Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 12:37:38 -0500
To: <WMason1021@aol.com>, FreeUrantia@cuenet.com, UBtalk@Utalk.org
From: Kristen Maaherra <urantian@concentric.net>
Cc: Keeler <rkeeler@allwest.net>, Choi <kchoi@iastate.edu>,
du Pont <gdupont@isp.fr>, Siegel <msiegel@ctea.com>,
Jameson <gjameson@pbtk.com>, urantian@concentric.net
Subject: FreeUrantia: A Letter from Kristen to Larry Mason
Subject: Denver Meeting
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 20:00:46 EDT
From: <WMason1021@aol.com>
To: urantian@concentric.netHi, Larry!
You write: "I have mixed feelings about your refusal to accept a license. I understand and certainly agree that the UB belongs to everyone and that no one should be denied free use of any part of it. However, I wonder if you were to accept a license or some other "compromise" it would not only make life much easier for you but also set a precedent that would effectively free the UB. Regardless, I support you completely in whatever you decide. You and Eric are in Mary and my prayers."
Because your concerns are echoed elsewhere, I hope you don't mind if I answer you in an open way:
Many Urantians (including the Foundation trustees themselves) seem to think the problem I have with the Foundation is over copyright itself; whereas, the real conflict I have with the Foundation is that they lied in court to obtain the copyright, and — this is the important element — thereby discredited the revelation to the world.
These 5 men have no more right to "offer" me a license than does any other being who attempts to destroy an epochal revelation on Urantia.
For the Foundation to claim that the Urantia Papers are NOT epochal revelation, that they are autorevelation, "arranged, selected, edited, and compiled" BY HUMANS, and that the Papers were authored by "Urantia Foundation" (as it says in Books in Print and on the Foundation's original copyright application), I believe, is a default exactly of the magnitude of any of the other defaults of epochal revelation on this planet.
As the midwayers wrote of Peter in the courtyard: "Having taken the first step along the path of compromise and least resistance, there was nothing apparent to Peter but to go on with the course of conduct decided upon. It requires A GREAT AND NOBLE CHARACTER, having started out wrong, to turn about and go right. All too often one's own mind tends to justify continuance in the path of error when once it is entered upon."
For the Foundation trustees to become "great and noble characters," believers could reasonably expect them to throw away the swords they conceal beneath their cloaks and cease to use material means (copyright, trademark, lawsuits) to "protect" the revelation.
It is not unreasonable for believers to expect the Foundation to file accurate statements with the copyright office concerning the authorship of the Urantia Papers. It is not unreasonable for believers to expect the Foundation to quit telling courts that the Urantia Book "is not a religious book." It is not unreasonable for believers to expect the Foundation's attitude towards all believers who are working for Jesus to be: "forbid them not." It is not unreasonable for believers to expect the Foundation to begin to use spiritual means to advance the spiritual kingdom.
If the Foundation had told the truth in court (i.e., if they had told the courts the same things they tell believers, such as, "We do not know — and no human knows — how these Papers were materialized into the English language;" and, "All the people involved in the 1955 First Printing of the Urantia Papers agree that everything known about the authorship and origin of the Urantia Papers can be found in the Papers themselves," etc.) -- if the Foundation's court arguments had been along these lines — and if they had won a copyright WHILE TELLING THE TRUTH — I would acknowledge their copyright. I would be first in line to apply for "permission" (a license) from them to give away an index.
(But, of course, if the Foundation were composed of the sort of people who would or could go into court telling the absolute truth — they would not be the sort of people who would sue me for giving away an index in the first place! And they would not be the sort of people asking for a permanent injunction against my using any of the "text of the Urantia Book.")
For the trustees to offer me a license to give away an index and yet at the same time to tell the court of all the harm I can do by giving away an index means to me that the crucial thing is obviously not the index itself — it is that these 5 men demand CONTROL.
They must not believe that my index activity (the activity that they sued me for) is that "harmful" to the revelation they claim to be "protecting" if they are willing to license me to do it.
So the element of importance here, to them, seems to be control. They want to control my relationship to the revelation. The opposite of Jesus' "forbid them not."
The Foundation trustees remind me of: "Nevertheless, many times did the apostles take offense at those who made bold to teach in the Master's name. To them it always seemed inappropriate that those who had never sat at Jesus' feet should dare to teach in his name."
The Foundation trustees seem to feel that they — and only they — have a "direct connection" to the revelators. And only they should "dare" to do anything with the Urantia Papers.
I believe that when I read the WORDS WRITTEN BY SUPERHUMANS, (i.e., read the Urantia Papers), it is EXACTLY LIKE sitting at the feet listening to another of our favorite superhumans — Jesus — who lived 2000 years ago.
That evening, after the session of questions and answers, John said to Jesus: "Master, yesterday I went over to Ashtaroth to see a man who was teaching in your name and even claiming to be able to cast out devils. Now this fellow had never been with us, neither does he follow after us; therefore I forbade him to do such things."
Then said Jesus: "FORBID HIM NOT. DO YOU NOT PERCEIVE THAT THIS GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM SHALL PRESENTLY BE PROCLAIMED IN ALL THE WORLD? HOW CAN YOU EXPECT THAT ALL WHO WILL BELIEVE THE GOSPEL SHALL BE SUBJECT TO YOUR DIRECTION? REJOICE THAT ALREADY OUR TEACHING HAS BEGUN TO MANIFEST ITSELF BEYOND THE BOUNDS OF OUR PERSONAL INFLUENCE. Do you not see, John, that those who profess to do great works in my name must eventually support our cause? They certainly will not be quick to speak evil of me. My son, in matters of this sort it would be better for you to reckon that HE WHO IS NOT AGAINST US IS FOR US. In the generations to come many who are not wholly worthy will do many strange things in my name, but I will not forbid them. I tell you that, even when a cup of cold water is given to a thirsty soul, the Father's messengers shall ever make record of such a service of love."
This instruction greatly perplexed John. Had he not heard the Master say, "He who is not with me is against me"? And he did not perceive that in this case ("He who is not with me is against me"?) Jesus was referring to man's PERSONAL RELATION to the spiritual teachings of the kingdom, while in the other case ("he who is not against us is for us.") reference was made to the outward and far-flung SOCIAL RELATIONS of believers regarding the QUESTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL and the JURISDICTION OF ONE GROUP OF BELIEVERS OVER THE WORK OF OTHER GROUPS which would eventually compose the forthcoming world-wide brotherhood.
I ask the trustees: "How can you expect that all who will believe the gospel shall be subject to your direction?" I am FOR the revelation — and Jesus said — regarding these QUESTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL: "he who is not against us is for us."
Why don't the trustees believe and trust Jesus? Why do they want to control me (and any believer "in active concert or participation with" me)? Why do they want to control ANY believer? As Paula Thompson reminded us all at the meeting in Boulder: "There are REAL enemies [of the Urantia Papers] out there."
I hope the above clarifies in your soul just why I am not interested in receiving a license from the trustees.
Much love, and God bless you, Kristen.