Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com
Subject: RE: Another Milne Deception?
Message-ID: <9509110902.0CPIG00@support.com>
References: <199509101828.AA19300@nc-17.ma02.bull.com>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 95 09:02:47 -0700
Lines: 58


stark@prostar.COM

>   "From: milne@crl.com (Andrew Milne)
>    Subject: Posting for "Mark"
>    Date: 9 Sep 1995 16:45:44 -0700
>
>            Today at the Church of Scientology in DC one of our
>      staff spoke to an individual named Mark, who said he did not
>      know that other religions than Scientology maintained
>      confidential scriptures and asked that information on this
>      be posted.  In fact, there is a wealth of material covering
>      this practice in other religions.  Below is an extract from a
>      letter written by a number of religious scholars and others
>      containing some data on this point:

>            What is worse probably, is insensitivity towards the
>      Church of Scientology's religious beliefs, which are also
>      protected rights under the First Amendment.  For centuries
>      and still in the present, many religions have been faced by a
>      dual need to disseminate their beliefs as widely as possible
>      without losing confidential central tenets of their faith and
>      practices through misappropriation, misduplication and
>      misunderstanding.  Thus, as the Court of Appeals for the
>      District of Columbia found in a 1986 case involving the First
>      Church of Christ, Scientist, at least thirty editions and
>      translations of the Bible are validly copyrighted and
>      protected against unauthorized publication.

Stark:
>Question: isn't "misduplication" a Scientology term?  And if so, doesn't
>that mean that the above "extract from a letter written by a number of
>religious scholars" was actually written by a Scientologist?

    Very sharp, Stark.  You are quite right.  In scieno-babble
    to misduplicate means to fail to "get" exactly what emanated.
    from "Source".  Or to represent Source incorrectly to
    others.

>Someone please verify whether or not "Misduplication" is a scieno term.
>It's not in my dictionary, but I've lost my scientology dictionary and
>can't check it.
>
>Stark

    The part you're referring to was difinately an OSA generated
    document.

    New OSA process:  Invent a religious scholar.
                      Make him more real. (repetitive to EP)

            +--------------------------------------+
           Rev. Dennis L Erlich  * * the inFormer * *
      dennis.l.erlich@support.com  +  inForm@primenet.com
                           "tar baby"