I have to confess that Scientology has not really been on my radar: it is not widely practiced (though with some high profile members, admittedl) and its beliefs are about as bizarre as you can get. I read science fiction, but I really don't think that most of it stands up to scientific scrutiny. And also, frankly, I've tended to distrust an organisation apparently started by someone with little moral character and who wrote what appears at the end of this section quoted from the referenced article.
"organised religions can be very lucrative - as L. Ron Hubbard himself recognised.
Giant photographs of Hubbard adorn the new London headquarters, and his many pronouncements (such as 'Man is basically good and it is this basic goodness we want to set free') are stencilled on walls.
A comment you won't find displayed, though, is the one Hubbard made to an author's convention before he invented Scientology.
'Writing for a penny a word,' he said, 'is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars he should start his own religion.' Basic introductory sessions for Scientology cost up to £80. Then there is another course which costs £300, then another..."
The other thing this raises for me though, is that my initial reactions to Scientology, be they well-founded or otherwise, seem perhaps not so dissimilar to how people see my 'religion' (though to be fair, few people see Jesus as a charlatan). It gives me a glimpse into how distrust of the institutional may feel when we are looking at religion. Heck, why should people give churches the benefit of the doubt? It also looks to me like if anyone is looking for the subject of a conspiracy theory, these are the guys.
And on the other hand, the money made seems to indicate that there is a hunger that is being tapped into. Perhaps we Christians should note and offer free alternatives or more 'subsidised' courses on personal and spiritual growth. And what are the ethics of such enterprises?
Still thinking but any clues ...
'Tom Cruise's Church of hate tried to destroy me' | the Daily Mail:
19 May 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"
I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...
-
"'Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell yo...
-
from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/online/2012/5/22/1337672561216/Annular-solar-eclipse--008.jpg -
I'm not sure people have believed me when I've said that there have been discovered uncaffeinated coffee beans. Well, here's one...
2 comments:
I may be mistaken, but I think the difference between any course we might run (free, subsidised or costly), and the Scientology courses, is that their "courses" actually promise to advance your "salvation" by completing them: it's sort of what you'd get if the infamous Friar Tetzel had been a Gnostic.
I don't see how anything we can offer can quite compare - although one or two individual churches / tele-evangelists seem to me to come dangerously close.
You'll get no argument from me Doug: that's precisely my point. Though what I am also advocating is that we in the church find ways to get stuff we 'have' into that market place of ideas ...
Post a Comment