© 1998 Merlyn Cox
© 1998 The Christian Fellowship of Students of The Urantia Book
When we began The Spiritual Fellowship Journal some seven years ago, our primary goal was to interface with mainline clergy. We had hoped to stimulate interest in The Urantia Book and dialogue with leaders of the churches, to “interface” between the two largely overlapping communities — thus the title of this column.
In the last issue Meredith Sprunger outlined the charting of a new course, which involved shifting the focus of our energies in a new direction, into the creation of new religious communities within the Urantia movement. It was based on the recognition that the overwhelming majority of the leadership of the churches simply isn’t ready to seriously investigate the claims of the Fifth Epochal Revelation. This was disappointing but not surprising. The seemingly meager results confirmed the suspicion that even in the face of the great spiritual unrest and hunger of our time, few are willing to look outside the bounds of the intellectual and institutional world in which they have been raised.
This is not to say we’ve given up on the church. Far from it. The church is not without spiritual vitality, and it has been “the best existent exponent of his (Jesus’) lifework on earth.”(UB 195:10.9) We still believe the Urantia movement will eventually serve as a significant leaven in the church. But it seems clear that in order to do that, it will have to develop institutions of its own that will nourish and sustain its families and members, and serve as a platform for evangelism — for sharing the Good News made real in Jesus of Nazareth, now shaped by the new conceptual framework of the Fifth Epochal Revelation. It will need to develop a visible presence that can increasingly dialogue with the world around it.
It will no doubt take a long time before it will be viewed as anything other than another cult in an increasingly pluralistic world. That’s discouraging, but inevitable. And as inherently stultifying as religious institutions tend to be, they are still necessary. The Urantia Book speaks of such institutions — more specifically the “cult” and its “symbolism of rituals, slogans, or goals” — as “the skeletal structure around which grows the living and dynamic body of personal spiritual experience-true religion.” (UB 87:7.10)
We need to get on with the business of intentionallycreating such institutions, even in the face of the realization that they will suffer through the same pitfalls that others have experienced before us. As Rebecca Kantor points out in her article on institutional leadership, “If you think that the Urantia movement is exempt from the challenges and pitfalls of other organized religions, let me tell you, WE ARE NOT.”[1]
The Urantia movement is already a diverse fellowship reflecting a wide range of theological views. It will undoubtedly become more so. The challenge lies in providing a minimal framework flexible enough to allow for maximum diversity and creative expression.
While frustration may be inevitable, I believe joy and satisfaction will be also, the joy and satisfaction of seeing new communities and structures — and yes, even buildings — symbolizing a new vision of our world and our destiny as brothers and sisters under the Fatherhood of God.
Rebecca Kantor, “To Be Wise as Serpents, Harmless as Doves,” Spiritual Fellowship Journal, Fall, 1997, p.12. ↩︎