PTS To The Church
I was watching a Youtube video by Pierre Ethier the other day (here). Pierre is a Class XII in the Field who heavily promotes his services as an auditor and/or C/S. He is also a controversial figure in the Independent Field for a variety of reasons.
Whether you like or dislike Pierre, one of his points was a good one. It was the idea of PTSness in relation to the Independent Field. His opinion is that PTSness is given inadequate attention. I can’t speak to that, as I don’t actually know what gets audited by auditors in the Field.
But it’s a worthwhile subject to shed light on. The Church has become a suppressive organization. If a person just emerged from it, their reasons may or may not include that one. (And it may or may not be applicable to them anyway.)
At one point when I was on staff, I got a cold. Of course, I was hauled into the Ethics Officer’s office to handle the situation since, as we all know, illness = PTS. I rummaged around but couldn’t find anyone in my present time environment who seemed suppressive to me. The Ethics Officer had me keep looking, and the only person I could come up with was someone from my childhood who had been cruel and abusive to me and my mother. I had been thinking about him. But I discounted that person, because he wasn’t in my present time environment. The Ethics Officer asked me if my thinking about this person didn’t constitute a “connection” to him, and I had to admit it did.
If you’re a Field auditor and you have someone in front of you who just stepped out of the shadow of the Church, you might consider, as a first step, a PTS handling on the person. But obviously only if the symptoms warrant it. And don’t consider that, if the person has “disconnected” from the Church, that’s the end of it. It may or may not be. One thing’s for sure– if a person truly is PTS, all your auditing of them is for naught if you’re auditing over a PTS condition.
(And by the way, there is a phobia in the Field about calling a person or entity “suppressive”, because the Church has perverted the meaning so badly. We need to get over this. There are plenty of LRH references on the subject which are perfectly valid and cover the subject completely. As with “floating needles”, forget what the Church says and use your noggin.)