Due to the widespread confusion rampant these days about the various versions of ACIM, and how to tell one from the other, I’v

ACIM Versions

Due to the widespread confusion rampant these days about the various versions of ACIM, and how to tell one from the other, I’ve decided to set out what I know of the nine documented versions of ACIM I know of. Several of the versions are “virtually unchanged” one to the next. Among these nine there are really only four major variations. However, the oldest version commonly available (on this website and elsewhere) is far from the “original” and there may be more extensive changes between Helen’s Notes and/or Bill Thetford’s original typescript than are so far known to me.

1) Helen’s Notes (three copies known to exist for sure, a fourth strongly suspected, I have only a few fragments of this one but am working on obtaining the whole thing. It’s been tied up in litigation for years)

2) Bill’s original Typescript generated as Helen read her notes to him, supposedly identical to the above. (no copies known to exist, one copy strongly suspected to exist)

3) Helen’s First Retying (no copies known to exist, one strongly suspected)

4) Helen’s Second Retyping (I have a copy, many others known to exist). This is the version commonly called the “Urtext.” That name properly applies only to Bill’s original typescript which is what we thought had been found in June of 2000 at the USCO. Further research indicates it’s certainly not the Ur and is probably Helen’s second re-typing.

5) The Thetford Redaction or “HLC” which Bill Thetford prepared late in 1968 according to Robert Skutch, while 1972 is the date given by Kenneth Wapnick.. (I have a copy, many others known to exist) It includes all the chapter and section breaks and headings.

6) The Nun’s Version (I have a copy, a few others are known to exist). This is the typescript which resulted from the 1973-74 editing undertaken by Dr. Wapnick and Dr. Schucman on the Thetford Redaction (HLC). A few headings are altered, and about 25% of the first five chapters is removed while another 2% is relocated elsewhere in the text.

7) The Criswell Edition (one copy known to exist) is not really any different than the Nun’s Version. It was the first formally published edition of ACIM, made by photo-reducing the Nun’s version to 50% of its original size so as to reduce the bulk of the Xerox product. That was a common technique in that era for printing short press runs of books on the cheap with ordinary office equipment.

8) The First Edition (hundreds of thousands known to exist) is the first professional typeset edition of the Course which first hit the streets in June of 1976. There are a few typos due to bad proofreading but otherwise the text is identical to the Criswell/Nun’s version.

9) The Second Edition (hundreds of thousands known to exist) contains a few corrections and minor modifications of the text, frequently changing “you” to “you and your brother” to make it clear that the editors believe that the plural of ‘you’ was intended.

In reality it may be more appropriate to describe the Nun’s Version, the Criswell Edition and the First Edition as simply different “Editions” of the same “Version” because there are few differences between the three.

So there are these nine “versions” of ACIM which are well-documented or in my possession. Everything after 1975 is “virtually unchanged.” Prior to that the known differences are substantial, but I’ve not been able to actually compare the three oldest versions, so while I know there are some differences (from Dr. Wapnick’s account in Absence From Felicity), I can’t tell you how extensive they are. Today there are three importantly different versions in circulation, 1) the so-called “Urtext” which is, I believe, actually Helen’s second re-typing, 2) the Thetford Redaction or “HLC,” found in the ARE library in 1999, and 3) the 1975 Abridgement known by various names, the “WSV” (Wapnick Standard Version), or just “The Wapnick Version,” but most commonly as the First or Second Edition.

The most important version is of course the “oldest” and “most original” and that is “The Notes” and that does exist, but I’m still working on obtaining a copy!

As for the differences, download the three column comparison document from my website http:/ca.geocities.com/dthomp74ca.

http://ca.geocities.com/dthomp74ca/sonship/04sons.pdf

There the so-called “Ur” and the HLC and the 1975 Abridgement are contrasted side by side.

What are the differences between the various versions?

Differences between the first and second re-typings are not known (to this author), since no copy of the first retyping has ever been made public. Differences between the Notes and Bill’s original typescript are not known for the same reason. Differences between that and Helen’s second re-typing are partly known, and documented in Ken Wapnick’s “Absence from Felicity” chapter 8. Differences between Helen’s second re-typing and the HLC are extensive, but mostly in the first 8 chapters. Changes in the later chapters are minor. Large amounts of material later deemed “personal” in nature is omitted. Differences between the HLC (1968) and the later (1975) Nun’s/Criswell/First Edition are extensive, involving roughly 25% of the first 5 chapters simply missing altogether and a significant chunk of those chapters being relocated to other chapters. Instead of the original 53 miracle principles, for instance, there are only 50.

Of course the significance of textual differences cannot be expressed in numbers. Whether that 25% which is missing is of any importance is a matter of some disagreement. Where the importance is accepted, there is further disagreement as to whether the alterations represent “corrections” of scribal errors or “corruptions” of Jesus’ authentic words.

In the older and more original manuscripts, we find numerous references to God having created space and time and matter, all of which vanish in the editions of 1975 and later. Most observers recognize such omissions as “important” but there are differences of opinion as to whether the changes represent correction or corruption of the text. They certainly change it a bit!

Most of the people I know who have read more than one, or all three basic incarnations of the Course which have been generally available since January 2000, most people prefer the earlier versions, finding them easier to read, clearer, far more “alive” in the sense of the author’s personality showing through, and generally preferable. In the so-called Ur there is a lot of Psychological jargon which people without any academic background in Psychology sometimes find a bit intimidating. For those with such a background, the use of technical jargon helps explain the author’s points and is welcomed!

I hope this brief summary is of use to you.

Warmest regards,

Doug Thompson

July 2005

Here’s a slightly more detailed rundown (August 2006)

1) Known editions, versions, redactions and recensions of the ACIM Text

1) Notes (Original Dictation)

· Original Shorthand Notebooks (1965-72)

· Thetford’s Typescript Transcription (aka Urtext)

· Photocopy of Notebooks at USCO

2) USCO Urtext (Helen’s First [or maybe Second?] Retyping)

· Original Typescript (1968?)

· Scanned Image files publication (2000)

· MS Word OCR (2000)

· MS Word with HLC chapter and section breaks (2002)

· Corrected Scanned Image files (2006)

3) Helen’s Second [or maybe first?] Retyping

· Unknown

4) HLC (Thetford-Schucman Redaction)

· Original Typescript (1968-1972?)

· Scanned Image Files publication (2000)

· Thetford Foundation “Blue Sparkly” (2003)

· MS Word OCR (1999)

· CIMS First Edition (2000)

· Thompson’s Corrected Recension of the HLC (2006)

· Corrected Scanned Image Files (2005)

5) 1975 (FIP) Abridgement (Schucman-Wapnick Redaction)

· Nun’s Version (1975)

· Criswell (1975)

· FIP First Edition (1976)

· FIP Second Edition (1996)