San Antonio, Scientology and World Class BBQ

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Just some random thoughts, about the Church, old friends, Scientology, San Antonio and world class BBQ.

J. Mueller’s BBQ

I recently returned from San Antonio to catch up with a couple of former BYU roommates. One is still active, the other is completely inactive and lives in Austin.

We drove up to Austin to meet our inactive friend and have some BBQ at J. Mueller’s. J. Mueller’s BBQ is just an old trailer and a smoker on an empty parking lot. However, many experts consider his BBQ the best in the world. He has been featured on several television programs, including the Travel Channel and the Food Network. Even though we had to wait in line for over an hour, it was an unforgettable meal. It’s pretty amazing what we humans can do with good quality meat, a smoker, salt and pepper, and a few hours to blow.

By the way, here is the Texas Monthly link to the full article entitled “Of Meat and Men”, which reviewed at length the history and awesomeness of John Mueller and his former apprentice, Aaron Franklin:

http://www.texasmonthly.com/cms/printth ... 2012-02-01



The Master

We all happened to see the “The Master” on opening day. It was the strangest movie going experience I have had. Here are some of my impressions about The Master:

“The Master”, is a recently released art-house film starring Philipp Seymour Hoffman as Lancaster Dodd, a fictional character whose life, times, and circumstances bear more than a passing resemblance to L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of the Church of Scientology. The film has been met with a great deal of unfavorable reaction from the Church of Scientology, which views any criticism (perceived or real) as a threat worthy of eradication by any means necessary. The movie has just enough differences from the real-life L. Ron Hubbard to give its producers and distributors legal recourse to effectively address the inevitable scores of defamation lawsuits, claims of copyright infringement, and attempts to enjoin the film.

As we entered the theater and looked around for an available seat, we decided to sit on the front row of the upper section of the theater. To enter the row, however, we needed to get by an old, elderly woman who was seated on the end of the row. As we attempted to politely scoot by her, she loudly and unhappily moaned, “Can’t you go around to the other side to get in?” Somewhat taken aback by her bitchiness, we took a few paces toward the other side to see if there were an aisle-entrance, but there wasn’t. The theater was small and there was only one aisle-entrance for each row. As we came back to the ornery elderly woman, I politely told her that there was no entrance to her row from the other side of the theater, that we were sorry to bother her, and that we’d find somewhere else to sit. We found a row several rows up into which we squeezed and sat down.

As we sat down and pondered the strangeness of that angry woman, we watched two twenty-something year-old men come in and try the exact same thing we had tried just minutes before. They came in and attempted to enter the upper front row where the angry old bitty was seated. She barked at them that they needed to go around to the other side of the row and enter there, they humbly did so, realizing like we did that she was unwell in the head. When they realized there was no other entrance into the upper front row, however, they came back and told the woman, “Sorry, there’s no other way in. We’re going to scoot by you here.” The angry old bitch did nothing to help facilitate their entry. She did not get up, or move her legs, or anything like that. So, the two young men just stepped right over her boney, varicose vein-ridden legs and sat down further down the row. We watched the scene with a great amount of interest and some perplexity.

Soon, a middle-aged couple came into the theater and needlessly took a seat right next to us on our row. Their reasons for doing do became apparent a little later.

The lights went down and after probably 30 minutes of trailers, the actual movie began. As soon as the opening scene began, we noticed the old, cantankerous lady on the end of the upper front row promptly get up and leave. A light began to flicker in our minds as we started to understand what may have been going on there.

The couple next to us continued to converse with one another in very loud voices, saying things such as “I can’t believe this. This is so offensive and inaccurate. Who made this movie. Only a complete idiot would believe this crap?”

When the first prolonged scene showing the character Lancaster Dodd appeared on screen, the couple declared loudly so that everyone in the theater could hear, that they couldn’t bear to watch anymore and departed the theater. Those of us left behind, though slightly confused, had a fairly good idea about what had just happened.

The movie, itself, was brilliantly acted and obviously well-written and directed. But, it was not an easy movie to watch. I don’t think I’ll ever watch it again. No, there were no scenes of violence or blood or gore. There was some rough language, but nothing we don’t hear in a PG-13 film these days. There was really nothing terribly offensive, although some of the nudity seemed unnecessary. Rather, the film was tough to watch because one of the lead characters, a man named Freddie played by actor Joaquin Phoenix, was deliberately written and acted in a way to make us feel unsettled. Freddie was borderline mentally ill, uncouth, uneducated, unaware of social norms, and unencumbered by notions of ethics or morality. And, he was an uncontrollable alcoholic.

Freddie’s character was intended to both repulse and fascinate us, and when he meets up with Lancaster Dodd and begins to show some improvement through his “processing” (a nod to Scientology’s “auditing”), his anticipated redemption seems like it will be all the more glorious. That redemption never fully happens, however. Freddie is ultimately unable to continue his association with Dodd. His involvement with The Cause has changed him, perhaps for the better, but it cannot be a life-long commitment. There is too much heartbreak, too much sickness, too much solitude, too much doubt, and too much abandonment in Freddie’s life. Freddie is wise enough to realize, without even realizing it, that he cannot combat his demons per Dodd’s methods. His redemption will have to come another way, and the audience is left guessing in the final scene when, how, and even whether that final redemption will come.

As the house lights came on after the end of the film, we sat there in our seats in stunned, awkward silence. “That was the strangest vibe I’ve ever had watching any movie, ever,” my inactive friend stated. “And, I’m not talking about the film.”

We quickly came to the obvious conclusion that the ornery old woman who tried to block access to her row, and the loudly-conversing couple who sat next to us and continually remarked how offensive and inaccurate the movie was, were plants from the Church of Scientology. Their purpose was to discourage people from watching the movie. Or, at the very least, to make the movie-going experience as uncomfortable as possible. Mission accomplished, I suppose. Very, very strange vibe throughout the movie and I don’t plan to rent the DVD or ever watch the show again.

According to Scientology jargon, we are likely PTSs, or potential trouble sources, for our patronage of the movie. If we were members of the Church of Scientology, we’d be subject to security (or “sec”) checks in an attempt to rehab us back to the orthodoxy.

The LDS Church

After the movie, we all took a walk around the hill country. As we walked, we discussed several topics, including the difficulties of growing up in heavily LDS Utah, and the challenges the Church is facing over declining and even negative growth, an unprecedented attrition rate, reluctance to objectively address problems and concerns with history, the hagiography of early Church leaders, peculiar doctrines, and other items pertaining to the origin and development of our unique canon. My active friend, who, like most of the active members of the Church has been unaware of these issues for much of his life, remains unconcerned about them and frankly uninterested in knowing much about them. That kind of treatment is a subconscious defense mechanism, much like the monkeys of the “hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” engraving at Nikko Toshogu Shrine at Nikko, Japan. His subconscious tells his conscious mind, “Hey, as long as you don’t know about these problems, you’ll never have to worry about defending them or justifying your belief”, and he accordingly tunes out and carries on as happy as an ignorant clam about to by pried open by a hungry and resourceful sea otter.

For myself, I have learned a great deal about the historical problems and personality problems of and within the Church, of doctrinal non-sequiturs and the real stories behind the virtually canonized official history. With respect to some issues, I’ve been able to find a satisfying (not necessarily academically cogent) answer and am willing to rely by way of faith on either an eventual answer or on the ultimate irrelevance of the issues at hand. For other matters, my mind remains full of questions and curiosities and I will continue my studies.

One question I would like to ask the Lord directly, assuming that in the end I’m found sufficiently worthy through the grace, mercy, and merits of the atonement to stand in his presence, is why did he allow his duly called and appointed leaders to confuse us so. Why weren’t better records kept so that we in the Church could intellectually let history be history without having to continually apologize for it, so that we could focus on what was really important?

I suppose he may answer something to effect of “Well, why did you let it confuse you? You knew what my gospel was about. You experienced some of the blessings of my grace during your life. You knew that the Church’s leaders, though I approved of them as leaders, were just men and were often as imperfect as you were. Why did you let anything they said or did that was obviously reflective of their mortal imperfections and prejudices draw your attention away from my gospel?”

At which point, I’ll probably respond, “But, we were told that they would never lead us astray. We were made to believe that once they had spoken, all the thinking had been done for us and we were just required to believe and obey.”

Jesus might say in patient response, “Again, it’s just evidence of their imperfections and their need of my grace, mercy, and atonement. Tell me, Everybody Wang Chung did they ever encourage you to stop trusting in me, my identity, my mission, my sacrifice for your sorry butt, or my love for you and your family?”

“Well, sometimes, Lord… yes. For years in your Church, we were indoctrinated with the requirement of earning our salvation through our works. The doctrine of grace was often ignored, or treated as a last moment cherry on top of a sundae… the sundae being our works. We were told that grace couldn’t save us without our best efforts, and that we’d get no grace and be shown no mercy unless we had done everything we could have possibly done in this life to save ourselves. It was a depressingly impossible standard, Lord. Did you know that Brigham Young was teaching something called ‘blood atonement’?”

“Yes, and I’ve already had a good discussion with him about that. Things are okay now. Wang, when you have time, you need to go back a review the scriptures and refresh your memory about what was said about grace and works. For anything one of the leaders of my church might have said to make you feel that you had to save yourself before I could save you, or submit to execution to receive forgiveness, I apologize in their behalf and ask that you forgive them. Things are clearer for you now, aren’t they? The doubts of the past don’t bother you like they used to, do they?”

“Correct, Lord. It’s better now.”

“Then let it go, forgive them now, like I’ve forgiven you, and cross this bridge right here over into the Celestial Kingdom. You didn’t earn it. Your efforts earned you eternal punishment. I earned this for you, and because you were occasionally willing to lean on me and depend on me, and to covenant with me and continually repent along the way, you can have it. Now, get over there and enjoy some of the activities we have going on, such as making things out of egg cartons.”

“Thank you, Lord. Will I ever see you again?”

“Yes, but you will have to wait. I’m due at the Telestial Kingdon at 7:30 p.m. to break up a fight between BC Space and Bob Crockett”

At any rate, I’ve experienced life both as a completely inactive member and as an active, willing participant in the Church. Life is pretty much the same either way, but I feel happier, more calm, more optimistic about life and about the future, and kinder to others as an active member of the Church. In all objectivity, it’d probably be the same regardless of the religion, but I think the phenomenon, itself, is noteworthy.

[_Equality]

Did you know that Brigham Young was teaching something called ‘blood atonement’?”

“Yes, and I’ve already had a good discussion with him about that.

Wouldn't the follow up be "what did you say to Brigham Young about it? Did you praise him for following Your word as it was given to Moses?" I mean, it's not like Brugham Young invented the doctrine out of whole cloth--he got it from reading the Bible and trying to "restore" all things.

Why did you let anything they said or did that was obviously reflective of their mortal imperfections and prejudices draw your attention away from my gospel?”

Is it always obvious to someone who has been taught that the scriptures are the word of God and the prophets his mouthpieces on earth to determine what is reflective of their mortal imperfections and prejudices?

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Is it always obvious to someone who has been taught that the scriptures are the word of God and the prophets his mouthpieces on earth to determine what is reflective of their mortal imperfections and prejudices?

No, it's not always obvious. I will be the first to admit the Church has done, and is doing a lousy job addressing this.

Many people leave the Church over this.

[_SteelHead]

There is a Mueler's location here in Taylor Texas about 5 minutes from where I work. I love thier smoke, but I think their sauce is too thin. Great bbq anyway you slice it.

I guess the one in Austin is a different grandson of Louie Mueler.

[_sock puppet]

The LDS Church

After the movie, we all took a walk around the hill country. As we walked, we discussed several topics, including the difficulties of growing up in heavily LDS Utah, and the challenges the Church is facing over declining and even negative growth, an unprecedented attrition rate, reluctance to objectively address problems and concerns with history, the hagiography of early Church leaders, peculiar doctrines, and other items pertaining to the origin and development of our unique canon. My active friend, who, like most of the active members of the Church has been unaware of these issues for much of his life, remains unconcerned about them and frankly uninterested in knowing much about them. That kind of treatment is a subconscious defense mechanism, much like the monkeys of the “hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” engraving at Nikko Toshogu Shrine at Nikko, Japan. His subconscious tells his conscious mind, “Hey, as long as you don’t know about these problems, you’ll never have to worry about defending them or justifying your belief”, and he accordingly tunes out and carries on as happy as an ignorant clam about to by pried open by a hungry and resourceful sea otter.

For myself, I have learned a great deal about the historical problems and personality problems of and within the Church, of doctrinal non-sequiturs and the real stories behind the virtually canonized official history. With respect to some issues, I’ve been able to find a satisfying (not necessarily academically cogent) answer and am willing to rely by way of faith on either an eventual answer or on the ultimate irrelevance of the issues at hand. For other matters, my mind remains full of questions and curiosities and I will continue my studies.

One question I would like to ask the Lord directly, assuming that in the end I’m found sufficiently worthy through the grace, mercy, and merits of the atonement to stand in his presence, is why did he allow his duly called and appointed leaders to confuse us so. Why weren’t better records kept so that we in the Church could intellectually let history be history without having to continually apologize for it, so that we could focus on what was really important?

I suppose he may answer something to effect of “Well, why did you let it confuse you? You knew what my gospel was about. You experienced some of the blessings of my grace during your life. You knew that the Church’s leaders, though I approved of them as leaders, were just men and were often as imperfect as you were. Why did you let anything they said or did that was obviously reflective of their mortal imperfections and prejudices draw your attention away from my gospel?”

At which point, I’ll probably respond, “But, we were told that they would never lead us astray. We were made to believe that once they had spoken, all the thinking had been done for us and we were just required to believe and obey.”

Jesus might say in patient response, “Again, it’s just evidence of their imperfections and their need of my grace, mercy, and atonement. Tell me, Everybody Wang Chung did they ever encourage you to stop trusting in me, my identity, my mission, my sacrifice for your sorry butt, or my love for you and your family?”

“Well, sometimes, Lord… yes. For years in your Church, we were indoctrinated with the requirement of earning our salvation through our works. The doctrine of grace was often ignored, or treated as a last moment cherry on top of a sundae… the sundae being our works. We were told that grace couldn’t save us without our best efforts, and that we’d get no grace and be shown no mercy unless we had done everything we could have possibly done in this life to save ourselves. It was a depressingly impossible standard, Lord. Did you know that Brigham Young was teaching something called ‘blood atonement’?”

“Yes, and I’ve already had a good discussion with him about that. Things are okay now. Wang, when you have time, you need to go back a review the scriptures and refresh your memory about what was said about grace and works. For anything one of the leaders of my church might have said to make you feel that you had to save yourself before I could save you, or submit to execution to receive forgiveness, I apologize in their behalf and ask that you forgive them. Things are clearer for you now, aren’t they? The doubts of the past don’t bother you like they used to, do they?”

“Correct, Lord. It’s better now.”

“Then let it go, forgive them now, like I’ve forgiven you, and cross this bridge right here over into the Celestial Kingdom. You didn’t earn it. Your efforts earned you eternal punishment. I earned this for you, and because you were occasionally willing to lean on me and depend on me, and to covenant with me and continually repent along the way, you can have it. Now, get over there and enjoy some of the activities we have going on, such as making things out of egg cartons.”

“Thank you, Lord. Will I ever see you again?”

“Yes, but you will have to wait. I’m due at the Telestial Kingdon at 7:30 p.m. to break up a fight between BC Space and Bob Crockett”

At any rate, I’ve experienced life both as a completely inactive member and as an active, willing participant in the Church. Life is pretty much the same either way, but I feel happier, more calm, more optimistic about life and about the future, and kinder to others as an active member of the Church. In all objectivity, it’d probably be the same regardless of the religion, but I think the phenomenon, itself, is noteworthy.

"Lord, with all that confusing crap in the Book of Abraham and D&C, and how the Bible was put together centuries after the fact, how was I to know what was truly your scripture and what wasn't?

"For example, did you really throw money changers out of the temple, but want tithes paid? What's up with the money issue, really?"

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

There is a Mueler's location here in Taylor Texas about 5 minutes from where I work. I love thier smoke, but I think their sauce is too thin. Great bbq anyway you slice it.

I guess the one in Austin is a different grandson of Louie Mueler.

God bless the Mueller family. Eating John Mueller's BBQ was a spiritual experience.

Here is a clip of Anthony Bourdain eating at John Mueller's BBQ:

http://digitaltexan.net/2012/atx-gossip ... icle39258/