^100:7.1 Although the average mortal of Urantia cannot hope to attain the high perfection of character which Jesus of Nazareth acquired while sojourning in the flesh, it is altogether possible for every mortal believer to develop a strong and unified personality along the perfected lines of the Jesus personality. The unique feature of the Master's personality was not so much its perfection as its symmetry, its exquisite and balanced unification. The most effective presentation of Jesus consists in following the example of the one who said, as he gestured toward the Master standing before his accusers, "Behold the man!"

  ^100:7.2 The unfailing kindness of Jesus touched the hearts of men, but his stalwart strength of character amazed his followers. He was truly sincere; there was nothing of the hypocrite in him. He was free from affectation; he was always so refreshingly genuine. He never stooped to pretense, and he never resorted to shamming. He lived the truth, even as he taught it. He was the truth. He was constrained to proclaim saving truth to his generation, even though such sincerity sometimes caused pain. He was unquestioningly loyal to all truth.

  ^100:7.3 But the Master was so reasonable, so approachable. He was so practical in all his ministry, while all his plans were characterized by such sanctified common sense. He was so free from all freakish, erratic, and eccentric tendencies. He was never capricious, whimsical, or hysterical. In all his teaching and in everything he did there was always an exquisite discrimination associated with an extraordinary sense of propriety.

  ^100:7.4 The Son of Man was always a well-poised personality. Even his enemies maintained a wholesome respect for him; they even feared his presence. Jesus was unafraid. He was surcharged with divine enthusiasm, but he never became fanatical. He was emotionally active but never flighty. He was imaginative but always practical. He frankly faced the realities of life, but he was never dull or prosaic. He was courageous but never reckless; prudent but never cowardly. He was sympathetic but not sentimental; unique but not eccentric. He was pious but not sanctimonious. And he was so well-poised because he was so perfectly unified.

  ^100:7.5 Jesus' originality was unstifled. He was not bound by tradition or handicapped by enslavement to narrow conventionality. He spoke with undoubted confidence and taught with absolute authority. But his superb originality did not cause him to overlook the gems of truth in the teachings of his predecessors and contemporaries. And the most original of his teachings was the emphasis of love and mercy in the place of fear and sacrifice.

  ^100:7.6 Jesus was very broad in his outlook. He exhorted his followers to preach the gospel to all peoples. He was free from all narrow-mindedness. His sympathetic heart embraced all mankind, even a universe. Always his invitation was, "Whosoever will, let him come."

  ^100:7.7 Of Jesus it was truly said, "He trusted God." As a man among men he most sublimely trusted the Father in heaven. He trusted his Father as a little child trusts his earthly parent. His faith was perfect but never presumptuous. No matter how cruel nature might appear to be or how indifferent to man's welfare on earth, Jesus never faltered in his faith. He was immune to disappointment and impervious to persecution. He was untouched by apparent failure.

  ^100:7.8 He loved men as brothers, at the same time recognizing how they differed in innate endowments and acquired qualities. "He went about doing good."

  ^100:7.9 Jesus was an unusually cheerful person, but he was not a blind and unreasoning optimist. His constant word of exhortation was, "Be of good cheer." He could maintain this confident attitude because of his unswerving trust in God and his unshakable confidence in man. He was always touchingly considerate of all men because he loved them and believed in them. Still he was always true to his convictions and magnificently firm in his devotion to the doing of his Father's will.

  ^100:7.10 The Master was always generous. He never grew weary of saying, "It is more blessed to give than to receive." Said he, "Freely you have received, freely give." And yet, with all of his unbounded generosity, he was never wasteful or extravagant. He taught that you must believe to receive salvation. "For every one who seeks shall receive."

  ^100:7.11 He was candid, but always kind. Said he, "If it were not so, I would have told you." He was frank, but always friendly. He was outspoken in his love for the sinner and in his hatred for sin. But throughout all this amazing frankness he was unerringly fair.

  ^100:7.12 Jesus was consistently cheerful, notwithstanding he sometimes drank deeply of the cup of human sorrow. He fearlessly faced the realities of existence, yet was he filled with enthusiasm for the gospel of the kingdom. But he controlled his enthusiasm; it never controlled him. He was unreservedly dedicated to "the Father's business." This divine enthusiasm led his unspiritual brethren to think he was beside himself, but the onlooking universe appraised him as the model of sanity and the pattern of supreme mortal devotion to the high standards of spiritual living. And his controlled enthusiasm was contagious; his associates were constrained to share his divine optimism.

  ^100:7.13 This man of Galilee was not a man of sorrows; he was a soul of gladness. Always was he saying, "Rejoice and be exceedingly glad." But when duty required, he was willing to walk courageously through the "valley of the shadow of death." He was gladsome but at the same time humble.

  ^100:7.14 His courage was equaled only by his patience. When pressed to act prematurely, he would only reply, "My hour has not yet come." He was never in a hurry; his composure was sublime. But he was often indignant at evil, intolerant of sin. He was often mightily moved to resist that which was inimical to the welfare of his children on earth. But his indignation against sin never led to anger at the sinner.

  ^100:7.15 His courage was magnificent, but he was never foolhardy. His watchword was, "Fear not." His bravery was lofty and his courage often heroic. But his courage was linked with discretion and controlled by reason. It was courage born of faith, not the recklessness of blind presumption. He was truly brave but never audacious.

  ^100:7.16 The Master was a pattern of reverence. The prayer of even his youth began, "Our Father who is in heaven, hallowed be your name." He was even respectful of the faulty worship of his fellows. But this did not deter him from making attacks on religious traditions or assaulting errors of human belief. He was reverential of true holiness, and yet he could justly appeal to his fellows, saying, "Who among you convicts me of sin?"

  ^100:7.17 Jesus was great because he was good, and yet he fraternized with the little children. He was gentle and unassuming in his personal life, and yet he was the perfected man of a universe. His associates called him Master unbidden.

  ^100:7.18 Jesus was the perfectly unified human personality. And today, as in Galilee, he continues to unify mortal experience and to co-ordinate human endeavors. He unifies life, ennobles character, and simplifies experience. He enters the human mind to elevate, transform, and transfigure it. It is literally true: "If any man has Christ Jesus within him, he is a new creature; old things are passing away; behold, all things are becoming new." 

  ^{100:7.19 Presented by a Melchizedek of Nebadon.}

*

  ^100:6.1 Evolutionary religions and revelatory religions may differ markedly in method, but in motive there is great similarity. Religion is not a specific function of life; rather is it a mode of living. True religion is a wholehearted devotion to some reality which the religionist deems to be of supreme value to himself and for all mankind. And the outstanding characteristics of all religions are: unquestioning loyalty and wholehearted devotion to supreme values. This religious devotion to supreme values is shown in the relation of the supposedly irreligious mother to her child and in the fervent loyalty of nonreligionists to an espoused cause.

  ^100:6.2 The accepted supreme value of the religionist may be base or even false, but it is nevertheless religious. A religion is genuine to just the extent that the value which is held to be supreme is truly a cosmic reality of genuine spiritual worth.

  ^100:6.3 The marks of human response to the religious impulse embrace the qualities of nobility and grandeur. The sincere religionist is conscious of universe citizenship and is aware of making contact with sources of superhuman power. He is thrilled and energized with the assurance of belonging to a superior and ennobled fellowship of the sons of God. The consciousness of self-worth has become augmented by the stimulus of the quest for the highest universe objectives -- supreme goals.

  ^100:6.4 The self has surrendered to the intriguing drive of an all-encompassing motivation which imposes heightened self-discipline, lessens emotional conflict, and makes mortal life truly worth living. The morbid recognition of human limitations is changed to the natural consciousness of mortal shortcomings, associated with moral determination and spiritual aspiration to attain the highest universe and superuniverse goals. And this intense striving for the attainment of supermortal ideals is always characterized by increasing patience, forbearance, fortitude, and tolerance.

  ^100:6.5 But true religion is a living love, a life of service. The religionist's detachment from much that is purely temporal and trivial never leads to social isolation, and it should not destroy the sense of humor. Genuine religion takes nothing away from human existence, but it does add new meanings to all of life; it generates new types of enthusiasm, zeal, and courage. It may even engender the spirit of the crusader, which is more than dangerous if not controlled by spiritual insight and loyal devotion to the commonplace social obligations of human loyalties.

  ^100:6.6 One of the most amazing earmarks of religious living is that dynamic and sublime peace, that peace which passes all human understanding, that cosmic poise which betokens the absence of all doubt and turmoil. Such levels of spiritual stability are immune to disappointment. Such religionists are like the Apostle Paul, who said: "I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else shall be able to separate us from the love of God."

  ^100:6.7 There is a sense of security, associated with the realization of triumphing glory, resident in the consciousness of the religionist who has grasped the reality of the Supreme, and who pursues the goal of the Ultimate.

  ^100:6.8 Even evolutionary religion is all of this in loyalty and grandeur because it is a genuine experience. But revelatory religion is excellent as well as genuine. The new loyalties of enlarged spiritual vision create new levels of love and devotion, of service and fellowship; and all this enhanced social outlook produces an enlarged consciousness of the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man.

  ^100:6.9 The characteristic difference between evolved and revealed religion is a new quality of divine wisdom which is added to purely experiential human wisdom. But it is experience in and with the human religions that develops the capacity for subsequent reception of increased bestowals of divine wisdom and cosmic insight.

6. MARKS OF RELIGIOUS LIVING

  ^100:6.1 Evolutionary religions and revelatory religions may differ markedly in method, but in motive there is great similarity. Religion is not a specific function of life; rather is it a mode of living. True religion is a wholehearted devotion to some reality which the religionist deems to be of supreme value to himself and for all mankind. And the outstanding characteristics of all religions are: unquestioning loyalty and wholehearted devotion to supreme values. This religious devotion to supreme values is shown in the relation of the supposedly irreligious mother to her child and in the fervent loyalty of nonreligionists to an espoused cause.

  ^100:6.2 The accepted supreme value of the religionist may be base or even false, but it is nevertheless religious. A religion is genuine to just the extent that the value which is held to be supreme is truly a cosmic reality of genuine spiritual worth.

  ^100:6.3 The marks of human response to the religious impulse embrace the qualities of nobility and grandeur. The sincere religionist is conscious of universe citizenship and is aware of making contact with sources of superhuman power. He is thrilled and energized with the assurance of belonging to a superior and ennobled fellowship of the sons of God. The consciousness of self-worth has become augmented by the stimulus of the quest for the highest universe objectives -- supreme goals.

  ^100:6.4 The self has surrendered to the intriguing drive of an all-encompassing motivation which imposes heightened self-discipline, lessens emotional conflict, and makes mortal life truly worth living. The morbid recognition of human limitations is changed to the natural consciousness of mortal shortcomings, associated with moral determination and spiritual aspiration to attain the highest universe and superuniverse goals. And this intense striving for the attainment of supermortal ideals is always characterized by increasing patience, forbearance, fortitude, and tolerance.

  ^100:6.5 But true religion is a living love, a life of service. The religionist's detachment from much that is purely temporal and trivial never leads to social isolation, and it should not destroy the sense of humor. Genuine religion takes nothing away from human existence, but it does add new meanings to all of life; it generates new types of enthusiasm, zeal, and courage. It may even engender the spirit of the crusader, which is more than dangerous if not controlled by spiritual insight and loyal devotion to the commonplace social obligations of human loyalties.

  ^100:6.6 One of the most amazing earmarks of religious living is that dynamic and sublime peace, that peace which passes all human understanding, that cosmic poise which betokens the absence of all doubt and turmoil. Such levels of spiritual stability are immune to disappointment. Such religionists are like the Apostle Paul, who said: "I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else shall be able to separate us from the love of God."

  ^100:6.7 There is a sense of security, associated with the realization of triumphing glory, resident in the consciousness of the religionist who has grasped the reality of the Supreme, and who pursues the goal of the Ultimate.

  ^100:6.8 Even evolutionary religion is all of this in loyalty and grandeur because it is a genuine experience. But revelatory religion is excellent as well as genuine. The new loyalties of enlarged spiritual vision create new levels of love and devotion, of service and fellowship; and all this enhanced social outlook produces an enlarged consciousness of the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man.

  ^100:6.9 The characteristic difference between evolved and revealed religion is a new quality of divine wisdom which is added to purely experiential human wisdom. But it is experience in and with the human religions that develops the capacity for subsequent reception of increased bestowals of divine wisdom and cosmic insight.

6. MARKS OF RELIGIOUS LIVING

  ^100:6.1 Evolutionary religions and revelatory religions may differ markedly in method, but in motive there is great similarity. Religion is not a specific function of life; rather is it a mode of living. True religion is a wholehearted devotion to some reality which the religionist deems to be of supreme value to himself and for all mankind. And the outstanding characteristics of all religions are: unquestioning loyalty and wholehearted devotion to supreme values. This religious devotion to supreme values is shown in the relation of the supposedly irreligious mother to her child and in the fervent loyalty of nonreligionists to an espoused cause.

  ^100:6.2 The accepted supreme value of the religionist may be base or even false, but it is nevertheless religious. A religion is genuine to just the extent that the value which is held to be supreme is truly a cosmic reality of genuine spiritual worth.

  ^100:6.3 The marks of human response to the religious impulse embrace the qualities of nobility and grandeur. The sincere religionist is conscious of universe citizenship and is aware of making contact with sources of superhuman power. He is thrilled and energized with the assurance of belonging to a superior and ennobled fellowship of the sons of God. The consciousness of self-worth has become augmented by the stimulus of the quest for the highest universe objectives -- supreme goals.

  ^100:6.4 The self has surrendered to the intriguing drive of an all-encompassing motivation which imposes heightened self-discipline, lessens emotional conflict, and makes mortal life truly worth living. The morbid recognition of human limitations is changed to the natural consciousness of mortal shortcomings, associated with moral determination and spiritual aspiration to attain the highest universe and superuniverse goals. And this intense striving for the attainment of supermortal ideals is always characterized by increasing patience, forbearance, fortitude, and tolerance.

  ^100:6.5 But true religion is a living love, a life of service. The religionist's detachment from much that is purely temporal and trivial never leads to social isolation, and it should not destroy the sense of humor. Genuine religion takes nothing away from human existence, but it does add new meanings to all of life; it generates new types of enthusiasm, zeal, and courage. It may even engender the spirit of the crusader, which is more than dangerous if not controlled by spiritual insight and loyal devotion to the commonplace social obligations of human loyalties.

  ^100:6.6 One of the most amazing earmarks of religious living is that dynamic and sublime peace, that peace which passes all human understanding, that cosmic poise which betokens the absence of all doubt and turmoil. Such levels of spiritual stability are immune to disappointment. Such religionists are like the Apostle Paul, who said: "I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else shall be able to separate us from the love of God."

  ^100:6.7 There is a sense of security, associated with the realization of triumphing glory, resident in the consciousness of the religionist who has grasped the reality of the Supreme, and who pursues the goal of the Ultimate.

  ^100:6.8 Even evolutionary religion is all of this in loyalty and grandeur because it is a genuine experience. But revelatory religion is excellent as well as genuine. The new loyalties of enlarged spiritual vision create new levels of love and devotion, of service and fellowship; and all this enhanced social outlook produces an enlarged consciousness of the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man.

  ^100:6.9 The characteristic difference between evolved and revealed religion is a new quality of divine wisdom which is added to purely experiential human wisdom. But it is experience in and with the human religions that develops the capacity for subsequent reception of increased bestowals of divine wisdom and cosmic insight.

Dear fellow readers of The Urantia Book and friends of the Global Endeavor,

1. PDF 1 MONASTICISM Questions for discussion 
2. PDF 2 Comparing and contrasting the true teachings of Jesus with the traditional tenets and practices of organized, institutional Christianity. 
3. PDF 3 C. H. Lawrence | Gert Melville  | Paul Collins

On Saturday, October 9, we conducted our fifty-eighth webinar based on topic 8 of Revelation Revealed, a topic that is entitled, “Comparing and contrasting the true teachings of Jesus with the traditional tenets and practices of organized, institutional Christianity.”

Overview

During the webinar, participants mainly discussed a very interesting innovation that enhanced the opportunities of women believers during the final three centuries of the monastic period (i.e., from about 1200 CE to about 1500 CE). This experiment with feminine characteristics was called the Beguines, and it became prominent in urban areas of the Low Countries and the Rhineland, as well as in northern France. (For native speakers of English who are not familiar with the pronunciation of words that come from French, here is a homemade approximation that may be helpful: The word Beguines can be pronounced Buh-GEENZ.)

In addition, participants reviewed and commented on the extraordinary achievements of two women who lived in monasteries for women (nunneries) during the Middle Ages: Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1171) and Hrotsvitha of Gandersheim (c. 935 – 1001).

Although we have not yet scheduled our next webinar, we may be able to conduct it on some Saturday during the month of November that we have yet chosen.

Internet access

For your information, the document containing detailed questions on monasticism is also available on the website of the Committee for the Global Endeavor (https://www.globalendeavor.net). On the document’s final page, you will find a note in red identifying a folder on the Internet from which you could download a ZIP file, one containing all 32 background documents related to monasticism that I assembled over a period of several months. For your convenience, here is the link:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ptIkzgQucwf27zqBJMR00KirIuePOSpk

When discussion began, I read the introductory paragraph at the top of page 28 of the document containing questions on monasticism (the second attachment to this message), and then another participant read the succeeding paragraph of analytical remarks by the historian Gert Melville.

Note:

For your convenience, the third attachment to this message consists of information about the professional background of the three historians whose writings are often excerpted in the document containing questions on monasticism: C. H. Lawrence, Gert Melville, and Paul Collins.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

The Beguines: an urban experiment with feminine characteristics

The historian Gert Melville describes a strong movement focusing on pious women that emerged in the final years of the twelfth century. He states that the movement’s focal point was “the vibrant urban environment of the Low Countries and the Rhineland,” but adds that “it spread from there to northern France and along the Rhine down to Switzerland.”

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

In the first half of the thirteenth century, in many places a form of community life emerged in which the Beguines lived together under the direction of a mistress (magistra). In this case too they renounced lifelong vows, with the result that they could leave the community (to marry, for example), though they had to leave behind the property they had brought when they joined.  …  In a few houses of Beguines the women embraced manual labor to support themselves, for example, in textile work, and devoted themselves in addition to religious exercises and prayer to charitable work such as care for the sick and dying and care for the homeless and the poor. In its outward form their pattern of life thus already had a strong affinity to the world of the monastery, and their houses were not infrequently tied, though without vows, to religious life — for example, to the Cistercian Order. They also often assimilated themselves to the mendicant orders by way of the pastoral care offered through those communities.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

As a brief introduction, I commented that this seemed to be a kind of “do-it-yourself” exercise whereby women were following their own inclinations in ways that were suitable and convenient for them. They were expressing a religious dedication and commitment in the social context that was possible for them at the time.

One participant pointed out that the original rule of “Saint Benedict” had provided for manual labor, but that the monks did not leave the monastery. On the other hand, she said, in centuries far later the mendicant orders — mainly the Franciscans and Dominicans — adopted a very different approach, ministering to believer who lived in towns and cities. From a similar perspective, the Beguines, the movement of women we are discussing now, likewise went out to the public and helped the poor, meeting people’s needs. This was very effective at the time.

I asked a different participant whether he thought that the voluntary efforts of the Beguines without taking vows represented an improvement over the general monastic system of a monastery, which was quite rigid. He replied that what the women were doing was a revelation, for they broke out from the pattern of monastic life in a nunnery and went out to the wide world. Like the Franciscans and Dominicans, they helped the poor and attended to them.

In reply, I said that he had highlighted an important point that the author describes, the service of the Beguines for the homeless and the poor. Even so, I said, the Beguines had a group home, living together in a group context and using that group home as a vehicle for going out into the community. He concurred with this observation of mine.

Turning to another participant, I said I wished to probe a phrase near the beginning of the historian’s remarks that seemed a bit unusual, his statement that “they [the Beguines] renounced lifelong vows.” To me, I said, taking a vow normally means renouncing a practice that one is no longer going to carry out, but in this case the historian seems to be telling us that the Beguines renounced the practice of making lifelong vows. In other words, they did not make vows. Therefore I asked the other participant why this was important and why the Beguines did not make vows.

The participant commented on the origin of the Beguines, paraphrasing a scholarly article that he had read online. As a do-it-yourself and hybrid movement, the Beguines embodied two key features: (a) chastity, and (b) organizational patterns that were not along the regular lines that characterized the monastic tradition. They lived in a community environment, but did not bow to the regula (the formal written rules that applied to a monastery or convent). This was a hybrid group of pious women, periodically supported in some ways by men, whereas that partial support seems to have ceased in the 16th century (the historical context that featured the Protestant Reformation). On the other hand, he had read an interesting article originally published in The New York Times describing a reporter’s visit to Antwerp and Brussels, where she had found vestiges of the Beguines, including some museums devoted to their movement.

Turning to another participant, I asked him whether the do-it-yourself or hybrid features of the Beguines were attuned to what could be called the psychological preferences of women for flexibility and adaptability. Did the women involved design a format that was more convenient and less rigid for their purposes?

In reply, he called the Beguines a revolution and genuinely feminine. For the first time, he said, a large number of women could decide from their own free will to act in these ways. Although there were many motivations for women to choose this path, it offered an opportunity to respond to spiritual aspirations associated with the inner life and serve other human beings. This was not “free parking” of the sort that applied to many daughters of aristocratic families that could not arrange for a suitable marriage, so that some of these families deposited the young women in a conventional nunnery.

I pursued these ideas, offering him the view that the Beguines were not a retreat from the world but instead a group context that permitted women to interact with the world. He concurred, while also commenting that this involvement was an objective sign of women’s participation in society.

Another participant noted that because the Beguines were independent, unlike the nuns, the Christian church did not like this and targeted them. Since the Beguines lived without male supervision, the clerics started calling them names, such as “heretics,” “prostitutes,” “beggars,” and “lesbians.”

In reply, I pointed out that these conflicts and concerns largely corresponded to the more detailed analysis that we would discuss in connection with paragraphs that appear near the bottom of page 29 of the document containing questions. At this point, however, we continued with the wording near the bottom of page 28.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

The historian C. H. Lawrence supplies considerably more detail, partly by analyzing the movement from a social and psychological perspective:

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

The Beguines, like the Cistercian nuns, were a product of the extraordinary spirit of religious fervour that swept through certain sections of Western society in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. They were groups of lay-women living in the towns of northern Europe and in some rural areas of Swabia, who came together to practise a new form of religious life. They were not affiliated to any religious order, nor did they follow any recognised monastic rule. The movement probably owed its recruits to the social exclusiveness of the nunneries; possibly it represented a conscious and widespread rejection of the affluent image and formalism of the established orders. But there was more to it than this. Its piety was rooted in the cult of voluntary poverty and the current ideas of the apostolic life, but it flowered in a very different soil. In northern Europe it was an urban phenomenon. …

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

I asked the participant who read the historian’s remarks whether he thought that the phrase “a conscious and widespread rejection of the affluent image and formalism of the established orders” solely pertained to male monasteries, or also concerned female nunneries (convents). He replied that previous discussion had highlighted funding from aristocratic sources as a key feature in founding and operating nunneries. Economic factors were a key feature in keeping monasteries and nunneries afloat. Therefore, by implication, there were grounds for believing that these institutions were just for the affluent. In contrast, the Beguines accepted the general tradition of chastity, but seemed to show a greater interest in personal religion. Female believers were able to gather together and live in communities.

I commented that there were a variety of elements (partly from the preceding paragraph in which the author noted that there was a magistra, a mistress who was in charge), but that the participants in a Beguinage did not take vows and could leave, perhaps in the event that a marriage was arranged for them. So this was not exactly a transient circumstance, but one that could be varied in ways that were suitable for the woman concerned at the time. For example, the Beguines did not operate under a vow of strict obedience, the requirement that applied to monks and nuns in traditional monasteries and convents (such as those operated by the Benedictine and Cistercian orders). I asked a participant whether the Beguines were responding to the idea of voluntary poverty, the appeal of an apostolic life.

He agreed that this was a catalyst and a driving force, showing a reverence for God and the desire to fulfill religious obligations. Behind this opportunity were the teachings of Jesus and the obligation to help the poor and the needy.

I agreed that this was a very important point psychologically, the fact that their reverence for God included a desire to minister to others in the community. It was not simply sitting in the chapel of a monastery or nunnery and chanting prayers. To the contrary, the Beguines were actually serving people in society. Was this a movement well distinguished from an exclusive and inward idea, the belief that God’s blessing came to those who separated themselves from society and lived in a cloistered environment? Were those convictions being rejected and perhaps also transcended?

He agreed that this was the case, pointing out that the rejection did not pertain solely to formalism but also related to restrictions that permitted the women to live their lives as they wished. In effect, these women wanted to respond to the spiritual leadings of the Thought Adjuster and the Spirit of Truth. He had been particularly struck by the feminine aspects of religion — service without judging or attempting to evangelize, as in the case of the master seraphim and current plans for the initiative in progress that we call the Global Endeavor.

I replied that, in effect, he had confirmed my insight that the approach of the Beguines was specifically different from reciting stereotyped prayers, as in a traditional monastery or nunnery. In contrast, the Beguinages, and the Beguines as people, were actually serving and assisting other human beings. He agreed, commenting that this was why urban life was a good place for these functions.

A different participant highlighted the difference between apostleship and discipleship, citing ideas that Jesus explained in Paper 140, “The Ordination of the Twelve.” The first four beatitudes, he said, were aimed at brotherhood, whereas the last four pertained to fatherhood. (Reference: section 3, “The Ordination Sermon,” in Paper 140 by the Midwayer Commission.)

In addition, he cited the following paragraph from section 8 of the same Paper:

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

He [Jesus] never taught his followers to avoid earthly possessions, only his twelve apostles. Luke, the physician, was a strong believer in social equality, and he did much to interpret Jesus’ sayings in harmony with his personal beliefs. Jesus never personally directed his followers to adopt a communal mode of life; he made no pronouncement of any sort regarding such matters.   [The Midwayer Commission, 1581:3 / 140:8.16]

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

In a subsequent interchange, the participant confirmed that by describing the spirit of the information in Paper 140, he was not implying that there was some kind of ordination that applied to the Beguines. To the contrary, they were not clergy and were not being ordained as clergy; the fact that they were not part of the structure of the formal Christian church was an important advantage. In addition, he agreed that the features of brotherhood and personal service were a distinction whereby the Beguines were serving people in society, not simply accommodating the rigid structure of the organized institutional Church.

Another participant remarked that the women did this work out of love, a desire to get closer to God that came from their hearts and souls. Unfortunately, however, the Church perceived this as an attempt to undermine its credibility and authority. One woman (Marguerite Porete) wrote a book entitled The Mirror of Simple Souls in which she discussed the inner light of the human heart and soul. Because these themes did not conform to the Church’s characteristic teachings, she was burned at the stake. Was this their way that the leaders of the institutional Church showed God’s love for humanity?

I replied that we would discuss the general controversy when we reached the analysis appearing near the bottom of page 29 of the document. In addition, however, I commented that the underlying spirit of the Beguines was indeed a desire to serve, not simply a desire to go through routines of formal observance.

In subsequent discussion, a different participant shared information about the mystical book The Mirror of Simple Souls by Marguerite Porete that he had found online. He believed that her book provoked controversy because it apparently contains a number of very striking statements that may be close to the idea of the Thought Adjuster and the concept of fusion with it. The book, he said, describes the annihilation of the soul, specifically its descent into a state of nothingness of union with God without distinction. He cited the following sentence that seems to have been part of her teachings: “The soul, annihilated in the love of the Creator, could and should grant to nature all that it desires.” Some people, he said, took this to mean that the soul can become one with God and that, when it is in this state, it can ignore moral law —  so that there was no need for the Church or for its sacraments. In his view, ideas like these were why she was burned at the stake, for they were certainly not the teachings of the Catholic faith.

I called this description very helpful from an analytical perspective. I believed that in terms of theology, not just in terms of discipline, the ideas that he had described set Marguerite Porete quite apart from the traditional teachings of the Christian church. I inferred that she was judged to be wrong in her theology, from the perspective of the Church’s accumulated theological traditions. In other words, these thoughts lead us to the impression that her critics and judges interpreted her as a heretic. He agreed, then commented that if we had a time machine that enabled us to return to that era and proceed to advance the ideas that we find in The Urantia Book, we too would be burned at the stake! I accepted his conclusion that all of us would be considered heretics from the perspective of the Christian church of the Middle Ages.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

Analysis by the historian C. H. Lawrence  (continued)

The rapid spread of the Beguines is one of the most arresting religious phenomena of the later Middle Ages. As they gradually secured recognition from the authorities of church and state, Beguinages sprang up everywhere in the northern towns. In some cases the houses were purchased out of funds brought to the communities by new members; in others, buildings were donated by members of the ruling nobility. By the end of the thirteenth century, Namur contained five Beguinages, and Cologne, the biggest and most populous of north German cities, had witnessed fifty-four such foundations. In Brussels, where the Beguines enjoyed the patronage of the dukes of Brabant, they were allowed to appropriate the chapel of La Vigne to their use, and they secured a right to have their own chaplains and their own burial ground. Here, as in other towns of the Low Countries, they came to constitute a separate enclave within the city.  …

Why were so many women attracted to the movement? The relatively free regime of the Beguinage, which offered its members a total surrender to God through a life of prayer and active service to their neighbours, clearly met the spiritual aspirations of women who had heard the call to the apostolic life.  …  Just as the nuns and canonesses had provided a home for the ladies of the landed classes for whom no suitable marriage could be found, the Beguinages, in turn, offered a refuge to the surplus daughters and the widows of the wealthier bourgeoisie. Nor were they only a haven for the unmarriageable. The religious life offered an escape, usually the only escape, for girls who found themselves forced by their families into a marriage they did not desire. Being the children of affluent families, they were readily attracted by the ascetical ideal of voluntary poverty and also, no doubt, by the relative absence of institutional constraint that characterised the life in the Beguinages.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

As an initial inquiry, I asked why these practices spread so rapidly, as stated in the first paragraph that had just been read — almost as rapidly as the spread of ideas on social media of our own era. What was going on in these centuries that made the customs of the Beguines so popular?

One participant called attention to the imbalance that affected the status of men and women, including the prevalence of warfare that caused many young men to be killed. On the other hand, the Beguines offered a new opportunity to women that created the possibility of a life of service, whereas this had not been possible before.

Turning to another participant, I said I was interested in the implications for the power structure that the first paragraph seems to contain. The author indicates that the nobility was donating land or money, and that the Beguines enjoyed the patronage of the dukes of Brabant (an area that is part of current-day Belgium). Why, I asked, was the nobility willing to sponsor this activity that was not a function of men and male authority? In reply, he said he thought that the nobility had taken note of the idea that the Beguines had apparently received the seal of approval of the Church and state; therefore they decided to go along.

Returning to the participant who had read the two paragraphs, I asked her whether we could infer that the ideas expressed were attractive even to men. She believed so, because it was so appealing when men looked out and saw people really doing the work, not hiding themselves and conducting prayer and rituals all day long, the pattern of monasteries and convents that had prevailed for centuries. Now the women were free to express themselves and apply their talents. On the other hand, these new practices of the Beguines implicitly took the limelight away from the organized institutional Church, and that reality was not welcome to everyone.

In effect, I said, she had agreed with my impression that the favorable reactions amounted to spiritual attraction: The Beguines were doing very valuable work for others in the community, and their motivations were clearly pious and praiseworthy. It seems that the nobility who were in charge of society in a political sense did not resent the fact that these women were under their own control and were operating out of their own sense of responsibility. As a result, the nobles who controlled the political structure were attuned to the spiritual and social benefit of the work of these women, more so than was the formal hierarchy of the Church.

Another participant commented that the work of the Beguines was spiritually attractive, remarking that these favorable reactions resemble those that often result from hunger strikes in our own era. Spiritual pressure from above is a very interesting phenomenon, one that often leads to real social change. The activities of the Beguines were implicitly creating true spiritual insight, which in his view is driven by faith. Further, he said, the women conducting these activities were not aristocrats; to the contrary, the Beguines were communities of a lower economic and social status.

Shifting to the second paragraph that a participant had read, I said I wished to do what we can to understand the social context of the work of the Beguines. In the pages we are discussing that analyze to the possibilities for women believers, there seem to be three levels of society that are implicitly being portrayed: the aristocratic level, the level of relatively affluent families, and then the level of the common people — perhaps women living in an agricultural environment on the land, or working in the towns in the context of the marketplace. I then asked one of the participants whether he associated the Beguines and the Beguinages with the middle level, for we did not seem to be talking about the efforts of truly poor people or those of peasants. In these regards, I cited two phrases from the paragraph: “a refuge to the surplus daughters and the widows of the wealthier bourgeoisie” and “Being the children of affluent families.”

In reply, he agreed that we should associate the work of the Beguines with the more affluent middle class, and perhaps the upper class. The main point, however, was that the work attracted people of any class, although people who really were poor were not in a position to contribute to these active efforts. During a subsequent exchange, however, he agreed that the Beguinages mainly represented an opportunity for women who came from the comfortable middle class.

During discussion with yet another participant, I highlighted the following sentences: “Nor were they [the Beguinages] only a haven for the unmarriageable. The religious life offered an escape, usually the only escape, for girls who found themselves forced by their families into a marriage they did not desire.” This made sense to her as one of the possibilities. She commented that in the centuries we are discussing, parents often arranged marriages for the purpose of gaining territory, money, or status. In many cases, the daughters were not in love with these people, and the situation was awful.

I then returned to the question of social classes. The women in a nunnery, I said, seemed to be mainly upper-class women who were serving themselves (serving their own spiritual needs), whereas the women who became Beguines were from the relatively comfortable middle class. They were not just serving themselves; to the contrary, they showed pious motives and served others in society, including people who were poor. The poor were receiving these benefits from the Beguinages, whereas they certainly were not receiving any benefits from the monasteries or nunneries.

He concurred, adding that the women in Beguinages wanted to reject the status of inferiority that pervaded these patriarchal societies. Women are not inferior beings; they often want to be helpful to others, but they did not find this in the nunneries.

In an extended exchange with another participant, he agreed that the nuns and canonesses who lived in nunneries (women mainly from an aristocratic background) were at least partly escaping from some circumstance in society that did not meet their needs, whereas the predominantly middle-class women who entered Beguinages and lived there were seeking to serve others in society.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

[Further analysis by the historian C. H. Lawrence]

On the other hand, not everyone was pleased, to put the matter mildly:

… the women’s movement encountered much hostile criticism from both the laity and the more conservative sections of the clergy. The spectacle of laywomen, without the sanction of any religious order, engaging in an active apostolic role was offensive to both male chauvinism and clerical professionalism.  …

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

I asked the participant who read this paragraph why the activities of the Beguines were offensive to “male chauvinism.” He replied that from his perspective, women had always been under strict control in the nunneries, contexts in which they were told what to do. In contrast, the Beguines broke out from all that, and the males who had previously been dominant did not like this. After all, the women were no longer taking orders.

Turning to another participant, I asked him why the activities of the Beguines were offensive to “clerical professionalism,” involving features that caused some people to be annoyed. In reply, he noted that the Beguines were not nuns or canonesses, not accredited as teachers or scholars. In part, they were assuming roles that the clergy normally carried out. Therefore the clergy no longer had complete control of these aspects.

To explore these ideas, I asked the participant whether the activities of the Beguines were an infringement on the monopoly of the ordained clerics and monks, people who had previously monopolized these apostolic roles and the role of piety. He agreed that the women called Beguines were implicitly cutting into their monopoly: The women were acting in religious ways that did not require the authority of men. Another participant offered the view that clerics called these women all kinds of names because they felt threatened.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

[Additional remarks by the historian C. H. Lawrence]

In the end the conflict was resolved by a compromise. The Council of Vienne in 1312 censured ‘certain women, commonly called Beguines, who lose themselves in foolish speculations on the Trinity and the divine essence  …  these women promise obedience to nobody, and they neither renounce their property nor profess any approved Rule’. Their way of life was permanently forbidden. But this was without prejudice to ‘those faithful women who wished to live as the Lord shall inspire them, following a life of penance and living chastely together in their hospices, even if they have taken no vow’. In other words, the Beguines would be tolerated as long as they stayed in their convents and accepted clerical supervision. Female vagrancy and similar antics were not acceptable. Most Beguinages, in fact, attached themselves to houses of Franciscan or Dominican friars, who supplied them with spiritual directors and confessors.

[emphasis added: the sentence formatted in bold]

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

I asked the participant who read this paragraph why the critics thought it was important to state that the Beguines “promise[d] obedience to nobody.” Why was it a major issue that there was no vow of obedience? Why were the men offended?

He replied that the men had never come across this pattern before. After all, women had been obedient to them for many centuries. I probed these reactions of his by applying a colloquial term from our generation, so as to ask whether he thought that the men’s reactions, in effect, amounted to asserting that these women were too “uppity.” He entirely agreed with that, for the male clerics in question had never encountered the independent way of life that the Beguines had designed and adopted. The tradition that these males had inherited from their fathers and grandfathers was that women did what they were told to do.

I then asked another participant about ideas expressed at the end of the same sentence, “nor profess any approved Rule.” Why was it a problem that there was no written text giving the Beguines detailed written instructions about what they were to do every minute of the day, as of course was the case of a Benedictine monk or nun?

He replied that there was a minority running society and that the lack of obedience could result in being burned at the stake. In addition, he expressed concern about the accuracy of the phrase that I had previously asked about, the idea that the Beguines  “promise[d] obedience to nobody.” To the contrary, he believed that they promised obedience to God, although he had not found any text stating this explicitly. Thus the Beguines had breached the tradition of professional intercessors who stood between the believer and God. In reply to a subsequent question of mine, he agreed that the observances and the piety and personal ministry of the Beguines amounted to a close approximation of personal religion.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

[Final paragraph of the passage by the historian C. H. Lawrence]

In its tamed form the Beguinage survived the onslaught of its critics and persecutors. In many of the cities of the Rhineland, northern France and the Low Countries, it remained an established and respected institution, providing a home for the sick and destitute as well as for the sisterhood. In a limited sense the Beguines represented a movement of women’s liberation. Even after their wilder manifestations had been suppressed, their informal associations offered unmarried women a greater degree of freedom and initiative than was allowed them either in a traditional convent or in a lay family. Their simple piety based upon study of the vernacular Bible and their cultivation of mystical experience, which in the writings of Hadewijch of Antwerp was expressed in the erotic imagery of the Brautmystik or ‘bridal’ mysticism, placed them alongside the friars as preachers and exponents of a new kind of religious experience. It was a distinctively feminine spirituality, individualistic and intuitive, which focused upon the humanity of Christ and sought to identify with his sufferings by mortification of the body.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

As a preliminary remark of my own, I noted that this paragraph includes many different elements that correspond to inclinations of women that the historian considers characteristic in a psychological sense. We will not say that we are analyzing all the psychological elements in this paragraph, although the author is referring to certain factors that connect with us now. For example, he states, “In a limited sense the Beguines represented a movement of women’s liberation,” and later he refers to “a distinctively feminine spirituality, individualistic and intuitive.” I then asked whether in this paragraph, we are getting a different point of view in regard to the idea of God and religious experience, a point of view that is indeed feminine.

One participant replied that we all have different attributes, and that all of them can be expressed and developed. She thought it was wonderful that these women could achieve these things at the time, and could influence society into a more open understanding of the flowering of each sex and the contributions that we can make. This spiritual reality cannot be stifled.

Turning to another participant, I asked him whether the net message of this paragraph, and perhaps of the entire two pages about the Beguines, is the idea that the impulses and reactions to spirituality are creative and original, and that there should not be a single frame for expressing one’s own reality and one’s love of God.

He believed that this was part of the message. On the other hand, he returned to a sentence that appeared in the preceding paragraph, the idea that “the Beguines would be tolerated as long as they stayed in their convents and accepted clerical supervision.” Well, they were strong in their personal spirituality and would not give in.

I then asked another participant whether the Beguines and Beguinages were an anti-monopolistic movement, in the sense that they were objecting to the monopoly of religiousness that came from the clergy, and were also objecting to the monopoly of religious approaches coming from men. Although he conceded that we could look at all this from those perspectives and could call that an outcome, he did not believe that the Beguines were proceeding with these goals in mind. In addition, he called into question the historian’s statement that the activities of the Beguines represented “a distinctively feminine spirituality, individualistic and intuitive.” For his part, he wondered about the idea of a “feminine spirituality” and wondered why the author called it “individualistic and intuitive.” From his perspective, Jesus taught personal insight through faith, and he considered that individualistic. In addition, he wondered what the author meant by the phrases “In its tamed form” and “their wilder manifestations.”

I replied that since I certainly have not researched these matters in great detail, I cannot answer his final question. On the other hand, I offered him certain comments on a linguistic level. When the author refers to “a distinctively feminine spirituality,” the use of the indefinite article “a” (rather than the definite article “the”) does not signify a conclusion on the author’s part that these methods represented the only variety of feminine spirituality. In relation to the participant’s question about the words “tamed” and “wilder,” all I could do was to interpret them in terms of previous remarks about carrying on activities in public that were not approved. To me, the author’s underlying point is that in the end, the activities of the Beguines were a procedure that became acceptable in the very broad sense.

He agreed in general, while pointing out that the author does not have the advantage of the teachings of The Urantia Book and cannot write from perspectives that are exactly the same as ours. I agreed with that, stating that the background information appearing in the document containing questions on monasticism simply represents the analysis and conclusions of respected historians who have studied and analyzed the monastic era, historians who are not readers of The Urantia Book. I believed that in general, these historians had done a credible job of trying to be as objective as possible.

Comment

-  -  -  -  -  -  -

As I indicated near the beginning of this message, the third attachment consists of information about the professional background of the three historians whose writings are often excerpted in the document containing questions on monasticism: C. H. Lawrence, Gert Melville, and Paul Collins.

(End comment)

At this point in the webinar, I called for participants to begin considering the information on pages 30 and 31 about the extraordinary achievements of two very distinguished women who lived in convents during the Middle Ages.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

Extraordinary achievements

From intellectual and cultural perspectives, the twelfth-century abbess Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1171) — whom we previously encountered as an advocate of class consciousness and social discrimination — appears to have been the most distinguished woman who lived in a convent during the entire Middle Ages. In the first two paragraph of the Wikipedia article about her, she is described as follows:

a German Benedictine abbess, writer, composer, philosopher, Christian mystic, visionary, and polymath. She is one of the best-known composers  of sacred monophony, as well as the most-recorded in modern history. She has been considered by many in Europe to be the founder of scientific natural history in Germany.

Hildegard's fellow nuns elected her as magistra in 1136; she founded the monasteries of Rupertsberg in 1150 and Eibingen in 1165. She wrote theological, botanical, and medicinal texts, as well as letters, liturgical songs for women choirs to sing and poems, while supervising miniature illuminations in the Rupertsberg manuscript of her first work, Scivias. There are more surviving chants by Hildegard than by any other composer from the entire Middle Ages, and she is one of the few known composers to have written both the music and the words.

[Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hildegard_of_Bingen]

In addition, the historian Paul Collins calls attention to Hrotsvitha of Gandersheim (c. 935 – 1001), stating that she was an aristocratic Saxon and “was part of an intellectual renaissance that flowered during the reigns of the three Ottos.” The corresponding article in Wikipedia provides more detailed information, describing her as follows:

a German secular canoness, who wrote dramas and poems during the rule of the Ottonian dynasty. Hrotsvitha lived at Gandersheim Abbey. She is considered the first female writer from the German Lands, the first female historian, the first person since antiquity to write dramas in the Latin West, and the first female poetess in Germany.

Hrotsvitha's six short dramas are considered to be her most important works. She is one of the few women who wrote about her life during the early Middle Ages, making her one of the only people to record a history of women in that era from a woman's perspective. She has been called “the most remarkable woman of her time”, and an important figure in the history of women.

[Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrotsvitha]

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

After I offered the opportunity for comments on Hildegard or Hrotsvitha, one participant said that the description of Hildegard is almost immense. He called her “a polymath squared” and wondered whether she may have been a member of the reserve corps of destiny. Another participant remarked that we know about Hildegard and Hrotsvitha because they left a great deal behind — their writings and, in the case of Hildegard, her music. In contrast, he believed that there were many other talented women who lived in the monastic area whom we do not know about because they did not leave anything behind.

Previewing our next webinar

When we conduct our next webinar (perhaps on some Saturday during the month of November that we have not yet chosen), participants will begin answering the five formal questions that appear on pages 31 and 32 of the document. As a preview that you may find interesting, here they are:

Formal question 18

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

18.   A Melchizedek states: “We do not regard a planet as having emerged from barbarism so long as one sex seeks to tyrannize over the other” [a Melchizedek of

the Jerusem School of Planetary Administration, 564:6/ 49:4.4]. On that basis:

     a.  Please comment on how women were treated during the period we are examining (from about 300 CE to about 1500 CE), especially in the context of monasticism.

     b.  Please proceed to apply the same general criterion to the situation of women on Urantia now, while avoiding any temptation that might lead you to focus solely on North America.

Formal question 19

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

19.   The historian C. H. Lawrence tells us that the 11th century abbot Hugh of Cluny “clearly judged it inappropriate that the ladies should be allowed to run their own affairs and organise their own religious life without male supervision.” Although it is possible to dismiss the statement by declaring that this conviction was characteristic of his era but not of ours, does the exclusively male hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church (and of the various Eastern Orthodox Churches) embody overtones that are broadly similar? Please analyze the net implications and their psychological overtones.

Formal question 20

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

20.  In discussing the urban experiment that is now called the Beguines, the historian C. H. Lawrence states: “The spectacle of laywomen, without the sanction of any religious order, engaging in an active apostolic role was offensive to both male chauvinism and clerical professionalism.” Please analyze this statement, doing your best to explain it.

Formal question 21

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

21.  Factors associated with social exclusivity and class consciousness appear to have been considerably stronger in connection with convents for women than they were in relation to monasteries for men. Why? Was this reality simply a result of the social patterns that prevailed in this era, or did it also betoken differences in the religious and spiritual expectations that Christian believers of these eras associated with monks and nuns? Please explain your answer.

Formal question 22

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

22.  After referring to “the male chauvinism of the Latin Church,” the historian C. H. Lawrence points out that clergy who were required to be celibate “tended to stress the moral and intellectual weaknesses of womankind.” He then comments that ascetical literature, written largely by men, primarily portrayed women “in the guise of the temptress” and then adds: “the elaboration of the cult of the Blessed Virgin Mary did nothing to counteract this image, for the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, which was gaining ground at this period, exempted her from the taint and consequences of original sin and thus detached her from the normal experience of the human race.” These observations tend to imply that conventional reverence for Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as doctrines that were evolving and accumulating — subsequently including “the Assumption,” the teaching that Mary was bodily assumed into heaven — were actually a net disadvantage for female believers in general, for they could not possibly meet this standard and would always suffer from the comparison. Do you agree with this general conclusion? If so, please analyze the net implications. If not, please explain your alternative viewpoint and the reasons for it.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

PRACTICAL FACTORS

1.  Since the recordings of our previous webinars remain available on YouTube, you could watch any or all of them whenever you wish. Here is the link that would take you to the specific location on the Internet:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_6QHPLuABZojhdjE8XJRQg

As a workaround that would help you if you do not have this link immediately to hand, you could log onto the main site for YouTube and then search for “Global Endeavor.” The results would include a reference to our programs, although it may not appear at the top of the list.

2.  Here is the standard time line that applies to all our discussions, including our next webinar, one that may occur on some Saturday in November that we have not yet chosen:

— Pacific Time Zone:  from 1:30 to 3:30 pm.

— Mountain Time Zone:  from 2:30 to 4:30 pm.

— Central Time Zone:  from 3:30 to 5:30 pm.

— Eastern Time Zone:  from 4:30 to 6:30 pm.

Please be aware that the starting time is only approximate, for it usually takes us a few minutes to make the adjustments to the rather complicated software that cause all the participants to be viewed and heard correctly. In relation to our preceding webinars associated with topic 8, live streaming in YouTube began at about ten minutes past the time stated.

Regards, Neal Waldrop.

Chairman, the Committee for the Global Endeavor

[October 15, 2021 at 8:00 pm]

      ​

Index Page

[player url="https://www.bitchute.com/video/rBkGPUWCsZS0"]

SALVATION HISTORY, VATICAN II, VIGANO, SSPX WITH E. MICHAEL JONES

In the globalised world that we live in today, how do we reconcile the Westernisation / “Latinisation” of the Church with her universality?

Was Vatican 2 was a way of opening up the Church to the world?

What role do you see Asia and Africa playing in the future of Catholicism?

[player url="https://www.bitchute.com/video/45MTeY7u0HvY"]

[player url="https://culturewars.com/podcasts/bitchute-embed-template-9nmpt" title="Resisting The Oligarchs! - Dr. E Michael Jones & Marek Chodakiewicz | THE FRONTLINE WITH JOE & JOE — Culture Wars" summary="Dr. E. Michael Jones and Dr. Marek Chodakiewicz join The Frontline with Joe and Joe to discuss how Christians can resist oligarchic control. They review moments of history where Christian persecution was even worse, and how European nations such as..."]

It is important to realize that the fifth epochal revelation is not confined to a stack of paper between two blue covers.  The revelation is dawning in widespread areas of the culture with no overt (as yet) connections to The Urantia Book.  The Spirit of Truth and the Seraphim are pulling out all the stops.   

.        

New Wineskins ● By Dave Kantor

Over the years there have been a number of conversations within the readership about starting a church or trying to start a Urantia religion of some sort. Groups in Oklahoma City, Boulder, Marin County, and other places actually formed church-like communities that served local readers for a while and then disappeared. On several occasions a considerable amount of money was spent on these projects.

This article contends that a distinctly Urantia religion has been evolving since the publication of the book in 1955. It is not only alive and well but is thriving and experiencing rapid growth. Urantia religion has been largely unrecognized because we're all subjectively immersed in it.

Let's go back to the point where the ship was still moored to the dock.

How we got The Fellowship

According to Bill Sadler, the revelators suggested that some sort of social organization be created for readers of the book. They specifically suggested something simple and were clear that they did not want to see a competing sect or denomination emerge. They said it would be a good idea to have something just to occupy the social space, to prevent someone else from doing it.

At the time—the 1950s—the most respectable social institution was the church. Local churches were the social hubs of most communities and even cities. If you didn't go to church on Sunday, there was something suspicious about you. In many places it was difficult to conduct business if you were not associated with a church. So the Sadlers set about researching social structures and came up with a model based on that of the Presbyterian church.

When the Sadlers presented their plan to the revelators they were told, "Well, if that's the best you can do, go ahead with it." The organizational structure of the Fellowship today was thus derived from a church model highly respected in the 1950s.

But not to despair! As the ship began to pull away from the dock the initial elements of what would become a radical new form of religious institution began to fall into place. As limited as it was, the Fellowship constitution provided a sufficient foundation enabling the readership to begin coalescing around a structure which would evolve into a 21st century networked religion.

The first nodes in the network were Societies in Chicago, Oklahoma City, and Los Angeles. In the 1950s the links between the nodes were tenuous—personal visits, written letters sent by mail, phone calls, and face-to-face meetings at occasional conferences. Each of these nodes spawned local subnetworks made up of regional study groups and served as local communication hubs.

Over the following two decades additional Society nodes began to appear along with the first nodes to develop outside of North America. The 1980s saw increasing struggles between a networked religion beginning to reach out to the world and the central node in Chicago struggling to maintain proprietary control over a growing readership increasingly motivated to share the revelation with the world.

Primary Elements of Urantia Religion

At this point we can already see the two primary elements of Urantia religion:

• 1. An evangelical drive to share the revelation with the world—service and outreach.
• 2. A desire to gather with other readers to study and share the exploration of the book—expanding the fellowship of God-knowing kingdom believers.

Urantia religion is unique in that its core religious elements are derived from a desire to socialize personal spiritual experience, rather than being based on specific beliefs, doctrines, rituals, or anything else that characterizes religion in the larger culture.

By the 1990s the sheltered bays of established tradition began to recede into the horizon as the copyright was put into the public domain concomittant with the spread of the Internet and the growing number of translations being published. The Internet provided the basis for a grass-roots movement to spring up simultaneously from many parts of the world—another unprecedented development in the history of religion.

The Urantia movement is the first major religious movement to be spawned in the age of the Internet. And just as Guttenburg's printing press drove the transformation of European civilization by making Bibles, tracts, and books available to an increasingly literate population, so is the Internet driving an unprecedented global social transformation, providing a vehicle through which the fifth epochal revelation is beginning to enhance spiritual perspectives in virtually every country on the planet.

In the early decades of the Internet the text of the book spread into every part of the world which had connections to the Internet. But as the 21st century got underway it was the development of social media that became the key element driving both revelation dissemination and the rapid growth of Urantia religion. Readers found themselves wanting to be involved in spreading the revelation and sharing its content; the Internet provided an ideal means for them to do so.

The Internet and social media provide the technological foundation for Urantia religion. Recall the two primary elements of Urantia religion identified earlier – dissemination and study. Urantia religion has become highly networked. There are now thousands of nodes in the network with more appearing almost daily. Each node catalyzes the sharing of information, communication between individuals, sharing within groups, and the building of diverse social communities.

The social media domain is seeing the emergence of new Urantia institutions whose structures have been designed to exploit Internet technologies. Urantia University, Perfecting Horizons Institute, Cosmic Citizen, Symmetry of Soul, Urantia Book Films, Truthbook, UrantiaNow, Square Circles, online Skype study groups—these are just a few of the reader-initiated expressions of Urantia religion.

Social media is also providing a basis for the emergence of online ministries which extend Urantia religion's dissemination thrust. Pato's "Followers of Christ Michael" study group, ministries being developed by Richard Stinson and Dave Jesusonian, God's Gumshoe, Dick Bain's service to Christians, Bill Rocap's Urantia group—along with dozens of other readers hosting online groups whose membership numbers in the thousands—these constitute the most vital nodes in networked Urantia religion, a religion that is spreading globally, rapidly. Social media is the environment to which new readers are drawn when they want to find out more about The Urantia Book.

What is networked religion?

One of the foremost researchers in this newly emerging field is Dr. Heidi Campbell of Texas A&M University. She comments that, "Central to the idea of networked religion is that religious practice emerges within a distinctive social sphere constructed of networked interactions. Networked religious communities function quite differently than traditional religious institutions and structures. Rather than operating as tightly bounded social structures, they function as loose social networks with varying levels of religious affiliation and commitment.

"The study of online religious community shows that, rather than living in a single static religious community, people in contemporary society increasingly live in religious social networks that are emergent, varying in depth, fluid, and highly personalized. The Internet challenges the role that religion traditionally has played in the process of socialization into an accepted religious belief and community."

Dr. Campbell lists five characteristics of networked religion in her article, Understanding the Relationship between Religion Online and Offline in a Networked Society, published in the March 2012 issue of Journal of the American Academy of Religion. The article expands these five elements. A copy is available via the link at the bottom of this document. I urge you to read it.

Characteristics of Networked Religion

• 1. Convergent Practice
  • —Personalized blending of information and rituals.
  • —Internet serves as a spiritual hub allowing people to assemble and personalize religious behavior and belief.
  • —Tension: Offering guidance and instruction to people who draw spiritual wisdom and practices from multiple sources and traditions.
• 2. Multi-site Reality
  • —Online and offline religious activities inform and shape each other.
  • —Tension: Offline contexts increasingly no longer serve as primary source for spiritual connections and knowledge.
• 3. Networked Community
  • —Loosely-bounded social networks.
• 4. Storied Identity
  • —Fluid and dynamic identity construction.
  • —Identity is constructed and performed online, encouraging malleable self-presentations.
  • —Tension: Religious identity becomes flexible and highly personalized, impacting wider understandings of what it means to be Christian.
• 5. Shifting Authority
  • —Simultaneous individual empowerment and challenge of traditional authority as bloggers, content creators, webmasters, and group administrators replace clergy on the front lines of religious development.

This, as I see it, is the current state of Urantia religion—a religion which has evolved around the dissemination of the revelation and the development of reader communities.

The Urantia Book is part of a much greater social transformation taking place in the world that is being driven by a rapid sequence of technological changes profoundly impacting human communications and modes of interaction, both of which are intimately tied to Urantia religion.

Urantia religion is a robust expression of a new religious phenomena—networked religion. It is a collective expression of countless readers mobilized by an epochal revelation, led by the Spirit of Truth. Urantia religion not only is alive and well, but is thriving and experiencing explosive growth completely outside the domain of traditional institutional structures. It is far more healthy and viable as an organic product of evolution than anything we could design or fabricate from our limited experience, idealism, and zeal.

The concept of networked religion presents a radically new paradigm which must be understood and embraced if we're to optimize our ability to propagate the revelation and foster emerging Urantia religion.

Highly Recommended:

• Dr. Heidi Campbell's article, Understanding the Relationship between Religion Online and Offline in a Networked Society
• What do we do Now? Examples and background on how the locus of dissemination has shifted from Urantia institutions to the networked readership

SOURCE 

.        

 A Real Opportunity for Students of the Urantia Revelations to become Messengers of Truth!

GO HERE

The World’s Religions

   DURING the Alexandrian sojourn of Jesus, Gonod, and Ganid, the young man spent much of his time and no small sum of his father’s money making a collection of the teachings of the world’s religions about God and his relations with mortal man. Ganid employed more than threescore learned translators in the making of this abstract of the religious doctrines of the world concerning the Deities. And it should be made plain in this record that all these teachings portraying monotheism were largely derived, directly or indirectly, from the preachments of the missionaries of Machiventa Melchizedek, who went forth from their Salem headquarters to spread the doctrine of one God — the Most High — to the ends of the earth.

There is presented herewith an abstract of Ganid’s manuscript, which he prepared at Alexandria and Rome, and which was preserved in India for hundreds of years after his death. He collected this material under ten heads, as follows:

      
Next Page Buddhism