ACIM Teacher Controversy

Q: What do you think is the deal with Course teachers and all the controversy? Is that just the nature of the beast (the ego), so to speak?

A: Yes, that's all. Course teachers and students are no different than anyone else or each other; they have split minds and are "in process", so the normal factions, separate interests, and controversies will arise in forms specific to the Course, spiritual communities / seekers, and to human beings in general.

It's all pretty standard stuff. Since teaching in the formal sense is simply form and signifies no concomitant level of ego detachment, I think it's safe to say almost every ACIM teacher would still have some degree of attachment to their own specialness. And for any teacher who is identified with themselves as a teacher, this would certainly be the case. If you are identified with the body at all, if you think you have a spiritual mission, you must be - according to the metaphysics of the Course - holding onto some remnant (or maybe a lot) of specialness. (It should be noted this is hardly a sin.)

Since specialness sees differences and makes them real and important, that misperception would find its way into one's teaching of the Course. It would show up in one or more of the usual ways: the desire for power, fame, recognition, money, status. The need to be seen as "right", to appear spiritual - or even enlightened! - and special. This would necessitate making other teachers wrong, inferior, less special. The next "logical" progression, from the ego's point of view, would be to defend and justify this stance. From here, divisions and controversies are inevitable.

To assist in this goal, many spiritual seekers "enjoy" the specialness of identifying themselves with whom they consider the "most special" teacher, - as this can serve to make them a most special student - and some teachers would welcome the attention and inference. When a teacher of specialness is ready, the student seeking specialness will show up to participate in a mutually "fulfilling" relationship. Almost everyone has experienced this lesson at some point in their life.

Even if specialness is absent in the teacher, some students will still be given to defend their choice of teachers, and concoct or participate in artificial controversies for their own reasons. Again, none of this is sinful, nor deserving of judgment, but rather something to observe in one's journey with the Course, and personal Atonement process, that we might invite peace instead.

A Course in Miracles, being based on an academic model (having a text, workbook for students, and teacher's manual), has spawned an unusually high perceptage of its followers to seek a formal teaching role, mistaking the Course's usage of the word teach, or "teacher of God". The only thing we can truly teach is which teacher we have chosen - Jesus or the ego - and we teach all the time, through the demonstration of this choice, no matter what it is we are doing. Even when we appear to be teaching A Course in Miracles, or addressing a boardroom, it is never our words that teach, but the content and attitude with which we offer them.

This is not to say that one should not teach nor attend a Course class if they feel guided and are interested in doing so. They can be wonderful classrooms - like any other - within which we can notice and forgive our reactions to various people, dynamics, the format, and the opinions that are expressed. This would be their true purpose. And if a particular ACIM teacher, class, or book is assisting you in becoming a kinder, gentler person, both with yourself and others, then the value of that speaks for itself.

That most Course teachers are still working on their own Atonement path is not news. Everyone is doing the same thing each in their own way; we're all in a slow dance with our specialness. A long good-bye. This is true even when that dance takes the form of being a teacher of A Course in Miracles. This perception of Course teachers does not separate, but softens, for it says we're all the same, and expresses shared interests. No matter our differences in form we are all the same in content. And there is peace in that. It calls forth compassion, not controversy.