1983-07-27-First Mansion World Problems

Session 1

Dialogue

Tom: Fine.

Karen: Very good. I have to go back to work on Monday. After a three week vacation.

DOC: It'll be good for you.

Karen: Yeah. Responsibility. Social contact.

DOC: I understand you wanted to ask some questions about my experience on the first mansion world.

Karen: Yeah, I would like some insight there. I think, as I mentioned before, I'm a little obsessed with this book I'm finishing up and I think that this book has a lot to do with the things that will be worked out on the first mansion world. It has to do with "aberrated sexual drives," paucity in the home life, the rearing of children, experiencing of parenthood, these kinds of things. My understanding is that we'll go to the first mansion world to fix that.

DOC: Yes, primarily those things are worked out on the first mansion world.

Karen: Well, I don't know how to ask, but would you talk a little bit about your experiences on the first mansion world. I'm sure I'll go there. I suspect most of my friends will go there.

DOC: I gather, since you have been writing a book on sexual aberrations, as you call it, I suspect that's what you'd like me to talk about.

Karen: Yes.

DOC: Well, ask some questions. I could talk for hours and....

Karen: I suppose. Well, let's try to limit it a little bit. I am specifically addressing the subject in this book about homosexuality. I don't think there's anything wrong with it. Our society doesn't exactly approve of it, but my feeling is that the ideal relationship between two people or three people or any number of people is founded on love for one another in the highest sense whatever the highest sense may be at that given time, or at that moment. Now here, in the realm of homosexuality, that's aberrated. Somebody would call it aberrated.

I don't think it's aberrated if it's having to do with love. It does hail from our Father. The concern you have for a person, even if they're of the same sex, doesn't take away from the value of the relationship. I know this. I feel this and I believe this, but still, since we who are females will be females throughout eternity and we who are males will be males throughout eternity, it throws me into a bit of a dither there.

What happens on the first mansion world when this thing allegedly gets straightened out? What happens to...? Is it an issue?

DOC: What happens to the evolving personality? Is this what you're asking?

Karen: Yeah.

DOC: They go to the satellite spheres where the material sons and daughters are and they spend their time with the material sons and daughters until such time as these things are satisfactorily worked out. Now who's the judge and who's going to determine the word 'satisfactorily' is not for either me nor you to make the determination, but the key to it is 'satisfactorily'. Now the thing is Jesus himself wouldn't and couldn't and won't stand in judgment of Lucifer. He has others who will do that so nobody can stand in judgment of these things, not even on the first mansion world. Not even in the homes of the Adams.

Karen: Well, let me ask this. The other night we were talking with the -- Mighty Messenger was it?

DOC: Yes.

Karen: Who had a 'matey' who was working on the planet also. It may have been you. But he had a mate. Now, our conception of 'matey' or of the mating process here on Urantia, culturally and generally, has been the male with the female. Is it, or does it exist in the universe where there are two — and I'll switch over here — two passive types in conjunction with each other as well as two aggressive types. That is to say, are there partnerships of the male personality going on into eternity or ultimately do we end up with a passive and an aggressive, a male and a female, in the eternal career.

DOC: Not necessarily. Let's back up here for a minute. The Mighty Messenger did not talk in terms of a mate, so be very careful of your terminology here. He spoke of someone with whom he was working.

Again, we're dealing with the English language; we're working with words that you give me to deal with. Let's go back to the beginning: male and female, passive, retiring, aggressive, however you want to look at it, in terms of the evolving mortal, are created and functional primarily for the purpose of procreation. The evolving of the races. If this didn't happen, the planet would end up being non-evolving because it takes people to evolve any planet. That goes all the way to God and the Thought Adjusters. So if we weren't evolving it would be a dead planet.

Now, you have read in the UB where it talks in terms of complimentary. There's one thing you're overlooking. That is that in all energy systems, there is always a duality. Again, it goes back to 'satisfactory resolution' -- satisfactory working out. The whole issue is being able to unite two energies together that compliment each other. Now take a moment and look at your seraphim. Very carefully, now, look at your seraphim. Your seraphim are designated 'she' and yet there are two, whenever you come into the third psychic circle, each one of you have two. One is always on duty, the other is in a passive state, and they are both designated as she. Right?

Karen: I've never heard it as 'him'.

DOC: You've never heard her referred to as anything but she, correct me if I'm wrong.

Karen: No.

DOC: Now they are complimentary or they could not both work together on the same issue. Correct?

Karen: Correct.

DOC: Does that help?

Karen: Yes it does.

DOC: And do they or do they not, interestingly enough, if you find it worth your while, do they not continue to evolve with you?

Karen: They certainly do.

DOC: So if you as recognizable as a female entity then would be evolving with two female seraphim, wouldn't you? So there's a whole bunch of females right there.

Karen: Yes, indeed.

Tom: (Laughter)

Karen: Yes. I'm in good company.

DOC: Tim, do you have any questions about this?

Tom: Not right off the top.

DOC: All right. There are several keys you have to look at. The issue in all of the early phase of early evolution is learning to work together. Now, the UB says that men must learn to raise children and must be as responsible in raising children as women. Now the society that I'm visiting today, this is not so, except in isolated cases. It's still a type of society where women is supposed to raise the children. Well, this is not complimentary, is it?

Karen: No.

DOC: It's imbalanced, so it's just as imbalanced as your initial question.

Karen: Good analogy.

DOC: So putting these things in balance where they become complimentary is the key to the whole thing. To the whole evolutionary plan. Okay, so looking at this business of Tom and Alan as soul mates and they have made the decision that they would like to evolve spiritually through the rest of their sojourn together. This is very possible because as long as they are complimentary, the resolution is one that is satisfactory. Now I do not make that value judgment; you do not make that value judgment. Do you understand what I'm saying?

Karen: Yes.

Tom: Well who makes it?

DOC: For instance if let's say a — this is going to sound very gross. Let's say a sex change comes up to first mansion world. Personally I have known very few who have made it, let's say a sex change who has actually gone through the operation, the physical transfor­mation with — and certain psychic, mindal changes have taken place also because of the implantation of hormones and different things. This is an aberration. This.... working out a satis­factory solution to that is quite a problem. A lot of work. Now, could you find a satisfactory way to resolve that?

Karen: My inclination would be to—

DOC: Could you? In all honesty? Put yourselves in the position of making that decision?

Tom: Not I.

DOC: Thank you. A little humility goes a long way. Very good. Not even the particular Adam and Eve in whose home this poor, deprived person would go to, could make this decision. They do the work. Like I do. As a Morontia Companion, I do work; I offer my services, my companionship and all these things. I'm a guide, a teacher, but judgments of this sort are out of my hands. So, that's just to give you some idea.

Karen: The impact of man and woman is primarily for, and it's overtly presented, for propagation of the human race.

DOC: Exactly.

Karen: And consistency and continuation of evolution.

DOC: And civilization, because it immediately involves the maintenance of that evolution which would lend itself to property and there cannot be any kind of solidified society without the maintenance of property.

Karen: Right.

DOC: So it's a fundamental, basic kind of thing. But his is also done between members of the same sex. Successfully. If this were not so we would be clamoring and putting pressure on the revelatory commission to strike all those paragraphs right out of Rodan of Alexandria because we would consider it misleading. But of course that would never happen. Do you understand, Tom?

Tom: You lost me about three minutes ago.

DOC: Ask questions.

Tom: You were talking about property? Why must there be...?

DOC: You have to maintain yourselves, right? You maintain yourselves better, more productively, when you have someone that you care for.

Tom: Yes.

DOC: When you have a situation other than singular; when you have goals established and things you can work for. Property, the maintenance of property, includes such things as institutions, the creations and maintaining of your institutions, which are the bulwark and the doors which society uses, goes in and out of, to learn by and to evolve. So it all gets down to the business-- back in the old days I could take what was yours and you could take what was mine and we could resolve that by killing each other off. And to the victor go the spoils. What were the spoils? A hut? A woman and a baby, maybe. Lion's teeth. An ass. But then when things evolved to an agricultural society, then it became grazing land, water rights, cattle, sheep, and that was how society evolved so the ownership of grazing land, the ownership of cattle, numbers of cattle was an indication of wealth and it immediately became an institution that did that. And it had to be maintained. And as a result society progressed. Mankind progressed. Understand?

Tom: Hmm.

DOC: So that's what we mean when we say property.

Karen: Culture.

DOC: Well, pottery-making, weaving, story-telling are all the early stages of culture which eventuated in the printed word, the printed page, and the UB is a result of that. And your communicators, your telecommunications, all of these things are progressive! All of which would never have occurred if there hadn't been a maintenance thing.

Now I'd like to say one more thing before we get off this subject. We were speaking rather philosophically about all this. There — now, we have to look at the mores. I believe people are saying in your society, are they not, AIDS is God's disease to get rid of the homosexuals? But, look at it for just a moment. What the people are saying, whether they realize it or not, as I understand it, is: we can't stand any more promiscuity. We're not criticizing the fact that two members of the same sex are together; what we don't like is the promiscuity; the rank savagery that's involved.

Statistically they have discovered that the majority of the cases of AIDS are people who have had oh, perhaps, something like 100 liaison contacts within a month. Rank savagery. So it's -- in a way, their protest has merit.

Karen: I... You're being philosophic now, Doc. I will give some credence to it, yes, but frankly I don't feel that people who are out there with banners that say "It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" "Sodomy is sin" — I think they're missing the whole boat and I don't think they're concerning themselves with the frequency of any individual's sex life. The fact--

DOC: I specifically brought up the subject of AIDS as an example and said that people have some understanding here because of promiscuity. Now I'm not going to take on the issue of pros and cons of peoples' attitudes concerning picketing and so forth. My point was promiscuity. And rank savagery. So this is why the mores, why people have negative attitudes in today's society about a lot of these issues. Their attitudes would be completely different about these things if let's say two women who were having an affair together of maintaining property in the same manner as their next door neighbors who have been married for 20 years and who are raising a family. Do you understand what I am trying to say?

Karen: Yes, I do. They want civilized behavior. Whatever you do in the privacy of your bedroom is okay, but let's have civilized behavior on the street.

DOC: And you don't always have to be in a baseball uniform in the front yard.

Karen: Right. Our society is not too keen on two people of the same sex rearing children.

DOC: Again, it's a reflection on the promiscuity. On the lack of disciplines. You see it takes discipline for a man and a woman to prevent divorce long enough to raise a family. Well if it's hard enough for a man and woman, then it's hard enough for two people of the same sex to do that. Especially in the complex society of today. But none of this has to do with the satisfactory resolution of the problem when we come to the mansion worlds except in terms of looseness, promiscuity, savagery. Savage behavior is not conducive to spiritual growth.

Karen: Very good, Doc.

DOC: Any questions? Did anybody learn anything?

Karen: I've been rather reinforced. With what I've thought.

DOC: As long as you want to go, you'll go. It's.just like—well, it'll all fall into place.

Karen: I want to go.

DOC: Any questions?

Tom: Not at all.

Karen: Could we take a short break?

DOC: Yeah.

[Break]

Karen: Trust. I trust my Father in heaven explicitly at least I like to think I do. Many of the things I go through I trust that he knows what's going on and will pull me through that I'll learn something from him, but I sometimes have trouble trusting my fellows and what bothers me even more is that I see so much mistrust and suspicion in my peers. Of course if we were to trust our Father more, we might trust our fellows more.

JACK: Well it would be very difficult for me to talk about that in a blanket — I can address the subject as far as you personally are concerned.