THETFORD:
The
Course suggests that we forgot to laugh
at the moment we first began to believe
illusions were real. Perhaps one way
we can find our way back to our true
nature is to begin to laugh at the foolishness
of many of our beliefs. Norman Cousins
has already demonstrated the importance
of laughter in the healing process.
For
example, in order to help anyone, whether
in psychotherapy or in everyday life,
I don't think we can identify with the
problem. What we need to do is to identify
with the answer. Since any problem is
always some form of fear, guilt or separation,
our responsibility is to identify with
the only answer that works. In offering
God's love in whatever form is appropriate,
we are offering the only answer that
is possible within this world. This
certainly does not imply a lack of compassion,
quite the contrary. If I identify with
the problem that you or anyone else
has, it simply means that I will suffer
too. And when I join you in suffering,
no one gains - rather we both lose by
reinforcing the problem.
The
Course says that all of our problems
stem from the belief that we are separated
from God, and the only way out of this
is to extend the miracle of love, which
is our natural inheritance.
NR:
Some
of the people who begin studying the
Course initially are disappointed that
it doesn't deal specifically with some
personal, vital questions, such as sex.
Why doesn't it?
THETFORD:
As you
know, the Course's real focus is on
mind-training. Its emphasis is on spiritual
development rather than the reinforcement
of our ego-body identification. But
there's nothing in the Course that prohibits
sex. What it does say is that the body
is a neutral vehicle for the communication
of love. What I think the Course is
trying to underscore is that physical
union can never solve the problem of
our sense of separation from God, it
can only be a substitute for our attempted
union with God. That's why physical
gratification as a goal in a relationship
is never lasting, never permanent in
unifying individuals. And that's also
true of many other physical and emotional
drives we have that stem from the ego
- things that we do to try to permanently
unite us with others, which always result
in failure.
NR:
Another
specific subject not addressed in the
Course and a concern to those who study
it is murder - dealing with it as an
illusion or through forgiveness.
THETFORD:
Perhaps
the difficulty comes in perceiving another
as a body only. I think that's the fundamental
ego-body equation, which is responsible
for an enormous amount of our unhappiness,
the very core of it. Without any doubt,
murder is a very emotional subject for
all of us. But the inner transformation
that we are concerned with here has
to do with our own shift in perception,
our own ability to recognize that fear
is a problem we all have. Whether it
takes the form of murder, attack or
loss, what we want to learn is how to
teach love so that fear is no longer
a part of our consciousness and our
own awareness, we are helping everyone
else do the same thing, and I think
it is through this process that we make
our contribution to a more sane society
and world.
NR:
Another
vital concern of living this life is
death, dying. Why doesn't the Course
deal with this for our peace of mind?
THETFORD:
I think
it does. The Course states very clearly
that “There is no death. The Son
of God is free.” In a sense, since
we were created eternal, we literally
were never born, hence we can never
die. That is, within the framework of
eternity, we have always existed as
an extension of God's love. I think
the notion of freshly minted souls coming
into this material world for a few years,
and then going into the great beyond
is not the lesson that the Course would
teach. The Course repeatedly states
that we remain as God created us; we
remain as eternal aspects of spirit
and have never been limited by form.
When the body is no longer alive and
animated, it simply means we no longer
have a use for it. Our body has nothing
to do with our being alive or dead because
our body is not our true reality.
NR:
What
about animals, then? Since the Course
doesn't mention them either, where do
they fit in? Or even insects or plants
and trees?
THETFORD:
The
Course frequently uses the phrase “all
living things”. Again, whatever
has life has eternal life. Since all
life stems from God and is one and inseparable,
certainly the life force that animates
animals and plants is the same as the
life force that animates us.
And I'm always amazed at what
animals can teach us. How quickly a
dog for instance can forgive us for
stepping on its paw. It doesn't harbor
grudges but shows us instant love the
moment we open the door. Whatever grievances
there might have been are not carried
over in a dog's mind. So I think pets
are wonderful teachers of forgiveness
for all of us. They are extensions of
the love of God in bringing joy and
additional dimensions of love into our
lives.
NR:
What
about killing certain animals and eating
them? How does this fit in with embracing
all life and trying not to be separate
from it?
THETFORD:
Many
people choose to be vegetarians for
very good reasons. Anything that increases
our sense of guilt would not be in our
own enlightened self-interest. So I
think students of the Course will determine
what is right for them through listening
to their inner guidance.
Jesus
taught us not to be so much concerned
about what we put into our mouth as
to what we let come out of it. So it's
not what we eat, but our thoughts and
how we relate to others that witnesses
to our spiritual progress. What is important
is the opportunity we have each moment
to choose between expressing fear or
love in our lives.
NR:
From
this premise, then, one could conclude
that bodies are not life.
THETFORD:
The
body is a vehicle for communication
and learning - the source of life is
always spiritual. The Course also teaches
us that whenever we have questions or
choices in this life we can ask for
help in make them from our inner guide
or as, the Course refers to It, the
Holy Spirit.
NR:
Regarding
one's inner guidance, the Course cautions
about getting it from the ego, doesn't
it? How do you distinguish between it
and the Holy Spirit? How do you know
who's talking?
THETFORD:
Well,
the Course says the ego always speaks
first and that it's wrong. In order
to hear our inner guidance we must quiet
our minds, be willing to let go of any
investment in the answer and listen
to that still, small voice within us.
The fact that our inner guidance is
never strident, but speaks to us in
a peaceful, loving voice, is a sign
of its authenticity, and I think all
of us have to learn with practice to
make that distinction.
NR:
How
do you personally deal with this problem?
THETFORD:
If I am not feeling peaceful, I know
I am listening to the surface static
of my ego. Then I choose once again,
and try to let go of the interference
so that I can listen to the gentle voice
of my inner guide. The Course identifies
this Voice as the Holy Spirit. It also
says that Jesus is equally available
to us for help in this manner, at all
times. In this sense, Jesus is regarded
as our wise older brother, whose message
is no different than the Holy Spirit's,
since God's teachers all have the same
message.
NR:
Do you think such unconventional references
to Jesus and the Holy Spirit, as well
as to other “new” concepts
with regard to Christianity are contradictory
to traditional Christians?
THETFORD:
Well,
I think if you go back to the original
teachings of Jesus, the answer is no.
For example, the Course illuminates
and amplifies Jesus’ teachings
on the fundamental importance of love
and forgiveness. I think, perhaps, institutionalized
religion has sometimes lost sight of
the essence of that message, by its
emphasis on guilt.
NR:
Then
you don't think the Course challenges
Christianity, or any of today's religions?
THETFORD:
I think
the Course is clearly in accord with
the perennial philosophy underlying
all the great religions. However, there
are some fundamental differences, such
as the Course's emphasis on giving up
our belief in the reality of sin and
guilt. Religion, as I experienced it
when I was younger, seemed to stress
these negative aspects. The Course,
however, continually tells us that we
are guiltless; that we may be mistaken,
but that mistakes call for correction
not for punishment. Concepts of guilt,
sin, and punishment are totally alien
to the Course's orientation.
The
Course states unequivocally that love
is our only reality and, “Love
does not kill to save.” Any
religion that emphasizes fear, guilt,
and separation from God would obviously
have trouble with the Course's concept
of total unity and love. However, the
Course does not discuss institutional
religion, and does not advise anyone
to give up membership in a church. In
fact, I think the Course material would
be very enhancing to people who want
to develop a richer spiritual life within
their own tradition; it's ecumenical.