© 1999 Jeanne Melchior
© 1999 The Urantia Book Fellowship
| Springtime: A Study of the Future | Volume 1, Number 2, 1999 (Spring) — Index | The Seven Psychic Circles |
In addition to being a longtime reader of The Urantia Book, I have been teaching English, reading, and communication skills for over twenty years. In that time, some of the most profound changes I’ve seen come about have been those involving gender. Among speakers of the English language, there is an increased awareness of the need for non-biased usage; and words like “man” and “mankind” are now commonly changed to “humankind” in order to reflect the presence of over fifty percent of the population, while the generic masculine pronoun is fast becoming extinct.
We sometimes think that this focus on gender and language, on gender and religion, has been a recent thing. However, as far back as the days of early Christianity, the male-female aspects of God, as well as the role of women in the church, were debated; and that debate has continued, often heatedly, into the present.
We know that the Christian Bible was transmitted to a male dominated culture, and that many of its themes and nearly all of its language reflect this, as do most modern translations. We also know historically, that the Bible was cited often as the reason for keeping “woman in her place”. Why then did the revelators of The Urantia Book use the gender-biased English language to bring what is purported to be the fifth epochal revelation into being?
Clearly, the gender bias in The Urantia Book is as much of a problem as the biased language of the Bible. Since The Urantia Book doesn’t claim to be infallible, we can at least entertain the idea that not everything in it is meant to be true. As Jesus said to Nathaniel, “… nothing which human nature has touched can be regarded as infallible.” (UB 159:4.8)
Even with this disclaimer, it is becoming increasingly difficult for a language sensitive person to read much of The Urantia Book, and even more difficult to see it as epochal revelation. I explore this, not to challenge those who find this book a compendium of wisdom, but to let those who are disquieted know they are not alone. The male focus of The Urantia Book is pervasive, and for many people, this interferes greatly with the apprehension of truth.
At the heart of this “bias of focus” is the premise that God is Father. The revelators assure us that calling God “Father” is only accidental, but so much of the book is based on this premise, that it begins to strain credulity. The revelators say: “The word GOD is used in these papers with the following meanings: 1. God the Father — Creator, Controller and Upholder. The Universal Father, the First Person of Deity.” (UB 0:2.12)
In another passage we are told: “The names which the creature assigns to the Creator are much dependent on the creature’s concept of the Creator. The First Source and Universe Center has never revealed himself by name, only by nature. If we believe that we are the children of this Creator, it is only natural that we should eventually call him Father.” (UB 1:1.1)
However, it is NOT natural that as children we should choose to call God “Father.” Indeed, the first names humans gave to God were mother names, and the first concepts of God experienced by early humans were as a mother.
The Urantia Book does explore the concept of God as mother. There are references to God the Son as mother (UB 6:8.1), and to God the Supreme as mother (UB 0:2.15 and UB 117:6.2), but these references are vague and conflicting. When we study the local universe personalities, we read of the Creator Son and the Divine Minister who “enacts the role of a mother, always assisting the Son” (UB 33:3.4). No gender equality there, and it gets worse, for we are told that only after the Divine Minister pledged “subordination, fidelity, and obedience” did a “Proclamation of Equality” ensue which: “becomes the transcendent pattern for the family organization and government of even the lowly creatures of the worlds of space. This is, in deed and in truth, the high ideal of the family and the human institution of voluntary marriage.” (UB 33:3.6) This is so far from any high ideal of family or any imaginable pattern of equality between men and women, that I simply cannot accept it as truth, but only as intrusion of a patriarchal viewpoint.
In another part of The Urantia Book, in the Jesus papers, the “Lesson on the Family” continues this biased representation of what a family is. In this paper, Jesus is quoted as saying: “The people of another age will better understand the gospel of the kingdom when it is presented in terms expressive of the family relationship — when man understands religion as the teaching of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, sonship with God.” Then Jesus discoursed at great length on the earthly family as an illustration of the heavenly family, restating what he called the “…two fundamental laws of living: the first commandment of love for the father, the head of the family, and the second commandment of mutual love among the children, namely to love your brother as yourself.” (UB 142:7.4) In the entire “Lesson on the Family” the word mother is never mentioned once! Literally, or as a metaphor, this just doesn’t work. The two great commandments of Jesus, namely to love God and love your fellow humans, are here distorted beyond believability.
In addition to biased language in general, as biased concepts that describe God, both the Jesus of the Bible and the Jesus of The Urantia Book go on record as saying that women are equal to men, the stories in both are clearly told from a male perspective. For example, in The Urantia Book, much of the Jesus papers recounts the activities of the disciples, but there is only a short section about the women’s corps, with scant details of persons or deeds. The vast majority of the universe hierarchy are described in male terms, and the twenty four Jerusem Counselors, who represent exemplary mortals throughout the ages, are all male except for Eve. Are we to believe that only males are worthy of such positions?
Where to go from here is far from simple. Translating The Urantia Book into a modern version which uses inclusive language is a possibility; however, such a translation would need to change literal meaning in order to be effective. Since biased language is part of a larger problem, that is, an androcentric world view which goes beyond gender, solutions like this won’t work. The authors tell us that: “The modern age will refuse to accept a religion which is inconsistent with facts and out of harmony with its highest conceptions of truth, beauty, and goodness.” (UB 195:9.5) In a time when that old androcentric world view is crumbling, The Urantia Book, loaded as it is with biased language and concepts, is certainly inconsistent with facts, and is, in many ways, out of harmony with the highest conceptions of truth and goodness.
So where do readers who have long studied The Urantia Book have to go? I recently read something that sparked my interest. I don’t recall the source, but it suggested that there are two ways to read scriptures — exoterically and esoterically. The exoteric reading is literal, and looks at historical meanings. Unfortunately, such a reading alone tends to idolize the words rather than the truth; and fundamentalists of all persuasions read scripture in this way, solidifying truth into dogma. On the other hand, the esoteric meaning looks for hidden meanings, or information coded there. I assume this would be similar to the recent Bible code that found predictions encoded within the text. I suppose such a possibility exists, and The Urantia Book is simply an undiscovered code, but I find that too speculative.
I can, however, think of a third way of reading, which is reading with the heart. It is possible, I think, to read and look for only those passages that truly speak to the spirit, and let the rest go. Undoubtedly many of us read that way, and this is likely at least part of what the revelators had in mind when they said:
“I have called you again to be born of the spirit…And so may you pass from …the authority of tradition to the experience of knowing God…The religion of the spirit leaves you forever free to follow the truth wherever the leadings of the spirit may take you. And who can judge — perhaps this spirit may have something to impart to this generation which other generations have refused to hear?” (UB 155:6.3) “You must cease to seek for the word of God only on the pages of the olden records of theologic authority. Those who are born of the spirit of God shall henceforth discern the word of God regardless of whence it appears to take origin. Divine truth must not be discounted because the channel of its bestowal is apparently human…” (UB 155:6.12)
Clearly, The Urantia Book was written in the language of another generation, while clearly, despite its imperfections, it contains much that is uplifting, much that is true and good and beautiful. Whether it is enough to read with the heart, is a question which will have to be decided by each person.
Fortunately, God sends messages to all of us every day if we just open our hearts to listen. “The true child of universe insight looks for the Spirit of Truth in every wise saying…” (UB 180:5.4) In keeping with this thought, and because of the many problems I find in The Urantia Book, my choice has been to put it aside for now, and to direct my focus to other repositories of truth, to writers who make no bones about their human origins. For I fear that I am in agreement with historian Gerda Lerner who says in her book The Creation of Patriarchy :
“The androcentric fallacy, which is built into all the mental constructs of Western civilization, cannot be rectified by ‘adding women.’ What it demands for rectification is a radical restructuring of thought and analysis which once and for all accepts the fact that humanity consists in equal parts of men and women and that the experiences, thoughts, and insights of both sexes must be represented in every generalization that is made about human beings.” (P. 220)
I’m awaiting the day when clearly and unequivocally, God begins speaking to women as well as men in language which in no way disguises or distorts the truth, and which makes no subtle claim that one gender is subordinate to the other. Then, perhaps, the fifth epochal revelation will become a reality.
Jeanne teaches unbiased language usage, critical thinking skills, and discernment to students at Vincennes University, Jasper Campus, in rural southern Indiana. She lives surrounded by trees and writes about environmental issues.
| Springtime: A Study of the Future | Volume 1, Number 2, 1999 (Spring) — Index | The Seven Psychic Circles |