Introduction

Note: I’ve added this brief introduction to my article titled, "My Response to the Witch-Hunt that is Currently Taking Place Among Some in the Course Community." This is a message that was posted at the online discussion group on Yahoo that talks about my books. I think it’s an accurate commentary on Jon Mundy’s recent attacks, as well as those of his collaborators. It was posted by Jim Carruth.

Re: Gary’s authenticity?

Gary’s authenticity did not come into question publicly until Jon Mundy and two other authors published their "Opening a Dialogue with Gary Renard," which more aptly should have been called "Opening an Attack on Gary Renard."

Since that article came out, I’ve noticed a few interesting things. The article is now gone from its original site, and also its featured place on the front of Jon’s website, and even anywhere else on the internet itself for that matter, except for an edited version at circleofa.org, which is the only existing version I could find.

In the original version, Jon Mundy, in trying to make a point about authors that are real and deserve our attention, versus authors that turn out to be fakes, praises author Brad Blanton for his "Radical Honesty" book, and in the same paragraph, puts Neale Donald Walsch down for supposedly admitting in print that he "made it all up," with regards to his Conversations with God books.

I then e-mailed Jon Mundy and asked him what he thought of "Honest to God: A Change of Heart That Can Change the World" by Brad Blanton and Neale Donald Walsch. Of course, there was no answer to that from Jon.

So, as long as we’re questioning authenticity here, how about looking at the guy who throws stones at others without bothering to do the tiniest bit of homework first? I was able to find this information out in less than five minutes by looking up Brad Blanton on Amazon.com.

If you’re going to attack someone, make sure to at least load some live ammunition in your gun. Jon’s shooting blanks, in my opinion. And if I may add my own observation here, I don’t think I’ve ever read Jon praising the author of any best-selling book. So, only small press, relatively unknown books can be authentic in Mr. Mundy’s mind. Hmmm…interesting. Say, isn’t HE a small press, relatively unknown author himself? Golly – WHAT a coinkydink! I guess I will let you draw your own conclusions there.

Hopefully this will offer some comfort to those who were upset by the controversy that Mr. Mundy started. Consider the source, my friends. Then forgive.

Jim Carruth

 

MY RESPONSE TO THE WITCH-HUNT THAT IS CURRENTLY TAKING PLACE AMONG SOME IN THE COURSE COMMUNITY

By Gary Renard

I remember one time I was having a discussion with my teachers, Arten and Pursah, (A & P) and I made the remark, "If I have a choice between being judged by God or being judged by people, I’ll take my chances with God any day." You saw why in the September issue of this magazine. It’s not the purpose of this article to make the error real, but merely to correct misinformation on the level of form, so that hopefully newer students of the Course won’t be confused. After all, the three articles that appeared in that issue should have been in a different spirit considering that they came from experienced teachers. Mr. Mundy took many pages of this publication to present those articles, as well as an earlier one, and I’m requesting as much space to answer them. If he’s going to display any integrity at all he will grant that request, and print this article unedited. I can only hope this is not like asking the fox to guard the henhouse.

When I say, "display any integrity at all," I do not say it lightly. The title of Mr. Mundy’s article was, "Opening A Dialogue with Gary Renard." Excuse me? That title is totally dishonest. I asked Mr. Mundy, and he accepted, to engage in a dialogue with me from June 30 until July 26, the "formal" part of it being from July 18 until July 26, at which time Mundy said, "I tire of this," mainly because he wasn’t getting the result he wanted. During that span of time I answered most of the questions that were raised later in his article. He then chose to ignore my answers and not print any of them, all of which can be confirmed by my original publisher, D. Patrick Miller, who was a witness to that dialogue. I don’t think Patrick enjoyed being a witness, but he was one nonetheless. So why did Mr. Mundy ignore my answers to his questions, choose to not print them, dishonestly title his article, and also print three negative articles about me all at once in just one issue of this magazine? The answer is obvious. It’s because to give my side of the story would not have supported his erroneous conclusions or those of his associates. To be fair and honest simply would not have worked for them.

This article will be my final word to Mr. Mundy. I’m not going to let this become a "he said, he said" dragged out event. No matter what slander Mr. Mundy may decide to include in this issue, knowing that I would not be able to respond to it for yet another two months, (meaning that he figures he could get away with it in the meantime) I will NOT respond to him again in the next issue. If you read this article (and if he prints all of it) you’ll have a good idea of what’s really going on in this magazine, including a very clear pattern in Mr. Mundy’s writings about me, as well as his two collaborators. I sent copies of this article to two well-respected and neutral observers in the Course community at the same time I sent it to Mr. Mundy. They can be witnesses as to whether or not it was printed in its entirety or instead edited by him.

On that note, when it comes to describing what appeared to happen in the illusory September issue of this magazine, when three A Course in Miracles teachers decided to attempt to gang up on another one with three different articles that completely mischaracterized me and the two books that have my name on them, it could be said that there has never been such an uncalled for, over the top spectacle of professional jealousy and mindless attack on a fellow Course teacher in the history of the Course Community. Congratulations are in order to the three writers who, for the purposes of humor, I will refer to in this article as the "axis of ego."

Humor is a vital attribute on the path to enlightenment, and the humorless articles by these writers should be taken as a call for love. In that light you might ask, why even bother to respond to them? After all, none of this is real. But my approach is simple. I’ve been taught that what you do in a situation like this is forgive. I then remember that what I really am cannot be attacked, so I don’t go through life as a victim of the world I see. Indeed, the world is not being done TO me, it’s being done BY me. Then, after you forgive, you should ask the Holy Spirit for Guidance. After that, if you feel inspired to take some kind of action in the illusory world in order to help share the Holy Spirit’s message with others then you should do so. Why not? Aside from forgiveness, sharing the Holy Spirit’s message is what I do. I didn’t have anything better to do. Fourteen years ago I was just sitting there suffering. Then the events that are described in my books started to occur. It all led to a wonderful kind of forgiveness that lessened my suffering. What better thing for me to do than to share it with others?

 

At the same time, I’ve learned that forgiveness doesn’t have to mean you become a doormat on the illusory level of the world for those who spread misleading assertions and rumors. I feel guided to respond to the numerous mischaracterizations of me and the books in the mentioned articles, as well as the not very subtle and blatantly self-serving e-mail campaign against me by Mr. Mundy that followed, so that those who may not have read "my" books will not be misled by misinformation. That is the only purpose of this response. I understand that advanced students don’t need me to lecture them or use Course quotes to make myself right and others wrong. But okay, I might use Course quotes once in a while just for the fun of it.

Most of the people who have read "my" books already know that the articles in the September issue were bogus, and I’ve received great encouragement and support from them since the articles came out. The most recent book, Your Immortal Reality: How to Break the Cycle of Birth and Death, just made number 2 at Amazon.com as I write this, and the first book, The Disappearance of the Universe, was number 11 at the same time. (They were number 1 and number 5 respectively in the category of Religion and Spirituality.) For this I’m deeply grateful.

When I shared my enthusiasm with other teachers in the Course community about how happy I was that two books that are specifically about A Course in Miracles were sharing the message of ACIM with so many people I was accused of "boasting about my book sales." This brings up an important point. I’m a grass roots person. I’ve never thought of myself as being a teacher or an author. I still don’t. I really am excited to just be able to share the message of the Course with others, and I consider it an honor to be able to do so, as well as a lot of fun. Sharing the message of the Course in some way is all I’ve ever really wanted to do since A & P turned me on to it. I think most people who know me realize that’s where I’m coming from. I’m genuinely happy about the reinvigoration of energy among those who gave up on the Course but are now back with it and staying with it (because they can understand it now) as well as the new students who are coming to the Course as a result of the books.

The students of the Course Community know they can talk to me, not because I say so but because I talk to them; and not about theories from a distance but about applications face to face. I think the reason some other teachers don’t get me is because they’ve forgotten what it’s like to be a student. But I’ve never been personally presented in my books, or have I ever presented myself in my workshops, as being anything but a student. I’m human. I make mistakes. I sometimes have a hard time applying these teachings just like other students. People see that in my books and they can relate to it. As for those who haven’t read the books, perhaps they have a right to know what’s behind the witch-hunt that is currently going on and what happens behind the scenes in the Course community. Amazingly, a few in that community are trying to make it look like my books cannot be believed because of the fact that I act and talk like a human being. But does that really make any sense when that’s the way I’ve always been presented in the books? It’s just the way I am. Does that make me ineligible to be worked with by the Holy Spirit and to share it with others?

As someone who was born in Salem, Massachusetts, I know the story of the witch-hunts pretty well. But I think my teachers hit the nail on the head when they described them as, "A classic example of the projection of unconscious guilt." What could be a better definition of a witch-hunt? What happens is you get a few people together and they engage in a feeding frenzy in which they find someone to be blamed for what they secretly believe to be true about themselves. (What the Course calls, "…the secret sins and hidden hates." Text, page 668) Everybody does that to some degree. The question is, do we catch ourselves and forgive it or not? And if we don’t catch ourselves right away then do we at least forgive it eventually, which is just as good, the only difference being that we suffer longer?

This will be a lengthy article, mainly because Jon Mundy had the Pearl Harbor mentality to publish three negative ones about me all at once, two of them by members of the same organization, an organization that is known, on the record, to be hostile to anything that resembles Ken Wapnick. People should not think the political campaign by the Circle of Atonement against me is anything new. They’ve been doing this in e-mails (some of which I’ve seen only because they were forwarded to me by others) for the last two and a half years. In the September issue of this magazine, Mr. Mundy left off the bios of these two people at the end of their articles so readers who didn’t already know both of them wouldn’t realize they were from the same organization and represented the same point of view. No doubt Mr. Mundy and his associates were hoping that publishing three negative articles about me all at once would be impressive enough to get people to overlook the fact that what was said in those articles did not justify their conclusions, and that would be the case even if what was said was true! On top of that, what was said was NOT true, because it merely expressed opinions, not facts, and repeatedly took lines from the books (or examples of my personal and public life) out of context, or missed their meaning completely. If the purpose of the September issue was not to attack and damage, then why do it the way it was done? Especially since my answers to the questions were already known by Mr. Mundy? It shows a lack of good faith. Also, he told me only that there would be one article (by Mr. Perry) about me in the September issue of this magazine, not three. Obviously if I had known there would be three then I would have INSISTED on having my answers included in that issue.

It’s possible that through his deceitful measures Mr. Mundy has managed to persuade a few people to hate me. After all, if you present only one side of the story then how can you miss? What a legacy for Mr. Mundy, who acted as if he was my friend, to leave me. I can forgive him for appearing to do so. The question of "why" then becomes meaningless, as does the rest of this insane world.

I can’t help but think of one of the last times I saw Mr. Mundy speak in public. It was in Salt Lake City, and I was about to give a keynote address at the International A Course in Miracles Conference (after which I received a standing ovation.) Mr. Mundy was speaking in his workshop about how he knew Helen Schucman, the scribe of the Course. Back at the time Jon had apparently hurt a woman who he was involved with in a personal relationship. According to Jon, part of Helen’s counseling to him was, "You’re not guilty." Certainly that is in harmony with the Course. So how did Mr. Mundy pass along this bit of mentoring to me? By conducting the Jon Mundy witch-hunt. He has judged, condemned and literally attempted to punish me on the level of form. To be sure, his words and actions against me are diametrically opposed to everything that A Course in Miracles stands for.

In the last couple of months Mr. Mundy has unleashed the dogs of guilt into the Course Community. (Thanks Jon, for answering the question, "Who let the dogs out?") A technique of the axis of ego is to simply leave out whatever facts don’t support what they want you to believe. This is a technique that a prosecutor uses before a grand jury. In response I would invoke the time-tested statement, "Beware the prosecutor who feels compelled to deceive the Court." Besides, Course students know that the Holy Spirit has already thrown out the "case" against me (See the Text, page 88.) The axis of ego, on the other hand, will do anything to keep its anemic controversy going. As A Course in Miracles says in the Clarification of Terms (page 77) "…those who seek controversy will find it. Yet those who seek clarification will find it as well. They must, however, be willing to overlook controversy, recognizing that it is a defense against truth in the form of a delaying maneuver." And make no mistake, what’s currently going on among some in the Course Community IS a defense against the truth. The question shouldn’t be whether or not Arten and Pursah are real; the writers of those articles should be asking if they themselves are real. According to Arten and Pursah as well as the Course, the answer is no.

In the interest of clarification, I’m going to answer all three of the articles to the extent that I feel is necessary and to the extent that is allowed by my availability. I was given three weeks until the deadline to write an article that answers three other long articles, plus an earlier one. At this time I was traveling extensively to California, Utah, and Indiana, sharing my books and the Course, and I didn’t exactly have time to sit around engaging in the kind of shenanigans that are the hallmark of people who obviously have way too much time on their hands. In any case, if Jon Mundy is going to start dealing in good faith then he’ll publish this article unedited and will not respond to it in this issue. After all, I was deliberately not given an opportunity by him to respond in the September issue, so people had to wait two months for my answer. I’m sure Mr. Mundy hoped the silly witch-hunt of the axis of ego would spread in the meantime. As for this issue, people should be able to read my experience without it being mischaracterized, yet again, by his statements, which as mentioned simply leave out any facts that don’t support his conclusions. You can determine for yourself how Mr. Mundy has conducted himself in this issue, which I know from experience he will not allow me to see until after you do. Others and I will let you know later if he printed the entire article. If he did, then we’re making progress. If he didn’t, then the dishonesty continues.

How ironic that I donated $700 last year to help keep this magazine going, and now Mr. Mundy has gone so far as to "de-list" me from his page of friends in the September issue who teach the Course! And that’s not all he’s appeared to do in the illusion. What I’ve done to him is speak highly of him in my workshops and audio CDs, help him get speaking engagements by personal recommendation, written favorably about him in my books, and tried to help his ministry. Now he’s responding by literally trying to destroy mine. That’s all on the record. It’s not an overstatement. Mr. Mundy has gone as far as to mail unsolicited copies of the three axis articles to my speaking venues without including my answers to his accusations. He’s not just "raising questions" about Arten and Pursah, as he would have you believe. He’s engaged in an all out, slash and burn campaign to damage my career and help his own, and there’s much verification of this. One can’t help but ask about the significant financial conflicts of interest Mr. Mundy has in this matter. We both speak at a lot of the same places, but he doesn’t draw as many people as I do. He stands to profit financially if he can damage me and have some of these speaking venues to himself. And there’s another financial conflict of interest I’ll identify later.

The false claims in the articles have already been answered by me in person and/or online before the articles were even written. I am certainly not someone who hides. I’ve been out there for three years, almost every week in a different part of the country or the world, answering people’s questions about myself as well as the books face to face and on stage. While the members of the Circle of Atonement sit at their computers imagining themselves to be intelligent, I’m out there in person, not running from people so I can engage in idle theories, but walking right up to them and introducing myself so we can get to know each other. People know me, and they know what I’m like. I’ve posted hundreds of messages at the Yahoo online discussion group that talks about the books (which currently has approximately 3,000 members after three years) as well as at other online venues. I’ve flown a quarter of a million miles in the last two and a half years to help spread the message of A Course in Miracles. I’m very grateful that I’m able to do this, even if the axis of ego has not been listening. I’ll answer the questions again here. The axis probably won’t accept the answers because that would mean they weren’t right about me. Perhaps they would rather be right than happy. However, I have trust in the Course community to be relatively fair. That having been said, it should be pointed out that to my way of thinking the Course community is NOT the twenty five or so very visible people and organizations that you see online or in newsletters and books that teach the Course. They represent only a tiny fraction of it. I’ve met the real Course community in the last three years, and it is you, the many thousands of students who really want to learn the Course and attempt to diligently apply it to your everyday lives.

Of course my readers who happen to peek at this magazine (I told quite a few people they should read this magazine and did numerous other favors for Jon Mundy before I found out what he was up to) already know that the axis of ego has completely missed the point as to why a lot of people are reading The Disappearance of the Universe (DU) and Your Immortal Reality (YIR). People read those books because they’re extremely helpful. It’s not because of ME that they’re extremely helpful. Yes, despite the B.S. in this magazine, my two ascended master teachers, Arten and Pursah, really do appear to me from out of nowhere in person and in the flesh. They are the teachers in the book and I’m the student. And the true test of whether or not something is authentic is whether or not it is truly helpful. "You will know them by their fruits." I will add, for the one thousandth time in public, that the books happened exactly the way they are described. There is nothing made up or embellished about them. That’s my experience and there’s no need for me to ever change what I say about it. The books follow a very observable time line over a span of thirteen years. The books are true, and there was no real evidence, other than opinions, in any of the articles in this magazine to prove otherwise.

In one of the articles Greg Mackie actually made the incredible statement that, "Renard has clearly not met the burden of proof." I beg your pardon? This is not Nazi Germany. In present day America a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is not on me. It’s on the axis of ego, and as we’ll see, they have failed. And by the way, since when is a mystic required to "prove" his or her experiences? When did Mr. Mackie make up that idea? Until now I’ve never heard of a teacher of the mystical Course who would actually be silly enough to suggest it.

Before I address the articles in the order in which they appeared, I’d like to mention one other seemingly important point about Mr. Mackie’s article. He tried to draw a comparison between my book and a discredited book called, "A Million Little Pieces." In response, I'd like to quote something Rev.Tony Ponticello wrote at the online discussion group of the Community Miracles Center in San Francisco on March 19 of this year. I have permission from Tony to use that quote in this article. Robert Perry had been e-mailing various teachers in the Course community trying to get them to start a forum to engage in controversy about my book. It was very clear from the responses that no one was interested (except apparently Mr. Mundy, even though he continued in his conversations to pretend he was my friend.) The sending of those e-mails by Mr. Perry did start a little bit of a controversy among some students though, and a student of Robert’s who is also a student of Tony’s posted a message at the CMC website, citing an article about the book, "A Million Little Pieces." Since that book was a lie the person was saying that "Disappearance" was also a lie. This is what Rev. Tony wrote in response:

"….this article (About "A Million Little Pieces") is talking about a situation where it has been proved that the book was a lie. Also, this book did not deal with a spiritual, mystical experience so I don’t think there is really a direct correlation. The Disappearance of the Universe has NOT been proven to be a lie nor is it likely to be. Here in lies the problem. By saying how relevant this article is to the A Course in Miracles community there is an assumption that we are talking about the same thing – a proven lie. But we are not. Is there an assumption that Gary Renard is lying without there being any proof? I have a problem with that. While this is NOT a court of law, shouldn’t Mr. Renard be assumed "innocent" until being proved "guilty" of lying? At this point the only proof I would accept is him saying, "I made it all up." I don’t think he’s going to say that. He’s said directly the opposite. Isn’t it odd that some are trying to develop objective criteria to "prove" his mystical experience invalid? It seems risky to me. Our whole spiritual discipline is based on a woman hearing the voice of Jesus in her head over a period of seven years. Would that hold up to the same objective criteria?" (End of quote.)

 

I’d like to thank Rev. Tony for the fairness he demonstrated in that statement, and the complete text of it, which contains other important points, can be obtained from Tony by e-mailing him at miracles@earthlink.net. And I’d like to add one comment of my own about the book, "A Million Little Pieces." The publisher of that book admits that they did NOT do any fact checking on the book. On the other hand my original publisher, D. Patrick Miller, DID do fact checking on "The Disappearance of the Universe" before he published it. One should ask why Mr. Mackie tried to suggest in his article that there’s a correlation between my first book and "A Million Little Pieces" when there is none, and he did not demonstrate one? And why did Jon Mundy publish what Mr. Mackie wrote? Certainly it does not meet any standards of journalism. So what is the real motivation of these writers? Mr. Mackie and the two other members of the axis of ego also brought up the book, "Mutant Message Down Under." Once again, why? Is this supposed to be guilt by insinuation? (Not that the writer of that book is guilty.) Just because some books are not true doesn’t mean mine aren’t. I’ll deal with some of the other ludicrous assumptions by Mr. Mackie when I address his article in more detail.

 

As for "my" books, I just play my part as explained in the Author’s Introductions and Acknowledgments. It’s because of Arten and Pursah that the books are extremely helpful. And people know it. For example, Dr. Wayne Dyer, who studies the Course, recently described "D.U." as "destined to be one of the most significant contributions to spiritual literature in this century." And best-selling author Doreen Virtue, Ph. D, a long time Course student, says of YIR, "Whether you’re new to A Course in Miracles, or a long-time Course student, you’ll find Ah-ha! moments on nearly every page."

There are three specific reasons why people find the books so helpful that I hear over and over again in my weekly travels around America and the world. 1) They are amazingly clear. (Once again, not because of me.) 2) They’re funny and entertaining. 3) They emphasize the practice of forgiveness in my personal "real time" situations, which are not denied but shared openly. In my portion of the dialogue I speak frankly about the images I see in my personal and professional life. I then do my best to forgive them, sometimes successfully, and sometimes not right away. My teachers counsel me on how to do better. In turn, the description of my efforts helps others to practice forgiveness.

Isn’t it interesting that not one member of the axis of ego, whose mood has shifted from suspiciousness to viciousness, ever mentioned any of these three qualities of the books in any of the articles that appeared in September? In fact, to read those articles you’d think the reason people read my books is because two ascended masters appeared to me in person, as if somehow that would be enough to make Course students and others go running to the book stores to buy them. Do the writers of those articles really have that low of an opinion of Course students? Since the books came out I’ve been told about other books that involve ascended masters. But most people don’t read those books. And the reason they don’t read them is because they suck. Arten and Pursah, on the other hand, rock with clarity, fun, and kick ass explanations of metaphysics and the genuine application of forgiveness to everyday life. I also play my part in a natural way and it works. The axis of ego is so much in denial of this that they could not identify even one of the real reasons the books are widely read. In their ongoing effort to protect the Course from becoming more popular, what they did was judge and condemn me. They have to. As A Course in Miracles says, "He who would not forgive must judge, for he must justify his failure to forgive." (Workbook, page 401.) Those articles spent a lot of time trying to justify judgment, and no time on what my books concentrate on, which is the art of using the things that are going on in your every day life to practice the Course’s unique brand of forgiveness.

 

We’ll take a look at some of the other spurious claims in these three articles and correct them, not because it’s real or important, but just to help spread the Holy Spirit’s message to those who may have ears to hear. The goal of the axis is to stop my books; the goal of my books is to teach forgiveness. Their goal is to distort the faithful translation of the Course that is available in my books in favor of their own woefully inferior interpretation of it. I have complete confidence that if people who have not read my books eventually do so, they will not see the same books that have been described by the axis of ego in their prosecutorial articles.

Before doing so, however, there are a couple of issues that Jon has brought up in his recent e-mail campaign against me. Once again, these are things that are not being presented honestly based on the information that Jon has. This is my only chance to respond, and I’ll do so now. The distorted information (because it’s presented out of context) has already been put out there by Jon in an effort to turn people against me, and I have a right to point out the truth. We’ll then proceed with handling the misinformation in the articles.

MR. MUNDY’S E-MAIL CAMPAIGN

In e-mails Mr. Mundy has sent out he’s presented a paragraph from an e-mail I sent to Beverly Hutchinson of the Miracle Distribution Center in January of 2005. In that e-mail I was trying to warn Beverly about what was going to be in my next book, based on conversations that had already taken place with Arten and Pursah. I gave Jon the correct information in the dialogue with him that took place last summer. Rather than including my explanation, Jon chose to still print the paragraph out of context in his e-mails. That paragraph, and then my explanation of it, is included in the following excerpt from our already mentioned dialogue. Notice what a difference it makes between simply looking at the one paragraph Jon is talking about and also looking at my two paragraphs which explain how it happened. Why is this paragraph being presented out of context by Mr. Mundy in his e-mail campaign? Because it’s misleading. And that’s exactly what Mr. Mundy and a few others want, for people in the Course community to be misled about me. Mr. Mundy wants people to think that the book was written after this e-mail paragraph as a way of "getting even" with someone. The truth is the conversations in that part of the book had already taken place and I was hoping for a better outcome before the book was finished. Here’s what was said in that part of the dialogue between Mr. Mundy and myself.

Jon: After The Disappearance of the Universe came out Beverly Hutchinson of the Miracles Distribution Center in California failed to pick up your book for distribution. You then sent an e-mail to Beverly in which you speak of your next book Your Immortal Reality. That e-mail contains the following sentences.

E-mail to Beverly Hutchinson – January 18, 2005 from Gary:

Whatever decisions you make about our relationship in the next six months or so will determine how you and Miracle Distribution Center are written about in that book. If you care about your image and your place in Course history then you’ll give very strong consideration to changing the nature of our relationship. The way things stand now, you will not be happy with my next book.

Jon: Having made this threat in Jan. ‘05 we now find Pursha telling you in Your Immortal Reality, published in the summer of ’06 that you and Beverly Hutchinson were married in a previous lifetime. According to Pursha you’ve been together in several life times. In some life times Beverly victimized you. In others you victimized Beverly. Sometimes she was a man and you were a woman and vice versa. In a recent past life you killed Beverly and she has not forgiven you. It is for this reason she will not carry your books. In yet another lifetime Beverly killed you so you continue to victimize each other. (Your Immortal Reality pages 106 and 107).

Gary: Yes, I wrote that e-mail to Beverly. I later regretted the tone of it and apologized. I still have my e-mails to her. In any case, my books have ALWAYS been about my personal experiences, as everyone knows. I’ve written openly about my take on Beverly at the Yahoo Discussion group about DU, which has grown to 2300 members. (Note: currently 3000.) I don’t live my life in secret. I’ve made mistakes in public. None of this calls into question the validity of the books. The part about Beverly and I having a past relationship is an amplification of points Arten and Pursah were making about the reason it’s so much harder for us to forgive some people than others. That part was certainly not meant to be derogatory to me or Beverly. It’s simply duality. In fact, what’s important about the brief discussion in the book about Beverly is the answer my teachers give me in regard to forgiveness, not what I said about the situation before that.

Jon: You say you apologized to Beverly in an e-mail. What’s mystifying is that after you apologized, you still saw fit to have Pursha attack Beverly with a complicated tale of murder and revenge. This is the point at which one wants to say, "enough is enough."

Gary: You’re wrong. That e-mail and apology was in January of 2005. The conversation in which I brought up the subject of Miracle Distribution Center, and in which Arten and Pursah answered me, took place seven months before that, in June of 2004. The book itself, Your Immortal Reality, says that they appeared to me every two months, from December of 2003 to August of 2005. The time line is very observable. If Beverly had taken my advice and tried to change the nature of our relationship then I could have reported that fact later in the book. That’s why I told her there were six more months to go. I’ve always been willing to work with Beverly and have never shut her out. She’s the one who practices exclusionary policies. We talk about her in my book because we talked about what was going on at the time, just like we always do. I asked a question and they answered it. I could have brought up later that the relationship had changed, if it had. (End of that part of the dialogue.)

So once again we see Mr. Mundy, in his e-mail campaign, ignoring the facts, printing several sentences out of context, and trying to make things appear the way they are not. The books are always my real experiences, and any idea to the contrary is simply mistaken.

Mr. Mundy would also want people to think I threatened him when I said in an e-mail, "If you continue to try to attack me I predict that only one of us is going to be hurt, and it’s not going to be me." Obviously what I meant by that is what Jon is saying is not true, and if he persists it will come back to haunt him. I believe that Jon is hurting himself, and his attempts at character assassination against me will not work in the long run because people will continue to get to know me better. I’m not going away.

Mr. Mundy’s comments in our dialogue about Miracle Distribution Center bring up his other financial conflict of interest I was talking about. He’s really going to bat for Beverly Hutchinson in all of this. (I don’t know why he thinks he has to, given that the incident with her is presented in my book as just another forgiveness opportunity.) In fact, she’s the one who supplied the edited e-mail to him. Beverly doesn’t sell my books, but she DOES sell Jon’s books (as well as at least one by Mr. Perry) and has had Jon speak many times at the Miracle Distribution Center’s conferences, which I’ve never been invited to. Jon has a profitable relationship with Beverly while me and my books are banned. He has a financial stake in keeping it that way.

Finally, and unbelievably, in his e-mails Mr. Mundy has also questioned my relationships with women. So let me say this very clearly. My personal life is none of his business.

 

MR. MUNDY’S ARTICLE

 

Mr. Mundy, the chief prosecutor, gives misinformation from the very first word of his headline, which says "Opening A Dialogue with Gary Renard." As we’ve seen, a dialogue had already taken place and he didn’t like the way it came out so he made up his own absurd attack edition in the September issue. This is a verifiable fact. I have no need to hurt Mr. Mundy. I believe he’s already doing that to himself, which I warned him against. Incidentally, Mr. Mundy would have you think we are good friends and that he knows me well. Yes, I considered him to be a friend before the September issue, but we only saw each other about once a year, and he does NOT know me well.

If Mr. Mundy was being graded for his article about me and Your Immortal Reality, he’d receive and "F." He did not give the book a good faith reading. Here are some, but not the only reasons that demonstrate this is the case. In most examples I will not use page numbers for the quotations from DU and YIR as I do not want people to read the books out of context, which is what the axis would like for them to do. The books should be read from start to finish in order to experience them properly. The quotations, however, are accurate and can be verified. All quotes from the Course are cited.

Mundy claims: "According to Pursah no other teacher of the Course, up to now, has presented us with such a clear understanding of the Course as Gary." But in fact, Dr. Kenneth Wapnick is described by my teachers in DU as "the Course’s greatest teacher," and in YIR I myself describe him as "the Course’s premier teacher." When Pursah pointed out that people could now read and understand the Course for themselves after reading our books, she was making a statement that has been verified by countless readers. I believe that Dr. Wapnick’s books can also accomplish that, but up until now they have not been best-sellers.

Mundy claims: "…more and more questions arise and the more complex his story becomes…" But in fact, the same questions have been coming from the same few people repeatedly for three and a half years who seek controversy, even though the questions have already been answered. Also, my story has not become more complex because it has never changed. If Mundy is simply referring to the fact that there’s a new book, then whether he realizes it or not, I have a right to share my experiences with my readers.

Mundy claims: "ACIM says nothing about ascended masters…" But in fact this is a typical mistake that Mr. Perry and Mr. Mackie also repeatedly make. Mundy assumes that just because the Course doesn’t use the exact words "ascended masters" that the Course "says nothing" about them. But that’s not true. The following words from the Course describe Arten and Pursah perfectly and show that the appearances by them could happen. "There are those who have reached God directly, retaining no trace of worldly limits and remembering their own Identity perfectly. These might be called the Teachers of teachers because, although they are no longer visible, their image can yet be called upon. And they will appear when and where it is helpful for them to do so." (Manual For Teachers, page 64.)

Mr. Mundy uses quotations from the Course about reincarnation that show that the Course teaches reincarnation is not true (because it’s just a dream) as if this would be news to the readers of my books. He uses the quotes AS IF to say that my books ARE teaching that reincarnation is true. But in fact that’s wrong. For example, here’s what Pursah says about the subject in YIR. "Now, you should always remember that whatever appears to happen is just a dream. The reason the Course says that reincarnation isn’t true (Manual, page 60) is because it’s an illusion. It APPEARS to happen, but you never really go into a body, it just looks that way. It’s an optical illusion. Why? Well for one thing, the Course teaches that the body doesn’t even exist! (Text, page 25) So how could you really be going into one? As the Course says, "The body does not exist except as a learning device for the mind. This learning device is not subject to errors of its own, because it cannot create. It is obvious, then, that inducing the mind to give up its miscreations is the only application of creative ability that is truly meaningful." (Ibid.) In DU my teachers say, "When we talk about reincarnation, it doesn’t really happen. It’s just a dream." That’s what my teachers REALLY teach. Once again, Mr. Mundy is trying to create a false impression about the book. What my teachers do is use bodies to teach me of the unreality of the body. This is a hallmark of the Holy Spirit’s method. He uses the same things the ego made to undo the ego.

Mundy claims he was reading DU, found it to be dazzling, and then says, "near the end, two things stopped me." But in fact, Mr. Mundy endorsed the book on the back cover AFTER he read it. So he couldn’t have been stopped too much! Perhaps what really happened was that he didn’t realize just how successful the book would be, and became more and more jealous as time went on.

After mentioning that my books make predictions about nuclear terrorism, Mundy claims that in the Course, "We are told that (the Holy Spirit) would never say anything that would upset or disturb us." But in fact the Course says many things to expose the ego that disturb a lot of people very much. It then teaches forgiveness of these things. And that’s exactly what Arten and Pursah do in this case. Does Mr. Mundy really believe they were trying to scare people? They also predicted many good things that would happen in the future. That’s duality. You have both good and bad. And if they were trying to scare people then why would they say about their predictions in D.U. "Now here’s something you probably didn’t notice about all of these things; they are ALL forgiveness lessons!" Apparently Mr. Mundy didn’t notice, and in fact it was the September issue of his "Miracles" Magazine that tried to scare people. The truth is that no matter what my teachers talked about with me in the books, sooner or later they would ALWAYS bring the subject back around to forgiveness, because that’s what all things are really for.

Mundy claims he never said a quote that is attributed to him in YIR. "I did tell Gary that he should go out on the road and speak…I did not tell him that he should go on the road and speak; otherwise, people might think he was making it up…" But in fact, Mundy did say those words, and I trust my memory more than his. We’ve already seen that his account of events is flawed, as with him saying he was "stopped" by two things near the end of D.U. when he not only endorsed the book after that but spoke positively about it in public.

Mundy claims, "…when Arten and Pursah speak they sound like Gary." But in fact, sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t. As for sounding like me sometimes, Mundy and his fellow snobs would have you think that’s a bad thing. Mundy lists individual words out of context that he apparently thinks are more "evidence." Yet the Course itself does not agree with him and his cohorts at all. A & P speak to me in a way I can accept and understand, which is exactly how the Holy Spirit works with everyone. As Jesus advises us in the Course, "If you would be heard by those who suffer, you must speak their language. If you would be a savior, you must understand what needs to be escaped. Salvation is not theoretical." (Manual, page 64-65.) The fact that the books are speaking to many speaks for itself. By the way, if my books are made into movies and use exactly the same language, they’ll be rated PG. The focus of the axis on language and style is silly and proves nothing except that they don’t get it.

Mundy claims that because A & P and I all use the phrase, "Just kidding," that it’s also some kind of evidence. But in fact a good faith reading of the books reveals that this is a running joke between the three of us. And speaking of running jokes, Mr. Mundy tries to make a federal case out of my flirtations with Pursah, and that she once wore a revealing outfit (from a distance, so I couldn’t really see her clearly, which of course Mr. Mundy didn’t mention.) The situations where I flirt with Pursah are obviously a joke, and virtually everyone gets it, except apparently the Puritan members of the axis. Pursah is an ascended master. She’s not interested in sex at all. Period. My flirtations with her are doomed to failure, and I know it, just as everyone else does. That’s why it’s funny. For example, in YIR I say to Pursah, "… when are you and I gonna hook up?" She replies, "Hmmm. Let me see. Does never work for you?" Yet Mundy asks seriously, "Would a student, specially selected as the mouthpiece for an ascended master, want to have sex with that master?" as if it’s a real problem. He has a clear, personal hope that people will think I’m a bad person, and all of this because of a running gag. Or is it something deeper in Mr. Mundy? In any case, if the axis doesn’t like the style of the book, so what? Most readers don’t share their unbelievably stiff take on it. My books even have the support of numerous members of the clergy. The axis has remembered not to laugh, most of my readers have remembered to.

Mundy claims there is a high level of attack in the book, but in fact the book simply emphasizes what the Course is teaching and points out that what other teachers are teaching is not the Course. Maybe some people don’t like that. But I don’t think A & P came along to tell people what they want to hear. There are already more than enough teachers doing that. And my teachers and I are not attacking. As a reader recently wrote at the online discussion group that talks about the books, "To say that teachers are veering away from the Course’s teachings is NOT an attack on them. It is simply an urging to see this. And we will not learn true forgiveness if we concentrate on smoke screens of human based good intentions." (Message number 25,415)

Mundy claims that DU uses an "unprecedented level" of quotations from the Course and that’s why it reads so well. He says he and Perry were limited to 5% quotations from the Course. But in fact my word count sheet for DU that was submitted to The Foundation for A Course in Miracles shows that 7.5% of the words (in 409 pages) are Course quotes. That’s not a big difference. 92.5% of the book is not Course quotes. Then Mundy also falsely claims about D.U. that "…the quotes are not italicized or indented and the type face is maintained, so it’s easy to think these words come from Arten and Pursah when we are actually reading the Course." It’s at this point that even a human judge would have thrown Mr. Mundy’s case out of court. Even a casual glance at D.U. will show that the quotations from the Course are in bold face type and are separated from the rest of the dialogue. The reckless and false statements that are being made by Mundy over and over are beyond comprehension and add up to either incompetence or slander. Slander is when you say very negative things about someone that are not true, especially if you have access to information that tells you they are not true. If you say them for the purpose of damaging the other person, that adds up to malice. As the Course says about attack, "Its sole intent is murder, and what form of murder serves to cover the massive guilt and frantic fear of punishment the murderer must feel?" (Text, page 495.) As for the second book, all of the quotes from the Course are duly noted right on the page and right at the end of the quote, just as in D.U, and that’s much more than most of the other teachers of the Course have ever done.

Mr. Mundy claims, "YIR was written in a few months." But in fact it was written over a period of two years and one month. He also claims, "it shows." That’s an opinion that is not shared by most readers, and the book is also about to receive excellent reviews in major spiritual publications.

Mundy claims, in quoting Mr. Perry, that "Ken Wapnick is being paraphrased and reparaphrased." He then mentions the phrase, "unconscious guilt." Here we see the same error Mundy and his associates made about the phrase, "ascended masters." Just because the Course doesn’t use that exact phrase doesn’t mean the Course doesn’t contain the message. The Course speaks volumes about what has been denied, and what has been denied IS unconscious. As we’ll see, Arten and Pursah translate the Course, they do not interpret it like Mr. Perry. (Perry urges a "literal interpretation" of the Course, which, as we’ll see, is a disaster.) But for now, remember that the Course uses the words deny, denial, unconscious, unconsciously, unconsciousness, as well as the word guilt and similar words, sometimes hundreds of times. The idea of an exact phrase from the Course always having to be used does not allow for an accurate translation of the Course into teachings that people can better accept and understand. Yet it’s because of an accurate translation such as the one found in my books that people can go back for themselves and read, comprehend, and also apply the Course to their personal lives more effectively.

Mundy claims A & P’s knowledge of early church history can be found in other books. Not only is he wrong about that in regards to many of the things they say, because they are NOT always saying the same things as others, but Mundy even makes specific errors, which if he had any class, he would apologize for. He says, "You can find, for example, in Elaine Pagel’s book, "Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas" the idea that St. Thomas was not really a "doubting" Thomas." I’d like Mr. Mundy to explain to all of us how it would have been possible for me to borrow that idea from the book, "Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas" when it was published at exactly the same time as The Disappearance of the Universe, in May of 2003? In fact, my book was being read in March of that year. The truth is, it would NOT have been possible.

Also, Pursah explains 22 Sayings from The Gospel of Thomas within D.U. in such a way that has never been seen before, and does not agree with other’s interpretations. She also gives the original version of that Gospel in YIR (70 Sayings instead of 114, sometimes with different wording.) I guess Mr. Mundy must have missed those parts. In fact, he missed most of the book, and he certainly missed its message.

Mundy claims in his article, "Earlier this year, Gary sent me a quote I was to sign on to as an endorsement for the back of Your Immortal Reality. It contained the phrase, ‘He doesn’t compromise one inch on the truth.’ I refused." But in fact it would have been honest for him to mention that the ONLY reason I sent him a sample endorsement for the book was because he specifically ASKED me to. (I still have the e-mail.) The wording of the sample endorsement was not important to me. When he said he didn’t like the phrase "one inch" I removed it immediately. It was not a big deal. It’s a common phrase. Mr. Mundy then still endorsed the book! Then, incredibly, Mundy goes on to say, "There is not one endorsement from any major ACIM author, leader, teacher, or speaker on the back or the inside of Your Immortal Reality." But in fact it would have been honest for him to mention that the reason for this is because of his own lack of good faith. The truth is I tried to do a favor for Jon. Despite his own apparent self-importance, he is not very well known. There were a dozen other people who would have been very happy to have the free publicity that would go along with this endorsement, including people who are MUCH better known than Jon is. Hay House (my publisher) doesn’t want a lot of endorsements on their newer books. They want things on the books that promote other Hay House products, which is their right. (For example, one of best-selling author Sylvia Browne’s new books has no endorsements.) I wanted Jon to be the one endorsement on my back cover because I was sincerely trying to help him. And then, at just the right time, Jon contacted Hay House, without consulting me, and removed his endorsement from the back cover just as the book was going to print. Then it was too late to replace the endorsement for the first printing. That’s why there’s not an endorsement on the first printing of the book. There is on the second, third and fourth printings, which have already taken place as of this writing. At this point Mr. Mundy’s case against me has been shown for the illusion that it is.

In closing the door on Mr. Mundy, he claims, "Perhaps Arten (or Gary) answers our question best when near the end of YIR in referring to the world and rephrasing Ken he says, "There is no point in asking how it came about because it hasn’t!" But in fact, Arten (not me) was most likely NOT paraphrasing Ken but simply translating the Course, which says, "It never happened in reality." (Text, page 382) And that is also certainly true of Mr. Mundy’s imaginary story about me and my books. Thanks for the witch-hunt, Jon. Your idea of what constitutes "Miracles, Mysticism, Metaphysics and Mirth" leaves a tremendous amount to be desired.

MR. PERRY’S ARTICLE

The next two sections will be short. That’s because in looking at Mr. Perry’s article, as well as that of his associate, it’s important to consider the commitment to controversy that goes along with them. (Until now, Mr. Mundy had not appeared to get sucked into it.) For many years Mr. Perry has been committed to propping up his interpretation of the Course and attempting to undermine the teachings of Ken Wapnick. He’s drawn comparisons at his website and in books between himself and Ken using the same kinds of tables he uses in his article about me. (Perhaps I should be honored to be treated the same as Ken?) Mr. Perry is obsessed with comparisons as much as he is with Ken. He sees my books as being more in line with the teachings of Ken than his own. That’s the REAL problem Mr. Perry has with my books. That problem didn’t just start with his article. He showed it in e-mails two years ago. The real reason he does not accept Arten and Pursah is because they don’t verify his work. To be sure, if my teachers had said that Robert Perry and not Ken Wapnick would be known in the future as the Course’s greatest teacher, then Mr. Perry would have no problem at all with their appearances. Mr. Perry was involved in a long and public (from his end, not Ken’s) "copyright controversy" which caused splits in the Course community. Since that situation was resolved two years ago the people in the Course community who are addicted to controversy have not known what to do with themselves. They needed another target on which to project what they secretly believe to be true about their lives. What they secretly believe is that they are a hoax, as anyone unconsciously believes about him or her self by virtue of the fact that they’ve attempted to usurp God’s power and make their own false existence.

Against that backdrop, it’s not hard to see that the entire premise of Mr. Perry’s article doesn’t work, just as his interpretation of the Course doesn’t work. This becomes especially clear when you look at the title he selected, "Why Don’t The Masters Have An Original Thought?" Of course the title isn’t exactly true, given that what Mr. Perry has done is the same thing that anyone could do with anyone’s books, i.e. go through them and just pick out the parts that are similar to what someone else is saying, especially if that someone else is talking about the exact same subject! Mr. Perry overlooks the many, many insightful and helpful observations that Arten and Pursah make about my personal and professional life, especially when it comes to how to APPLY the teachings of the Course, not just engage in theosophical speculation. Those insights as well as their amazing clarity about what the Course means have been and will continue to be very helpful to many. In fact, there are 626 pages of material in the two books, and Mr. Perry has attempted to make it appear that most of those pages do not exist. Of course he’s wrong, but there’s a much larger and more significant issue here.

 

My Perry’s title for his article and the things he says about himself give away both his reading and teaching approach. He says that if Arten and Pursah actually appeared to me then, "We would expect them to come out with stunningly original insights into the Course." He goes on and on about how in the Course, "Every paragraph is a minor symphony of themes, with little twists and turns of thought that are whole teachings in themselves. Most importantly, there are ideas on every page that I never hear Course students or teachers talk about. As a result, most of the Course’s hundreds (perhaps thousands) of themes, including many of its main themes, are simply not discussed. Much of what’s there we just don’t see. Further, much of what we do see isn’t in there."

Wow! I haven’t analyzed things like that since I used to smoke pot back in the 70s. But what does the Course actually say about itself? There are two things to focus on that are relevant here. 1) The Course says it is SIMPLE. And it doesn’t say it just once. It uses the word simple 158 times. (Hey Robert, this is a word you can see that really is in there!) 2) The Course DOESN’T advise us (or its teachers, including ascended masters) to have original ideas, as Mr. Perry indicates in the title of his article. In fact, it says, "Ingenious thinking is not the truth that shall set you free, but you are free of the need to engage in it when you are willing to let it go." (Text, page 45.) And it also says, "The Course merely gives another answer, once a question has been raised. However, this answer does not attempt to resort to inventiveness or ingenuity. These are attributes of the ego. The Course is simple. It has one function and one goal. Only in that does it remain wholly consistent because only that can be consistent." (Clarification of Terms, page 77) Well, Mr. Perry can have all the original ideas he wants, and he can interpret the Course all he wants. And he’ll continue to teach it badly. Which brings up another subject.

Mr. Perry interprets the Course. Arten and Pursah do not. What my teachers do is TRANSLATE the Course. They are excellent translators, which means they don’t change the meaning. In fact, the Course knows that’s what a good translator does. "…a good translator, although he must alter the form of what he teaches, never changes the meaning. In fact, his whole purpose is to change the form so that the original meaning is retained." (Text, page 115)

Mr. Perry, on the other hand, not only interprets the Course, but offers a LITERAL interpretation of it that has led many students, some of whom I’ve met on my travels, to give up the Course, until D.U. brought them back to it. In fact, Mr. Perry attempts to put down Arten and Pursah in his article for sounding like Ken on the subject of a literal interpretation. Perry quotes Ken as saying, "Only those statements that reflect the unified reality of Heaven …should be taken literally." Arten and Pursah say, "The parts of the Course that express non-duality should be taken literally, but the parts of it that seem to express duality should be taken as metaphor." But why wouldn’t Arten and Pursah sound similar to Ken if they’re speaking the truth? Nobody has a monopoly on the truth. Of course they sound like him sometimes. That’s because they BOTH are translating A Course in Miracles. Perry on the other hand, espouses an interpretation of the Course that leads students toward much unnecessary confusion.

For example, the Course says, "God knows not form." (Text, page 631) But the Course also says, "God weeps at the "sacrifice" of His children who believe they are lost to Him." (Text, page 89) So, which one is it? If God doesn’t even know form then He can’t distinguish anything to weep at. (Although Perry may want you to think that both can be true.) But in fact, under Perry’s literal interpretation of the Course we are given a Jesus who is an idiot. He constantly contradicts himself, and people have QUIT the Course because they believed that the Holy Spirit or Jesus would NOT contradict themselves. Under Perry’s literal interpretation they do. But what if Arten and Pursah are correct? What if non-duality ("God knows not form.") should be taken literally, and duality ("God weeps at the sacrifice of His children…") should be taken as metaphor? Then we have a Course that works. We have a Jesus who does NOT contradict himself. And this works all the way through the Course. Arten and Pursah get students excited about the Course because instead of seeing contradictions they see consistency. Instead of confusion they have understanding. All of which makes Mr. Perry’s unbelievably condescending and arrogant attitude in his article that much more ridiculous.

Mr. Perry’s article is riddled with false assumptions and errant opinions. He mentions that Arten and Pursah describe our life as being like watching a movie as Ken does. So what? Does Mr. Perry really think that Ken was the first to use that analogy? And doesn’t he know from reading the books that going to the movies is my favorite hobby, so of course my teachers would use an analogy like that? And while Perry claims that much of what A & P teach isn’t in the Course, any good faith reading would indicate that Arten and Pursah constantly used quotes from the Course to back up what they were saying.

Mr. Perry couldn’t figure out why the masters appeared. After all, they aren’t offering the stunningly original (and egoic) interpretation of the Course he is seeking. Yet he answers his own question as to why they appeared better than I could, and he does so right at the beginning of his article. In talking about D.U. he says, "…the message has inspired so many…" and, "The book has brought so many thousands of people to the Course, as well as thousands of lapsed students back to the Course." He then goes on to question in his article why the masters would have appeared. Hello? Is he saying that what he just described isn’t enough of a reason? Actually it’s more than just thousands, and the numbers are increasing every month. D.U. is being translated into fourteen languages. What does Mr. Perry want? Oh, I forgot; stunningly original insights. And there’s one more thing he forgot to mention. A lot of those students gave up on the Course because they were confused by teachers like him, couldn’t understand it, and quit out of frustration. Now, the "old guard" is closing ranks to try to prevent the new kid on the block and his teachers from doing better. How about giving someone else a chance?

As to whether or not the masters really appeared to me, Perry claims, "Some, however, question the relevance of this issue due to the fact that we simply can’t know if the story is true or false." He then says, "Ah, but have we tried? Maybe we can’t know in the absolute sense, but how many things can we know in that sense? Since such knowing is unattainable, all we usually require is a kind of personal version of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Would anyone who didn’t know guess that he’s talking about the mystical experiences of a student of A Course in Miracles here? You’d think he was talking about an armed robbery with witnesses. And apparently Mr. Perry’s idea of "beyond a reasonable doubt" includes only presenting one side of the story, having the axis of ego act as the prosecutor, judge and jury, and finding me guilty. Never mind that because of my teachers people can read our books and then understand and apply the Course, but that if they read his books they can’t. Never mind that Arten and Pursah have brought the Course into the vernacular. Let’s not let a great development like that taking place with a popular book for the first time get in the way of the witch-hunt.

And Mr. Perry’s proof of his position is that there are teachers, Ken, Arten and Pursah, (and by extension, myself) teaching the truth of a great spiritual document like A Course in Miracles, and that they sound alike! What a concept! And they don’t sound like him! So Mr. Perry’s little "expose" of me has proven nothing except his desperation to discredit my teacher’s translation of the Course, with no consideration given to the idea that the translation he’s trying to discredit could be right and his interpretation could be wrong.

How do you tell the difference between a translation and an interpretation? Simple. One of them works. One of them gets people excited about the Course, rather than leading them to controversy and confusion. Mr. Perry once wrote a book called, "One Course, Two Visions." Maybe it should have been called, "Two Visions, One Full of It." Arten and Pursah are right when they teach that there is only one possible correct interpretation of the Course. That interpretation is simply a good translation. For his part, Mr. Perry has been the biggest source of controversy in the Course community for the last ten years. He knows no other way, but there must be another way.

 

MR. MACKIE’S ARTICLE

Finally, there’s the article by Mr. Mackie. He uses something called, "Occam’s razor" and says my book violates it. Yeah, I remember Jesus talking all the time in the Course about how important Occam’s razor is. But seriously, I never heard of Occam’s razor, and I know only one thing about it for sure. It sure as hell doesn’t have anything to do with the Course. Mr. Mackie has arbitrarily taken something he thinks is important, which is actually just part of the illusion, and tried to use it to invalidate something that is successfully teaching A Course in Miracles. Hmm. What’s wrong with this picture?

I was especially fond of the following statement in the article by Mr. Mackie. He had just been writing about the discredited book, "A Million Little Pieces," hoping you’d think my book is like that one just because he mentioned it. Then he writes, "Some people have told me that Renard is such a nice guy that he would never do something like this, but people described as "nice" have proven capable of doing just about anything – including murder." So there you have it! The experience of people who have met me doesn’t count. Only the opinion of Mr. Mackie, who has never met me, does count. Forget about people who have had a genuine experience of me. According to Mr. Mackie, I once used the word "crap" in an e-mail. What more proof do you need that I’m a terrible person and could perhaps be a murderer? Certainly someone who speaks English and stands up for himself, rather than baffling people by talking about something called Occam’s razor, cannot be qualified to share the message of the Holy Spirit and must be a fraud!

Given this absolute, undiluted nonsense, I’ll be as brief as possible in answering a couple of other points about this article. Mr. Mackie claims about me, …"his wife, most likely with his approval, created a false identity on his DU Internet discussion board to praise and defend DU. (She eventually confessed and apologized for this.) Does any of this sound like the behavior of a person who truly encountered ascended masters?" What was that again? "Most likely with Mr. Renard’s knowledge?" Once again, under the guilt trained eye of Mr. Mackie, I am presumed guilty until proven innocent, even though any examination of the evidence would say I’m innocent. In fact my wife said in public at the time, now three and a half years ago, that I did NOT know she was doing that. So what’s going on here? What’s going on here is a list of twelve reasons by Mr. Mackie as to why he doesn’t believe me, and all twelve of them are nothing but his opinion. They are not facts. They are slanted and tainted opinions masquerading as an article.

For example, Mackie claims, "There has never been a verified instance of ascended masters or other advanced spiritual beings appearing physically." So, let me see. Is he calling Yogananda a liar too? Dr. Bill Evans, who wrote an article about me in this magazine called, "Mystical Experiences: Is Gary Renard and The Disappearance of the Universe For Real?" (by the way, he came to a dramatically different conclusion than the axis of ego) wrote in that article, "…I was in a position of being a psychiatrist knowledgeable of Yogananda’s documentation of experiences similar to Gary’s, and friendly with Gary in a personal manner. Certainly, being a psychiatrist with some special interest in diagnosing clinical delusional disorders and distinguishing them from other clinical psychotic disorders, I am in an expert position to assure you that Gary is not delusional when he relates his story of the actual physical manifestations of the ascended masters…"

So whom should we listen to? An expert who actually knows me and has had time to observe me as a friend, or someone who has never met me, like Mr. Mackie? And if Yogananda documented experiences similar to mine, then why did a self-described "mystic" like Mr. Mundy choose to listen to Mr. Mackie, who doesn’t know me, instead of Dr. Evans, who does?

Mackie’s love for the trees at the expense of the forest really shows when he insists that certain "facts" in the illusion are true, such as evolution. Yet as Pursah says in YIR, "This year’s scientific fact is the next century’s debunked old theory." Finally, and this one really hurt, Mackie claims that the book contains, oh my God, "grammatical errors!"

But seriously, I’d like to share something personal with you. Seeing Arten and Pursah has not been the ultimate spiritual experience for me. Despite the fixations of the axis, the ultimate experience does not take place within the realm of perception, which they cherish. It takes place in God. It’s an experience of what you really are, and where you really are. That experience, which the Course is directed toward, is best facilitated by the practice of forgiveness.

So now I must forgive all this silliness, and I have faith that you will forgive me. I’m leaving for Michigan to lead a workshop. That’s part of what I do, and I’m not about to stop. Which reminds me. In February, Mr. Mundy, Mr. Perry and myself will all be speaking at the A Course in Miracles Conference in San Francisco. I’d like to invite them, as well as Mr. Mackie, to meet with me there. Perhaps we can find a way to live in peace. As the Course says so beautifully, "The holiest of all the spots on earth is where an ancient hatred has become a present love." (Text, page 562) *