To understand the term "ex-Scientologist" one must look at how it came about in the first place. Then, of course, it's meaning would have evolved differently for different people.
So the point of agreement would occur at the time of formation of this term.
Was this term first used on an expulsion order by the Church, or on some suppressive declare?
I am not very certain about it. But, this would be the place to start.
Is anybody there who knows this for certain? Alan?
.
I'm not sure we need to look to the CoS for a definition of the word "ex". They didn't coin that word.
From Wiki:
The prefix ex- first appeared in English words in the Middle English in words borrowed from French. It comes from the Latin where it was both a prefix and a preposition. Later in the Middle English period it became a productiveAncient Greek (εκ-, εχ-, εχω-). Its meaning ranges from prefix. It is akin to
- 1. "out, away" (example exit)
- 2. "up" (abstract meaning indicating increase or strengthening of a particular quality, often negative - sometimes called intensive) (example exaggeration, exacerbate)
- 3. "former, prior" (examples ex-boyfriend, ex-president) This is a much later development and did not exist in Latin.
and:
Etymology
From Latin ex-.
[edit] Prefix
ex-
- out of extract, expel, except, expression, etc.
- outside ex-directory
- former (but still living) ex-husbandex-president
But LRH did invent the term Scientology:
From the CoS website:
Scientologist: one who knows he has found the way to a better life through Scientology and who, through Scientology books, tapes, training and processing, is actively attaining it.
Scientology: Scientology applied religious philosophy. It is the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, universes and other life. Scientology means scio, knowing in the fullest sense of the word and logos, study. In itself the word means literally
knowing how to know. Scientology is a “route,” a way, rather than a dissertation or an assertive body of knowledge. Through its drills and studies one may find the truth for himself. The technology is therefore not expounded as something to believe, but something to do.
And here is where my confusion lays.
To me Scientology is the whole of the writings, tapes, books, lectures etc. It's everything LRH created. Not just the "nice" bits.
I don't understand how someone can call themselves a Scientologist, whether it be a FZer or Indi, yet actively reject part of the teachings.
LRH said himself that squirrels are NOT Scientologists. Yet isn't picking out only bits and pieces of the "tech" and completely ignoring other bits of the tech "squirreling"?
Not having done any FZ or indi services I admit I might have things wrong here, but this is how I see it.
A lot of people find some good in the auditing tech of Scn, yet find the policies of disconnection, the RPF, overboarding, lower conditions, freeloader bills, baby watching, high security etc etc to be abberant Yet it was the same guy, the same author, the same source that came up with this stuff as came up with the "nice" stuff. So if you only pick & chose what bits of Scientology you use, you aren't really a Scientologist as per the founders own definition. Isn't that what "keeping Scientology Working" was all about?
So how is it that someone like Fluffy still calls herself an Indi "Scientologist"? Is it just lack of a better word? Or am I missing something here? I don't mean to pick on you Fluffy, it's just that you are a good example of my confusion about these terms.
I've probably derailed my own thread here but this question has been on my mind for a long time.