From: inForm@primenet.com (Rev. Dennis L Erlich)
To: "Perry Scott" <perry@ez0.ezlink.com>
Subject: Re: The making of a religion
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 1997 15:35:10 GMT
Organization: inFormer Ministry

>"Perry Scott" <perry@ez0.ezlink.com> wrote:

   

>Hi Dennis,

   Hi Perry.

>Thanks for your "prepared comments".  While I realize the events of
>1969 are a dim memory (at least for me they are - I was just a kid at
>the time), I wanted to understand if there was any PR line from Hubbard
>regarding AOLA becoming "more churchy".  The whole thing intrigues me.

   It was like a ripple that went thru the whole org.  There may
have been an issue we had to read.  It said that the change was
for legal or accounting reasons.

>Was this the first time that Hubbard played the religion angle?  

   Hardly.   The whole church thing had been a ruse from the
git-go.

>Was it
>indeed in response to IRS attacks, or a desire to hide behind the
>more respectable mantle of religion, or some other motive?  Feel free
>to speculate, but label it as such.

   .

>Did Hubbard create the marraige and funeral ceremonies shortly
>thereafter?  What other "religious" ceremonies are there?

   The 'ceremonies' were really just hubbard-spew.  There was a
christening, I believe.  There is a book called Ceremonies of the
CoS.  Priscilla Coates has a copy.

>When did the scientology cross first appear at AOLA?  

   Around that time.  70-71

>What was the
>PR/HCOB/HCOPL behind it?  

   Never saw any.

>What did the non-Christians (like those
>of Jewish heritage) think of this symbol?  

   I knew it for what it was.  Slapping up the trappings to
restim the wogs.

>Did anyone blink when
>they remembered Hubbard had talked about the cross in the context of
>R6 and the Class VIII course (i.e. it would restimulate PCs)?

   We all knew.  The tech staff, that is.

>If you have any comments on my web page, I'd appreciate it.  I know
>you and MoFo are busy making life difficult for RTC right now.  Nice
>catch on the DM deposition, BTW.  In the best of all possible worlds,
>Wollersheim owns the NOTs.  Heh.

   That'd be justice.

   Dennis