The report included a list of purported cults based upon information which may have been provided by former members, the general information division of the French National Police ("Renseignements généraux" — the French secret police service) and cult-watching groups. The criteria chosen by the French Renseignements généraux to establish the potential dangers of a movement were criticized since they were considered vague and may include many organizations, religious or not. One of the first criticisms came from bishop Jean Vernette, the national secretary of the French episcopate to the study of cults and new religious movements, who stressed that these criteria can be applied to almost all religions. Moreover, sociologists such as Bruno Étienne emphasized that the mental manipulation should not be defined by the policemen of the Renseignements généraux. The list of cults was based on the criteria defined by the Renseignements généraux, but without specifying which of their practices are specifically criticized. In addition, the secrecy of the work made by the RG led to questions about the presence or absence of certain organizations in the list. Étienne questioned the presence of the CEDIPAC SA company, formerly known as European Grouping of Marketing Professionals (GEPM), as its activity is not in the religious field. The absence of Opus Dei or the Freemasons also raised questions. In 2007, Yves Bertrand, General Director of the Renseignements généraux from 1992 to 2003, spoke about his collaborative work with the parliamentary reports on cults, and said: "Alongside genuine and dangerous cults practicing removal of school, abuse of weakness or pedophilia, some groups have been a bit quickly dress up of the word cult". Furthermore, on 27 May 2005, the 1995 list of cults of the French report was officially cancelled and invalidated by Jean-Pierre Raffarin's circulaire. In France, Antoinism was classified as a cult in the 1995 parliamentary reports which considered it one of the oldest healer groups. However, in a 1984 letter, the French Minister of the Interior wrote that the movement was considered, from an administrative point of view, as having for exclusive purpose the exercise of a religion, thus complying with the 18th and 19th Articles of the 1905 French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State. He added that antoinism had always been allowed to receive bequests or donations, which meant that its religious nature was never challenged.