Tony Ortega did a write up on me at the Village Voice yesterday.
I appreciate the work Tony has done in investigating and working to understand me and what the independent movement is about. I think he provides a fairly accurate picture. One thing that Tony and I apparently don’t see eye to eye on is what our impact is on the future of Scientology. While he takes pains to distinguish between Corporate Scientology and Independent Scientology in the article at issue, he continues to consider – by the relegation of his story to the top twenty five people “crippling Scientology” – that we are somehow hurting the public image of Scientology. I couldn’t disagree more emphatically. I post about signs of our objectives being attained – differentiating in the public mind between the practice of Scientology philosophy and the daily criminal activity of the “church” of Scientology – fairly often (ironically including Tony’s own coverage of Janet Reitman’s book, our recent trip to Germany, and religious scholar Hugh Urban’s book on Scientology).
Perhaps not coincidentally, the only other thing I take exception to in Tony’s article on me is his painting a picture that I am focused on getting people out of the church and even out of Scientology. He misduplicated what happened with the three psychoanalyst referrals I received. One of them returned to the Bridge is moving up it actively, one considers himself an Independent Scientologist but is not actively pursuing the Bridge, and one – who for twelve years considered herself not a Scientologist – continued not to consider herself a Scientologist but lost all of her considerable antagonism and victimhood feelings for the subject, and instead went off considering her experiences part of her continuing growth.
I just let him know that I don’t solicit, advertise or pressure anyone to pursue Scientology. What he omitted to report is that I considered that approach remarkably effective. We just do our work and let the results speak for themselves. We are consistently booked solid four months in advance, and every week we have to refer people out because we just cannot handle the demand.
This week is a perfect example. On top of delivering Grades to another pc, the amiable and delightful Bruce Pratt paid us a four day visit and he and I were able to chop some wood. Here is what Bruce has to say about what we do here:
26 Sep 2011
I don’t really have a lot to say about Clear. Not now. 🙂
I can say that the freedoms associated with the state allow some pretty wide open vistas. One such vista near and dear to me — the vista of the rest of my existence beginning with further ascent along LRH’s Bridge.
Marty, thank you for helping me clear the way. I still cannot believe how utterly simple it was. Yeah, I had some dim cockamamie notion, but it don’t really count. After all, we’re dealing with the science of certainty, not the pedagogy of vacillation. Do I make myself clear?
LRH was a man for all time. I am so grateful I have the time to follow in his wake. May my ripples compliment that wake.
Casablanca de Tejas has been described by others more eloquently, so I’ll just say: “(expletives deleted) What a spiritual oasis/refuge/sanctuary!
I had an idea of what Scientology was about. I got a damn good introduction back in 1987 or so. Reality began to digress further and further from what my idea was. I have tried to apply “The Road to Truth”, the inspiration for my blog handle Fellow Traveller. The rewards for persisting along my road to truth are incalculable, precious and a whole string of similars. Marty, in his inimitable fashion, bedrocked on LRH principles and technology, with Mosey as his cohort in cause and mischief, did not just reaffirm my idea of LRH’s Scientology, but made it conceivable and real that not only can the Aims of Scientology be achieved, but I can achieve them. Someone queue up “To Sir with Love”, please.