David Miscavige, Ecclesiastical Leader of the Church of Scientology

Here is the official text:

David Miscavige is the ecclesiastical leader of the Scientology religion. From his position as Chairman of the Board of Religious Technology Center (RTC), Mr. Miscavige bears the ultimate responsibility for ensuring the standard and pure application of L. Ron Hubbard’s technologies of Dianetics and Scientology and for Keeping Scientology Working.

In that capacity, Mr. Miscavige has redefined the term “religious leader” to fit the tasks necessary to direct a truly unique, contemporary religion—a religion born in the twentieth century, which has achieved an unprecedented level of expansion in the twenty-first century, including some 8,500 Churches, Missions and affiliated groups across 165 nations.

Under Mr. Miscavige’s stewardship, Scientology-supported social betterment and humanitarian programs have touched the lives of billions. Mr. Hubbard’s religious works are more widely available than ever and the Church has achieved unprecedented growth both in physical size and in the reach of its ministry.

Such is the stamp of Mr. David Miscavige in fulfilling the vision and legacy of L. Ron Hubbard and such is the encapsulated story of his leadership:

  • Guaranteeing the continued growth and expansion of Scientology internationally
  • Making Scientology broadly available to people of all walks of life world over
  • Developing programs to address society’s worst ills and providing the resources to put those programs into action
  • Ensuring that the Scripture of Scientology is true to the Founder’s original writings
  • Restoring Mr. Hubbard’s written works, recorded lectures and filmed lectures
  • Seeing to the international dissemination of Scientology
  • Creating Ideal Scientology Church Organizations
  • Establishing two state-of-the-art digital publishing houses capable of producing 1.3 million books and 1 million CDs per week
  • Inspiring the Volunteer Ministers Program, the world’s largest independent relief force, with more than 200,000 volunteers
  • Securing official recognitions of the religion
  • Presiding over nine annual globally broadcast events that serve as briefings for Scientologists on the Church’s strategic programs

More on Scientology.org

79 Comments

  1. I’ll just leave this here.
    For a funny comic, it makes a good point.

    http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2164#comic

  2. Bumping last for great interest

  3. Am I mistaken, or didn’t Hubbard only designate Miscavige as the chairman of Author Services, inc? Isn’t this the organization that Norman Starkey said in his court declaration is “a private corporation and is not in any way affiliated with any church of scientology, any sea organization unit, branch or entity”?
    I’m just wondering, as I still don’t understand how David rose from the position in which Hubbard assigned him to that of the top authority within the church. Or is there anyone that is above DM in the chain of command? Is DM above the president of scientology in the chain of command? Are they equal? I mean, I know DM outranks the president in the sea org chain of command- does that have effects outside of the sea org activities?

  4. But the scientologist has an answer for this, as Louanne has demonstrated:
    It’s true because they were told it’s true.
    You see, David Miscavige said it was true. He was the ONLY one that made the claim. Hubbard himself never even claimed that this was his plan. Watch the announcement of Hubbard’s death- Miscavige claims that it was intentional. He can’t provide anything backing this up, because nothing exists. All there was was a statement that, at some time, he will “give up his body” (die). Even my child knows that he will someday die. When he does, many years from now, all that know him will surely be amazed that his prediction came true.
    I also notice that DM didn’t announce who Hubbard had designated as running the organization in his absence.

  5. How did he finish his work, when he didn’t even complete OT9-OT15?
    I could write OT9-OT15 for you though. It’s not that difficult to invent an OT level really and i am sure that my OT levels would work at least as good as L.Ron’s.
    Do you want me as your new tech developer?
    I could also refurbish a lot of the old tech on the lower bridge.

  6. I see, Louanne. And that’s certainly true because David M said so, right? After all, he’s the one that announced it, right? Hubbard didn’t write anything about it. He didn’t announce it. He didn’t prepare anybody (least of all, scientology as a whole) for it. He just… died. And he didn’t see it coming.
    And if he did, he left everyone, including his appointed successor (who was later ousted by DM) in the dark on his plans.
    Do you REALLY believe that’s not important?

  7. He sure left a whole lot of loose ends, it seems. Odd that someone like Hubbard wouldn’t think to mention what he planned.
    Once again, do scientologists believe that lrh will ever share his new research?

  8. “Comment by Big daddy on November 19, 2010 5:43 pm
    But I would wonder how it is that Scientology (specifically david, who made the announcement) can say that he voluntarily died to continue his research, when in fact it is not known? It just seems rather important to know, doesn’t it?”

    He finished his work here and was ready to move on. I don’t see what else would be important.

    – L

  9. But anyways, question remains: do scientologists believe that Ron will ever share his new “research” with the rest of the world?

  10. But I would wonder how it is that Scientology (specifically david, who made the announcement) can say that he voluntarily died to continue his research, when in fact it is not known? It just seems rather important to know, doesn’t it?

  11. “Comment by Big daddy on November 17, 2010 3:17 pm
    Bump to re-address my last question. I can’t find this information in any official source.
    May I assume that hubbard’s decision, if indeed his death was intentional, was something that he had planned, rather than a spur of the moment event, or even a mistake?”

    I might be the wrong source because I wasn’t there in 1986 when he died. But here is what I know:

    – he finished his research, writings and anything else he had to do in the early 1980s
    – he returned to science-fiction writing from 1980 on and spent his time writing, or giving interviews (1983) or photographing
    – in short, he finished his Church projects as far as he could do them in a body. That he would have to continue without a body has been said by him several times over the decades, mainly in lectures.
    – so Scientologists considered his work done when he left in 1986

    So the time of death could have been intentional or just determined by the body stopping to work – it won’t make a difference for the Church of Scientology nor Scientology teachings.

    – L

  12. Bump to re-address my last question. I can’t find this information in any official source.
    May I assume that hubbard’s decision, if indeed his death was intentional, was something that he had planned, rather than a spur of the moment event, or even a mistake?

  13. […] Scientology Myths Forum Tags: Church, David, Ecclesiastical, Leader, Miscavige, Scientology […]

  14. I don’t know if this is the right thread for this. If not, I apologize.
    I am aware that it is the belief of scientologists that LaFayette Ron Hubbard voluntarily gave up his body in order to continue his research on another plane. In other words, that it was a willful act to further his understanding and benefit mankind.
    Is it believed that he will find a way to communicate his findings to others? It seems that it would do little good for him to continue his research, if he was not able to give us the benefit of his enlightenment.
    Has this ever been addressed? I’m sure he knew that others wouldn’t understand- Did Mr. Hubbard communicate this plan before he died?

  15. After watching AC360 for at least the 100th time I have to ask: “Who is in control of your Church and/or RTC when David Miscavige “is not there”? Why could other upper management or board members not discard the perpetrators of violence? Who and/or how many did know of these offenses and did nothing until DM was informed/back on base?

    Jenny L – “And Mr. Miscavige was not at the property at the time…”
    Mr. Starkey – ” Mr. Miscavige was not there…”
    Tommy Davis – “When Mr. Miscavige was informed, Marty was removed…”

    Is security lax at all CoS installations when DM id not there?

  16. Don’t play dumb Louanne. You know it’s nothing but the truth. The “but i had no idea this was happening. I thought this was all just propaganda by these anon assholes” excuse won’t go for you.
    You are merely pretending your ignorance and disbelief because you don’t want to take personal responsibility.

  17. Now I’m still a little bit confused- being the curious type who likes to find actual factual documents.
    I see the original 1023 IRS finding, which includes the formative documents of the RTC. In Exhibit E, the legal agreement granting the RTC control over certain copyrights, it saus that the Church of Scientology International is “the mother church and the highest ecclesiastical authority of the religion of scientology” and “with other organizations of the religion of Scientology under the ecclesiastical control and supervision of CSI”. This document was signed by both Hubbard and Miscavage. Why did this change after Hubbard died? It would appear that at the time that Hubbard died, current president Heber Jentzsch was in charge of the organization that was the “highest ecclesiastical authority of the religion of scientology”, which is also the reason why it receives (by contract in the 1023 filing) 90% of the income received by RTC. Of course, it was also at this time that Rathbun was the President of the RTC (form 1023 application).
    Now, what’s very interesting is that the original formative documents define the RTC as the “ultimate authority in matters of religious orthodoxy”, which is a far cry from being the ultimate ecclesiastical authority for the organization. It would seem that, according to filings, the actual ecclesiastical structure of the RTC is pretty much limited to the IGN, WISE, RTC Asutralia and IGN int.
    So, since we see that it was after Hubbard’s death, when did DM become the “highest ecclesiastical authority” within scientology?

  18. Louanne, that doesn’t exactly answer my question.
    David is only responsible for a very specific function within scientology. He is not day to day management. That implies that someone else handles such things, to include overall management of the organization and him, himself.
    Is there any person within scientology that is equal to or over him in the “chain of command”, in any form? To be specific, in the org chart hanging on some wall somewhere, are there any boxes equal to or over David?

    Also, out of curiosity, who created the rtc and the position of cob? Was it hubbard?

  19. “Comment by Bigdaddy on October 16, 2010 4:32 pm
    So If “David Miscavige is responsible for the broad the implementation of L. Ron Hubbard’s writings, and to to keep Scientology clean from influences that would make Scientology unworkable”, does that mean that he can not create day to day policy, management direction and the like?”

    He can point out the correct LRH policy to apply in the current situation. And I am sure he is being heard. He is also presenting Church programs and plans at international events but those are being worked out by those staff who are responsible for it.

    “Is anyone over or equal to him?”

    Over him is LRH policy but not a “person” if you will. And no, there is only one Chairman of the Board RTC.

    “Could he establish operational standards and declare conditions?”

    What would “operational standards” be? Yes, he could declare conditions (Scientology ethics conditions that is) but so can and does every administrator in Scientology. It’s part of LRH Administrative Technology.

    – L

  20. Anon, can you STFU with your propaganda shit? You are so disconnected from reality that I fear for you being institutionalized soon!

    – L

  21. David Miscavige is the single de facto leader of the Church. There is no one above him in the Church hierarchy.
    He controls and micromanages every single aspect of the Church and the Sea Org.
    The president of CSI, Heber Jentzsch, is an old man, who is kept prisoner by David Miscavige. DM has removed him from power. The other church execs have no say on their own either. They only obey DM’s orders or get beaten up by him.

  22. So If “David Miscavige is responsible for the broad the implementation of L. Ron Hubbard’s writings, and to to keep Scientology clean from influences that would make Scientology unworkable”, does that mean that he can not create day to day policy, management direction and the like?
    Is anyone over or equal to him? Could he establish operational standards and declare conditions?

  23. There are plenty of people leading aspects of the Church of Scientology, like the Executive Director International or the President of the Church of Scientology International. They speak about their area of responsibility. David Miscavige is responsible for the broad the implementation of L. Ron Hubbard’s writings, and to to keep Scientology clean from influences that would make Scientology unworkable. That does not make him the “top manager” but the ecclesiastical leader of the Church of Scientology who doubles as a speaker to brief all Scientologists on worldwide plans and developments in relation to Scientology philosophy, or as a guest speaker at church openings.

    – L

  24. Is = of

  25. Just out of curiosity… Why isn’t the president is Scientology it’s leader, instead of the chairman of the board of one of the organizations?

  26. Boy, it’s a good thing david was there to clean house, because Lafayette certainly had some trouble with picking those to trust. I mean, 90% of his personal staff was declared “supressive” under David, and the “loyal officers” that Hubbard personally named… Where are they?

  27. Bigdaddy, no he did not. Not at least to the Scientology community.
    The Brokers were the only ones and DM did what he had to do to remove them from control.

  28. I’m really trying to educate myself, but I’m having a whole lot of trouble finding ANYTHING that LRH wrote or said publically, putting David in the role which he now holds. The closest that I can find is layafette’s final last will and testament, which lists David as an alternate executor to the will (third in priority).
    Are you aware of anything more definitive?

  29. Perhaps before I call it a night, I can float out a few concepts related, for thoughts…

    Could you please deconflict this: faq.scientology (dot) org says:

    “Church of Scientology International (CSI), the Mother Church of the Scientology religion, is headquartered in Los Angeles. CSI oversees the ecclesiastical activities of all Scientology churches, organizations and groups throughout the world, and sees that individual churches receive guidance in their ministries.”

    However, even though CSI oversees the “ecclesiastical activities”, it is the chairman of the board of the RTC that is the “ecclesiastical leader”? Also, the same site further states that “CSI also provides the broad planning and direction needed to support the Church’s international growth.”, but you say that it is David Miscavige that is “Guaranteeing the continued growth and expansion of Scientology internationally”. Who does it, or do they work together on it, with CSi providing direction for David to carry out?

    The same site says of the Executive Director International that “is the most senior management position in the Church” and “is responsible for seeing that the Scientology religion continues to expand internationally”. Is this person in a senior management position over David? Do we have any idea who this person or his staff is?

    To that same point, the site says, “RTC is not part of the management structure of the Church and is not involved in its day-to-day affairs.” Is this saying that the chairman of said board is not involved in management nor day to day affairs?

  30. that’s weird, I don’t even know what word that is that my autocorrect would add. Would you be so kind as to fix that, Louanne? I was asking “does he” have any peers or superiors in the organization?

  31. Okay, as he is only the chairman of but one of the multiple components, firstevie have equals within the organization, in terms of position? Superiors?

  32. (yes, I changed some settings)

  33. Some fixed ideas here…

    Mike Rinder ran away from the Church and left kids and wife behind. He then was expelled upon severe breach of trust. Long before that he was removed from his functions due to gross incompetence and visible damage to the well-being of others. It does not take a “boss” or “senior” to do that. In Scientology staffs lose their position when they repeatedly violate organizational policy. The violation is determined (or allegations rejected) by other staff members upon request. It’s a transparent system and helps the group to correct, clean up or get rid of those who have issues. No secrets are revealed here. This all is covered in the Introduction into Scientology Ethics Book that is part of the 18 Scientology Basics books that are available in libraries all over the world.

    – L

  34. If David Miscavige has no say in administrative questions of CSI, then how could he decide that for example Mike Rinder gets fired?
    Mike Rinder was the head of OSA Int., which is part of the CSI structure and not RTC. So formally David Miscavige wouldn’t be in the position to make job decisions concerning the staff of CSI.

  35. Maybe, Pat, you could educate me a bit. I understand the role of the RTC, according to the articles of incorporation and other formative documents.
    Given that David is the chairman of ONLY that organization, and has the second hat of “chief investigator”, what is his job? In other words, what are the responsibilities of DM?

  36. Pat,

    This very well may be your best argument yet- it’s a great improvement and I’m geniunely impressed with your lucidity.

    To begin. Ecclesiastical is defined as:

    “of or relating to a church especially as an established institution” (merriam-webster)

    Or, similarly, “Of or relating to a church, especially as an organized institution.” (American Heritage)

    If these definitions were to be accepted, the phrase would be expanded to be “David Miscavige is the ultimate authority relating to the church”. Yet, you say that you disagree with definition, and more so that scientology has some sort of accepted definition that scales this back. Is that what you’re saying?

    If so, it would seem odd that even the main page of scientology, plus multiple related pages to include this one, talks at great length about the ultimate “clerical” authority of scientology, if that is truly as restricted as you claim. After all, you really don’t see much from the president of scientology, do you?

    But, we’re really into interpretation now, it seems. But you would surely admit that DM is the most advertised figure in scientology, would you not? And you would agree that he is frequently advertised to be the “ecclesiastical leader” of scientology, strictly in the realm of black and white fact?

    Good answer, about the trustees. Do you know how they’re selected? It’s not an issue if you don’t, I’m just curious as to how much say the average scientologist has in the management of their organization.

    Now, on to FM. He may be petty with that. Or, he may have been making a self-depreciating joke. I don’t know, nor do you. So without judging the WHY, perhaps one could understand the WHAT he said. I feel that I accurately clarified his question. It has nothing to do with Niki, and certainly not the video. I think you missed the point of what he, and I, said.

    The question remains unanswered, but I can clarify again if needed.

  37. @Comment by Bigdaddy on September 15, 2010 5:16 am

    “Next, our racing fan friend, you don’t appear too fond of him, but he does raise two points as valid as they are ignored. ”

    What I am not fond of is when a person says that he’s a Race Car driver and it’s used as a way to knock Scientology. I have absolutely no idea what choosing to be a Scientologist has to do with how many races he has or has not been in or won. What does that have to do with his choice of religion? Or, for that matter, his choice of profession?

    That’s why I don’t see any “point” being made, except by RF’s own admission that he’s being petty. It’s non-sequiter to what is stated in the video.

    Pat

  38. @Comment by Bigdaddy on September 14, 2010 4:39 pm

    “Okay, pat, let’s work within the framework you’ve created. Eventually, David will how old, and either retire or die. Who will decide who takes his place?”

    He’s Chairman of the Board. That would be up to the Trustees, wouldn’t it?

    Pat

  39. BD,

    Complete understanding is important to me. I understand that RTC and Church leadership are 2 different things. Ecclesiastical means the clerical side or religious technology side in our case. The Church leadership is in CSI. Too often I’ve seen you and others try to make that mean that he is the only authority in the Church. I want you to distinguish the difference. Ecclesiastical leader does not = leader of the Church of Scientology. This becomes even more important when people start asking whether he can be replaced or not, as if he is considered THE head of the Church. CSI and RTC have authority over different areas. Does that make sense to you?

    Pat

  40. Pat – Are you caling Louanne a liar?

    http://www.scientologymyths.info/

    Q:Who is Mark Marty Rathbun?
    Mark “Marty” Rathbun is a former Scientologist who once worked close to the ecclesiastical leader of the Church of Scientology, David Miscavige. After revelation of gross misconduct, violence against other and alterations of Scientology he was demoted and left the church in 2004. Since about 2009 has publicly been an anti-scientologist.

  41. I provided multiple cos references. Do you deny David to be your ecclesiastical leader, in relation to Scientology?

  42. Dear god, pat, are you having trouble with the synonym? Can you accept the equitable phrase “ecclesiastical leader”?

  43. “David Miscavige is the ecclesiastical leader of the Scientology religion. From his position as Chairman of the Board Religious Technology Center (RTC), Mr. Miscavige bears the ultimate responsibility for ensuring the standard and pure application of L. Ron Hubbard’s technologies and Keeping Scientology Working.”

    Do you see the distinction? If not, compare that with the RTC statement. What do you consider that means in relation to CSI and the organization versus the religion?

    Pat

  44. “RTC holds the ultimate ecclesiastical authority regarding the standard and pure application of L. Ron Hubbard’s religious technologies. Religious Technology Center is not part of the management structure of the Church, nor is it involved in the Church’s day-to-day affairs.”

    From the RTC site, section on DM.

    So, BD, again, I ask ..

    Where did this idea come from that DM is the ecclesiastical head of Scientology?

    Pat

  45. “Where did this idea come from that DM is “ecclesiastical head” of Scientology?”

    David Miscavige is called the “Ecclesiastical Leader of the Scientology Religion” on the front page of scientology.org.
    Scroll down to the bottom of the page:
    http://www.scientology.org/

  46. I see I misread what you wrote.
    RacingFan asked some very direct questions, even only in his 8:03 posting. His question, in case you missed it, could be summarized as: is there anything that a scientologist can PHYSICALLY do that a non-scientologist cannot? Is there anything at all that a SCIENTOLOGIST can do, anything that can be observed, versus esoteric concepts like feelings and thoughts, that a non-scientologist cannot also demonstrate?
    I hope that clarifies what he appears to be saying (correct me if I’m wrong, RF)

  47. Pat- I think this URL would address that.
    http://tinyurl.com/2cff2pn

    And fine, we can call them questions if you want to, points if one would rather. It doesn’t matter. Are you able to discuss them?

  48. @Comment by Bigdaddy on September 15, 2010 9:41 am

    “Where did this idea come from that DM is “ecclesiastical head” of Scientology?”

    “Just a few websites, like the scientology website, scientology news website, rtc’s website and louanne’s website. Do you not count those?”

    Specifically where on these do you see this? link
    ====================================

    Again, I see no points. I see opinions, not questions.

    Pat

  49. Actually, heck, I already reiterated his points. Are you not noticing them, as well?

  50. “Where did this idea come from that DM is “ecclesiastical head” of Scientology?”

    Just a few websites, like the scientology website, scientology news website, rtc’s website and louanne’s website. Do you not count those?

    “I don’t see any points to ignore.”

    They’re in there.

  51. @Comment by Bigdaddy on September 15, 2010 5:16 am

    “Next, our racing fan friend, you don’t appear too fond of him, but he does raise two points as valid as they are ignored. ”

    I don’t see any points to ignore.

    Pat

  52. @Comment by Anon on September 15, 2010 7:12 am

    Correction:

    “That’s Author Services Inc. , right?”

    Yes. Established to handle his personal affairs in 1982, and to handle his literary works, music and theatrical works.

    Pat

  53. @Comment by Bigdaddy on September 15, 2010 5:16 am

    “For one, arguing over the mere title doesn’t change the question as to when/where was David selected to be the ultimate “ecclesiastical head” of Scientology? Who held that role before David? Most importantly, who selects the person that will hold that role next?”

    Where did this idea come from that DM is “ecclesiastical head” of Scientology?

    Pat

  54. @Comment by Anon on September 15, 2010 7:12 am

    “Pat, you’re right, i misread.
    It doesn’t say that DM was appointed as chairman of RTC, only as chairman of the organisation that handled LRH’s personal affairs.”

    ok.

    “That’s Author Services Inc. , right?”

    No.

  55. Pat, you’re right, i misread.
    It doesn’t say that DM was appointed as chairman of RTC, only as chairman of the organisation that handled LRH’s personal affairs.
    That’s Author Services Inc. , right?

  56. Correction to grammar: I had meant that ‘a wog cannot do’

  57. Pat, you’re still missing or ignoring the main points in favor of arguing semantics.

    For one, arguing over the mere title doesn’t change the question as to when/where was David selected to be the ultimate “ecclesiastical head” of Scientology? Who held that role before David? Most importantly, who selects the person that will hold that role next?

    Next, our racing fan friend, you don’t appear too fond of him, but he does raise two points as valid as they are ignored.

    First, he asks a question that most neophytes ask when first exposed to Scientology: if Scientology can make one so fantastically able, why are the practicing scientologists, in general, not doing so fantastically well? In other words, why isn’t the scientologist driver doing better in his races? By extension, where are the Scientology world leaders, Nobel prize winners, medical prodigies?

    To answer your question, speed racer, and feel free to jump in here, pat, applying Scientology actually doesn’t enable one to perform any actions or accomplish any task that a “wog” (Hubbard’s term for a non-scientologist), they just feel more spiritually aware in a non-demonstrable way. I don’t mean that to in any way lessen the belief system, which I support their right to hold, but that’s the reason why niki is not needed to win to validate his position.

    Second point he makes, which you may have missed, pat, is that it’s very common for a “founder” to name a successor. That’s his point in the second posting, hence the headlines.

  58. @ Comment by RacingFan on September 14, 2010 9:17 pm

    “Do you still hold that belief, Pat?”

    Fact: L Ron Hubbard relinquished all authority in the Church of Scientology.

    Yes, because I saw the policy where he did that. Unless you have policy where he later re-assumed the reigns of running the Church and took that away from CSI I have no reason to believe critics who spin to the contrary.

    Pat

  59. @Comment by RacingFan on September 14, 2010 8:03 pm

    “I really hate to be petty”

    Me too. So stop.

    Pat

  60. @Comment by Holly on September 14, 2010 4:01 pm

    “Pat – thank you very much for responding.

    You’re welcome.

    “Could you comment on the watchdog committee that was mentioned, is that part of the current Scientology organization?”

    The WDC was just that – a committee – and has been falsely placed as “highest” in the CofS structure. It never was. CSI holds that function. That claim was made on Wikipedia. I’d sure like to see the cites for that, such as C of S policy, etc. It isn’t relevant as it’s duties were absorbed into the CSI structure.

    Pat

  61. “I haven’t looked, but my point is not dependent on doing so. The fact is you’re right- I can’t find anywhere where anyone OTHER than David claims that Hubbard assigned him the role, or the extended role of the “ultimate ecclesiastical leader” of the organization. Did Hubbard ever appoint him to that role before any witnesses, or do we have only David to trust? Now, I’m not saying it didn’t happen, I’m only saying that I can’t find it, if so. Maybe you can help.”

    Where does David claim that, BD?

    Pat

  62. Oh, and just because I hate it when people are just so wrong…
    Scientology, I see, cops out by saying that Hubbard has “no successor”. Fine, that’s just a matter of how one wants to perceive it. Maybe some feel that the new fella is the spiritual successor of hubbard, that he’s taken his place as the head of scientology, maybe some don’t. But saying here that a “founder” can have no successor is plain ignorant of facts. A few recent headlines:

    “Debrah Lee To Become CEO Successor To BET Founder”
    “Qaida founder blasts successor bin Laden for ‘immoral terror”
    “Co-founder leaves Atlas Brown; successor says firm is thriving”
    “Touro College Announces a Successor to Its Founder and Longtime President”
    “Tears for a Union’s Founder, Cheers for His Successor”

    Do you still hold that belief, Pat?

  63. I really hate to be petty, but as a racing fan, I need to bring up the point. Hell, I don’t care a thing about scientology, but if there’s one thing I know, it’s racing.
    But near as I can tell, a scientologist is supposed to be very capable, an exceptional human being able to accomplish more than us average people. Isn’t that true? Isn’t that scientology is supposed to do for you?
    If so, is Niki Lanik really the best example of this? You’re talking about a driver who’s biggest sponsor is his religion, who’s only won seven individual races since 2003 (a win ratio of only 8%) which puts him miles below even the top 100 of racers!
    I mean, the guy’s only hit the podium a handfful of times, and my grandmother hits the corners with more guts. Seriously, why isn’t he winning more, if scientology is working for him??

  64. Now, Pat, that I have a few minutes, I can more intelligently respond to your multiple posts.

    For starters, you say, “Wow. I don’t see that here. Can you give me the exact line where that is stated?”

    I haven’t looked, but my point is not dependent on doing so. The fact is you’re right- I can’t find anywhere where anyone OTHER than David claims that Hubbard assigned him the role, or the extended role of the “ultimate ecclesiastical leader” of the organization. Did Hubbard ever appoint him to that role before any witnesses, or do we have only David to trust? Now, I’m not saying it didn’t happen, I’m only saying that I can’t find it, if so. Maybe you can help.

    You also say, “Ergo, DM would have to have the title of Founder to be L Ron Hubbard’s “successor”.”

    That’s only true if one does not fully understand the role of successor. While assuming the TITLE of another is one of the many definitions, it is not the only one. For example:

    USLegal.com: “A successor is a person or entity who takes over and continues the role or position of another”

    Princeton (among other definitions): “a person who follows next in order”

    Dictionary.com: “a person who succeeds another in an office, position, or the like. ” (note, “or the like”)

    Merrian Webster Dictionary of Law: “one that succeeds another (as in a position, title, office, or estate)”

    Was not, at one time, Hubbard the ultimate authority within Scientology, as in he one time managed and led the group? Is not David performing that function now? The title is irrelevant- the responsibilities are. At one time, Hubbard was the figurehead of Scientology- he was succeeded in that role by David.

    But, it’s a tomayto, tomahto situation- it doesn’t matter what one refers to David as- the question is, how do you know how he got there? I’d imagine there’s a very easy answer, I just don’t know it. Do you?

  65. Okay, pat, let’s work within the framework you’ve created. Eventually, David will how old, and either retire or die. Who will decide who takes his place?

  66. Pat – thank you very much for responding.

    Could you comment on the watchdog committee that was mentioned, is that part of the current Scientology organization?

    Holly

  67. @Comment by Anon on September 13, 2010 1:28 pm

    “According to scientology.org, David Miscavige was appointed as chairman of the RTC by L. Ron Hubbard:”

    1) Trustee was DMs appointment in RTC by L Ron Hubbard and DM became Chairman after L Ron Hubbard’s death in 86.
    2) L Ron Hubbard’s personal affairs were not administered by RTC. That was what L Ron Hubbard appointed DM to administer.

    Again, more proof that there is rampant alteration of truth by the critics.

    Pat

  68. @Comment by Anon on September 13, 2010 1:28 pm

    “According to scientology.org, David Miscavige was appointed as chairman of the RTC by L. Ron Hubbard:

    http://www.scientology.org/david-miscavige.html?link=bodytitle

    Wow. I don’t see that here. Can you give me the exact line where that is stated?

    Pat

  69. Ergo, DM would have to have the title of Founder to be L Ron Hubbard’s “successor”.

    Pat

  70. Holly,

    DM is Chairman of the Board for the Religious Technology Center, which owns the trademarks and copyrights for the Church of Scientology. DM is not considered a “successor” to L Ron Hubbard, since L Ron Hubbard removed himself from the Administration of the Church, many years prior to his death in 1986. DMs posting order would have come down as an Executive Directive from RTC as an internal order, and wouldn’t have been in the public domain, nor are any other posting orders for Church staff. This is part of the administration policy written by L Ron Hubbard. DM became the Chairman of the Board in 1987, established there by the Church of Spiritual Technology. The only ones using the term “successor”, I’ve seen in my 39+ years in Scientology have been the critics’ use of it to try to spin that DM somehow, someway wasn’t appointed properly. It’s just another indication of failure on the part of critics, in my opinion, to have an actual understanding of technology or policies they criticize. L Ron Hubbard’s official title as of his death was Founder.

    Pat

  71. According to scientology.org, David Miscavige was appointed as chairman of the RTC by L. Ron Hubbard:

    http://www.scientology.org/david-miscavige.html?link=bodytitle

    “In light of what had nearly transpired, L. Ron Hubbard requested a corporate reorganization of the Church designed to ensure the Church would not fall into hostile hands and the religion could move on into perpetuity—always remaining true to its Source teachings. To that end, L. Ron Hubbard saw to the formation of Religious Technology Center to hold the Scientology and Dianetics trademarks and to preserve, maintain and protect the Scientology religion. He appointed Mr. Miscavige a Trustee of that Church organization.

    To oversee his personal affairs for the remainder of his life, L. Ron Hubbard also appointed David Miscavige as chairman of the organization charged with handling those matters.”

  72. Holly, truthfully, I don’t believe that a scientologist will answer that question- at least not here. Have you asked this at your local org?

  73. Are either of you Scientologists? I would like an authoritative answer if any would care to reply.

  74. Oh, how embarrassing! The error, it seems, was mine, kindly ignore last.

  75. Was there a website error, or are you censoring questions you’re not able to answer?
    I assume it was an error, because asking where and how Hubbard officially designated miscavage as his successor seems to be a very simple question. Surely Hubbard, who wrote so many millions of words and spoke so many times, mentioned such a thing in some way?

  76. Holly, there was an organization that was put together to make sure there was never only one person running all of Scientology. The name was WDC Watch Dog Committee. DM has effectively removed this group from existence. Therefore he is the sole manager of all of Scientology.

  77. Biddaddy, since they are either ignoring you or haven’t answered I’ll answer your question.
    No there was nothing ever publicly shown that Hubbard wanted DM as his successor. The Brokers however had something in writing but DM demonized the Brokers so badly that they canceled the order that the Brokers were supposed to be in charge. DM claimed that the Brokers wrote the order themselves. Of course there was nothing shown for evidence from DM about that at all.
    He essentially muscled his way into control.
    And that’s why you have the organization being run the way it is. Thankfully DM isn’t smart enough to realize you wont gain respect from those that can see logic with the way Scientology is being run.

    And on another note. DM isn’t even supposed to be giving orders. the way the Organization is set up he’s not supposed to be giving any orders legally.

  78. Along those lines, did Hubbard ever formally appoint dm as his successor? Was that ever done in writing, or in public?

  79. Hi –

    Question regarding David Miscavige,

    Mr. Miscavige’s title is Chairman of the Board – is that a position that’s voted upon by a board of directors?

    What organization is in charge of appointing/replacing church leadership? Could you explain that process?

    Thank you.


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

  • What is this blog?

    I am running a website, ScientologyMyths.info which deals with critical questions about Scientology.
    So naturally I am into finding answers to the questions that are constantly being asked all over the internet about Scientology, Scientologists, the Church, L. Ron Hubbard and the Church's leader, David Miscavige. I want to find answers from independent sources, not only Church of Scientology owned sites or anti-Scientology hate sites. So what's left? Court documents, photos and other reliable sources. Help me find stuff and ask whatever you want. Thanks!

    The easiest way to shoot a question over to me is to click here.

    Or search below.
  • Archives

  • Religion Photo Feed

    S. Spirito in Sassia

    San Pietro

    Flight into Egypt

    More Photos