2012-03-23 – Social Sustainability; Morality
– Mar. 23, 2012
Teacher: Charles, Mighty Messenger standing in for Monjoronson
Conversations with Monjoronson #45
Topics:
Urantia, a “drama queen” planet
The “make or break” factor for our civilization
What is required to sustain an individual, a family and a community?
Exposing the assumptions
Seeking to develop collective intelligence
Ant colonies are socially sustainable
Separating social structure from moral structure
Incarceration system is unsustainable
Using morality proactively
Urantia requires a new sustainable morality
Need for thousands of design teams worldwide
What happens if CCDT groups do not form?
Need for implementation teams
An instruction manual for design teams
Need for clarification on morals and ethics during design work
Distinction between personal morality and social morality
Need for a vision that is sustainable into the future
TR: Daniel Raphael
Moderator: Michael McCray
March 23, 2012
Prayer: Father, Christ Michael, Mother Spirit, we call upon your presence here today to fill us with your wisdom, your guidance and your understanding for those events which we do not understand and which cause great distress. We appreciate your presence, your love, your tenderness and your compassion to us personally, in our lives. You make each day more sensible and reasonable and acceptable. We understand that there are learning lessons along the way, and we ask your assistance to understand them quickly so that we do not have to endure them for quite some period of time before getting our lesson. We begin this session in love, with your presence filling us with your light and surrounding us with your light. And we give thanks.
MMc: Good morning.
CHARLES: Good morning. This is Charles. Our leader is away attending to immediate business on your planet and requested that I fill in for him. We have reviewed what will take place this morning and we/I am prepared—the team is prepared—to answer your questions as though Monjoronson were here in person.
MMc: Would you like to dialog about anything today?
Urantia, a “drama queen” planet
CHARLES: Yes, I would. Your planet is a most unusual planet and it is one of those “drama queen-types of planets” that seems to heighten the drama of life and living and the relationships with others, and “others” on this world means others in other nations and within your nations. Your world is also very unstable and is in need of stabilizing influences more than usual on any other planet. There is only one other planet within those that were in rebellion which requires as much attention as Urantia. It is not that your are “our bad child,” in the family of planets, but that your history is so convoluted and has been made so difficult by what has occurred in the past that the present situation requires much attention, even from those who are in charge of the planet. Machiventa, Christ Michael and Monjoronson are personally involved in the events of your planet; Christ Michael less so than Machiventa and Monjoronson. They are all overseeing the progress of the Correcting Time, and at times the correcting takes much more attention than is usual.
The “make or break” factor for our civilization
MMc: Thank you. I only have a few questions for you today. They are on the topic that we’ve touched on before. Monjoronson said that social sustainability is the factor which will make or break the existence of our civilization. The concept of sustainability is tremendously important for our future, is it not?
CHARLES: That is correct.
MMc: I suspect that if I open the next three sessions with the question that social sustainability is tremendously important for our future, and if you spoke uninterruptedly for an hour on the subject each time, you still wouldn’t be able to cover completely how important this concept is to our future.
CHARLES: That is most definitely correct!
MMc: I wonder if you could enlarge upon that for us, please?
CHARLES: I would be glad to. Social sustainability is the make or break issue on your planet at this time, simply because it involves the voluntary acceptance of mortals, accepting that project, that goal, to fulfill. As your people in this century tend to be very lazy and self-centered, there is not much motivation for them to engage in accepting the precepts and the work involved in developing social sustainability. It is a guarded situation. This topic would have been presented to a world much earlier in its development than Urantia, but due to the difficulties of the past and the lateness of the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution and the electronic data and intellectual revolutions that have occurred on your planet so late, many of the cultural issues on your planet have not caught up with the advanced technologies.
Your societies are still quite primitive in their thinking and therefore, they think they can overcome any challenge in the future by power and might, but this is certainly not the case. Linear, logical thinking that is discontinuous will not suffice to bring you into the world of the future successfully. The choice to develop social sustainability is a choice that individuals must make first, and then their communities and societies and nations and the world civilization, the global civilization. You have some acceptance—and I say “you,” I see the larger “you” as a nation of people and a world of people—have begun to accept recycling and material sustainability as a necessary adjunct to material use and the eventual depletion of material resources on your planet. The bridge must be made now, so that the vast majority of people begin to understand that the human population is also a resource that will be tremendously diminished in the near future, such that it will be much like petroleum, oil and other natural resources, that there will not be enough people to sustain the population unless there is a philosophical and pragmatic acceptance of the precepts of social sustainability.
This has not caught the eye of even your most advanced thinkers, so for us to introduce this to your world population now, is quite an advanced problem, one that will require tremendous finesse and participation of the unusually large number of midwayers that now populate your planet. We have begun to influence the thinking of the leading people of your world about sustainability, though few have thought about social sustainability. Those who were involved in developing the global consciousness for the conscious evolution of your world are at the forefront of those individuals who will be ready to accept this larger mission, and this will be as difficult as trying to convince materialistic individuals to participate in the conscious evolution of this world, by projecting their consciousness, right order, integrity, wholeness and oneness upon the planet.
The visualizing of this is necessary for it to have an energetic influence upon the social dynamics of your world. This consciousness and this visualization are central to the human consciousness, the race consciousness, planetary consciousness of your world. We have already seen an impressive change in that factor, and we wish to promote it even more. The challenge, of course, will be when your world is desperately in great strife and during the era of transition that will become more severe in the near future, that people will flip into fear rather than projecting their consciousness of wholeness, oneness and of love, and embracing all humankind with the same love, whether they are the enemies or whether they are the friends. This requires far more than just the animalistic tendencies of human beings to exist. It requires the advanced mindedness of those who have a capacity to project their consciousness.
We seek to enlist everyone who has any idea, any part of willingness to participate in this, whether they are closeted recluses in their home, or whether they are gregarious conference gatherers, wherever in the world. It is highly important to continue this effort, for these individuals, who are evolving the consciousness of this world, are tilling the seedbed for the work that must be done — that idealistic pragmatism that is required to bring your planet, your civilizations successfully into the future, no matter how many there are or how few of you there are. The plans for social sustainability must be devised and developed now in order for this transition era to be successful, to aid those who will remain.
Now, this sounds rather dire to you, I would imagine. You think of war, you think of starvation, your think of deprivation, you think of anarchy in large metropolitan areas and so on, and these may perhaps be an eventuality, but they are not now. We advise you, we adjure you to remain at peace in your minds; this is the peace that will sustain you during greater difficulties. It is “the peace that passes all understanding.” You have an opportunity to practice peace in your mind and remove worry. Your worry has an effect upon the world, and influences other people to worry as well, and to visualize those dire things in the future, which have not yet happened. This, in our minds as celestials, as morontial beings, is simply daydreaming about the fearful things that could happen and have no value to you at all. Rid yourself of fear and you will become far, far more effective in the unfoldment of your personal life-plan and as a participant in the reclamation and healing of your civilization and your planet.
So, back to the beginning; it is the decision of individuals that will make or break the future of your planet. Once an individual chooses to support social sustainability, there will be some who will choose to do so, but take no action. Their lives are as though they are worthless to those who remain on your planet. It requires a decision to take action, sift among the choices available and then act on the best choice. You must begin this process, otherwise you will become one of the victims in the future, one who does not understand their victimization and their circumstance.
What is required to sustain an individual, a family and a community?
We are in the process, in the later stages of making the people of your planet aware of what they need to do. It is very much like a plan that you read as an engineer or as a contractor to build a building. It is very straight-forward; it is very simple to understand—you simply need to act upon it and devise the best results you can with you, your neighbors and your community. You must begin to understand what is required to sustain an individual, a family and a community. You need not think past these levels, as your efforts would be ineffectual. Just as a mighty cathedral stands as an edifice of might and engineering of tremendous excellence, it actually began with the first spade of dirt being moved and the first blocks being put into place. Your individual family and community action are those blocks upon which a sustainable civilization will be built. It will not occur overnight; you must not expect that you can achieve the fullness of the plan within even a single decade, but it is important that you begin, you lay the foundation. Begin working the precepts of social sustainability immediately, so that the next generation accepts this as a matter of fact and as a way of life.
MMc: And this plan, this process can be worked through the co-creative design teams, the sustainability teams?
CHARLES: Yes, that is correct. It will require the voluntary initiation and organization, establishment and function of local design teams. The results in each team must then be coordinated by some function that gathers the best designs for a specific social topic and collates them and summarizes them, and then publishes the results. This is very much like your scientific community uses, but it is much more rapid and the requirements for certainty are not as high as those of chemistry or physics and so on.
MMc: I understand. As I understand it, there is a lot more that will come out of the work of the co-creative design teams. The process should shift the field not to just a linear effect, but a cyclic effect or a circular effect, much in the same way that we see fractals.
Exposing the assumptions
CHARLES: Yes, you will see this systems approach, using systems thinking. One of the most important pieces of work that teams will do is to begin to carefully expose the assumptions upon which your contemporary civilization and social organizations are based. It is highly important to expose those assumptions, because these are the cracks in the dam that will cause an eventual fault for the work that has been done. If the assumptions are not exposed, then there will be difficulty later on. This is another issue, a factor, of the success of the social sustainability action, is that people must be willing to face their assumptions in a safe, social team environment, where it is correct and appropriate to question those truisms of assumptions, which have pervaded your society for so long, and which are operant today. Remember, that you need not be embarrassed by exposing an assumption and to discuss it as being valid or invalid; it is simply the act of exposing the assumptions that will lead you to the correct answers.
The Schematic of Sustainability has been devised in such a simplistic way that those assumptions will be exposed. The three primary values of life—the quality of life, equality and growth—are so simple as to be capable of testing all social assumptions, beliefs and expectations and the ways of behaving, the criteria for performance that fulfill those expectations. You need not be rocket scientists to operate this simple team process and the simple schematic process. Anyone who has a bright mind, who can read and write, and who has a discerning mind can work this process quite well. Together, the team creates a collective mind for accumulating the collective intelligence and collective knowledge of the team; there is no competition, there is no one to evaluate your results, other than yourselves. And then when you are through, have taken a social topic to its maximum development, whether it is simple or complex, then you can compare that with others who are doing the same.
Seeking to develop collective intelligence
We have foreseen that your Internet technologies, your social media, can be useful to begin this process. We have striven to design this whole operation, not on a hive mentality, but that everyone knows what everyone else is doing. It is a collective intelligence that we are seeking to develop, so that what you know, others know across the world. Besides the work of particular and specific social issues, there will be several teams who have the capacity and capability to scientifically examine the principles, the truths, the axioms and corollaries that are involved in the truths of social sustainability, those truisms that are as true now as they were ten thousand years ago, and will be as true as they will be ten thousand years from now, that the truisms of how the society in the days of light and life operate. It is important that these now be discovered, published and shared. These will be adjunctive to the three core values of social sustainability, to guide the development and the social engineering of new societies, new communities and new groupings of communities. Once you understand the three values and these truths and principles of social sustainability, you will find that even young children, even pre-adolescents, will have the capacity and capability of designing whole communities, much as it is done now through computer simulated games.
This is something that can be taught rather rapidly, but because it is a new field and so few people, even those advanced intelligent academics of the world are quite unaware of social sustainability as a necessity, for maintaining the human civilization, at the same level of lifestyle, intelligence and social maturity as exists now. Our whole efforts through this work of social sustainability, within the Correcting Time, is to save the cultural developments that have occurred on your world, so that there is not a regression culturally, socially, or otherwise on your world during this difficult era of transition, so that those who remain after transition can pick up the pieces or have continued to do so during this era, and continue to advance and mature as a civilization.
Ant colonies are socially sustainable
The ant hive/ant hill mentality is not too far wrong. Ants, however many millions of years old, they have that communication system within each one that it is quite in-touch with the rest of the hive. They have a perfected design for their ant hills and for their ventilation, for food supply, for their nurseries—all of these are sustainable. They have devised and developed sustainable social practices within the ant hill that have been worked out over millions of years, so that the principles, precepts of social sustainability and hive sustainability are now ingrained and emplaced and embedded in their gene structure. This is something that will somewhat occur in the future in human society on Urantia, though there will never be a “true hive mentality,” as this would work against the individuality and uniqueness in the relationship with the God-presence within you.
However, there will be a much higher moral awareness of the obligations of the individual to maintain their life and living within this socially sustainable environment of their family, their community and as they contribute to a global civilization. No one will be left without this awareness, and everyone will understand their obligations to make right decisions that support social sustainability. Your world, the social being of much of your Western civilization—and I would also include all of human civilization—is quite unaware of the importance of individual and social agencies and social organizations decisions, to support the sustainability of your world, of your social organizations from the individual to the global levels. This will be a painful adjustment that will take approximately two generations to emplace, but it will be agonizing in the beginning for many individuals in the world, as it will go against many of their thoughts of morality, which are quite admirable, but not well balanced and mature at this time.
MMc: Thank you. Let me ask a clarifying question. As I understand it, as these co-creative design teams generate their information, the process generates ideas, and as these ideas are released into the public, collated and released to the public, they will gradually change our culture, our morals, and ethics?
Separating social structure from moral structure
CHARLES: Let us separate the social structure from your moral structure. Your societies have enough work to do now to emplace designs for social sustainability upon the social institutions of the family, of your political organizations, your political institutions, your economic institutions and education institutions, for example. The morality issue is one which is/will blanket everything eventuality, but it need not be a concern now, as it would cause too great a consternation. We are striving to have people understand first, the necessity of engaging social sustainability practices first, and that they see the simple necessity of beginning to practice social sustainability decisions. Then, when that is ingrained, we will overlay this with the morality that sustains and supports social sustainability.
Incarceration system is unsustainable
I will give you an irony, a desperate irony in your world, which makes almost absolutely no sense on other worlds, as they have observed your social structure. Your morality calls for the punishment of assailants who have killed another person; that is murder. That is a consideration because your society has the abundance of resources now to put away an assailant for a life of incarceration. That decision to do so works against social sustainability, as the individual will continue to use the resources of a decreasing per capita material resource in the future. This is unsustainable.
If you were to have a child predator, one who sexually abuses or violently abuses children and you put them in prison for a year or two and then release them, they have a predisposition to continue this behavior. The injuries are this: there is permanent injury to the child throughout the rest of their lifetime. There is fundamentally no recovering from sexual abuse as a child. The child will be deeply injured for the remainder of their life and it will affect their self-esteem, their psyche, their interpersonal relationships and their own sexual orientation and fulfillment. Worse yet, it may affect their own family and their own children, so that the injuries are visited upon future generations from this one perpetrator, from this one assailant. Your statistics already prove that for every conviction of sexual abuse or rape, that this individual has perpetrated, has committed at least thirty other crimes, which have gone undetected and have not been prosecuted. These all involve social decisions, moral decisions of social sustainability. You have more compassion for the assailant and their treatment and care, and their keeping than you do for the victims and the generation of victims who issue from those immediate victims.
Using morality proactively
This is immoral in our eyes, in the eyes of the larger universe, that you do not use your morality proactively. The morality of your Western civilization is historic, retroactive and is ineffectual. The morality for the future must be proactive and looks to the future to make decisions to assist in the process of developing social sustainability. It is made by decisions that are consciously made to improve social sustainability and by ceasing to make decisions that are neutral or that inhibit social sustainability. As you can see from this very brief discussion of a socially sustainable morality, those of you who can thoughtfully engage this topic will already see what difficulties your culture will have in engaging a new sustainable morality.
This is not a concern to develop now, but it will be a topic which you will become aware of and acquainted with in the near future, but it requires no decision-making on the part of you, your family, your communities, your states or your nation. It is simply providing you with a pattern for a sustainable morality for the future, when events and situations in your world become so dire and so desperate that you will seek answers, even those which seem horrific to you, as you must move into a sustainable civilization and society and community. You are the only species on your planet, of the mammalian species, that condones predation on its own kind. As you think about this, you realize the incredible immoral nature which your society has gone to. It was necessary that this older traditional Hebraic morality was invoked centuries and millennia ago, as a way of preserving your society, but it no longer serves your society very well for the ends of social sustainability and a sustainable planet.
MMc: By Hebraic you mean “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth?”
Urantia requires a new sustainable morality
CHARLES: Yes. This code was developed in the Fertile Crescent thousands of years ago, and includes the code of Hammurabi and the Ten Commandments, the Mosaic laws, that were very similar and familiar to those societies and civilizations during that era. They have continued into the current era where they have assisted in the moral development of your society. But when a planet is fully occupied, fully inhabited and the material sustainability of a planet is in jeopardy, then also is the social sustainability. Social functions of your planet are also in jeopardy and require a new sustainable morality that contributes to the larger ends. You see, the morality of the Hebraic code and of the Assyrians and others during that era, were to protect the numbers within their tribes. As greater numbers were needed for the society to become greater to increase harvests and to have larger numbers of soldiers to protect the borders of their lands, their sovereign nations, and also needed to take over the territories and populations of the weaker nations. Therefore, there was great value on the numbers of individuals. There was not a concern about the quality of the lives of individuals in those societies, as the qualitative function was never considered, and this has carried over even into the contemporary era of your democracy. There is a greater concern about “one being equal to one,” whereas in an advanced civilization, that is taken for granted, but that the quality of life of each individual must be equally improved as the individual seeks and desires, and this has many definitions and ends in it, which we do not have time to examine today.
MMc: Would you tell us please, what the fate of a child molester might be on a neighboring planet?
CHARLES: Yes, they would be removed from the population permanently.
MMc: Thank you. I had prepared a set of questions and we are into territory that I wasn’t prepared to go into, but you have enlightened us today, completely. I want to thank you for your doing this.
Anything you can tell us about how many design teams should we anticipate are needed to bring about the changes that we are talking about? Are we talking about a hundred design teams? Are we talking about thousands or tens of thousands of design teams?
Need for thousands of design teams worldwide
CHARLES: We are talking about thousands of them worldwide. You will find that this will be a phenomenon that will not be limited to this nation, but will begin to be developed in all democratic nations. That is why it is important that documents that develop out of these discussions, and the writings that develop from this are translated into the languages of the most populated, democratic nations. That would be English, Spanish, French, German, Italian and so on.
We are highly interested in the Nordic countries having copies of this available to them. We have not had the opportunity or willingness of individuals in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and so on, to engage the materials of Monjoronson. Though these nations are very advanced and most capable of engaging these topics, they have not done so, whether they believe in God or not. It is unfortunate that so many, who have a high percentage of the Blue Race within them, have become Godless, and have become distanced from the Creator. This has not been the situation with God, as God has not abandoned them. They have, however, the social organization and the cultural mentality to engage these topics very rapidly and enthusiastically, and are capable of applying them rapidly to their nations.
It is our hope that the work that we are doing will be seen by individuals who are known as “cultural creatives,” would engage these topics and would be the ones to initiate local design teams. To have one hundred in this nation would mean that there would only be two per state; there would be one hundred for many millions of people, which is not helpful. What will be necessary in the beginning is initiation of several, and that someone would take it upon themselves to collect and collate the results and to publish them. There would be some editing involved in removing duplications, as in the end, the result will be that every team will duplicate every other teams final results of those designs, because they are so universal and they are so uniform to the social behavior of humans. But it will be necessary that someone take it upon themselves to do this. Some have a predisposition to collection, archiving and library work, and collating, sifting and sorting and simplifying the discussions of several groups of people.
If this collection process begins early enough, or simultaneously with the work of teams, then the distribution can begin immediately as well, which would help other teams around the world. You will find that the social sustainability principles are uniform to all human societies and do not need to be reinvented. Every one knows that a workable wheel is round, and that to make it move there must be an axle in it, with a driving force on the axle. So too, there will be the simplicity involved in the designs of social organization processes and institutions; principles will become the same. The principles will become as familiar as the π “pi” (3.14159265359…) You know this to be true and others will know it to be true too, whether they work it out as the ancients did, or whether they take it out of a formula book to apply to their work. Therefore, the early work will be very tedious; it will be very simple, however, and need not be complex, but thorough and thoughtful and without making assumptions and accepting the assumptions that exist.
What happens if CCDT groups do not form?
Roxie: I have a question. Charles, do you have a scenario for what will happen to our world if this process of social sustainability does not proceed with the co-creative design teams that you anticipate?
CHARLES: Yes, I would be glad to answer your question and thank you for asking it. If social sustainability is not accepted in the larger societies, then what will occur during the decimation and the transition era is that your world will be transported back to a city-state existence, where many areas will be on their own and they will have advanced technologies, but your social and political organizations will be quite isolated. It will be—not out of unfriendliness—but out of physical necessity of returning to those agricultural/industrial/technological whole units that can self-sustain themselves in a locale. It would be very much as though you found the City of Saint Louis, one hundred and fifty years ago, that it had blacksmiths, that it had woodworkers, it had timber and lumber and agriculture, schools, churches and so on, but that it was very isolated from other cities.
What would then occur is that there would still be higher education for thoughtful individuals, and still the Internet and these technologies would still exist. They would recall the principles of social sustainability and begin to build their societies then as socially sustainable units. This eventually would spread to all other city-states situations throughout the world and eventually, you would have a more homogeneous social existence around the world, though you would still have the language barriers and cultural differences.
Another scenario is that all democracies would cease to exist, as the divisiveness of individuals would bring it to collapse and anarchy, where only those benevolent totalitarian states would exist because they had the foresight and power of might of united direction from the top down to eliminate any adversity or any opposition. What does not exist in your democratic societies is the capacity to engage the collective mind, the collective knowledge and collective wisdom of your whole society, from the local level to the highest to participate, so that everyone is on the same page at the same time. The principles of democracy are such that only these democracies provide for the maturation of society, and maturation of political and social process so that it progresses and becomes more mature and evolved. Your democracies—the democracies of the world at this time—are at that critical era where many think that this is the perfect pattern and that it works for them and they think, “Why change the mold?” However, if you were one of the people who does not have power or does not have influence, or is not affluent, then you know that you do not have any political power and you have no capacity to participate in the larger decisions that affect you, your family, your community and in fact, your whole nation.
You also realize that you have the intelligence—perhaps even greater intelligence, awareness and education—to participate responsibly in a co-responsible democracy, where individuals can participate in their opinionation sentiments and choosing upon a gradient of options to make wise decisions. We are of the belief that thoughtful, responsible individuals will come to the front of your society to influence the right decisions, the wisest decisions for the course in the future. The problem is—and there are several problems—but one of them is that you as individuals have such an isolated individualism that you think, “Why become involved, what can I do?” It is our intent to change your culture, to mold your culture, to bend it slowly without it breaking, so that it becomes much more adaptive.
Right now, your democracies are not adaptive. They cannot move quickly enough to engage the social issues, political issues, military issues of your world, let alone within their nations, states, counties and even cities. It is too slow. And so, if democracies do not engage social sustainability, which also means the development of a democratic government as a sustainable democratic process of governance, then democracies will fail and they will exist no more. That is the other option. There are several other options with less probability of occurring, but I will save that for another time and another discussion.
Roxie: Thank you.
MMc: You told us that people must make the choice that they want social sustainability and more, they need to take action in order to bring it about. You have thousands and thousands of design teams that you’d like to see throughout the world, so people are going to have to join co-creative design teams in order to bring about the plan of social sustainability. Am I stating that correctly?
Need for implementation teams
CHARLES: Yes. You may see these design teams as scientific research teams and laboratories. They do the research, they write the results and they publish them. And what happens? Not much. Oftentimes it takes years and decades for good ideas in the scientific world to have a pragmatic application. What will also be required, and which we have not spoken of much in depth, is the necessity of then having ‘Sustainability Implementation Teams.’ Those teams would then take the finished designs of sustainable social processes and organizational designs and then determine how to implement them on a developmental basis. You cannot go from 2012 to the days of light and life in five years—it is not possible. (One moment.)
[[ Daniel: He was drawing the parallel between the Russian nation, going from the Tsarist culture to the communistic culture and now to a semi-democracy, and they simply do not have the cultural heritage, the cultural base and the social organization of a democratic culture to support a really workable democracy.]]
CHARLES: Your societies, communities and families are social organizations; they are social “organisms.” You must begin to think of your social entities as social beings, that they are fragile, that they can be adapted and amended and can be moved and changed tremendously, but the larger the organization, the longer time it takes. Or the less time it takes when more people are individually and consciously involved in the change. So, this movement now is to share the principles and truths of social sustainability and have people begin to think about them and to be willing to participate in design teams, so that all of the truths and principles are discovered. If this was done diligently by hundreds or thousands of teams and coordinated well, those discoveries could be completed within three years, globally.
However, then the implementation would probably take twenty to fifty years to adapt how to implement those designs on a graduated, developmental basis so that your society is not in an immediate state of chaos. People do not accept new ways of doing business easily or quickly. You see this from what happened during the Hispanic Missionary influx to native populations, that they brought a new way of thinking and worshipping and praying in a new religion, and eventually what happened was that many of the Catholic principles and ceremonies were adapted to include the indigenous native religious practices.
MMc: Earlier, Monjoronson was very anxious for me to set up my own co-creative design team for healthcare, and I was under the impression that as we were talking through this that he was looking forward for other individuals—perhaps some of our listeners—doing the same type of thing, that is setting up a co-creative design team, or becoming a part of a co-creative design team. He seemed to have a little bit different outlook on that situation. I was going to ask what direction or advice do you have for those of us who wish to become involved in the co-creative design team. Would you like to answer that question, or is that a question that is appropriate?
An instruction manual for design teams
CHARLES: I would be glad to answer. Through these transcripts we have engaged the interest of many people throughout the world. We seek to have design teams across the continents and we have been involved in the development of a document that will act as an instructional manual for the development of design teams. It will not be detailed; it will not be something you would find in a box from IKEA on how to assemble a cabinet, but it will be simple enough that intelligent individuals will understand what is needed to be done and why. Only those individuals who have followed these many dozens of transcripts have a thorough understanding of what we are up to, and very few people have done that. Therefore, we have been using this audience to assess our progress and the development of that document. You call it a book; we call it a document, so that we have been attuned to the minds of those individuals who have read these transcripts and who have read early copies of this book. We have learned a great deal. We do not learn much from individuals who read a document and go, “Huh!” and then set it down without any conclusions or any thoughtful recommendations, whether they are helpful or critical. Critique is as valuable as those pats on the back; both tell us, “This way and not that way.”
Those who have read those early documents with a critical mind have had something to say about them, either to themselves or to a friend, a neighbor, or on the phone, or through email, have been of assistance to us as we have been diligently attuned to those minds. We are striving to produce the most useful instructions available at the time, without having to revise them radically in the future. Revisions tend to confuse followers, and followers who are enthusiastic tend to lose their enthusiasm. That is why we have been so slow in bringing this forward. This document has now been provided to an individual who is an editor and publisher, for examination to see if it is worthy of his time to work with. I apologize for sharing privy information, but I know that some of you are quite curious to know what is developing with this. I am not stating individuals in this, as we do not need to have further social confusion or personal involvement in this work, at this time. We simply ask individuals who read this to pray for “right and perfect outcomes,” of the development of social sustainability. That will suffice to assist us.
MMc: Actually, that was my last prepared question. I wish to thank you for your frankness today in speaking with us. Certainly, I’ve learned a lot by listening to you. Is there anything that you would like to say in closing?
Roxie: I also have another question, if I may?
CHARLES: Most certainly.
Need for clarification on morals and ethics during design work
Roxie: In my own thoughts concerning population control and healthcare, I see that our Christian cultural beliefs are really going to contaminate the outcome of the work of the CCDT groups, because of our over-sentimentality and our ideas of what mercy is all about. You mentioned earlier that you were going to hold off on the moral and ethics issues until a later time, but I see that it is going to complicate some of our work. Do you have a comment on this?
CHARLES: Most certainly! The student is ready to hear the answer when the student asks the right question. Therefore, I will continue. First of all, the morality we are speaking of is a non-religious morality. There is not a religious orientation to the morality of social sustainability. Socially sustainable morality has no ethnicity, has no preference, no racial preference, no religious preference, no political preference, no preferences whatsoever, other than the singular orientation to support the social sustainability of a planet, uniformly, to all cultures, to all people, to all nations, and this is one of the truisms of social sustainability. The test is, is it applicable to just Americans, or is it applicable to Estonians, to those who live in Patagonia, to those who live in Rwanda? Is this the same morality to them as well? Yes, it is. It is socially sustainable if it meets that criteria, and this is in keeping with how God sees everyone equally, that God’s love is universal to all people alike. Therefore, we ask you to have the same social sustainable principles, applicable to others as to yourselves. This is social sustainability and its morality is truly a morality of the Golden Rule—to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Distinction between personal morality and social morality
Now, your Christian/Hebraic ancient, traditional morality is a “personal morality.” It is not a social morality. You do not have a distinct morality for the social organization of your societies. Neither do you have a civilizational morality that is applicable to all nations of the world. You must make that distinction. The social organization determines its morality, and it determines it upon the basis of the principles of social sustainability. The personal morality of not taking lives of another individual will remain. You will be forbidden from taking the life of another. However, at the social level, your social organizations of communities, states and nation can dictate the ethical and moral removal of an individual from society, permanently, and that it would be a moral act to do so. To let a predator remain in your society would be immoral, as that individual is detrimental to the sustainability of the larger society.
Your personal Christian ethic and morality has bled into the social morality and ethics of the larger society, and it is not applicable. Your God requires that “you,” individually, personally, be a moral and ethical individual. God did not set any morality for your nations or societies. The relationship between God and you is personal, it is individual, it is unique, it is isolated to yourself; however, you have confused your morality with the morality of your larger society, and they are not the same. Your societies could afford to be so generous as to let predators remain in your society, as there was enough room for everyone and that there was enough material supports to keep these predators alive until they died of natural causes. In a society that has chosen to move toward social sustainability, this is an immoral and unsustainable tenet. Therefore, you will see a tremendous anguish in your nation as it faces this moral crisis of clearly choosing and deciding to build a continuing, individual morality and now to consistently build a social morality, and of course, amend all the laws and social policies that support it. This is missing; that is why there is such a desperate irony in many aspects of your social morality in this nation and other nations.
Need for a vision that is sustainable into the future
You do not clearly have a goal, something that draws you into a future that is sustainable. You have no vision for a sustainable future. Once a nation begins to see that it must choose the long-term goal of social sustainability as a goal for all of its efforts, all of its decisions, then it will begin to pull together those discordant issues and problems that have bedeviled it for decades and centuries, so that all efforts become unified. Once this differential between the old morality and the new morality is in place, as it has been leveled, then it will be much easier and less social anguish-engaging than what you will go through in the near future. The adjustment of a society to a new sustainable morality is no small event. It is historic and it will echo through the consciousness of the planet for evermore. Thank you.
Roxie: Thank you. That was extremely helpful, Charles. I appreciate it.
CHARLES: I appreciate your thoughtful questions. They are quite engaging.
Let us bring this to a close today. This has been a weighty session; it is one which I have chosen to develop as I have, under the general direction of Monjoronson. You will find little variation in responses to the above topics and questions if you asked Monjoronson. The larger differences would be observable concerning issues of an infinite or eternal nature — Monjoronson is a citizen of the Divine Realm and I am not. I have been to those realms, I understand the long-term goals of the universe, the Superuniverses and the local universes, and this sector of Nebadon, and so my answers will be certainly useful to you. I wish you good day.
Know that in your personal travail, as you experience your life and the future, that you must be concerned about the moment “now,” and it is the moment “now” that dictates your relationship with the Divine, that Divine Part that is within you. You have that assurance that when you are in oneness with that Divine, that it can last evermore. Be at peace, you live in a good world—it is beautiful—there is much that you can do for this world and it can do for you. It is now time to honor that relationship between yourself and your larger family, your community and your global civilization, just as you have begun to honor the earth as “Mother Earth,” who is the progenitor of all the human species. You must love yourself as earnestly as you love your world, and take care of it. Ensure that your life, your children, your grandchildren live in a sustainable world. That is dependent upon your individual personal decisions. Thank you.
MMc: Thank you very much! We are certainly grateful for the words you have spoken to us today. I have learned a great deal.
