To my good friends in the Millennium Initiative,

It is with great sadness and disappointment in the human stewardship of our revelation that I write to you in the shadow of Urantia Foundation's having taken legal action yet again against a sincere believer with whom they have been unable to find grounds for compromise. I write this in the knowledge that there are among you those who believe this event, as well as the circumstances leading up to it, render our own exertions on behalf of improved relations within the readership fruitless. I write to urge you to consider an alternative path, a path that may yet bear the sound fruit of brotherhood, a path that I believe we need to illuminate today as at no prior time in the history of our movement.

Two years ago I was privileged, as a member of The Fellowship's Executive Committee, to meet for an entire day with the Trustees of Urantia Foundation to explore ways to try to adjust the relationship between our organizations to reduce conflict, resolve copyright disputes, and prevent further litigation that would intensify divisions of opinion within the readership. At the time, the Trustees were unable to embrace the bold proposal we brought forth for resolution of all concerns. I believe that their reluctance stemmed from an unwillingness to trust The Fellowship, although our proposal involved The Fellowship placing its utmost trust in their good intentions. Since no action was taken, I cannot with certainty claim that what has since come to pass could all have been avoided, but in my heart I believe it so. In the months that have passed since that time I have continued to hope that the tensions corrupting our social structure might at least be ameliorated in the absence of participation by the Foundation.

Reflecting on these matters in preparation for our meeting last Spring, I said to you, "...as long as Urantia Foundation exists, it will be a polarizing force in the way individuals and groups of believers transform their common spiritual goals and their individual spiritual inspiration into social action. Because a very large fraction of all Urantia Book readers do not accept the self-defined role of Urantia Foundation, because a very large fraction do accept it, and because the Foundation will always be tempted to exploit this diversity to achieve social control, the readership will never be peacefully united." I concluded my remarks by saying:

"I think the best course at this time is for us to all understand that we are participating in the growth of a religious movement with the legacy of a half-baked organizational plan that is very difficult, if not impossible to correct. If we can all (including the Foundation) cease to worshipfully adore the foolishness of the founders and, instead, understand and fearlessly analyze the absurdities with which our movement has been burdened, we will be able to achieve a rational assessment of the present situation and find a practical path of transcendence to move forward to a better, more harmonious future of planetary service.

"To this must be added the need to understand the time required for the natural evolution and development of a better idea, liberated from the limitations of the past. We should recognize that a workable organizational practice can eventually emerge from our curious legacy if we will simply open our minds and hearts and give it time to happen."

In the aftermath of the second Millennium Initiative meeting, I was heartened by the emergence of the concept of a working "alliance" as an alternative to an unworkable "unification" and a step towards improved communications and relationships throughout the movement. For a moment it seemed as if our organizations (The Fellowship and the IUA) might agree, independently of Urantia Foundation agendas, to work together in the social domain to accomplish good things for the readership, even as a number of IUA members were working with Fellowship members in developing and executing the 1999 International Conference. It seemed to me that this conference activity vividly demonstrated the potential for informal alliance and what had been proposed in our group at the Gulley would have recognized, memorialized, and enhanced the potential for future collaboration.

Let me summarize my understanding of the alliance proposal -- it was simply that The Fellowship and the IUA agree to work together cooperatively in social service areas of mutual benefit. It did not require us to reach agreement on any matter of social posture or outreach attitude in advance. It simply stated that, if there was some activity in which each organization felt its own goals would be better served by working cooperatively with the other, we would do so and not let our possible disagreements in other areas stand in our way. This is the essence of the idea of "alliance" as Travis expounded to us so eloquently. No one commits to do anything that isn't in their own best interests to do, but they do agree to follow through on those opportunities that arise.

Shortly after our meeting at South Shaftsbury, and before the Vancouver conference, the text of most of Part IV of the Urantia Book was published under the name "Jesus -- A New Revelation" (JANR) by Michael Foundation, which is supported and directed by Harry McMullan, an officer of The Fellowship. The existence of this project had been known to the General Council of The Fellowship for at least three years. Various forms of the project, including sponsorship, publication, sales representation, marketing, distribution, etc., had been proposed to The Fellowship at different times. In each case, The Fellowship declined to become involved in this activity. The primary thrust of our proposal to the Foundation two years ago had been to find a way to forestall this activity and the attendant cost and controversy for the movement.

Shortly after JANR was published, Seppo wrote to us, "In my interpretation it means that The Fellowship has to pledge itself to a policy of law-abiding and copyright preservation. The Fellowship has to dissociate itself from the illegal printing of Part IV as a separate volume. The Fellowship has to remove Mr. Harry McMullan from its treasurership, from the General Council, and from the Executive Committee. Unless The Fellowship is ready to give these pledges I see no chance for any working alliance between the IUA and The Fellowship. In imitation of an old adage, I say: "No pledge -- no alliance.'"

There was absolutely nothing in our discussions of an "alliance" at the Gulley that would have invited the introduction of this tone or these considerations into the relationship between The Fellowship and the IUA. The very principle of "alliance" requires that each party set aside preconceptions about personalities and agendas and commit to finding common ground where each will derive benefit from working with the other. As I explained at the time, those of us who occupied leadership positions in each organization were obligated to work within OUR OWN ORGANIZATION to discover the basis for potential cooperation. No one was charged or entitled to presume to instruct the other organization in any way in the conduct of its business.

Now, Seppo was certainly entitled to his opinions about The Fellowship and its proper governance, just as I am entitled to my opinions about all sorts of things that are probably very important to Seppo. But none of this has anything to do with the ideal we brought forth in Vermont of cooperation for mutual benefit. The General Council of The Fellowship understood and recognized this truth. Councilors who held strong objections to the corporate actions of the IUA and to the personal actions of many of its leaders set these objections aside and supported this initiative. The General Council gave its unqualified support to the concept of a working alliance in areas of mutual benefit. The IUA still has the opportunity to engage The Fellowship cooperatively and follow through on this commitment.

I challenge the Millennium Initiative group, and the IUA and Fellowship leaders in particular, to set aside peripheral concerns and return to the vital concept we grasped last June. The Fellowship does not control the personal actions of Harry McMullan just as the IUA does not control the private decisions of Urantia Foundation. I could not prevent the publication of JANR, just as Seppo could not prevent the filing of a lawsuit by the Foundation. The Fellowship will not choose to repudiate Harry's work for the socialization of the revelation, although many of its members and many readers do not agree with his personal actions. Should I expect the IUA to repudiate the larger work of Urantia Foundation, simply because many IUA members and many readers find the Foundation's lawsuit repugnant?

Let us admit that these eventualities (JANR and the lawsuit) are matters beyond our control and return to our original, and proper focus -- finding ways to foster better working relationships among the social body of believers. I believe the filing of the JANR lawsuit has actually created a great opportunity for us to demonstrate to ourselves, the readership, and the world that, in the practical realities of good and truthful living, Urantia Book believers can work together harmoniously in spite of dogmatic and organizational differences. Let us succeed, together, as a movement, to meet this challenge constructively.

In His Light,

Dan Massey