Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
I was once on staff at a Mission. I started off as a volunteer staff
member. The ED always approvingly commented that you could set your watch by me, I was that reliable.
Sometime later, a poison pen letter came in that had gone up the lines and
came down from Int Mgmt to that mission with demands for explanation. It
was from a disgruntled ex Mission student ( a long time one) who wrote a
negative paragraph about every single person there. It was almost like she
was trying to think of things she could comment on in a negative way. So
there was a paragraph that said "Well, I don't know much about Claire, but
she IS living with a druggie." Which was true. I was living with a guy (not
John) who took a lot of drugs and thought beer was a type of religion. The
mission had never tried to intervene in this relationship, although he was a
non Scn'ist.
The Mission holder said she was trying to "cover your ass" (because of the
letter) and that I should therefore sign a contract. I said I liked being
volunteer because I could get time off to do things and whatnot. She said
that I could still have that. So I signed. I was, in a way, sort of tricked
or coerced into doing so.
Oh well. Life is for learning.
So after a year and a half I found that it pretty much sucked there and that
no promise made to me would be honored. When I tried to get some time off to do some things I was told that since I didn't get this promise in writing,
then it wasn't valid. The mission holder did NOT deny making such promises,
either. So I said, Well, I just have about a year or so to go. I'm glad. She
then said my contract hadn't even started running yet because I hadn't done
all the staff statuses yet. (I've looked and looked through policy and
found this NOWHERE).
So there was some back and forthing, and I ended up feeling stuck with the
situation and that I was, in effect, a slave.
Every time any money came in to the mission, the missionholder took it and
said "oops, they owe me back rent.". I received $5.00 the whole time I was
working there.
John and I would show up Saturday or Sunday a.m. (it was all foundation
hours there) and the Missionholder, her husband, her daughter, her daugher's
boyfriend,- all management staff- would be sound asleep. And the doors would be locked because they were all asleep. They assured us that they put in plenty of time when we weren't there. And that although they told us
schedules must be rigorously adhered to, they themselves were exempted from this.
Again, young, feeling trapped, went with it.
Then, later, the Missionholder indicated she might want to give up the
charter. She was getting older and wanted to move away to CW, or do
something else.
Meanwhile she was dramatizing and yelling constantly. Nothing we did was
ever right.
So John and I and another person came in and asked her for the mission
charter. Asked,not demanded. She blew up. Said we didn't do any research. So we told her we did, told her which entity we called, then she blew up about that. She brought in her daughter's boyfriend and he accused us of mutiny. Of course this was false as we'd demanded nothing.
We were put in lower conditions and a call to the parent Org was made. They
sent down a woman who I later saw on a list of people expelled and declared
a couple years later. Her style was mainly to look steely eyed, shriek, and
point fingers of blame. No one ever asked us what happened. She took a
shine to John and got him sent away for some auditing. She had an entirely
different response to yours truly and to our friend.
So I was there while John was gone, and I was working as in lowered
conditions. Most people there wouldn't look me in the eye except for a
couple people who would sneak me a snack or a pat on the back. I was In
Disgrace, as it were.
So John came back and so did the Missionholder's husband, who'd been away at an AO for training and auditing of some sort. He interviewed all of us and
asked what happened. I told him and he said "No, here's what happened. There was a squirrel group, you got sucked in, and then mutinied." I said no.
So this went on and on.
The 3 of us got busted for trying to take our pc folders with us one night,
too. Stopped at the door by several men who implied that they'd use force if
they'd have to. We left our folders there.
Finally I said, look, just let me out of here, I'll take the Freeloader
debt, no problem. I was told I had to do ethics handlings. So I did. I
showed up and I was placed in the lowest condition there is. Confusion. Not
Doubt or Liability. Nope. Confusion. So I went with it although it didn't
"indicate", since I felt trapped. Then I said I'd worked through it and I
was told that I couldn't be let out of that condition until I signed back on
staff. Never have I seen this as an indication that someone's out of
Confusion in any policy, but then again, their own "scriptures", so to
speak, can be bent every which way if it suits any exec.
The idea was to have me back on staff but in lower conditions so that I
could be made to do all kinds of scut work, extra hours, etc.
So I refused to do that and wasn't let out of the condition. They never
pushed John to come in to Ethics, just mentioned it a bit, he never came but
he never refused.
Later on they said he refused ethics handling which was untrue.
So I went home and stopped coming in as did John. The mission holder's
husband visited us at our apartment and told me that I was leaving because I
wanted to go to the movies. I assured him this wasn't the case but he'd
already made up his mind.
We were given a choice by the parent Org and by the Mission. Go back to the Mission or go work at THAT Org or be expelled. We said we weren't going back and that the mission holder had sanctioned many departures and blows in the past, so let her sanction one more.
We were rather upset because we still believed in the system in those days
and thought that the church was actually just fine, it was just this one
Mission. So we were puzzled that the Org would not listen to us. We
requested a comm ev and did not get one. We sent many write ups to that Org with no response.
We got a sort of draft of an expell/declare decree and it had mutiny in it.
I sent back a letter outlining all the reasons it wasn't mutiny and so the
expulsion went through without that charge and with very little else.
We were expelled for crossing the Mission holder and pissing her off. Per
the "Leaving and Leaves" PL if someone wants to leave staff then let them
leave. But this is not honored very often. It wasn't in this case.
The Expulsion order claimed that John refused Ethics (not true) and that I'd
broken the Leaving and Leaves PL by telling John I was leaving staff. John
not being just my husband but also a staff member and per that PL you can't
announce any impending departures. They reasoned that I *must* have told him that since he was my husband and that therefore I *must* have committed a high crime.
I believe this is known as a Catch 22. Heh.
A few weeks later the Mission called John up to demand all our books and
meters. He laughed in their face (well, actually, this was on the phone. But
he did laugh.) and the Missionholder's daughter who'd made the call freaked
out and put her Mom on the phone who started ranting and screaming about
squirrel groups. Now, many of these books were given to us by my Dad, and
the rest we'd paid for ourselves. Hell, no, they couldn't have them.
I went away to some event where they said they could help Scn'ists who ran
afoul of the Scn justice system but nothing happened there. I hooked up with
a former friend of mine from the mission and we reestablished our
friendship. I was really glad.
Then, later, I got a letter from her saying she couldn't see me any more
because she was about to get auditing and couldn't "go PTS" and I had to do
A to E steps. I told her I was working with an EO at an Org, (by then I was.
We'd moved from the area and one of the first things I did was to hook up
with an EO at an Org- not Seattle- to work on getting the expulsion
overturned.) and she said it wasn't good enough. Overturning isn't doing an
A to E set of steps. I know this was the mission holder's hand in things
because they had personally told me I'd be better off doing A to E steps
rather than trying to get the expulsion overturned since the missionholder
herself had once gotten an expulsion overturned (of hers) and it took her 6
years. My response was, Ok, cool. Let it take 6 years. My "friend" said
reestablishing friendship was contingent on my doing A to E. I told her
nothing like that had ever been mentioned and that if it had, I'd have told
her where to go.
Later we got a copy of our free loader debt which was padded. It had items
like plane fare to Flag even though this had been paid for by us, not by the
Mission, and room and board at this one town when I went away to an Org for training, even though I'd stayed with my Aunt and Uncle who were, I believe, Lutherans.
The mission ceased to exist. The Missionholder used this as an excuse of
sorts to disband it, which was something she'd wanted to do for quite some
time in any event, and move down to CW.
We asked for a comm ev in Seattle and got one.
During this time a good friend of mine back in my old neck of the woods
bumped into the Missionholder's husband downtown and said happily "Well,
Claire and John are doing well. Looks like they're going to get this
overturned." He said "They'll have to do A to E."
(a note to those unfamiliar with this term and process. A to E steps are
designed for those who are expelled and want to get back in . The person
ends up admitting his fault and guilt and has to do amends. My position was
that it wasn't a valid expulsion so why would I do such steps?)
So the comm ev wrote to the Missionholders as interested parties. They did
not respond. At all.
This made the comm ev go in our favor. Plus their comment was that if
someone wants to leave staff, then let them leave. I'd gone to ethics, tried
really hard to toe the line, so what was the problem. They also said if a
spouse tells her husband what she wants to do that this would be a normal
and natural thing.
So, it was overturned.
The reason I'd wanted it overturned instead of just saying good riddance was
I did not know the things I know now. Had I known them, I'd not have been
interested in getting back in the church. But I'd been told "We don't do
that anymore" many times. I'd believed it. I had been told there'd be
nowhere else to study Scn and things of that nature.
I've remarked on this forum that a lot of people may stay in CofS 'cuz
they're worried about being "cut off from salvation". Well, it was certainly
true in my case.
At this point, I no longer worry about it. I carry my own seeds of salvation
and can do what I like.
Back then, I thought what happened was an anomaly in an otherwise good
church. I do not have this perspective now, of course, but I surely did
then.
I have heard there are many people who get expelled and then do A to E and
sometimes again and again. I knew a couple, actually.
For me, this second expulsion is the last one, as witness my having walked
out one year before this second one went through.
member. The ED always approvingly commented that you could set your watch by me, I was that reliable.
Sometime later, a poison pen letter came in that had gone up the lines and
came down from Int Mgmt to that mission with demands for explanation. It
was from a disgruntled ex Mission student ( a long time one) who wrote a
negative paragraph about every single person there. It was almost like she
was trying to think of things she could comment on in a negative way. So
there was a paragraph that said "Well, I don't know much about Claire, but
she IS living with a druggie." Which was true. I was living with a guy (not
John) who took a lot of drugs and thought beer was a type of religion. The
mission had never tried to intervene in this relationship, although he was a
non Scn'ist.
The Mission holder said she was trying to "cover your ass" (because of the
letter) and that I should therefore sign a contract. I said I liked being
volunteer because I could get time off to do things and whatnot. She said
that I could still have that. So I signed. I was, in a way, sort of tricked
or coerced into doing so.
Oh well. Life is for learning.
So after a year and a half I found that it pretty much sucked there and that
no promise made to me would be honored. When I tried to get some time off to do some things I was told that since I didn't get this promise in writing,
then it wasn't valid. The mission holder did NOT deny making such promises,
either. So I said, Well, I just have about a year or so to go. I'm glad. She
then said my contract hadn't even started running yet because I hadn't done
all the staff statuses yet. (I've looked and looked through policy and
found this NOWHERE).
So there was some back and forthing, and I ended up feeling stuck with the
situation and that I was, in effect, a slave.
Every time any money came in to the mission, the missionholder took it and
said "oops, they owe me back rent.". I received $5.00 the whole time I was
working there.
John and I would show up Saturday or Sunday a.m. (it was all foundation
hours there) and the Missionholder, her husband, her daughter, her daugher's
boyfriend,- all management staff- would be sound asleep. And the doors would be locked because they were all asleep. They assured us that they put in plenty of time when we weren't there. And that although they told us
schedules must be rigorously adhered to, they themselves were exempted from this.
Again, young, feeling trapped, went with it.
Then, later, the Missionholder indicated she might want to give up the
charter. She was getting older and wanted to move away to CW, or do
something else.
Meanwhile she was dramatizing and yelling constantly. Nothing we did was
ever right.
So John and I and another person came in and asked her for the mission
charter. Asked,not demanded. She blew up. Said we didn't do any research. So we told her we did, told her which entity we called, then she blew up about that. She brought in her daughter's boyfriend and he accused us of mutiny. Of course this was false as we'd demanded nothing.
We were put in lower conditions and a call to the parent Org was made. They
sent down a woman who I later saw on a list of people expelled and declared
a couple years later. Her style was mainly to look steely eyed, shriek, and
point fingers of blame. No one ever asked us what happened. She took a
shine to John and got him sent away for some auditing. She had an entirely
different response to yours truly and to our friend.
So I was there while John was gone, and I was working as in lowered
conditions. Most people there wouldn't look me in the eye except for a
couple people who would sneak me a snack or a pat on the back. I was In
Disgrace, as it were.
So John came back and so did the Missionholder's husband, who'd been away at an AO for training and auditing of some sort. He interviewed all of us and
asked what happened. I told him and he said "No, here's what happened. There was a squirrel group, you got sucked in, and then mutinied." I said no.
So this went on and on.
The 3 of us got busted for trying to take our pc folders with us one night,
too. Stopped at the door by several men who implied that they'd use force if
they'd have to. We left our folders there.
Finally I said, look, just let me out of here, I'll take the Freeloader
debt, no problem. I was told I had to do ethics handlings. So I did. I
showed up and I was placed in the lowest condition there is. Confusion. Not
Doubt or Liability. Nope. Confusion. So I went with it although it didn't
"indicate", since I felt trapped. Then I said I'd worked through it and I
was told that I couldn't be let out of that condition until I signed back on
staff. Never have I seen this as an indication that someone's out of
Confusion in any policy, but then again, their own "scriptures", so to
speak, can be bent every which way if it suits any exec.
The idea was to have me back on staff but in lower conditions so that I
could be made to do all kinds of scut work, extra hours, etc.
So I refused to do that and wasn't let out of the condition. They never
pushed John to come in to Ethics, just mentioned it a bit, he never came but
he never refused.
Later on they said he refused ethics handling which was untrue.
So I went home and stopped coming in as did John. The mission holder's
husband visited us at our apartment and told me that I was leaving because I
wanted to go to the movies. I assured him this wasn't the case but he'd
already made up his mind.
We were given a choice by the parent Org and by the Mission. Go back to the Mission or go work at THAT Org or be expelled. We said we weren't going back and that the mission holder had sanctioned many departures and blows in the past, so let her sanction one more.
We were rather upset because we still believed in the system in those days
and thought that the church was actually just fine, it was just this one
Mission. So we were puzzled that the Org would not listen to us. We
requested a comm ev and did not get one. We sent many write ups to that Org with no response.
We got a sort of draft of an expell/declare decree and it had mutiny in it.
I sent back a letter outlining all the reasons it wasn't mutiny and so the
expulsion went through without that charge and with very little else.
We were expelled for crossing the Mission holder and pissing her off. Per
the "Leaving and Leaves" PL if someone wants to leave staff then let them
leave. But this is not honored very often. It wasn't in this case.
The Expulsion order claimed that John refused Ethics (not true) and that I'd
broken the Leaving and Leaves PL by telling John I was leaving staff. John
not being just my husband but also a staff member and per that PL you can't
announce any impending departures. They reasoned that I *must* have told him that since he was my husband and that therefore I *must* have committed a high crime.
I believe this is known as a Catch 22. Heh.
A few weeks later the Mission called John up to demand all our books and
meters. He laughed in their face (well, actually, this was on the phone. But
he did laugh.) and the Missionholder's daughter who'd made the call freaked
out and put her Mom on the phone who started ranting and screaming about
squirrel groups. Now, many of these books were given to us by my Dad, and
the rest we'd paid for ourselves. Hell, no, they couldn't have them.
I went away to some event where they said they could help Scn'ists who ran
afoul of the Scn justice system but nothing happened there. I hooked up with
a former friend of mine from the mission and we reestablished our
friendship. I was really glad.
Then, later, I got a letter from her saying she couldn't see me any more
because she was about to get auditing and couldn't "go PTS" and I had to do
A to E steps. I told her I was working with an EO at an Org, (by then I was.
We'd moved from the area and one of the first things I did was to hook up
with an EO at an Org- not Seattle- to work on getting the expulsion
overturned.) and she said it wasn't good enough. Overturning isn't doing an
A to E set of steps. I know this was the mission holder's hand in things
because they had personally told me I'd be better off doing A to E steps
rather than trying to get the expulsion overturned since the missionholder
herself had once gotten an expulsion overturned (of hers) and it took her 6
years. My response was, Ok, cool. Let it take 6 years. My "friend" said
reestablishing friendship was contingent on my doing A to E. I told her
nothing like that had ever been mentioned and that if it had, I'd have told
her where to go.
Later we got a copy of our free loader debt which was padded. It had items
like plane fare to Flag even though this had been paid for by us, not by the
Mission, and room and board at this one town when I went away to an Org for training, even though I'd stayed with my Aunt and Uncle who were, I believe, Lutherans.
The mission ceased to exist. The Missionholder used this as an excuse of
sorts to disband it, which was something she'd wanted to do for quite some
time in any event, and move down to CW.
We asked for a comm ev in Seattle and got one.
During this time a good friend of mine back in my old neck of the woods
bumped into the Missionholder's husband downtown and said happily "Well,
Claire and John are doing well. Looks like they're going to get this
overturned." He said "They'll have to do A to E."
(a note to those unfamiliar with this term and process. A to E steps are
designed for those who are expelled and want to get back in . The person
ends up admitting his fault and guilt and has to do amends. My position was
that it wasn't a valid expulsion so why would I do such steps?)
So the comm ev wrote to the Missionholders as interested parties. They did
not respond. At all.
This made the comm ev go in our favor. Plus their comment was that if
someone wants to leave staff, then let them leave. I'd gone to ethics, tried
really hard to toe the line, so what was the problem. They also said if a
spouse tells her husband what she wants to do that this would be a normal
and natural thing.
So, it was overturned.
The reason I'd wanted it overturned instead of just saying good riddance was
I did not know the things I know now. Had I known them, I'd not have been
interested in getting back in the church. But I'd been told "We don't do
that anymore" many times. I'd believed it. I had been told there'd be
nowhere else to study Scn and things of that nature.
I've remarked on this forum that a lot of people may stay in CofS 'cuz
they're worried about being "cut off from salvation". Well, it was certainly
true in my case.
At this point, I no longer worry about it. I carry my own seeds of salvation
and can do what I like.
Back then, I thought what happened was an anomaly in an otherwise good
church. I do not have this perspective now, of course, but I surely did
then.
I have heard there are many people who get expelled and then do A to E and
sometimes again and again. I knew a couple, actually.
For me, this second expulsion is the last one, as witness my having walked
out one year before this second one went through.