--- In Disappearance_of_the_Universe@..., BBFBBN@a...
wrote:
Hello starchild1124@y...,
In reference to your comment:
¨¨ Actually it is a "correction" (and Ken Wapnick is the
¨¨ one who pointed it out to me and called it this, when I
¨¨ was new to the course and asked him about the
¨¨ "foolish thing" passage)
One of the things that have been consistent with Ken when he speaks
of
changes in the Course early on, was due to Helen's fear. Early on
Helen's ego would
slip in and Jesus would later correct it.
Peace
I think it's the other way around. I think Helen took it down as
Jesus gave it to her, in the first place. Where it says "if a brother
asks you to do a foolish thing- even if it's insane (which it will be
if he's in ego), etc" (from memory)
Later, a few chapters on, maybe when they were rereading it or
editing it, Helen read that and thought "oh no, people will be asking
someone else to steal or kill someone and strongly insisting on it,
and the person (if they have read the course) will feel they have to
do it!"
And added that afterthought, which doesn't even really fit in the
place it's in, like "I have told you to do a foolish thing, but not
if it might harm yourself or others".
Which came from Helen's ego/fear.
I think (not that I was there or asked (LOL) that the first
reference to it was clear and simple and could have stood on it's
own. Just the idea of "trusting HS" would take care of it.
Trusting that nobody would strongly insist you do something like
kill someone.
And it doesn't really mean you have to do it. If you felt it was
wrong (which killing someone might be) you don't have to do it, even
if it seems really important to someone else. But, look at the armed
forces, who are trained to kill and ordered to in a war?
Just look at it (whatever it is) and ask yourself WHY do I have a
stronger investment in not doing it?
Like giving in, as the most peaceful/joining way to be.
Ask myself "does this really matter?" My brother is just as right
as I am.
Like Hugh Prather has said about forgiveness being a thought and
not (always) a behavior. You can forgive a murderer and still keep
him locked up or an abusive spouse and not choose to live with them.
Even IF someone strongly insisted you do something that might hurt
someone, or you didn't feel right about doing. You could look at it
and why you might not want to do it (if it's just digging in your
heels and not wanting to give in) without actually doing it.
More of a thought/exercise than actually doing it.
But I've always thought that was an ego/afterthought where it was
later corrected "out of the blue" like that.
If anyone believes differently and feels strongly about it, they
can be right (LOL)
Actually, I applied this myself, when I had a discussion board (not
an ACIM based one but we sometimes wrote about this and quoted from
it) and recieved an email from the foundation's lawyer (Carrie
Fletcher) pointing out the copyright rules and guidelines and
how "the other versions" weren't to be quoted at all, etc.etc. I was
supposed to monitor and moderate the board (which I wasn't doing up
till then and didn't want to) to make sure the copyright rules
weren't broken. Because it was MY board and I was responsible for
what was written on it.
My board was a little "nothing" board that had been brought to the
attention of the foundation (by the "ACIM police" (LOL)
I did write about it on the board and suggested that people just
give the reference number instead of using long quotes. I got accused
of being "afraid of getting sued" but it was more like Ken and the
foundation seemed to want so badly to own and control those words,
the most peaceful thing to do was just allow them to. No big deal. We
could put it into our own words if we needed to.
Not that there weren't (and still aren't) boards that are openly
writing about and quoting the course and don't even have copyright
notices on. And the foundation is aware of this.
But at the time it was something that felt right to me. If we don't
at least try and live what we believe, what good is it?
~ Carrie
