© 2000 Neal Waldrop
© 2000 Urantia Association International (IUA)
| What Do I Think Today About Tomorrow? | Journal — June 2000 — Index | Internet Site and Internet School in Spanish |
Presented at the observance of the 50th Anniversary of the founding of Urantia Foundation Chicago, USA, March 19, 2000
Neal Waldrop, Switzerland
Once upon a time, on a Sunday afternoon in a city of the past not so far away, a family of four was strolling in spring sunlight shortly before dinner. They passed through a park and came to a quiet square with broad sidewalks and tables in the shade of maples and elms. Just as they were sitting down, a tall man clad entirely in black strode up to them and extended his right arm toward a nearby doorway. “You must go in,” he intoned solemnly. John looked at him warily and answered, “We’re just going to rest here for a few minutes.” “You must go in,” the man repeated firmly, this time pumping his extended arm three times toward the door.
Mary saw John’s face redden and noticed a prominent vein starting to throb on his forehead. “It’s almost supper time,” she said, “so we might as well go in and see what they have.” John smiled and asked the tall man clad entirely in black: “Can’t we just sit out here in the shade?” The man folded his arms and repeated with a dry and clipped voice, “You must go in.” John shrugged and glanced over to a nearby tree, where the children had crouched down to examine pebbles and wildflowers. “Jenny, let’s go,” he said. “Come on, Mike.”
After they were seated in an entirely empty dining room relieved by episodic frescos and icons, a cherubic, chubby waiter brought a succession of menus in Greek, Latin, and Old Church Slavonic. But John and Mary refused to accept his assurance that the standard fare was edible and appealing; instead they insisted that he bring them water first and a menu they could read. This eventually resulted in four glasses and a menu in cramped Gothic script with florid illuminated capitals. Mary raised a glass to her lips but frowned and set it down. “What’s the matter?” John asked. “See for yourself,” Mary replied. Since John was thirsty, he unwisely tossed down quite a gulp. “Vinegar!” he exclaimed. He glared at the waiter and asked, “What is the meaning of this?” “Just as the Master changed water into wine,” the chubby waiter answered, “so do we change water into vinegar. Actually,” he added in a confidential voice, “we do not quite do that; we simply give our customers vinegar when they ask for water. After all, vinegar is good for them, and we know best. But please admire the beautiful calligraphy, which I can interpret by explaining its roots in the original Hebrew, Greek, Latin, or Old Church Slavonic.” Then he smiled and walked away. Jenny said, “Daddy, I’m hungry. Where’s the beef?” “Not here, dear,” John answered; “we’ll have to go somewhere else.” As they exited into the early evening shadows and dappled sunlight, John noticed that Mike had knocked over one of the uncomfortable wooden chairs. That was not important, he decided. At least, it was not important enough for him to go back.
The parallels to methods used by established churches of the past may already have been overwhelming, but you may interpret the story as you like; I certainly shall not parse it in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin. In any case, there can be no doubt about our heavy debt to the secular revolt from ecclesiastical totalitarianism, which the Midwayer Commission tells us yielded many liberties and satisfactions UB 195:8.6 as well as the amazing creativity of American industrialism and the unprecedented material progress of Western civilization UB 195:8.7. Now, at the outset of the third millennium, we must close two chasms that have fragmented society over the last few centuries—chronic and often abusive contention between religion and science, plus even more venomous quarrels between various traditional religions and numerous strands of contemporary culture.
In doing this, we must guard against a tendency to propound intellectual interpretations, as if that were the point. It is not. We must likewise guard against a tendency to indulge in theological controversy, the time-honored diversionary tactic that the Samaritan woman Nalda employed when she sought to evade Jesus’ searching gaze (UB 143:5.5). All these expedients amount to elaborate intellectual diversions that sidestep and deflect the call to be perfect as the Father is perfect, and to love others as the Father loves us. By such methods, we are told, [t]hinking man. . . invariably tries to rationalize, traditionalize, and institutionalize a strong and moving religion that threatens to dominate him, thereby hoping to gain control of it UB 195:9.6.
The new teachings are spiritual, mindal, and cultural, not solely spiritual. They address the longing for growth and advancement of the individual and the group, not just the craving to be “saved.” They unify the entire experience of each human being and all civilization; they do not subside into intellectual dogmas, moral codes, and hallowed rituals. The teachings’ net impact is the newest Covenant: God the Father and God the Mother have a plan for each of us and for the entire planet that humanity inhabits.
A purely religious approach to the revelation would therefore be defective and flawed. We are not free just to sit in a corner, read The Urantia Book, and marvel at its spiritual inspiration. No, we must do far more than that. We have obligations to each other, to society, to our planet’s growth and advancement.
In all this work, we must find ways to inspire religionists, non-religionists, and anti-religionists to join together in pursuing shared ideals. We need to imagine and invent a flexible new framework for joint efforts, ways to link arms with others on the basis of unity of ideals and purposes and [g]oals rather than creeds UB 99:5.7. I believe that even the task of constructing a new and appealing philosophy of living will be active, interactive, experimental, and evolutionary—neither an excuse for armchair imagining, nor the product of abstract theorizing based on symbols, paradigms, and conceptual relationships.
The authors of the fifth epochal revelation comment in considerable depth on social, economic, and political dimensions of life on Urantia. They repeatedly advance explicit value judgments based on historical, philosophical, and moral viewpoints, which they proclaim with vigor and defend with verve. If we are not prepared to adopt, explain, and, if necessary, defend the revelators’ conclusions; if we are not willing to mobilize our own wisdom and discretion while endeavoring to implement the revelators’ ideals in our societies and lives; if we are not willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with the revelators in pursuing their epochal goals for the renewal and upstepping of spiritual, mindal, and material life on our planet; by what stretch of anyone’s imagination could we justify our claim to be believers?
Thus far, committed readers of The Urantia Book have mainly emphasized that disseminating the teachings is bound to have a strong positive influence on individuals and the world. But it is at least equally logical to reason from the opposite perspective. Even preliminary, tentative, and highly selective efforts to carry out the revelators’ ideals will inevitably spur intense interest in their ideas. This will be dissemination by attraction. Later, as we and others who are cooperating with us for common purposes are actually able to implement the revelators’ teachings—gradually, partially, and progressively—the net result will be to disseminate the revelation as a living reality.
At this early stage, we need a decentralized and relatively spontaneous process of innovation and experiment—on the understanding that we and our successors will probably end up trying at least nine unsuitable practices before making a single significant advance we consider fully satisfying. But I do not believe these potential activities and goals amount to a menu of projects that we, as a group of believers, should proceed to catalogue, characterize, address, or adopt. I do not wish to suggest—and, to the contrary, would strenuously oppose—the active involvement of organized groups of Urantia Book readers in social, economic, or political projects. Instead, our challenge as a group of believers is to discover how we can best stimulate individuals to pursue their most profound and most productive insights, preferably in cooperation with others who may or may not be readers of The Urantia Book.
This is a challenge for each of us. It is a challenge for me as well as for all of those who wish to hear my voice. Each of us must delve deeply into his or her imagination and decide for ourselves what best we can do for the cause of growth and advancement of civilization and society on our planet Urantia. We must build on our education, our experience, our character, our judgment. We must then seek to cooperate with others who have similar goals and visions.
The revelators offer us ideas and insights that we can and should explore. A Mighty Messenger states that the realization of social brotherhood on your world depends much UB 52:6.2 on the personal transformations and planetary adjustments which he portrays under five headings: (1) social fraternity; (2)intellectual crossfertilization; (3) ethical awakening; (4) political wisdom; (5) spiritual insight (UB 52:6.2-7). To add to this, an Archangel of Nebadon identifies 15 factors that are key to the development of civilization (UB 81:6.1-44), and the Chief of Seraphim describes the fields of endeavor that the seraphic planetary government’s 12 corps of master seraphim actively promote and foster (UB 114:6.1-20).
Our outward and visible work of reform and renewal will not be a religious endeavor, and in these regards we should not label ourselves “religionists.” We will and should approach these efforts from a spiritual perspective, but we will not be promulgating a religion, promoting a religion, or sustaining a religion. Further, our relationships to each other and to others cooperating with us will be purposive and practical, not discursive, theoretical, theological, or dogmatic.
Let me put all this in context. I am not in any sense disputing the need for energetic effort to produce further translations, nor am I detracting from the work of study groups or the desire of individuals to deepen their understanding of the teachings through reading and reflection. All these aspects are important in themselves, and they are closely linked with Urantia Foundation’s concordant objects under Article 2.2 of the Declaration of Trust. But during the Foundation’s first fifty years we paid very little attention to its principal object: implementing the revelators’ teachings in our lives and in the world as a whole. That must change.
Committed readers of the revelation will have to wrestle with exceedingly difficult questions:
At a much later stage—either in this same extended age or in another era that follows—each and every inhabitant of Urantia, acting of freewill choice, personal conviction, and individual commitment, will enlist in the planetary crusade to efface the last lingering traces of Caligastia’s betrayal. They will do so not by donning uniforms, shouting slogans, and brandishing swords, but by embodying potent inner realities that attest to dedication and alignment: conscious acceptance of the Father’s watchcare and limitless love; active participation in his supernal plan for our individual and collective growth; and brotherly cooperation with all who seek to serve him here and on high.
During the millennia before Urantia reaches this transcendent landmark in planetary destiny, we and others who affirm the revelators’ intent and seek to implement their ideals may well be pursuing paths that seem agonizingly slow and winding. Perhaps every so often, during brief respites from wrenching uphill scrambles, we shall find sustenance and solace in recalling that Van and Amadon, with extremely limited resources and only intermittent inklings of ultimate triumph, pressed on resolutely and patiently for over 150,000 years until Adam and Eve arrived.
| What Do I Think Today About Tomorrow? | Journal — June 2000 — Index | Internet Site and Internet School in Spanish |