NHNE Special Report:
Saturday, January 15, 2000
A Course in Controversy
& Consumer Protection
for Spiritual Seekers"
NHNE Special Report:
A Course In Controversy
Saturday, January 15, 2000
Total NHNE Mailing List:
Last Mailing: 1977
This Mailing: 1966
Subscribe NHNE, send a blank email message to:
Unsubscribe NHNE, send a blank email message to:
To read current NHNE posts:
To keep NHNE on the radar screen of planet Earth:
P.O. Box 2242
Sedona, AZ USA 86339
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psychic Edgar Cayce, in 1970, the unpublished manuscript, which has
been archived at the ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND ENLIGHTENMENT (A.R.E.)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differences between the early, unpublished HLC version of the Course,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...
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:
CIM COPYRIGHT WEBSITE:
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
If you want to check out the HLC version of the Course for yourself:
THE HUGH LYNN CAYCE VERSION OF THE COURSE:
NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT INFRIGEMENT
From: Sanford J. Hodes
Epstein Becker & Green
One Riverfront Plaza
Newark, NJ 07102
phone: (973) 639-8268
fax: (973) 642-0099
Re: NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
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 copyi ng 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
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:
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 repuptation 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 retyping
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
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"
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 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
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 "corrrect" 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
When I first heard those claims, I laughed them off. Biblical scholars
consider themselvs "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, expungment, 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 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
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 exent 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 supressing 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
Surely you can't seriously believe that any honorable 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 hourable 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 favor 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,
honor and integrity to help you suppress and or corrupt what we believe
to be the authentic teaching of Jesus, our Lord and savior. 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
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, honor
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 honorable man would accede to such a request and no honorable 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 defense. Under the
Canadian constitution, the right of freedom of religious expression
is deeply entrenched and the Supreme Court has consistently ruled in
favor 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'!
David Sunfellow, Founder & Publisher
a 501(c)3 non-profit organization
P.O. Box 2242
Sedona, AZ USA 86339
Primary eMail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Secondary eMail: email@example.com
Phone: (928) 282-6120
Fax: (815) 346-1492
Subscribe NHNE Mailing List:
send a blank message to <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Review Current NHNE Mailing List Posts:
Subscribe NHNE News List:
send a blank message to <email@example.com>
Review Current NHNE News List Posts:
Subscribe NHNE Y2K List:
send a blank message to <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Review Current NHNE Y2K List Posts:
Appreciate what we are doing?
You can say so with a tax-deductible donation: