The Current State of Scientology

[F.Bullbait]

True enough that except for the desert part; that's just a natural consequence...

 

[F.Bullbait]

Well...they skipped the refreshed and relaxed part...

 

[Karakorum]

I figured I'd give it a go. Joining staff for a 5 year contract, why I would go clear, and also learn the secrets of management technology, on how to run a group, how to become a leader,
Little did I know I became trapped. I had read too much of hubbard's words or persuasion or rhetoric. Only to realize it's a false promise of words carefully arranged.

Yeah the whole program is designed in such a way as to have you sink in by the time you get to clear. Then the regs get you and you find yourself donating money for copies of "The Way To Happiness" to be handed out to kids in Sikkim.

 

[F.Bullbait]

One thing about being a Scientologist, nothing to steal.

 

[Sheila Lindsay Day]

The current state of Scientology? I'd say that they're flat-lining, but it's actually worse. They're contracting, and have been doing so since at least 1990, when the international 'bodies in the shop' stat began to fall. At that time, there were roughly 100,000 people actively involved with Scn.

According to best estimates, they've shrunken to fewer than 35,000 members worldwide, and that includes all staff and public. That means that Scn has shrunk 65% over the last 30 years - or looking at it differently, that's a net loss of 2,166 members per year (2.16% annually).

Given the accelerating rate of attrition, they'll be down to fewer than 10,000 members total by 2025. There are already more Jedis and Wiccans, than there are Scientologists.

I think the 'carrot' that keeps us interested in this subject, is the question of when the attrition will result in a final collapse of the organization. It's coming soon, even if Miscavige's billions still keep the lights on.

Maybe instead of completely ceasing to exist the shrinking Church of Scientology will have to change. I tend to see Scientology as being in an early, fundamentalist, extremist phase of a religion, one that religions have usually had to diverge from if they are going to survive.

 

[Karakorum]

Maybe instead of completely ceasing to exist the shrinking Church of Scientology will have to change. I tend to see Scientology as being in an early, fundamentalist, extremist phase of a religion, one that religions have usually had to diverge from if they are going to survive.

I have no idea how can this come about.

Ok, if some 11 year old girls from Venezuela shows up at flag, says that she is LRH that came back. Then proves she has perfect recall. then recites any given LRH policy from memory when asked. Then says she has with her all the new researcherd OT levels including OT XV... yeah then people would follow her and she could reform the church.

and still some would stick with Davy.

I'm being half joking but half serious now. The only way I currently see to radiclaly reform CoS is to have LRH come back and change policies.

 

[PirateAndBum]

I have no idea how can this come about.

Ok, if some 11 year old girls from Venezuela shows up at flag, says that she is LRH that came back. Then proves she has perfect recall. then recites any given LRH policy from memory when asked. Then says she has with her all the new researcherd OT levels including OT XV... yeah then people would follow her and she could reform the church.

and still some would stick with Davy.

I'm being half joking but half serious now. The only way I currently see to radiclaly reform CoS is to have LRH come back and change policies.

Well we know that ain't gonna happen

It's been 33 years since he croaked. If he was gonna come back he'd have come back and RPF'd lil Davey long ago.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

I think that it may be appropriate to start off a new thread that gives the current state of orgs and the cherch. It feels like it might be a good time in this weird environment that's going on, PLUS the fact that it (THE CHERCH) is doing really, really shitty. I guess the squirrels are getting the last laugh!! Bwahaha.

The local org here, which is an ideal morgue, has crashed. They had several weeks recently of practically zero income, this reported to me by someone with a spouse on staff. I was driving past the morgue the other day, a weekday after 3:00 pm, and there were about fifteen cars in the parking lot total. This city is definitely a commute to the org city, so conceivably those were mostly staff. There are probably some staff within walking distance, so there may be a few more staff than that in the org at any time.

I will endeavour to get some numbers from some staff there now. Some actual GI, BIS, etc.

I am surprised Miscavage has not already been deposed. I might almost suspect the sappers working to destroy CoS from within are the core of his support.


It has to come to a head sometime.

 

[Karakorum]

Well we know that ain't gonna happen

It's been 33 years since he croaked. If he was gonna come back he'd have come back and RPF'd lil Davey long ago.

Oh come on, nobody knows how long researching these last OT levels might take. Nobody did it before.
Also, maybe LRH is already here? He's just laying low on purpose, preparing to take back CoS in one masterstroke, so as to avoid a schizm in the church.

You never know. There are trillions of ways to explain stuff within scientology.

But actually I do believe in this: The easiest way to depose Davy, would be for someone to belieavably be able to claim that he/she is LRH and then have DM's inner circle support the usurper.

If one things it is impossible for a cult leader to be deposed like that - well, this happened before. That is exactly how David Koresh took over the branch Davidians from their current guru. He came as a usurper and the higher ups supported him.,

 

[Voodoo]

Maybe instead of completely ceasing to exist the shrinking Church of Scientology will have to change. I tend to see Scientology as being in an early, fundamentalist, extremist phase of a religion, one that religions have usually had to diverge from if they are going to survive.

The church is most definitely headed for extinction if it doesn't reform, and soon. That does present a host of fundamental challenges for the cult, though.

Essential Reforms

One, ending the practice of disconnection means that the church will lose it's number one most effective control tool over their public. If Scientologists can quit the church while remaining connected to all their Scn kin and friends, it opens a Pandora's Box of free flowing communication between members about the various unethical (and even criminal) activities of the organization.

Two, ending the practice of excommunicating parishioners simply for disagreeing with management will also strip the CofS of one of their most effective control mechanisms over their staffs and public. Working in tandem with the practice of disconnection, SP declares work to frighten people into toeing the corporate line because they're afraid of 'losing their eternity'. If the offender isn't sufficiently cowed by the prospect of being declared, the prospects of losing their family, friends, and business associations usually does the trick. If that doesn't work, then disconnection at least ensures their Scn associates don't become infected with the truth.

Three, ending the crush regging for direct donations for Ideal Orgs, IAS, front groups, etc, will remove a tremendous amount of stress from the staff and public, but it will force the organization to resort to selling their base products, which DM has so thoroughly altered from their original formats as to make them virtually unusable. That in itself will be a death sentence for the CofS, unless they also reform their own tech. This step would require a top-down repair/re-set of the entire Bridge, starting with throwing out GAT I and II. Of course, they'd have to get rid of DM to accomplish this, and that is a very large part of the challenge.

Four, the Sea Org has got to go - no ifs, ands, or buts. That, and the entire body of Scn management policies need a thorough rebuild from top to bottom. Hell, you could simply throw 75% of it in the dumpster, and the organization would probably run far smoother than it's ever done. And I would hope that the fixation with weekly stats would be one of the first things to be chucked out - that, and the ridiculous units system of pay. Pay the staff at least minimum wage and allow for higher pay rates for specialized posts and execs. They'd attract a better grade of employee if they did that, and those people would work harder and be much happier doing it, if working for the church were more like working in any other business.

Five, roll back the prices charged for services to 1970s levels (adjusted for inflation, of course). Per the founder, prices should be set at the level where the low end of the lower middle class can afford training and auditing. Essentially, you should be able to afford to go all the way up the Bridge working at a tire shop. Contrary to DM's crooked way of thinking, this would actually result in a cash windfall for the organization. Well, at least it would have, before Miscavige wrecked the little remaining good pr the church had when he took over.

There are at least another dozen or so major items you could add to that reform list, but you get the gist. The internal dynamics are such, that a true reform of the CofS may not even be possible. We're talking about a radical transformation that would totally alter the church down to its very core. It wouldn't resemble the old organization at all. In fact, it would be even better than it was "back in the day".

Problem is, who's going to initiate such reforms? Who will implement them? The people in charge now? Not bloody likely. Like I said, there's an internal cultural dynamic inside the CofS that will resist change to the bitter end.

 

[Karakorum]

Three, ending the crush regging for direct donations for Ideal Orgs, IAS, front groups, etc, will remove a tremendous amount of stress from the staff and public, but it will force the organization to resort to selling their base products, which DM has so thoroughly altered from their original formats as to make them virtually unusable.

Agreed, though I think the whole underlying philosophy of spending funds has to go. What I mena by that is: Currently CoS has a lot of funds, but no sensible idea on how to spend them. Real churches do.
We could spend the funds to imprtove living conditions of staff and SO, fund retirement plans for SO, medical insurance for both staff and SO... Not to mention doing actual charity work like all real churches do

Four, the Sea Org has got to go - no ifs, ands, or buts. That, and the entire body of Scn management policies need a thorough rebuild from top to bottom. Hell, you could simply throw 75% of it in the dumpster, and the organization would probably run far smoother than it's ever done. And I would hope that the fixation with weekly stats would be one of the first things to be chucked out - that, and the ridiculous units system of pay. Pay the staff at least minimum wage and allow for higher pay rates for specialized posts and execs. They'd attract a better grade of employee if they did that, and those people would work harder and be much happier doing it, if working for the church were more like working in any other business.

I think both staff and SO are currently in a very bad condition. The dilemma is:
1. Should we terminate SO and reform staff?
2. Reform the SO and terminate staff?
3. Merge the two and reform it?

I would personally argue to terminate staff. I worked both as staff and as SO and to be honest staff was far worse. Why? Because working on staff I found myself with insufficient time and money to make a living. The idea of staff was to have full-time employees who at the same time have private lives, live "in the big world", own a house and pay their rent etc.

Thus even if we reform staff to be just a regular full-time job with minimum wage, that would put people either in a condition of poor living standards if they have a family, or force them to work both staff and a moonlight job thus not having any time for their kids. However you look at it: staff would make for shitty parents and not very good "big world citizens" either.

The most functional staff were people who worked both day and foundation and either had no kids, or have their kids be raised by other family members (I wouldn't see my mom for weeks at times when she was on staff). At this level of engagement, we might as well have these staff be SO and get rid of the pretence.

Staff should primarily be limited to part-time volunteers. If someone has free time and wishes to help with something on weekends or in the evenings, that's cool. If we cut the bs bureaucracy and treat small orgs in a realistic manner (and not pretend they are a big part of a corporation), than daily workload would drop by 80% or so. An outer org would just need a receptionist and a few auditors to function. The smallest missions could work with just one weekend auditor.


How to make the SO function well:

The SO should be treated seriously, much in the way like catholics treat their monastic orders.

1. They should get everything for free - clothes, food, housing, medical care, sick leave, pensions, retirement homes.
2. I'm not saying they should live in luxury, but I think they should live in normal 1st world standards. Clean simple housing, modern furniture, "corporate cafeteria" style food etc.
3. They should get a small weekly amount of cash, that would cover some additional "life" expenses like being able to goto a movie or buy a book every week etc. Nothing grand, but something allowing them to pursue whatever interest or small hobby outside of scn they might want.
4. No more than 11 hour work a day. Most days it should be 8-10. At least one full day off each week.
5. Should any SO want to leave to start a family, they should be at once allowed to do so with no jumping through hoops, freeloader bills and whatnot. I'd say ex-SO members with a small child should even receive some further support from the Cos (being allowed to live at the org until they get their jobs in order etc).
6. The church should finance any "big world" courses or education for its SO members if they need it. Like accountant courses or HR management studies etc. This should be both a reward and an investment in one's workforce: "If you are a good SO member, we will invest in your education to allow you to take on bigger and more responsible posts".
7. Again: The church should finance any medical treatement the SO members need, including old age diseases. No more leaving old SO members out to dry - this should be a lifetime commitment by the church.
8. Elderly SO members hsould be allowed to leave their posts if they no longer are able to handle them, then they should be assigned as "residents" at an org, to help out with minor things there at a daily basis. Once they are too old or too infirm to do that, they should be moved to a retirement home owned and ran by the church, it should be a place with decent 1st world living standards.

Conclusion: I think the SO should thus go on being the full time commited part of the church (like catholic monks or clergy), making use of its already existing camraderie and "we are tough, hard-working people with a purpose" self-image. If you change the horrible living standards and drop the admin tech shitshow, most people would actually enjoy the SO.

Most of this is not my idea, this is what the catholich church offers its clergy. It works, been tested for many centuries. Let's go with what works, instead of trying to reinvent the bicycle.


Final note:

I have to stress that I do not believe in the CoS and I don't want to go back and have auditing or whatnot. The reform suggestions I'm giving should be treated like "a doctor giving health advice to a patient he does not personally like".

 

[Voodoo]

Agreed, though I think the whole underlying philosophy of spending funds has to go. What I mena by that is: Currently CoS has a lot of funds, but no sensible idea on how to spend them. Real churches do.
We could spend the funds to imprtove living conditions of staff and SO, fund retirement plans for SO, medical insurance for both staff and SO... Not to mention doing actual charity work like all real churches do


I think both staff and SO are currently in a very bad condition. The dilemma is:
1. Should we terminate SO and reform staff?
2. Reform the SO and terminate staff?
3. Merge the two and reform it?

I would personally argue to terminate staff. I worked both as staff and as SO and to be honest staff was far worse. Why? Because working on staff I found myself with insufficient time and money to make a living. The idea of staff was to have full-time employees who at the same time have private lives, live "in the big world", own a house and pay their rent etc.

Thus even if we reform staff to be just a regular full-time job with minimum wage, that would put people either in a condition of poor living standards if they have a family, or force them to work both staff and a moonlight job thus not having any time for their kids. However you look at it: staff would make for shitty parents and not very good "big world citizens" either.

The most functional staff were people who worked both day and foundation and either had no kids, or have their kids be raised by other family members (I wouldn't see my mom for weeks at times when she was on staff). At this level of engagement, we might as well have these staff be SO and get rid of the pretence.

Staff should primarily be limited to part-time volunteers. If someone has free time and wishes to help with something on weekends or in the evenings, that's cool. If we cut the bs bureaucracy and treat small orgs in a realistic manner (and not pretend they are a big part of a corporation), than daily workload would drop by 80% or so. An outer org would just need a receptionist and a few auditors to function. The smallest missions could work with just one weekend auditor.


How to make the SO function well:

The SO should be treated seriously, much in the way like catholics treat their monastic orders.

1. They should get everything for free - clothes, food, housing, medical care, sick leave, pensions, retirement homes.
2. I'm not saying they should live in luxury, but I think they should live in normal 1st world standards. Clean simple housing, modern furniture, "corporate cafeteria" style food etc.
3. They should get a small weekly amount of cash, that would cover some additional "life" expenses like being able to goto a movie or buy a book every week etc. Nothing grand, but something allowing them to pursue whatever interest or small hobby outside of scn they might want.
4. No more than 11 hour work a day. Most days it should be 8-10. At least one full day off each week.
5. Should any SO want to leave to start a family, they should be at once allowed to do so with no jumping through hoops, freeloader bills and whatnot. I'd say ex-SO members with a small child should even receive some further support from the Cos (being allowed to live at the org until they get their jobs in order etc).
6. The church should finance any "big world" courses or education for its SO members if they need it. Like accountant courses or HR management studies etc. This should be both a reward and an investment in one's workforce: "If you are a good SO member, we will invest in your education to allow you to take on bigger and more responsible posts".
7. Again: The church should finance any medical treatement the SO members need, including old age diseases. No more leaving old SO members out to dry - this should be a lifetime commitment by the church.
8. Elderly SO members hsould be allowed to leave their posts if they no longer are able to handle them, then they should be assigned as "residents" at an org, to help out with minor things there at a daily basis. Once they are too old or too infirm to do that, they should be moved to a retirement home owned and ran by the church, it should be a place with decent 1st world living standards.

Conclusion: I think the SO should thus go on being the full time commited part of the church (like catholic monks or clergy), making use of its already existing camraderie and "we are tough, hard-working people with a purpose" self-image. If you change the horrible living standards and drop the admin tech shitshow, most people would actually enjoy the SO.

Most of this is not my idea, this is what the catholich church offers its clergy. It works, been tested for many centuries. Let's go with what works, instead of trying to reinvent the bicycle.


Final note:

I have to stress that I do not believe in the CoS and I don't want to go back and have auditing or whatnot. The reform suggestions I'm giving should be treated like "a doctor giving health advice to a patient he does not personally like".

I don't want to be terribly complicated about it, but essentially the whole staffing structure of the church needs a complete overhaul. Number one, the Sea Org as an institution has GOT to go. It has become so thoroughly debased and destructive, there's no saving it. I don't think it's even possible to reform it as a Catholic style religious order.

It's like saying we can reform the Nazi party of the late 1930s if we just improve working conditions for the staff. Well, that might improve SO staff morale a bit, but the group ethos is so degraded at this point, there's no changing the corporate culture. It's got to be replaced by a professional staff who are paid real world wages.

The Sea Org has become too Nazi-like to ever salvage.

I would do away with the arbitrary distinctions between Class V orgs and Sea Org orgs. It would probably still be a good idea to keep the existing separations between missions, Class V orgs, Class VI orgs, and Advanced orgs, but restructure the overall organization to allow for greater autonomy and local control for the orgs. Let them hire their own people and pay them a competitive wage.

Reform of the CofS is a huge subject, and there are many intertwining considerations and ramifications of the radical changes we'd all like to see.

For instance, I think the entire upper Bridge is invalid, and would like to see it revealed for the unworkable waste of time and money that it is. If disconnection were ended as an official practice of the church, individual parishioners would be free to compare notes about the OT levels, at which point, the cat would be out of the bag and few people would be willing to devote the time and money it takes to do them.

If that transpires, what becomes of the AOs? Quite frankly, they'd be out of business without their signature line of services, wouldn't they? This is just one example of how one plank of church reform would affect another.

Here's another one. Let's say they decide to do a major overhaul of the organization policy, as I suggested upthread. Chuck out 75% of the green on white, as I said before. That would immediately shift the center of balance in the organization back towards the service orgs, as much of the existing management bloat would be wiped off the org board. Such a shift would deeply affect the inner workings and politics of the organization, resulting in a much leaner, more focused management structure, and a much improved situation for the service orgs.

Anyhow, I'm getting wordy again. I really just wanted to reiterate what I think about trying to salvage the Sea Org. I think the rest of your ideas are sound.

 

[Karakorum]

I don't want to be terribly complicated about it, but essentially the whole staffing structure of the church needs a complete overhaul.

Oh yeah, we are in total agreement here. The majority of "management" and "reporting" needs to go. I think in a sensible model, you should have at least 5 SO members doing auditing and takign care of new members and the public to each 1 SO member who does office admin stuff.

Number one, the Sea Org as an institution has GOT to go. It has become so thoroughly debased and destructive, there's no saving it. I don't think it's even possible to reform it as a Catholic style religious order.
It's like saying we can reform the Nazi party of the late 1930s if we just improve working conditions for the staff. Well, that might improve staff morale a bit, but the group ethos is so degraded at this point, there's no changing the culture. It's got to be replaced by a professional staff who are paid decent real world wages.

We can get rid of the SO and replace them with Staff. Thing is, that would not remove the "group ethos" for two reasons:
1. Most "hardcore" full time staff share most of the SO ethos and culture.
2. If we dissolve the SO, then these ex-SO would mostly become staff (because that's what they know how to do, you can't expect them to all find big world jobs), thus they would bring the "ethos" with them.

So if we turn all previous SO posts (except the ones that we would cut as redundant) to staff, you would pretty much turn staff into "SO-lite". Except they would have a full time scn job, have to pay for their "big world" expenses like rent, food, clothing etc. They would likely also be expected to have families, but given their responsibilities they would be shitty parents or hand their kids to someone else to raise.
I had a full time, D&F staff mom, at times I wouldn't see her for long periods of time. I don't wish that on any kid, its not healthy.

So I think this sort of big, ful time professional staff extepcted to fulfill both all their "regular big world society" demands and all their full time scn demends... that would still be overwhelming in my view. Its probable that they would remain a lot like today's full time staff: Not very good scn employees, not very good parents, not very good citizens.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I am basing this on my personal staff and SO experiences (90s and 2000s). Full-time, D&F Staff was in many ways even more overwhelming than SO.

It would probably still be a good idea to keep the existing separations between missions, Class V orgs, Class VI orgs, and Advanced orgs, but restructure the overall organization to allow for greater autonomy and local control for the orgs.

Agreed. Its just common sense that not all orgs will be large enough to fulfill all functions. Especially if we get rid of much of the "management cluter" and later bridge bs.

I honestly could see how a "1 part-time-staff person" mission that can serve a small community of public members. They could even meet at someone's private apartment. No-nonsense and low expense - the opposite of "Idle Orgs".

Let them hire their own people and pay them a competitive wage.

That could certainly be true for many admin positions, especially accounting and stuff like that. Those could even be outsourced to hired non-scientologists in small outer orgs with small staffs. Then the remaining scn staff could concentrate on doign actual auditing and service to the public.

For instance, I think the entire upper Bridge is invalid, and would like to see it revealed for the unworkable waste of time and money that it is.
If disconnection were ended as an official practice of the church, individual parishioners would be free to compare notes about the OT levels, at which point, the cat would be out of the bag and few people would be willing to devote the time and money it takes to do them.

Yep, agreed.

If that transpires, what becomes of the AOs? Quite frankly, they'd be out of business without their signature line of services, wouldn't they? This is just one example of how one plank of church reform would affect another.

Oh sure. But that "auditing space" could be taken up by something more sensible and productive. For example people having more auditing on PTP or more meditative activities. In the "activity" field, I feel the model should not be the catholic church but rather Theravada buddhist communities.

Here's another one. Let's say they decide to do a major overhaul of the organization policy, as I suggested upthread. Chuck out 75% of the green on white, as I said before. That would immediately shift the center of balance in the organization back towards the service orgs, as much of the existing management bloat would be wiped off the org board. Such a shift would deeply affect the inner workings and politics of the organization, resulting in a much leaner, more focused management structure, and a much improved situation for the service orgs.

I'm with you all the way, that would all be a massive change. I woudl say it is not just teh "management bloat", but also "admin bloat". Admin is ineffective because the admin tech is a failure, thus everythin g ends up taking a boatload of work hours and stress. If we got rid of that, I believe 50% or more abuses of the SO would simply go away.
I'd say 90% of the conflict and stress in the SO was cuased by us being overworked, sleep-deprived and dealing with stats that made no sense and an absurd admin tech.

Anyhow, I'm getting wordy again. I really just wanted to reiterate what I think about trying to salvage the Sea Org. I think the rest of your ideas are sound.

Yeah I think we are mostly in agreement except that. The choice is between a "smarter, leaner, more audition&service focused SO" and a "larger, more dedicated full time, SO-like staff".

What I'm getting at: "my reformed SO" and your "full time, professional reformed staff" are not really as different as it might appear. I think the only two key differences are:

1. I believe such a full-time dedicated staff would not like be able to be very good parents.
2. I think its best to pay people less, while covering their medical, education, retirement and similar expenses. You think its better to pay them more, so they would cover said expenses themselves.


Last topic I'd like to bring up are the major moral issues the CoS needs to tackle (and reform):

1. The way the elderly are treated.
2. The way abortions are promoted left and right.
3. CoS currently encouraging parental neglect and in general shitty parenting, discouraging formal education of kids, discouraging some parts of healthcare. This needs to change.
4. The rat culture. Ethics should not be about thought-policing or forcing people to say in or harassing people for dissention or insufficient donations and whatnot. Ethics should be about people being able to clear their own conscience and resovle conflicts with other church members. So most EOs would simply become regular auditors and CoS should develop comprehensive "marriage counseling" and "arbitration of conflict between staff" processes that would fill the space of some of the previous witholds/overts/sec-checking etc.

Ethics inv should become something like what "Toshiba ethics" or "JP Morgan Ethics" is. It should be a department where people get help to deal with REAL ABUSES inside CoS. Like bullying of staff by superiros, sexual harassment, racism, nepotism, corruption, theft etc.
OSA should be disbanded, with some of the ex-OSA members who had poists with actual investigation experience becoming part of the new Ethics. "New Ethics" should police the management and prevent abuse, rather than help managment hide their abuses as they do now. This is what actual Ethics departments in real corporations do.

Oh and of course the CoS needs to cooperate with "big world" police in all matters and abide by the law of the respective country.

 

[Enthetan]

One, ending the practice of disconnection means that the church will lose it's number one most effective control tool over their public. If Scientologists can quit the church while remaining connected to all their Scn kin and friends, it opens a Pandora's Box of free flowing communication between members about the various unethical (and even criminal) activities of the organization.

Besides that, it would allow for free discussion of what doesn't work, which would lead to collapse of Scientology, when people were able to discuss the emperor's lack of clothes.

Four, the Sea Org has got to go - no ifs, ands, or buts. That, and the entire body of Scn management policies need a thorough rebuild from top to bottom. Hell, you could simply throw 75% of it in the dumpster, and the organization would probably run far smoother than it's ever done. And I would hope that the fixation with weekly stats would be one of the first things to be chucked out - that, and the ridiculous units system of pay. Pay the staff at least minimum wage and allow for higher pay rates for specialized posts and execs. They'd attract a better grade of employee if they did that, and those people would work harder and be much happier doing it, if working for the church were more like working in any other business.

In Scientology, Int Management gets it's money first, off the top, before anything else is paid.

In normal businesses, the legally mandated priority list is:

1) Taxes,​

2) Payroll (and payroll is fixed, except for salesmen's commissions. No "units")​

3) Bills and other debts​

Once those are paid, what's left can be used for present-time spending.

 

[Karakorum]

Besides that, it would allow for free discussion of what doesn't work, which would lead to collapse of Scientology, when people were able to discuss the emperor's lack of clothes.

That's overly optimistic. Evangelical christians are allowed free discussion about how the "power of prayer" doesn't work. So far that religion doesn't seem to be near collapse.

I'm not aware of even one religion whose collapse was caused by "the emperor's lack of clothes".

 

[JustSheila]

That's overly optimistic. Evangelical christians are allowed free discussion about how the "power of prayer" doesn't work. So far that religion doesn't seem to be near collapse.

I'm not aware of even one religion whose collapse was caused by "the emperor's lack of clothes".

That analogy isn't even remotely similar and doesn't make any sense. Evangelical Christians aren't a single church or a single religion, either, so what religion "doesn't seem near collapse" if it isn't a religion in the first place? They're from many different churches or you would have named their church. Of course they have different opinions. It's neither a church nor a cult, just a loose group of born again Christians with a few beliefs in common, most notably belief in the power of Jesus Christ. Of course they can discuss it openly. Christianity is not a cult. Scientology is. Cults collapse all the time once they are exposed. Have a look at NIXVM, the latest one in the news. There was one here locally that had a bunch of coffee shops that collapsed because it was using drug addicts and not paying them. I think it was around about five years. You wouldn't have noticed it before it was gone.

Without Scientologists having it drilled and drilled in them all that BS about how Scientology is an exact system and the only system that works, Scientology becomes no more useful than a few drills that are only altered versions of others. Christianity is free and the majority of Christian churches actually help people out of their own initiative and belief in values they share about helping others.

 

[Karakorum]

That analogy isn't even remotely similar and doesn't make any sense. Evangelical Christians aren't a single church or a single religion, either, so what religion "doesn't seem near collapse" if it isn't a religion in the first place? They're from many different churches or you would have named their church.

General specific sir! Sorry for being insufficiently concrete sir!

I'm gonna give a specific example: The members of the United Methodist Church can talk all they want how the power of prayer doesn't work for them. Sure, there might be some other members who will think less highly of them or think: "Yeah it doesn't work for you because your faith is weak or you are a sinful bastard".

But open discussion is not prohibited. People do so, most of the time their prayers don't do shit. I don't see this causing that church to collapse.

Christianity is not a cult. Scientology is.

If we define "cult" as a spiritual movement that is manipulates and exploits its members, then most christian denominations are not cults for most of the time.

But for the purpose that Enthetan mentioned ("free discussion of what doesn't work") scn and the United Methodist Church are identical:
They both believe in tech that doesn't work. Simple as that.

 

[JustSheila]

General specific sir! Sorry for being insufficiently concrete sir!

Rude. Just because you write something stupid off the top of your head that makes no sense is no reason to get nasty when you get called out on it.

I'm gonna give a specific example: The members of the United Methodist Church can talk all they want how the power of prayer doesn't work for them. Sure, there might be some other members who will think less highly of them or think: "Yeah it doesn't work for you becaus e your faith is weak and you are a sinful bastard".
But open discussion is not prohibited. People do so, most of the time their prayers don't do shit. I don't see this causing that church to collapse.

If we define "cult" as a spiritual movement that is manipulates and exploits its members, then most christian denominations are not cults for most of the time.

But for the purpose that Enthetan mentioned ("free discussion of what doesn't work") scn and the United Methodist Church are identical:
They both believe in tech that doesn't work. Simple as that.

Not even similar. You missed again. And there you are, right back to making up definitions for things and redefining them however you need to try to force what you said to sound rational. Doublespeak. Like Scientology.

You seem to have studied very little of the cult characteristics, despite having been provided links by others, and seem to have a difficult time differentiating between churches and cults because you clearly dislike all religions so just group them all together because it takes far less thought for you that way. Yet there are hundreds of articles about the clear characteristics of a cult. From just one of them, this describes Scientology, which is a cult, but not other churches that are not:

The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader, and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.

Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.

Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, or debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).

The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (e.g., members must get permission to date, change jobs, or marry—or leaders prescribe what to wear, where to live, whether to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).

The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and its members (e.g., the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).

The group has a polarized, us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders, or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).

The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (e.g., lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).

The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and control members. Often this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.

The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.

The group is preoccupied with making money.

Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.

The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave—or even consider leaving—the group.

http://cultresearch.org/help/characteristics-associated-with-cults/

 

[Bill]

Rude. Just because you write something stupid off the top of your head that makes no sense is no reason to get nasty when you get called out on it.
<snip>

Yes, Karakorum has the interesting character combining ignorance and absolute certainty. He "heard something or believed something or thought something and is absolutely certain he is absolutely correct. Birdy does something like that as well. It is nigh impossible to have any reasonable discussion with someone like that. Belief is like that.

 

[Sheila Lindsay Day]

I have no idea how can this come about.

Ok, if some 11 year old girls from Venezuela shows up at flag, says that she is LRH that came back. Then proves she has perfect recall. then recites any given LRH policy from memory when asked. Then says she has with her all the new researcherd OT levels including OT XV... yeah then people would follow her and she could reform the church.

and still some would stick with Davy.

I'm being half joking but half serious now. The only way I currently see to radiclaly reform CoS is to have LRH come back and change policies.

I have no idea how can this come about.

Ok, if some 11 year old girl from Venezuela shows up at flag, says that she is LRH that came back. Then proves she has perfect recall. then recites any given LRH policy from memory when asked. Then says she has with her all the new researcherd OT levels including OT XV... yeah then people would follow her and she could reform the church.

and still some would stick with Davy.

I'm being half joking but half serious now. The only way I currently see to radiclaly reform CoS is to have LRH come back and change policies.

I think that you guys are overlooking an important part of the situation, that the Church of Scientology is also a community of people. I see the offshoot "squirrel" groups, and even this chatroom to be a part of the community of the protest movement of Scientologists. Maybe the protest wing will become the main church. Also we might be in the process of redefining all of Scientology; the theologian Karl Barth said that each generation will have to write its own Church Dogmatics.