| Dated: Mar. 19/00 | Page edited by
Bob Russell |
The main purpose of this page is to give information about
the controversy surrounding the ACIM.
An interesting page found on the Internet is "The
Course, the Copyright, and the Controversy: A Brief History"
by D. Patrick Miller for The Holy Encounter. Another is reprinted
without the express permission of David Sunfellow at this point in time,
shown below:
NHNE: SPECIAL REPORT: A Course In Controversy:
INFORMATION ABOUT THE COURSE COPYRIGHT ISSUE:
FOUNDATION FOR A COURSE IN MIRACLES:
THE FOUNDATION FOR INNER PEACE:
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
A COURSE IN CONTROVERSY
By David Sunfellow
If you are a student of "A Course in Miracles," or know someone who
is,
you probably know that the Course world is presently aflame with law
suits
and counter law suits concerning who ultimately owns and controls the
three-volume set of books that claims to have been authored by Jesus
Christ
through a Jewish psychologist named Helen Schucman.
While I am not a student of "The Course" (you can find out why by reading
"A Course In My Side" in Part Three of our "Emissary of Light" Special
Report http://www.nhne.com/specialreports/sremissary.html#three,
many of
my closest friends are. Indeed, some of them are not only students,
and
teachers of the Course, but they are also the main ones challenging
the right
of THE FOUNDATION FOR A COURSE IN MIRACLES, INC.
(FACIM), who presently owns the copyright to the Course, to silence
those
who use the Course extensively in their work.
Anyway, the point of this special report is not to give you a blow-by-blow
account of the copyright episode but, instead, to let you know about
an
interesting turn of events.
Up until now, the copyright battle has revolved around the current,
published version of the Course. But now a new version of the
Course has
surfaced. Given to Hugh Lynn Cayce (HLC), the son of famed American
psychic Edgar Cayce, in 1970, the unpublished manuscript, which has
been
archived at the ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND
ENLIGHTENMENT (A.R.E.) all these years, is now popping up all
over
the Internet.
What is all the commotion about? In the nut shell, there are significant
differences between the early, unpublished HLC version of the Course,
and
the current, FACIM/Ken Wapnick version. And, yes, I've not only
seen the
HLC version, but also seen a side-by-side comparison of the two versions
and can confirm that there are, indeed, important differences.
What all of this means in the ongoing power struggle over who ultimately
controls the Course is anyone's guess. But I wanted to be sure
all of you
knew about the unfolding drama and, more importantly, that those of
you
who are students of the Course, had the opportunity to review the Hugh
Lynn Version of the Course yourselves.
What follows are links to important Course websites, including one that
contains a copy of the HLC version of the Course. These links
are followed
by a letter that was issued by a lawyer working for FACIM, Sanford
J.
Hodes, who has been desperately trying to stop the HLC wildfire by
sending
"copyright infringement" warnings to folks suspected of copying and
disseminating the HLC version of the Course. Mr. Hodes' letter
is followed
by another letter, written by Douglas Thompson, who was one of the
folks
that received Hodes' letter and responded to it. Taken together,
these two
letters faithfully itemize the many hot issues surrounding the current,
and
ongoing controversy.
I hope you find this as interesting as I do...
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
IMPORTANT WEBSITES & LINKS
If you want to find out more about the legal wrangling surrounding A
Course in Miracles, including letters back and forth from the suing
and
counter-suing parties, you can visit these websites:
INFORMATION ABOUT THE COURSE COPYRIGHT ISSUE:
http://nen.sedona.net/circleofa/copyinfo.html
CIM COPYRIGHT WEBSITE:
http://www.whitmorelaw.com/CIM_Copyright.html
If you want to find out more about the HLC Version of the Course in
Miracles and/or just keep up on the latest twists and turns in this
ongoing
drama:
TALK.RELIGION.COURSE-MIRACLE:
http://www.deja.com/group/talk.religion.course-miracle
If you want to check out the HLC version of the Course for yourself:
THE HUGH LYNN CAYCE VERSION OF THE COURSE: This is not available at
present
http://msnhomepages.talkcity.com/LibraryLawn/f_you2000/For_You.html
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
From: Sanford J. Hodes Epstein Becker & Green One Riverfront
Plaza
Newark, NJ 07102 phone: (973) 639-8268 fax: (973)
642-0099
[email protected]
Re: NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
Dear ------------:
This firm represents the Foundation for "A Course in Miracles," Inc.
(FACIM) and the Foundation for Inner Peace, Inc. (FIP).
I write on behalf of our clients to ask that you discontinue your unlawful
copying and dissemination of the improperly obtained early manuscript
of
"A Course in Miracles," referred to as the Hugh Lynn Cayce manuscript,
and that you cease encouraging and cooperating with others in this
illegal
activity.
The manuscript is copyright protected material, registered with the
United
States Copyright Office and bearing registration number TX 421-821.
For
your information, this copyright is enforceable under the Berne Convention
and the Universal Copyright Convention in Canada and elsewhere around
the world. This version is an earlier draft of the published
work "A Course
in Miracles, " the copyright of which is owned by FACIM and licensed
by
FIP.
Dr. Helen Schucman provided this unpublished manuscript to Mr. Hugh
Lynn Cayce in 1970, in confidence, so that he could provide his advice
and
comment about the work. His comments, as well as the comments
of a few
others who received this version, assisted Dr. Schucman, her colleague
Dr.
William Thetford, and their associate Dr. Kenneth Wapnick to edit and
revise Dr. Schucman's early manuscript into what ultimately became
the
published version of "A Course in Miracles."
The Association for Research and Enlightenment (the ARE), started by
Edgar Cayce, held the manuscript in its archives. ARE has advised
us that it
did not permit anyone to copy the work. Thus, in addition to
the unlawful
copying of the material in violation of copyright law, if the material
was
obtained from the ARE's archives, it was apparently done so illegally.
Regardless of how this manuscript was obtained, it has been copied
without
the permission of the copyright owner in violation of law.
Neither FACIM nor FIP wishes to stop anyone from discussing, reading,
commenting upon, or writing about "A Course in Miracles," its ideas,
philosophy or spiritual thought system. Our clients merely seek
to prevent
the verbatim copying of the work or other similar infringing activities.
Scholars, students and teachers who are interested in this material
are
welcome to read the Course and to use their creativity to write about
it in
their own words. Please understand, however, that U.S.
and world
copyright laws require copyright owners, like our clients, to diligently
protect their works from known infringements, which is essential to
maintaining the integrity of a published work.
Accordingly, we write to secure your assistance and must direct that
you
stop copying our clients' copyright protected materials and otherwise
cease
publicly disseminating these works over the Internet, by email, or
through
any other means or by encouraging others to do so. Of course,
if you wish
to quote from the published work in something you have created, please
do
not hesitate to contact the publications director at FACIM to discuss
your
materials. You might be surprised to learn that almost all persons
who
request permission to use quotations from "A Course in Miracles" in
their
own creative works, are granted permission, without charge, and regardless
of the views or opinions expressed in that work. FACIM denies
permission
only to those persons who seek to copy substantial portions from the
material or who seek to create derivative works as they are defined
by law.
In those instances, FACIM will discuss the matter and work to overcome
the objections, if possible.
It is not, and has never been, my clients' desire to employ litigation
to stop
infringements like that in which you are currently engaged. For
this reason,
if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me directly
or to
contact FACIM, the current copyright owner, to discuss the matter.
We
trust that you now understand our clients' position, and hope that
we can
communicate amicably about these issues. In that way, it is our
hope to
avoid the necessity of filing legal action. But if you persist
with your
infringing activities, we will have no choice but to consider filing
that action,
which my clients' consider to be their course of last resort.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Sanford J. Hodes
Sanford J. Hodes
-----------transmitted by FACIM Correspondent -------------------
FACIM Correspondent is a volunteer agency providing Internet and Web
services for the Foundation for " A Course In Miracles"(r) and
its attorneys
Epstein Becker & Green, One Riverfront Plaza, Newark, NJ 07102,
phone:
(973) 639-8268, fax: (973) 642-0099, email:
[email protected]
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
DEAR Mr. HODES
Saturday, January 15, 2000
By Douglas Thompson
Dear Mr. Hodes,
Thank you for your inventive and most entertaining letter of Jan 14.
It would appear that Dr. Wapnick whose reputation for accuracy is not
that
good, has misled you on a number of items.
Let us review the matters of legal error to begin with.
The document in question represents Helen Shucman's second retying and
editing of the Urtext. The Urtext is Bill Thetford's typescript
dictated to
him by Helen after Jesus dictated the material to Helen. This
is according to
Helen, Bill, Judith and Ken's published, spoken and broadcast statements.
As you know divinely authored documents cannot be copyrighted so rest
assured, there is no copyright on this document to violate.
In 1972 Helen published this edition in limited numbers but certainly
not
"confidentially." The first recipient was Hugh Lynn Cayce, and a later
recipient was Dr. Wapnick who can confirm that there was no
"confidentiality" associated with it. Certainly Hugh didn't know
of any
confidentiality because he put his copy into the ARE library where
it has
been and remains in circulation. As you know, this represents
publication in
the public domain and you can't copyright public domain documents so
it
doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out there can be no valid
copyright
on this document.
Further, a careful inspection of the document will reveal no copyright
notice
and no statement of any restrictions of any kind. The copyright
and
confidentiality claims are quite bogus.
As for "improper copying without permission" I invite you to sit beside
the
photocopiers in any public library and just watch for a few hours.
You will
see hundreds of people bring library materials to the copier, copy
them, and
leave with the copies, without ever asking permission. Since
when does one
need permission to make a photocopy of a public domain document, or
for
that matter of ANY library materials?
As for "unpublished" very clearly the document has indeed been published,
I've got a copy, you've got a copy, there are dozens of websites offering
it
for download and some 10,000 copies have found their way into private
hands in the past week alone. Hardly "unpublished" sir!
I think that takes care of the legal points you mentioned. There
are a few
I'd like to mention.
Jesus' authorship of the material has been affirmed and advertised for
25
years by Dr. Wapnick and Judith Skutch, presidents of FACIM and FIP
respectively. Jesus' authorship of the material was affirmed
by Helen
Shucman and Bill Thetford from the inception of the work in 1965 to
their
respective deaths. At no time did Helen claim to be author.
In the video
promoting the material Ken Wanick says on camera "Helen couldn't possibly
have written it." While there has been some debate as to whether Jesus
actually wrote it, until last year no one made the claim that the book
does
not itself make the claim that Jesus wrote it. Then, when Ken
realized his
copyright claim was bogus by virtue of the document's divine authorship,
he
changed his mind and perjured himself, denying Jesus and the truth
he'd
been teaching for more than two decades. Did someone mention
integrity?
I've read copies of Ken's sworn testimony in court to the effect that
Helen
wrote the book and Jesus had nothing to do with it. I also know
the
meaning of A) perjury and B) false advertising. Ken
has certainly
committed one of these offences. Either he's lied about authorship
under
oath or he's lied in his scholarly works, public statements and advertising
for
the material. Maybe you know which it is?
I presume you have heard of Jesus Christ? He's the chap who claimed
to
the Messiah prophesied by Judaism's founding Prophets whose disciples
went on to found the Christian religion. The material in question
is written
in the first person, and the author clearly identifies himself as one
and the
same Jesus who claimed to be the Messiah, who walked on water, who
rose
from the dead and whose disciples founded the Christian religion and
wrote
the New Testament. More than 800 times this author quotes the
Bible, not
infrequently correcting it or offering novel and intriguing interpretations.
No single human life recorded in History has had a larger influence
on
Western civilization than that of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ.
People have
pored over the scanty historical accounts of His life and ministry
for 2,000
years. No human's thought and deeds have been more closely studied,
more
rigorously examined and re-examined, more carefully pondered, more
frequently published and quoted. Translated into more than 1400
languages, the Bible has been the best selling book in the world for
400
years, and remains so. Jesus' words are beyond price and certainly
beyond
commercial ownership.
The main problem with the events of 2,000 years ago is that we don't
have
any copies of anything Jesus wrote, nor any original manuscripts of
anything
written by eye-witnesses. What we have are copies that passed
through the
hands of the early Church leaders who, unfortunately, felt the need
to
"correct" some things and expunge others, leaving us with debased,
corrupted text. Good textual scholarship can often detect traces
of the
mucking about the early editors of the Bible did but rarely can we
reconstruct missing pieces.
My own academic background in Biblical Scholarship gives me an acute
sensitivity to the issues and problems and the value of original documents
and the tendency for those in a position to do so to meddle with Holy
Writ
so as to alter its meaning to suit their prejudices.
Indeed, in the document in question a good deal of time is spent by
the
Author, Jesus, correcting the errors of the Scriptural guardians 2000
years
ago.
You can perhaps appreciate that were this claim made by the text, its
scribes
Helen and Bill, and its promoters and publishers, Judith and Ken, that
Jesus
Christ wrote this to be *true*, the significance of this new written
revelation
from Jesus to Western civilization would be in time at least as significant
as
that of the Bible. It would represent something more important
in many
ways for it actually gives us 1500 pages of Jesus thought while in
the Bible
we have barely 1500 words directly from Jesus!
What we have here is probably the single most important document
produced in the world in 2000 years if the claims made for it are true.
It is,
in short, Holy Scripture in the belief of many and as such, requests
to
cooperate with repressing or corrupting it aren't likely to be well
received.
When I first heard those claims, I laughed them off. Biblical
scholars
consider themselves "Jesus experts" and Jesus hasn't been around for
nearly
2000 years to write anything. However, on the recommendation
of a
trusted friend, a clergyman, I took a look at the book called ACIM.
After a
few weeks my clerical friend asked me "What did you think? Is
that really
Jesus or a fraud?" I answered "I think it's really Jesus." My friend
nodded
"so do I, this is the most amazing piece of religious literature ever
written in
any event." And I nodded. That it is. I've read a lot of
theology in my time
and nothing even comes close to this. It is a work in a class
of its own.
Since the first few copies were published in 1972, more than a million
copies of ACIM have hit the streets. Around the world people
gather to
study it and view it as Holy Scripture and for whom it becomes a
centerpiece of their religious faith and practice. It's "truth"
and "reliability"
has been a hotly debated topic. Some think it's advertising is
true, that it is
literally, word for word what Jesus dictated to Helen. Others
think it's been
mucked about with some. Ken always asserted that except for personal
material in the original, there were no significant changes in the
editing, just
punctuation, spelling, and the occasional "which" exchanged for "that."
Oddly though, Ken wouldn't let anyone look at the original documents
in his
possession. As a Biblical Scholar I had the training to notice
signs of
interpolation, expungement, and other textual corruptions and I strongly
suspected the text had been corrupted and the reason for refusing scholars
access to the primary sources was to cover that up.
Needless to say, the recent publication of the HLC edition of ACIM has
scandalized the ACIM Community and shattered whatever shreds of
credibility Ken's five years of copyright persecutions had left intact.
The
first five chapters are barely recognizable. About 24% of the
text has simply
been removed. A great deal more has been shuffled about and altered
in
meaning. This was a shock since Ken had so adamantly insisted
that no
significant changes had been made. Ken lied. This document
which you
and Ken wish to suppress to cover up his lies proves it. This
is a scandal
and your cooperation in the cover up is unconscionable.
The HLC version represents the work of the scribes, Helen and Bill.
It is
edited, but clearly much less edited than the later volume published
by FIP
which is a worthless corruption of the HLC version. What Ken
is currently
publishing is an academic fraud and a scandal. Were he a university
professor presenting something this badly altered as a job of mere
"editing"
for publication, he'd be fired for violation of academic integrity.
Few people expected to find changes of this magnitude and nature when
the
HLC edition was examined. It was sought simply because it was
known to
be in the public domain and therefore immune from copyright harassments
of the sort Ken has visited on hundreds of ACIM teachers and
commentators over the past five years. When it was found to be
virtually
unrecognizable, people were scandalized but also enormously grateful
that
the truth had finally got out, that they finally had their hands on
the real
thing, the authentic words and teaching of Jesus. Indeed it's
not "the real
thing." That's the Urtext and KKen continues to suppress that priceless
document, but it's clearly much *closer* to the real thing than the
abomination Ken has published.
If this book is what it claims to be, and what hundreds of thousands
of
sincere believers judge it to be, the authentic work and teaching of
Jesus
Christ, then the suppression of the document or the corruption and
debasement of the document is clearly a crime against humanity and
an
extreme violation of freedom of religion. Any attempt to prevent
people
from reading it, quoting it, preaching from it, copying it, publishing
it and
sharing it around, as the book itself instructs us to do, can also
clearly be
seen to be a direct attack on freedom of religion. It is more
than that, it
represents a threat to a cultural artefact of world-historical importance.
Jesus gave this book to His Church and the entire human race through
Helen with clear instructions to give the message away. Ken,
when he first
saw it, reports that he had "problems" with it and proceeded to make
changes between 1973 and 1975. While he claimed all these changes
were
done at Jesus' instruction, clearly many were not. Other scholars
have
described the "editing" as "butchery" and "a hatchet job." Ken re-wrote
the
first five chapters so as to substantially alter the meaning of the
very clear
and eloquent HLC text so as to make a confusing, jumbled, mystifying
first
five chapters.
If there's a "crime" here, and there certainly is, the crime is not
that of
ensuring that the HLC text is available to the world as Jesus directed
nor is
it that of ensuring that the text cannot be suppressed, nor is it that
of
revealing the extent of Dr. Wapnick's fraudulent corruption of the
text.
The crime is that of attempting to destroy or debase what is probably
the
most important book ever written.
Ken has long claimed a "sacred trust" to protect the "purity and integrity"
of
Jesus' work, to make sure no one rewrites it. It turns out that
the exact
opposite is the case. He's not only re-written it himself, he's
lied about
doing so and done all in his power to cover up the lie and suppress
the
authentic text. He's the only significant threat to the purity
and integrity of
the text and the only one who's mucked about with it significantly.
These, Mr. Hodes are the facts of the matter. We are not dealing
with a
simple or straightforward copyright case. We are dealing with
a fraudulent
copyright on an uncopyrightable book written by Jesus of Nazareth,
the
Christ. We are dealing with an effort to use the law to suppress
the thought
and teaching of Jesus Christ and prevent the world from reading Jesus'
message to humankind. We are dealing with a religious scandal
of
world-historical importance. We are dealing with the mentality
that burned
Bible translators and banned the Bible in the 16th Century, that undertook
the burning of heretics in the 15th Century, that undertook to toss
Christians
to the lions in the 3rd and 4th Centuries, that undertook the crucifixion
of
Jesus in the 1st Century, that set about the persecution of the Prophets
in
the centuries before that.
You ask me now to join with you in suppressing the authentic words of
Jesus in order to prop up a copyright on a debased, corrupted version,
so as
to help hide the truth from the human race and help Dr. Wapnick earn
more
millions by selling a falsified version under a commercial monopoly
with
which he has deprived many people of freedom of religious expression
already.
Surely you can't seriously believe that any honourable man would agree
to
such a request. Indeed, no honourable man would make such a request.
I'm
operating on the assumption that you are an honourable man and that
you
are merely ignorant of the facts, having been misinformed by a client
whose
honesty and truthfulness there is good reason to suspect.
What honourable men and women have done is form the Tyndale Society.
The purpose of the Tyndale Society is the protection of the purity
and
integrity of Jesus' writings. The only visible threat to Jesus'
writings is Ken
Wapnick's FACIM, your client, which is seeking the suppression of the
authentic work of the scribes in favour of a corrupted, debased version.
To
secure the purity and integrity of Jesus writing for posterity, many
thousands of copies have been made and distributed to the general public
and secreted in various places where they are safe from detection and
destruction. The copy in the ARE, which you can freely inspect
if you
doubt the accuracy of our copy, is not the only copy of Helen's original
public domain publication. I'm not going to tell you where the
other one is
for obvious reasons. I have no doubt you'll attempt to suppress
or destroy
that one also.
Many websites are offering the authentic words of Jesus for download
on
the net, and the presses are running as I write.
What you are asking of me and others is something we cannot give you.
You are asking people to set aside religious beliefs, faith, conscience,
honour and integrity to help you suppress and or corrupt what we believe
to
be the authentic teaching of Jesus, our Lord and saviour. Diocletion
tried
that, and he had all the legions of Rome to help him. Diocletion
was forced
to abdicate and it wasn't tried again for a long time. There
is no law strong
enough nor lie big enough to convince honest and sincere believers
to
violate their conscience. You won't suppress the authentic words
of Jesus
nor cover up Ken's corruption of the work with lawsuits, no matter
how
many you launch. The genie is already out of the bottle, the
authentic work
has already been published. In time its demonstrable superiority
to the
corrupted version Ken publishes will be apparent to all.
Miracles compress time and undo errors. The republication of the
HLC
edition is a genuine miracle that undoes the error of the corruption
of
ACIM, cancels the effects of the mistakes made in 1974 and 1975, renders
the copyright a moot point, and puts us back were we were in 1975,
before
the error of trying to copyright this material was made.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle, it's already out and nothing
you
can do will suppress this work or remove it from public domain circulation.
Ken can spend his entire ill-gotten fortune on lawsuits of the faithful,
and
the only thing he'll achieve is infamy. He can't cover up his
debasement of
ACIM and he can't suppress the authentic text.
Henry VIII, a man at least as honest as Ken, tried to prevent the Bible
from
entering England. He burned translators at the stake. He
didn't stop the
translation work and he didn't keep the Bible out of England.
Around the world, quite spontaneously, (and ACIM tells us miracles are
spontaneous) The Holy Spirit has rallied people to the cause.
The Holy
Spirit has raised a peaceful army whose only "crime" is believing in
Jesus
and spreading his words. And his words are spreading in a most
astonishing, remarkable way.
Eventually you folks will realize that you are not using, but rather
abusing
law to suppress religious freedom, suppress and falsify the teaching
of Jesus,
cover up fraud and perpetrate lies for the sole purpose of commercial
gain.
And you will realize that law was not designed to and indeed cannot
achieve
that objective. You can not hide the truth with it, all you can
do is
manufacture martyrs and earn for yourselves a reputation that few would
wish to own.
The very nature of the work of Jesus defies ownership. There are
reasons
why the law says you can't copyright divinely authored works.
They are
properly the province of faith and religion, not commerce and monopoly.
Monopolizing a religious teaching is religious persecution and copyright
law
simply does not fit nor can it be made to fit the situation.
Copyright has
nothing whatsoever to do with the current problem, save insofar as
there is
a transparently fraudulent claim to copyright. You should know
that in law
to be considered an author and be eligible for a copyright, one has
to at least
CLAIM authorship of the work in question. Helen always denied
authorship. In the simplest legal test, Helen can't be the author.
The real
author identifies himself in the work quite clearly. Your claim
to copyright
hasn't a shred of credibility, honesty, honour or integrity.
It is pure fraud.
The issue is freedom of religion and freedom of expression and fraud.
Some
legal fraud, some merely academic fraud and some garden variety lies
and
deceptions and dishonesty. Unless it's false advertising.
Ken has sold more
than a million copies with the claim that Jesus is the author.
If Jesus is not
the author then Ken is just a charlatan and a con man.
Up until last week we had one kind of problem, the desire by Ken to
control
the use people made of ACIM's name and text in order to shore up his
multi-million dollar commercial empire. Surely you realize that
the
re-publication of the HLC edition completely changes the and situation.
The previous arguments and disputes no longer have a shred of meaning.
What Ken is asking for now is the suppression of an authentic version
so as
to perpetrate the fraud that his corrupted version is the authentic
version.
On this there can be no middle ground or compromise. Scholarship
demands access to the primary sources, they cannot be suppressed.
It's not
negotiable. The suppression of the original source material is
itself an
academic crime and a crime against humanity, this material rightly
belongs
to the human race. It is of inestimable scholarly, historical,
religious and
cultural value. It is the birthright of mankind and you ask me
to help you
suppress it????
No honourable man would accede to such a request and no honourable man
would make such a request!
If you feel that the cause of forgiveness, which is God's definition
of justice,
and the happiness of the human race would be best served by suing me,
the
court house is across the street. I can assure you though that
no suit is
going to stop me from teaching, preaching, copying, quoting and spreading
the Word of God.
My defence if you do sue will be a constitutional defence. Under
the
Canadian constitution, the right of freedom of religious expression
is deeply
entrenched and the Supreme Court has consistently ruled in favour of
religious freedom and tossed out many laws that infringed upon it.
I will
claim the legal right to read the words of Jesus, preach the words
of Jesus
and quote the words of Jesus.
I will also of course point out that your claim to own a copyright fails
to
meet any of the four tests for copyright validity in Canadian copyright
law,
the most obvious being the *CLAIM OF AUTHORSHIP*. Helen, since
she denied she wrote the book, is not a candidate for consideration
as
possible author. Therefore there cannot be a valid or enforceable
Canadian
or Commonwealth copyright in her name.
So, if you want to go that route and you feel the bests interests of
everyone
would be served by that, go ahead.
I would suggest to you that the best interests of your client would
be better
served by more creative and honest approaches to the situation.
The HLC
version cannot be suppressed no matter what you do, no matter how many
lawsuits you launch and even no matter how many you win. You
are
tackling an object of religious faith and devotion and your persecutions
are
met with rejoicing. To quote Jesus:
"When men persecute you and revile you and heap all manner of calumny
upon you for my sake, rejoice and be exceedingly glad, great is your
reward
in heaven, for so persecuted they the prophets which went before you."
I believe that. So do many others. Persecutions won't scare
us off. Since
you can't suppress the truth, you'd be well advised to work with us
to come
to some sort of accommodation. I want to remind you that in the
past week
the situation has changed dramatically. On the earlier copyright
questions,
your harassment techniques were quite effective. At that time
there was no
question of the complete suppression of the authentic text and no one
believed Ken had corrupted the text and was offering for sale a worthless
forgery. All that has changed and we are dealing with an entirely
new kind
of question and problem. Whatever claims Ken had to copyright
on his
corrupted edition, his claim to copyright on the HLC version which
has been
in the public domain for 20 or 30 years is nonexistent. The edition
in
question was in the public domain when Ken first read it in 1973!
If Ken
were to publish it and claim monopoly rights on it as with the corrupted
version, that would be one thing. But Ken is trying to suppress
it totally
and cover up the scandal of his butchery of the authentic text.
That is
something that no person with a shred of integrity is prepared to accept,
nor
could we!
You are asking me, in effect, to cooperate and collaborate in the fraud
by
quoting a corrupted version in my scholarly work on ACIM rather than
what I know to be a more authentic version. I can't do that!
I'm not
capable of that kind of dishonesty. My own scholarly credentials
would be
worthless if I did. Surely you see that you seek the impossible.
Dr. Wapnick has been asked many times to consider mediation, negotiation
or arbitration and has consistently refused, preferring coercive, threatening,
harassment. Perhaps it is time to reconsider before starting
a new and much
larger legal war which he cannot possibly win and which can only demolish
whatever is left of his reputation and credibility.
I find the whole situation absurd and almost unbelievable. As
a Church
Historian I'm aware that it's really nothing new though. It's
just astonishing
that one who claims to be a teacher of God whose teaching is that only
forgiveness can work and guilt is an illusion should be so determined
to
abandon forgiveness and try to prove that guilt is real.
To quote Jesus again "what you give, you give only to yourself." And
again
"the blood you shed shall be your own."
Please Mr. Hodes, advise your client to suspend these attacks on freedom
of
religion, freedom of speech, freedom of expression and drop the lies
and
frauds and perjuries, to stop these persecutions and repressions and
suppressions and come and reason together with us and let the Holy
Spirit
show us the happy solution that is in the best interests of all.
As Bill Thetford announced to Helen which got the whole thing started
in
1965 "There must be a better way!"
There is Mr. Hodes. Let's stop these harassments and witch hunts
which are
devoid of both legal and ethical merit and join together to find that
'better
way'!
Sincerely, Douglas Thompson [email protected]
************************************************************
THE EARLY MANUSCRIPT OF "A COURSE IN MIRACLES" GIVEN TO HUGH LYNN CAYCE
Kenneth Wapnick, Ph.D.
In light of the misinformation circulating about the early manuscript
of "A
Course in Miracles" -- referred to as the "Hugh Lynn Version" -- I
believe
clarification is required. Let me begin by presenting the facts that
relate
to the history of that early manuscript. I am here summarizing what
I have
already detailed in my book "Absence from Felicity: The Story of Helen
Schucman and Her Scribing of A Course in Miracles,"
(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN= 0933291086/newheavenneweartA/)
and
in more succinct fashion in the preface to the pamphlet "Errata for
the
Second Edition of A Course in Miracles."
Helen took down her internal dictation in stenographic notebooks, using
her
own version of shorthand, and dictated these notes to Bill. Helen
intentionally omitted some material while dictating to Bill, who typed
Helen's dictation. We later termed this the "Urtext," a word usually
used to
denote the original manuscript of a later published literary work.
At that
time, Helen and Bill were in occasional contact with Hugh Lynn Cayce,
son of
the renowned psychic Edgar Cayce, and President of the Association
for
Research and Enlightenment in Virginia Beach. Helen valued his opinion
and
he was most interested in her work. For that reason, Helen shared the
material with him to secure his advice and comments.
In 1972, Helen and Bill gave to Hugh Lynn a copy of what was then the
completed manuscript. This is what has been called the "Hugh Lynn Version."
It was made clear to Hugh Lynn that Helen and Bill were providing these
pages for his personal review and comments, and that the manuscript
was
*not* to be shared with others except for his son, Charles Thomas.
Hugh Lynn
died in 1983, but Charles Thomas Cayce, current President of the A.R.E.,
recalls conversations in which this point -- so central to Helen's
feelings
of privacy -- was understood by all parties involved.
After seeing some of the early and later chapters of the text, Hugh
Lynn
commented to Helen and Bill that he thought that perhaps more than
one
source was involved, presumably since the writing styles were so discrepant,
especially when one compared the early scribing -- what now roughly
constitutes the first four chapters of the text -- with what came later.
Hugh Lynn's observation goes to the heart of the matter of the editing,
and
how and why it proceeded. Again, "Absence from Felicity" goes into
this in
more detail, so that interested readers may wish to consult it if they
so
choose. There are two relevant issues here, and they bear on what Helen
and
Bill (and later I) came to refer to as Helen's "scribal uncertainty"
or
"pedagogical caution" in introducing a thought system that was so alien
to
the world's thinking:
1) The early months of the dictation -- again, we are speaking of what
are
now roughly the first four chapters of the text -- were experienced
by Helen
as a dialogue or conversation between her and her inner Voice, which
she
identified as Jesus, in which the actual Course material itself was
only *a
portion* of the dictation. Personal material -- meant only for Helen
and
Bill -- was part of what she had written down, and it was her very
specific
guidance that this was not to be included in the published version.
This
personal material also included many references to psychologists and
various
psychological issues and subjects, which were also not meant for the
public,
but rather were to help Helen and Bill make the bridge between *their*
psychological understanding and that of the Course.
2) In addition to the interspersal of the personal material and discussion
of various psychological issues with the Course teaching, there is
the issue
of Helen's *scribal uncertainty* and *pedagogical caution*. These
interferences certainly affected her writing during this period. I
provided
one such example in "Absence from Felicity," where the story of the
so-called "celestial speed-up" message is recounted. This "explanation,"
which Helen never said came specifically from Jesus, but rather was
"given"
her, speaks of people losing more than they were gaining, necessitating
a
"celestial speed-up" in which certain people were being called back
--
including Helen and Bill -- to lend their talents on behalf of the
"plan."
Helen later insisted upon removing this inconsistent material.
Therefore, what was taken out of the original material was *meant to
be
taken out* by Helen, as instructed by her Voice, since it detracted
from the
actual teaching message of "A Course in Miracles," and could have seemed
to
contradict that message, thus confusing its students. Helen and Bill
had
removed most of this material by the time I saw the early manuscript.
However, Helen felt that additional material needed to be removed for
the
published edition. Helen made these deletions and changes and did not
truly
consider them to be important, as they were never meant to be part
of the
published Course.
Further, obvious editorial revisions were also necessary -- punctuation,
paragraphing, capitalization, etc. -- all of which are documented in
my
book. I might also add that the editing that Helen and I completed
was
Helen's work. Any thought that it was I who did the editing could only
be
held by someone who clearly did not know Helen. As I have said many,
many
times, Helen was extraordinarily protective of "A Course in Miracles,"
and
would not have allowed anything to be done with the material without
her
approval. Indeed, during our long period of editing, I functioned more
or
less as Helen's secretary, implementing the changes that she wished.
Again, anyone who knew Helen (and Bill), would appreciate the fact that
"A
Course in Miracles," as it is published, reflects the guidance that
she
followed and then implemented. Therefore, readers of the published
Course
(especially now that the second edition includes the earlier inadvertent
typing omissions) can rest assured that they have before them in the
published edition the expression of what was given to Helen by her
inner
Voice, the true teachings of "A Course in Miracles."
In 1990, Louis Schucman, Helen's widowed husband, assigned to me and
I then
copyrighted The Unpublished Writings of Helen Schucman, which, among
other
things, included the notebooks and Urtext, as well as all subsequent
revisions up to but not including the published version. This was done
to
protect Helen's frequently expressed wish for privacy, to which she
zealously clung and with which Louis identified. Helen, Bill, and I
felt
that the long process of editing -- from notebook to publication --
did full
justice to a public edition of "A Course in Miracles," while at the
same
time respecting Helen's and Bill's wish and inner guidance that the
personal
and other material not be included in the public version.
Therefore, even though Helen's guidance was to eliminate both the personal
material and confusing language from the final edition, the published
Course
clearly is intended to be read and studied by all students of "A Course
in
Miracles." All of us at the Foundation for A Course in Miracles and
Foundation for Inner Peace earnestly hope that Helen's fervent wish
for
privacy will be honored and respected by all Course students. This
can only
be accomplished if the early manuscript of "A Course in Miracles" remains
unpublished.
In summary:
1) The early manuscript provided to Hugh Lynn Cayce was the incompletely
edited combination of the notebooks, Urtext, Helen's first retyping,
and the
first complete draft (1972).
2) This manuscript was given to Hugh Lynn Cayce by Helen for comment
only,
with the understanding that it would not be shown to the general public.
3) After 1972, Helen, with my assistance as well as Bill's, personally
revised the manuscript to ensure that the final (published) version
of "A
Course in Miracles" had eliminated:
a - personal guidance and information meant only for her and Bill
b - contradictory or confusing metaphysical and psychological concepts
that
she had introduced, especially in the first four chapters of the text
c - various other similar material, including awkward, confusing, or
inconsistent language
4) At Louis Schucman's request, I copyrighted "The Unpublished Writings
of
Helen Schucman" in 1990, including all Helen's notebooks and successive
revisions of "A Course in Miracles," which include this early manuscript.
Drop us a line! Page maintained by Robert Russell who can be reached at e-mail address [email protected].