Ken Wapnick and Robert Perry - teachers of God
Val Scott
For those who might wish to note:
It is possible to strongly disagree with even the best of teachers and
personal friends - even with “masculine” or “assertive” energy - and still
retain strong mutual respect within an ongoing spiritual relationship.
I wish the readers of this page to know that my observations of what these
teachers have come to represent to me in the Course world today, and most
particularly in my daily spiritual experiences, are in no way intended to
be a personal attack on them of any kind.
What I am endeavoring to address in my most recent posts in a fundamental
way - as well in my web page - is the insidious issue of “SPIRITUAL
SPECIALNESS” - which I feel has seriously crept into Ken and Robert’s work
in the past few years, and which, notwithstanding the prominence of these
two outstanding teachers in our Course community, is, I feel, totally
antithetical to the teachings of the Course as I have come to understand it
over the past 18 years. That is what I am basically saying, and have
accordingly documented these contentions through numerous private letters
to Ken and Robert in the most loving and responsible ways I know how. But
my friends have been - so far - unmoved. And that’s okay.
However, they are no longer, in my mind, the “Course authorities” that they
used to be for me, having, I feel, outgrown what they now represent to me
in our so-called A Course in Miracles community. And that, I trust, should
be equally okay.
Here are a couple of biographical excerpts taken from some of the content
from my web site - http://www.netshop.net/~valscott/ - which describe the
relationship that I feel I currently have with these two teachers of God in
my personal life.
As I sincerely trust and hope that you will note, the love and respect I
have for both Ken and Robert remain undiminished.
KEN WAPNICK was my first Course teacher and, as such, has made an
absolutely enormous contribution to my spiritual development. As a result
of Judy's introduction (Judy Skutch Whitson, who first introduced the
Course to me), I flew from Ottawa to New York to meet him personally and
spent some leisure time with him and his wife, Gloria, in their home (where
I also had the memorable experience of sleeping in the room with the
original manuscripts of A Course in Miracles -- which, of course, I took
the liberty of perusing very fondly before I went to sleep!).
Our long-time association has included sponsoring the first Ken Wapnick
workshop in Canada, subsequent visits to the Wapnicks in New York,
enthusiastic sales of their books and tapes through Inner Peace Unlimited,
as well as Ken and Gloria very graciously, and out of pure friendship,
serving as my "best man" and my second wife's "matron of honor" when we wed
at the Omega Institute in Rhinebeck, New York (with Ken's friend, the Rev.
Jon Mundy, officiating), following a one week Wapnick-led Course intensive.
Ken and his teachings, not to mention his personal friendship, have been
paramount to my spiritual development. In fact, I don't believe there is a
book or a set of Wapnick tapes (until very recently) which I haven't read
or heard many times over -- so influential Ken and Gloria have been in my
life.
However, Ken's position on Journey Beyond Words is not as positive as mine.
In fact, it is completely opposite to my own experience and is what this
paper is addressing with a call for openness and joining. At the same time
(and in spite of our current differences --which do not ultimately matter
anyway), I continue to love Ken and Gloria and consider them to be my very
good friends.
ROBERT PERRY has been the second foremost influence on my development as a
Course student, and in many respects I find myself fully aligned or in
agreement with most of his spiritual and metaphysical assumptions. I met
him through letter writing in the late 80's, when I first came across his
booklet, Introduction to A Course in Miracles. I sponsored, or was
instrumental in sponsoring, workshops for him in several cities in Canada
and generally did my utmost to help Robert become recognized as a major
Course theorist. We also became good friends over the years, during which
Robert was most helpful in assisting Inner Peace Unlimited become firmly
established as a Course entity in Canada.
In addition to our personal relationship, I have read, studied, and
carefully assimilated just about everything he and his associates at The
Circle of Atonement have published to date, and have tremendous respect for
his commitment and integrity -- both as a Course theorist as well as a good
friend.
However, as with Ken Wapnick, Robert and I now appear to be at an impasse
over the authenticity of the Jeshua materials. Robert has taken a very
close look at Journey Beyond Words (as well as other associated Jeshua
transmissions which I have sent him over the past year) and put his
personal views about the Jeshua transmissions in writing in the form of a
14-page semi-public letter to Brent dated January 9th, 1996. In so doing,
he served as the inspiration for Brent's immediate response in the form of
a document of his own, entitled TOWARD A NEW UNDERSTANDING OF THE COURSE,
which was sent to Robert prior to an impending New Hampshire gathering at
which they were both scheduled speakers. A meaningful dialogue there
between the two on this subject, however, did not happen.
Knowing Robert's general desire for open dialogue on Course perspectives, I
was somewhat puzzled by this "non-event" in New Hampshire until I received
a letter from Robert, dated January 24th -- written after he had received
Brent's paper, but before the scheduled New Hampshire weekend -- a letter
which contained the following statement: "I must confess that I did not
feel that his arguments held up." He did add, however, "I am not on a
campaign to discredit Brent's material," and therefore would be only
sharing it with those people who specifically asked for his views on
Journey Beyond Words. I would urge anyone interested in Robert's views on
this subject to write him and ask for a copy of his letter; compare it with
Brent's paper; then decide what this may be all about.
Georgianne Baartmans
Val, I would like to comment on only one aspect of all of this posting.
It is the tendency to make idols out of others as well as the desire to
become an idol oneself. This tendency is part of the condition of
thinking we are in a world (be it yours or mine or anyones) of
separation. It is major work to recognize where and when we idolize and
to forgive that tendency.
Ken and Robert and their associates are astute academic students of
ACIM. They are also dedicated teachers of the academic understanding of
ACIM. To idolize them (putting them on a pedistal as having something
that we don't have, but which we want) is to do them and ourselves a
great disservice. They really are just other aspects of ourselves. Their
apparent accomplishments in the ACIM 'community' are to the credit of
our higher mind and its choice to use the tools of the projected world
(intelligence) in accordance with the Holy Spirit's Voice. Each of us
has tools which can be likewise used. Such a blessing! Their work
reinforces ours, whatever form ours might take. It does not make them
'special' except in the sense that all sons of God are special. It only
makes them examples of consistency within the dream--consistency with
the memory of Christ's Voice, the Holy Spirit. In their personal lives,
they are also consistent. They are very gentle, loving, caring,
compassionate people, as I'm sure you know.
In this world(s), everyone whats to be the hero of their own dream. We
want to be the idol we see other's being, when others seem to have the
following every good idol thinks he/she deserves. That is the basis for
levels within the dream. It reflects the original error--the authority
problem. There is only one answer to that problem, and our playing it
out within our world. It is the answer which HS always responds with,
when we seek out that memory with our higher power, by letting go of our
desire to maintain the theory of specialness within our script, every
time it rears its head. It is the answer that shows us that our roles
and those of others within our dream are just that...dream roles from a
dream that we ourselves made.
An idol becomes an opponent when they can't meet up to the expectations
that we build for them. As they 'fall' from grace, we feel, as heros of
our own dream, that we still stand, a little higher now that we are
proven to have been 'right' and superior in some way to our former idol.
And so the game of desire for specialness continues as long as we
reinforce our association with the dream as being our reality...
Namaste, Georgie
Saul Steinberg
Dear brother Val . . .
In 1977 when A Course In Miracles was being attacked by many . . . Judy
Skutch said to me . . .
The Course does not need to be defended by any of Us.
If it is True . . .
Everyone will know it.
I'm working on and with some "new" materials which I do believe is True.
I often think about Judy's words of more than 20 years ago.
Much Love . . . Saul
P.S. I'll send You and others some of these scribings very shortly.
creature
Hello from a fellow disciple who is not embroiled in any controversy,
I know nothing of the issue that pivots these apparent differences in
perspective, but i did have a couple of impressions when reading this
post that i wanted to share. Please forgive my ignorance, and i hope i
have something of value to offer.
Very simply, i let the Course be my guiding light whenever i evaluate
the usefulness of any related material in relation to my spiritual
path. If it conflicts not with what i have accepted as a workable plan,
then it can be part of the workable plan i have accepted. The course
was published anonymously, or at least that was the intent of the
Author. Any other related works can remain anonymous as well for all i
care. It is the content that matters and the Course is the standard for
comparison.
creature