The Uniqueness of the Ascending Daughter to God, and Higher Relationships Between Men and Women in Committed Unions
by Niánn Emerson Chase
I’ve realized that women’s issues are simply human beings’ issues. It’s not “men’s” issues, “children’s” issues, “women’s” issues; it’s human beings’ issues, and it’s how human beings view each other, how humans relate to each other. There is a spiritual paucity, a spiritual poverty in Western civilization that is a disease. It’s a most serious disease; it is the plague of the centuries. It has been a plague since the Lucifer Rebellion took place approximately two hundred thousand years ago, and it’s just compounded now. The Rebellion has influenced how people see and relate to each other.
Unlike the married couple that I described in Part 1 of this teaching, my mother and father had an appropriate relationship. They are both first-light souls, new souls. They shared similar spiritual values—they loved God, the Universal Father, within a Christian context. They both agreed in the implementation of their faith walk. They had the same goals and agreed on the lifestyle that they wanted to live. Plus, they each had a strong sense of who they were as a man and a woman in relationship. The roles were clearly defined for my father, the breadwinner, and for my mother, the homemaker.
Throughout my growing-up years I never sensed any competition between my parents, only cooperation. I saw love and honor shown to each other, and I do not recall ever seeing my parents arguing or fighting with each other, though I knew that they did not always agree on everything. I also was aware that the relationship wasn’t perfect, but I never, as a child, experienced them expressing anger with each other in front of me. My father consistently showed my mother respect, appreciation, and protectiveness, and he did not tolerate any disrespect shown by us children to my mother. He showed that same respect, love, and protectiveness to us three girls, his daughters.
My mother showed my father respect, gratitude, and cheerful submission. I said submission, not subversion; there is a big difference in those two realities. As I pointed out last week, subversion is a derivative of subvert, which means “to overthrow or destroy, to undermine, or corrupt.” Subversion is what happens in the fallen Caligastia mindset, and it doesn’t just happen with men towards women, but women can attempt to subvert men. Parents can attempt to subvert their children; children can attempt to subvert their parents; peers can attempt to subvert each other.
Some of the children who were angry and picked up guns felt like they had been subverted by some of their peers, and these children didn’t have the tools to deal with it in a higher way. They must have felt like they had no adults to go to, no option except in their anger and their hurt and their frustration to pick up those guns. Possibly, in the minds of those children, resorting to violence was what would work in this society—there are so many expressions of rage and violence in the music they hear, in the movies they watch, in the cartoons they watch, in the books they read, and in the news that describes what is happening all over the world, including in other schools in this country. What these children observe is subversion in many forms and people reacting to that subversion.
Submission is a derivative of submit, which means “to yield to authority; to surrender, to defer, or to consent to; to abide by the opinion or authority of another.” Submission within divine pattern does not mean automatically giving in to any form of authority, whether that so-called authority is an individual or is a social or governmental function. Many “authorities” within the dominant culture are within the Caligastia mindset of subversion rather than in divine pattern of acknowledging and respecting servant-oriented leadership and complementarity.
So, we shouldn’t blindly submit to authority. We should question authority, especially within the dominant culture. We should question the authority of social mores, and we should question the authority of established religious mores. We should question the authority of political leaders who say one thing and their budgets say something else. Jesus said to submit one to another in love, and that is what I experienced as a child within the home and family that my father and mother created. They both submitted to each other in a complementary relationship, understanding that men and women are different and appreciating and valuing each other’s gender and personality differences.
Because my father and mother were a mutual source of strength, rather than one dominating over the other, I grew up in a home where all of us in the family—parents and children—could grow, where our strengths were fostered and possibilities increased. In my home, the difference between males and females were affirmed without connotations of inferiority and superiority; therefore, I grew up with a sense of self-respect as a female, and I never wanted to be anything else but a female. I expected all males to treat me with the same kind of love, honor, protectiveness, and dignity that my father did, and most of my male colleagues, neighbors, friends, and complements have.
I also knew as a result of my upbringing that I had many choices in composing my own life. I did not have to get married while still in my teens as my mother did, and I didn’t have to pursue a career outside of the home, or I could; it was all up to me. The possibilities were limitless for me; it was my choice. I don’t recall my parents ever verbalizing any of this to me; they didn’t ever talk about it. I just knew because of how they brought me up. In fact, I somehow understood that the kind of homemaking my parents did (for my dad was very much present in our home) is the kind of homemaking that should be happening in all homes, in all schools, in all workplaces. That kind of homemaking has to do with attitudes, values, and a sense of respect for self and for others. That kind of homemaking belongs to both men and women and allows for sustainable living which encourages, rather than discourages, continual growth, exploration, and spiritual ascension.
In order for men and women to become full-time homemakers, they will have to move out of their old ways of perceiving and relating to the opposite sex, as well as gaining a sense of self-respect that creates sustainable relationships and situations. Unfortunately, on our world called Urantia, sexual subversion and tyranny has been and is seen by many as normal and good. Throughout our history and “herstory” (after all, history is “his story,” but it’s “her story” too), cultures, religions, and language which reflect the consciousness of the people using it have oppressed women, and that tyranny continues today in many places.
The URANTIA Book acknowledges that on page 778: “Man’s brutal treatment of woman constitutes one of the darkest chapters of human history.” On page 564 we are told that from divine mind perspective, “Sex equality prevails on all advanced worlds; male and female are equal in mind endowment and spiritual status. We do not regard a world as having emerged from barbarism so long as one sex seeks to tyrannize over the other.” Obviously from celestial perspective and from the divine mindset this world in many areas is very barbaric, regardless of the high technology that is present.
The main purpose of Divine Administration is to help bring about global advancement through a shift in consciousness. Higher relationships between men and women cannot happen until persons, male and female, understand that all people—men, women, black, yellow, red, brown, white, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Chinese, Russian, Iraqi, Palestinian, Israeli, Mexican, American, Socialist, Communist, Democrat, and so on—realize and recognize that the fragment of the Universal Father is in every other person, and that we are indeed one planetary family. So, let’s all become “homemakers,” with the planet as our home, nurturing and sustaining all of life. Here in Divine Administration, besides calling each other “Minister so-and-so,” or “Elder so-and-so,” you might want to add “Homemaker so-and-so.” Thank you.