ACIM Fundamentalism

            Sometimes clients are surprised when I warn them against “A Course in Miracles fundamentalism”. They say they never thought they would hear that word associated with the Course. But fundamentalism refers to an approach, not a specific religion or spirituality. We are used to the term being applied to the distorters of Islam that have taken over whole swathes of the world or to Christians who took over one of the major political parties in the US in the 1980s and are at this time trying to force their  distorted view of Christianity on the whole country. Anyone paying attention sees little daylight between Islamic and Christian fundamentalism not because they use the same symbols but because they use the same approach to same effect.

Google defines fundamentalism as “a strict, literal adherence to sacred texts or traditional ideologies and a rejection of modern secular interpretations”. Fundamentalists interpret their sacred text but insist it is not an interpretation. They use their interpretation to justify an “us against them” mentality and create a hierarchy of “true believers” at the top and everyone else below. They rely heavily on the idea of sin for their leaders to manipulate and control their adherents. They dismiss common sense and proven science because these challenge their interpretations of their sacred texts.

In the Course community, fundamentalism hasn’t taken root, largely because there is no central authority for it, but many aspects of fundamentalism are there. When you feel tempted to say, “But the Course says…” when common sense or science gives you an answer, you are slipping into the same mentality that fosters fundamentalism. You are raising a set of books to the level of holy authority. Everyone does this to some degree when they first come to feel that the Course is their path forward. You feel something true, and therefore authoritative, radiating out of the books as you study them. But that truth is coming from within you; it is the something that recognizes itself in the source of the words, but not the words themselves. The words were meant for two people (Helen Schucman and Bill Thetford) in a specific time, place, and situation. The rest of us are meant to know this and to study it in this awareness with our inner teacher.

When you offer quotes from the Course rather than compassion to someone who is hurting, you fall into the fundamentalism trap of appeasing your own guilt with perceived authority. You put aside your humanity and the humanity of the other to use the Course as a cudgel to bat away the discomfort you feel at the other’s unhappiness. This leaves the other feeling battered, not helped, but this doesn’t matter in fundamentalism. Fundamentalists deny their humanity and disparage compassion because they believe sin is real and do not want to face their guilt. They see their knowledge of their sacred text of choice as making them sinless or at least less sinful than others, but they have experienced no real spiritual shift. Fundamentalism is about appearances, not real transformations.

When you don’t go to the doctor or take medication because of what you read in the Course, you fall into fundamentalist-like thinking that if you go against “the book” you are “sinning”. Taking this approach does something typical of fundamentalism: Conveniently denying aspects of the text that do not conform to the fundamentalist interpretation. All spiritual texts are full of contradictions because what is written is dependent on context at the time it is written. So, for the Course, adhering to what it says about illness and treatment ignores that, first, it also says to use worldly treatment while the world is real to you (T-4.IV.4.). Second, that solutions to your problems will appear at the level of the problem (S-1.I.2). Third, that there is no sin (T-26.VII.10).

When you grant the Course unquestionable authority by insisting it was written by Jesus, you fall into fundamentalist-like justification by raising a spiritual teaching to untouchable holy heights. This leads to dogmatic rigidity, an interpretation that is denied to be an interpretation, and is ultimately cruel to both you and others.  The Course itself says Jesus (and many others) is a symbol of a universal state (C-5.1), and that the man himself should not be held in awe but be seen as a brother, an equal, who has simply gone before you on the same path (T-VII.5). The Course never claims to be an authority, but rather that the Authority is within you in your inner teacher, what it calls the Holy Spirit.

The Course points out that the Bible, interpreted correctly, is not fearful (T-5.VI.4-5). No one would say this by merely reading the Bible. “Interpreted correctly” means read with the Holy Spirit—in the spirit of love, not fear. The same applies to all spiritual teachings, including the Course.

Fundamentalism usually harkens to a glorious past to which it means to return, but the Course is too recent for that. Many of us were there at the beginning and know there was no period when it was “correctly” interpreted and practiced. But when it is used to justify cultural and political positions and turns any other approach into a sin, it is being used as a fundamentalist-like justification by raising the book to an authority. To say, “I think we should all love one another” because you think it is a better way for society to be is different from “We should all love one another because the Course says so.” The first indicates an authentic value. The second implies inauthentic performance to appease guilt. Fundamentalism is performative, not transformative or authentic.

When you don’t take into consideration the time, place, situation, and people involved in the origins of the Course when you study it, you fall into the fundamentalist’s disregard for illuminating facts that give helpful context to a spiritual text. Sure, this makes it less “special”, but it also makes it kinder and more accessible. No one can hold it over you as an authority if it isn’t rigid and is open to interpretation. Fundamentalists want you to look to its leaders, not your inner teacher, as the authority. In the absence of leaders, fundamentalism will look to an interpretation of a book for authority, but never to your inner teacher, because fundamentalism is an expression of guilt and fear—it is an expression of ego.

 

>>>> 

If you have a question the answer to which you feel may be helpful to others, send it to Liz@acimmentor.com and indicate that you want it answered in this newsletter/blog.