American religious population and you wouldn't know any of that. Standards dropped and fakery abounded from mills, to faith healers and tele evangelists.

 

The Dr title is regulated but not the PhD. I can use in my business card PhD (C.Psychology) followed by P.Counsellor. I would need to be ordained in Ontario which is not easy as many religious organizations do not allow abuse of fake titles or pseudo psychology practices. However, some religions have their own psychology. Scientology has its own psychology for example, however, you would need to first sign up as a member of the church before you can be given Scientology therapy so if you decide that the therapist crewed you up, you cannot sue as you signed up as a member.

As a consumer, you should always ask if your therapist is insured, if the insurance company has insured the person to practice that therapy is because the insurance company verified credentials.

When it comes to mental health, there are many therapies that have value that are not regulated such as mindfulness, relaxation therapy, etc. So it is OK if the person is not licensed but it should have the training to give the therapy and be insured. The use of a fake PhD just shows lack of integrity so this professional might not be the best one to see.

 

Agreed. And a fake credential of any other type is never a good thing to see, either.

 

I rather see a therapist that just states "Certified in Mindfulness by X University" with no degree than a PhD from the Christian University of Mickey Mouse Mill in California. There are few videos on youtube of people practicing in Ontario with fake PhDs, one below:

 

Interesting. I went to the Gatesville U. page, as I hadn't heard the name. One of the "accreditors" is a known Axact fake entity (Pakistan) so I concluded that Gatesville is part of the 300-odd schools in the Axact stable. "We are phenominal, they say." I guess they mean "phenomenal." Axact - under their new name - cranks out $2 million of fake degrees every month - yep, that's phenomenal, to me. The Pakistani Government and its courts are unwilling or unable to stop them. Not really surprising.

Yes, confirmed Axact. Canadian article on Gatesville here: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/fake-degrees-manitoba-1.4284962
Excerpt: "Marketplace was able to purchase three PhDs, two from Almeda University and one from Gatesville University, along with transcripts with a 3.92 GPA and record of attendance papers for $1,550 US."

 

I always check with the professional that is insured and check with the insurance company. If I hire a fake lawyer with a PhD in Metaphysical law, I can always sue the person and insurance would pay. If the person is claiming to be Clergy with a Rev. PhD title, I would check with the government before I hire him to perform weddings or other ceremonies.
There are some cases where government employees get their PhDs in Metaphysical or Christian organizational leadership or similar to pass for real management degrees to get pay increases, I think the media checks and spots those with high salaries and fake credentials.
Religious degree are abused but it is not the problem of religions but people that get them with the wrong intentions.

 

Yes - as you correctly point out, if you take all kinds of precautions, you're less likely to get stung - or damaged. It's disturbing to me, if insurance companies are actually writing liability policies for people with fraudulent credentials. If they do that, they're not abiding by their industry's risk policies. Not only is that going to let people be bilked and hurt, they're going to be paying out more claims - and that raises the cost to legitimate practitioners - and ultimately, their clients. The insurance companies owe it to themselves to check credentials of those they insure.

As to the above quote, I'd add a cautionary note. There are some religious schools established by the most unholy -the WORST people you could imagine - who are solely interested in obtaining large sums of money through the fraudulent school. I've seen the odd person with a criminal background - one or two had pasts of the most unsavoury kind. Fortunately these are few in number. I'd rather there were none.

I have seen examples of churches being established by such people for the same reason. "School" and "Church" are used to legitimize each other, make money and protect assets that are really proceeds of crime, but conveniently labelled as "Church Property" from taxation or legal seizure. Often in these cases, church and school ownership are interlocked. In these cases, the abuse of degrees IS the problem of the church - but those who run it don't see it as a problem. Especially when school and church are run by the same people.

Not all religious schools are holy places. Neither are all churches.

 

You make a good argument for denominationalism wherein the membership of a church in say, the Anglican Church of North America or the Southern Baptist Convention, precludes the nefarious 'let's start a church and a university on the interwebs.'

 

People abuse, the whole idea of religious freedom is to accommodate all beliefs and credos and avoid persecution. Most denominations do not grant degrees but just certificates. The idea is to train to be clergy not to sell yourself as a psychologists, lawyer, etc. Many of the real institutions for training are free or little money.

 

Yes - that's the way it happens, where we are. It also happens in the 22 States where there's a religious exemption allowing academic degrees. And the misuse I talked about mainly happens there, - in those States where it's possible for unaccredited schools to confer degrees by religious exemption. That's where the villains operate. Without the degree provision they'd be gone. And the legit churches could offer all the training, certificates and diplomas they want - but not degrees.

That's my suggestion - but I don't live there, so nobody has to listen to me. That's OK.

 

One of the biggest issues with the "unlicensed psychologist" concern is that, much to the chagrin of some lobbyists, talking to people is not therapy. I don't mean to be glib here. And it cuts both ways. There are many therapists who are not providing any actual therapy. They're serving as sounding boards for people. Cathartic as it may be, just having someone spill their guts to you for $100/hr is not therapy. Therapy implies that there is some treatment modality at play and, for insurance purposes, that there is an underlying mental health condition being treated (obviously, person centered therapists would dispute this but, at the end of the day, you have to code something for billing purposes).

There are people who go to their priest/pastor for counseling on all manner of difficult life decisions. And if the nature of that counseling is "I just want someone to listen" or "I want someone to guide me, informed by my religious tradition" then, hey, that's fine. That isn't therapy no matter what degree they claim to have.

That said, it's quite possible to do damage in that realm even with legitimate credentials. There are people who have accredited degrees and licenses and everything and offer conversion therapy. And there are people who, even within the scope of practice that is solidly "pastoral counseling" or the even less regulated "pastoral care" will tell you things like how you're going to hell if you're LGBT which, as has been established, can do quite a bit of psychological harm. These are things that, I think, are a more pressing concern on the psychological damage front. And they happen every day. If unaccredited doctorates play into it they are, at best, a minimal factor.

Of course, a lot of this is at least partially avoidable if they stick to distinctly religious degrees. A PhD should, in my opinion, never be in play for an unaccredited/religious exempt institution.

 

​

In general I agree, but you have the example of Bob Jones University that apparently did it competently (prior to accreditation).

 

Just to clarify, Christian evangelism which includes the warning of impending judgment is not "conversion therapy." I'm not suggesting you equated the two, but routinely these are conflated. Conversion therapy is an entirely distinct modality from say, biblical counseling or even integrationism. Moreover, I very much doubt ordained churchmen who believe in the Christian faith would accept the notion that warning anyone of judgment "can do quite a bit of psychological harm," at least unwarranted "harm." Were that the case, I suppose that when a physician notifies a patient of terminal cancer that can do some psychological harm too. Although, we accept that as a ramification of knowing the truth. Then again, we live in a day when disagreement is construed as abuse and even racism or bigotry. Given that Christianity has existed long before western society's general acceptance of homosexuality, perhaps some consideration and respect is in order for those who haven't felt compelled by the zeitgeist.