Masthead | Auditorials
Published Monthly--10 or 12
Times a Year, at 207 North
Washington, Enid, Okla., U.S.A.
Editor: Mr. ALPHIA HART, HDA, HCA, B.Scn., F.Scn.
Publisher: AGNES JOHNSON HART, HCA, WFE, H.Kpr., SEC.
POLICY--Don't take it so damn' seriously.
NOTE--We reserve the right to change our minds from issue to issue -- or even from Page 1 to Page 2, if we desire.
Subscription Price: $1.71 or so a year. No trade-ins or refunds, even if you don't like it--or we quit sending it.
Advertising Rates: $1 an inch if you twist our arm; double if you don't.
Vol. 1, No. 3 June, 1954
HAVE WE A FAITH? OR A SCIENCE?
Following Issue 2 of The ABERREE, correspondence indicates there has been some tendency in the field to believe we are antagonistic toward Dianetics and/or Scientology. Nothing was further from our purpose.
After three years of investigation into L. Ron Hubbard's science--following more than 15 years' research into religion, mysticism, psychology, and allied fields--we are convinced Scientology comes closer to answering our questions about ourselves and life than anything we've ever found. In this lifetime, at least. To us, it has become a way of living, and unless something comes along to supplant it, we shall continue to use and endorse Scientology and the majority of Mr. Hubbard's books on the subject.
Any opposition we have expressed or expect to express is concerned wholly with false, bombastic claims about the science, either in whole or in part. As a religion, we feel that Scientology comes closer to explaining the where-what-and-why of man than any other creed or dogma. As a therapy, we have seen it produce results neither the medical profession nor so-called prayer-and-faith cults have been able to touch. But it's not the ultimate. Not yet.
We sincerely believe that claims any technique will cure anything from ingrown toenails to baldness to a cold in five minutes to five hours are not only false but are unfair to Scientology itself. These claims not only invalidate the preclear, but the auditor trying to use them. When promised results are not obtained within promised limits, the auditor--no matter how well trained and sincere--believes he has failed. He approaches his next case with less certainty, and, eventually, is no better off than the doctor who knows he can do nothing, but needs the money, and "anyway, it was good research". Some continue taking training courses as long as they can afford it; others drop out of Scientology altogether, and the field has lost a friend and follower.
As long as we're operating in the MEST Universe, we're going to conform to MEST acceptance 1evels (unless we can develop sufficient power to demonstrate total cause). It's one thing to put out a "mock-up" and say results are possible rapidly, and another to prove it so others will be convinced. A blind, undying faith just isn't going to get the job done.
SHOULD WE RETURN TO "MERCENARIES"?
It won't be the same Air Force (with no K.P. and no "spuds" to peel for personnel under punishment), if an experiment now being tried at Vance Air Base in Oklahoma works out.
Some brilliant brass hat (probably with an engram from his privatcy) conceived the idea of let-
Turn to Page 16, if you're a subscriber. If not, Stop Here.)