Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Search for a word within this document – use the  Ctrl + F keys  on your keyboard.

Leave a suggestion or comment >CLICK HERE<. 

IND30- Fatherly & Brotherly Love

1992-12-09-Fatherly & Brotherly Love
Indianapolis #30

• 1 Heading
o 1.1 Topic: Fatherly & Brotherly Love
o 1.2 Group: Indianapolis TeaM
• 2 Facilitators
o 2.1 Teacher: Welmek
o 2.2 TR: Unknown
• 3 Session
o 3.1 Opening
o 3.2 Lesson
 3.2.1 Love
o 3.3 Dialogue
 3.3.1 Discipline
 3.3.2 Forgiveness
 3.3.3 Time
o 3.4 Closing

Topic: Fatherly & Brotherly Love
Group: Indianapolis TeaM
Teacher: Welmek
TR: Unknown


WELMEK: Greetings. This is Welmek, your teacher and guide. I am again happy to be with you this evening, and I appreciate the fact that you ventured out on an evening with such inclement weather. I suspect some of you may entertain the question of asking me if I can stop the snow, and I would like to say “no” now so that we can dispense with that. (laughter) However, I will ask all of your angels to watch over you on the way home.


WELMEK: Tonight let us begin with a discussion of fatherly and brotherly love. We touched upon this last week, and many good ideas were put forth. Your assignment was to think about these, to read over the transcripts and to read the text to find references to this concept. Who would like to begin and share an understanding or a question?

Q: Welmek, I was looking through the book for references for fatherly and brotherly love and I saw a portion of a paper on fatherly and brotherly love. It was the section of the book where Jesus was about to give the twelve their ordination, and he talked about it. Basically, I got the impression that the enactment of fatherly love is sort of like based on the beatitudes that you can find in the New Testament of the Bible, only it was broken down into two parts.

After reading through everything, it seems to me that I have a confusion, I guess, between what I’ve always thought of as brotherly love, and loving thy neighbor is more, at least according to the book, of a fatherly type love. It’s more all-encompassing; and so I’m beginning to get the impression that fatherly love, in addition to some of the things we’ve talked about last week, is more all- encompassing. You could call it sacrifice, except there is no sacrifice where real love is concerned. I feel a little confused also because I thought of these in past as being more of a brotherly type of love.


WELMEK: Are there other comments, questions?

Q: I would like to comment. I noticed that Jesus taught two different methods. For his followers he taught love your neighbor like yourself; but for his apostles he taught love our neighbor as I have loved you. I get the impression that one is very, very ethical, the fraternal one is a high set of ethics; but the paternal or the fatherly love is the supreme ethic. But it’s very difficult to describe or to put in words exactly what the difference is. There is a difference, but to put it in words is very difficult. It’s something that’s almost innate. It’s a feeling rather than the emotion of it that we had talked about several weeks ago. So while I think I know that there’s a distinction, to describe that distinction or to come out with the difference (this word versus that word) I don’t have. I have a struggle with trying to find the right words.

WELMEK: But would you say you can feel or sense the difference?

Q: Oh yes, I believe there’s definitely a feeling of difference.

WELMEK: Can you at all describe the difference in the feeling?

Q: Not to do it any justice.

WELMEK: Are there any other comments?

Q: Welmek, I was thinking about this this week; and in thinking about it I came up with the fact that in the fatherly love, the child is a part of the parent, part of the parent but yet a separate and distinct entity. In that extension of the parent or part of the parent, there is that inherent love that seems to just exist. So would the distinction perhaps be in the fact that part of the fatherly love, (?) of the fatherly love is the fact that that is always there? It just exists because it’s a part of, the child is a part of the parent? And when you love your child, that’s….this is where I got confused.

Q: Well, one is the family; and the other one is the over-the-fence neighbor, and it’s hard…

Q: Is that to say if you adopt a child you don’t love it with parental love?

Q: Yes, that’s where I got confused.

Q: Could you really give it parental love if you hadn’t had a previous parental experience?

Q: Another child?

Q: Because it seems to me that fatherly love has a lot of parental existence to it, and like Bob’s saying, brotherly love is more of a companionship type of feeling or…

Q: Or it’s unselfish, or…?

Q: Yes, but both of them could be unselfish.

Q: In parental love you are totally responsible, you feel totally responsible..

Q: Willingly.

Q: Yes, willingly, and I guess maybe where we should take more responsibility with our brothers that maybe we don’t.

Q: I think in fatherly love there’s more of an intensity of affection for the individual; and the affection is so strong that it encompasses your concern for that individual’s welfare. You might have kind of a protective attitude for that individual.

Q: It’s kind of like a different perspective. With brotherly love, I think it’s sort of a peer, it can be supportive, it can be caring, and have the affection with it too. But I think fatherly love has a little more commitment to supporting that person, their growth and not participating in terms of making decisions or telling them what to do, but to be more nurturing and more involved maybe, in terms of what their goals are in life or what their issues are, or where they’re going spiritually.

It’s a spiritual focus that you’re referencing there, helping to foster that as would a parent to a child, understanding that we’re all in process of growing, even as adults. I think brotherly love tends to accept you as and deal with you as you are more so than looking for where you’re going. So the perspective may be a bit more of a universal perspective of the father. I mean that wouldn’t be true in terms of human relationships in some cases, but that’s how I envision it.

Q: Something Mary said brought to mind what I think of as characteristic of parental love, and that is that you mentioned that it’s selfless. When you see the things that a parent does for a child, and someone who’s not a parent will say, “Well, that parent is sacrificing this and that..” If you were to ask the parent, they would say “What are you talking about?” I mean it’s done automatically, and the love is there and you don’t think about it, you just do it.

Q: Because you want the best for that person. You want them to achieve the best that they can.

Q: Yes, and you don’t stop and think “Well, how am I going to do this or do I have time to do this?” It is just done.

Q: It’s like if you were in a situation of danger and your child’s life was at stake, you would without thinking put yourself in between the danger and your child so that you would receive the danger and not your child. And I don’t know if, I have never been put in that situation, but I don’t know if it would be as instinctual if it were a brother as it is with a child.

Q: But getting back to what Linda said, in practical application so to speak, it seems like in a nutshell, you could look at fatherly love as more of a long-term focus, and brotherly love is more of short- term kind of deal or relationship. So your attitude and the things that you do with a person when you’re focusing brotherly love is still loving and kind and benevolent, but you’re not looking at the big picture. You’re not look at it as far as a long-range goal is concerned.

Q: A life-time relationship with that person necessarily.

Q: Right. Your commitment is deeper, but at the same time you’d naturally have to recognize the individuality and all of that person. It’s almost a paradoxical attitude because you’re very committed, yet you have to give them a lot of freedom to grow and to develop on their own.

WELMEK: Would it be fair to say, based upon your comments, that one of the first distinctions that we might draw is that fatherly love is more devoted than brotherly love? Would this summarize or characterize some or your comments about the extra commitment?

Q: Why didn’t you just say that? (laughter) Just one word.

WELMEK: Because as you think in your own minds about these things, you deepen your understanding; and then when certain words appear, whether they come from me or from anyone, then you immediately recognize their truth. Whereas, if you do not previously think about these things, you might hear the truth but you might not so easily recognize it because you have not made the effort to prepare your minds to receive it. Let us continue the discussion.Are there other distinctions that can think of?

Q: It seems to me that if you can see the child in anyone, it’s easier to have a feeling of warm, fatherly-type of affection for them.

Q: You see the potential?

Q: Well, the child that’s in all of us. Hopefully, it’s still there.

Q: But are there any other distinctions besides the parental? ‘Cause that’s what you’re all coming back to, the parental relationship and how it applies. But what are the other? Is there any more? It seems like that relationship, we keep bringing it up, the difference is all based on parental relationships.

Q: It’s the level of acceptance of that person?

Q: Or maturity? Inside of yourself, and how you love, is it more mature?

Q: I would think that if we had a fatherly type of affection for other people that we would be automatically more forgiving about any possible differences and more accepting.

Q: More merciful? Sympathetic? understanding?

WELMEK: I would say that both being more merciful and more forgiving are definitely aspects of fatherly love. Please continue.

Q: I have a question going back to that chapter that I read. When talking about fatherly love, one of the beatitudes is “hungering and thirsting after righteousness” and I’m a little puzzled about how that fits fatherly love because it seemed a little confusing to me. Let me get a reference here… It was the second one. It said there were four attributes or faith attitudes that were the prelude to the subsequent portrayal of his four transcendent and supreme reactions of fatherly love in contrast to the limitations of mere brotherly love. The second one was, of course, “Happy are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness.” How does that relate to fatherly love. I mean, I’m confused.

WELMEK: Do you wish to read the passage so that all might understand your question?

Q: Okay. The Master introduced this momentous discourse by calling attention to four faith attitudes as the prelude to the subsequent portrayal of his four transcendent and supreme reactions of fatherly love in contrast to the limitations of mere brotherly love.

He first talked about those who were poor in spirit, hungered after righteousness, endured meekness, and who were pure in heart. Such spirit-discerning mortals could be expected to attain such levels of divine selflessness as to be able to attempt the amazing exercise of fatherly affection; that even as mourners they would be empowered to show mercy, promote peace, and endure persecutions, and throughout all of these trying situations to love even unlovely mankind with a fatherly love. A father’s affection can attain levels of devotion that immeasurably transcend a brother’s affection.

The faith and the love of these beatitudes strengthen moral character and create happiness. Fear and anger weaken character and destroy happiness. This momentous sermon started out upon the note of happiness.”

And then it went on from there. So I guess these are almost like “Confucius say” and these are codes of living? Is that what the beatitudes are as far as getting to the point where you want to attain fatherly love in your life?

WELMEK: Yes, I would say that is what is being expressed in your text. The pursuit of righteousness and the other beatitudes that are mentioned here primarily deepen your God-consciousness; and as you deepen your God-consciousness and become more aware of the Father as a personal being, it will increase your fatherly attitude. So, to the extent that the pursuit of these beatitudes deepen your God-consciousness, it will manifest in an increased sense of fatherly love.

Q: Mary, will you read that first part again, where those four things were listed?

Q: Before the four or all four of them? There’s actually eight of them.

Q: There were some qualities that you listed near the beginning.

Q: It says “Jesus did not expect his followers to achieve an impossible manifestation of brotherly love, but he did expect them to so strive to be like God—to be perfect even as the Father in heaven is perfect—that they could begin to look upon man as God looks upon his creatures and therefore could begin to love men as God loves them—to show forth the beginnings of a fatherly affection. In the course of these exhortations to the twelve apostles, Jesus sought to reveal this new concept of fatherly love as it is related to certain emotional attitudes concerned in making numerous environmental social adjustments.

The Master introduced this momentous discourse by calling attention to four faith attitudes as the prelude to the subsequent portrayal of his four transcendent and supreme reactions of fatherly love in contrast to the limitations of mere brotherly love.

He first talked about those who were poor in spirit, hungered after righteousness, endured meekness, and who were pure in heart. Such spirit-discerning mortals could be expected to attain such levels of divine selflessness as to be able to attempt the amazing exercise of fatherly affection; that even as mourners they would be empowered to show mercy, promote peace, and endure persecutions, and throughout all of these trying situations to love even unlovely mankind with a fatherly love. A father’s affection can attain levels of devotion that immeasurably transcend a brother’s affection.

he faith and the love of these beatitudes strengthen moral character and create happiness. Fear and anger weaken character and destroy happiness. This momentous sermon started out upon the note of happiness.”

Q: Okay, it was those four that started with poor in spirit. I don’t understand what poor in spirit means, I guess, that it should be a desirable attribute.

Q: Poor in spirit is seeking righteousness…

Q: Seeking righteousness I can understand, and the others make sense; but what is “poor in spirit”?

Q: It says it’s being humble. It says “Happy are the poor in spirit – the humble.”

Q: Okay. That would be it.

Q: I remember one reference that Jesus made that it was more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom than it is for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. I think that’s what they mean by poor in spirit…

Q: It goes on to talk about being willing to deny, self-deny in order to reap subsequent harvests of augmented happiness. It says “happiness has all too often been associated with the idea of the possession of wealth.”

Q: I’d like to add another perspective perhaps, and that is brotherly love is the love that we feel for each other, the love as a friend, somebody that we care about that we desire to do good for, that we would sacrifice ourself for, all of these noble qualities. Yet, then there’s also the love that all of us can have for (?); and that love, for me, transcends the love that I feel for my brothers and sisters on this planet. I don’t worship my brothers and sisters, but I do worship my Father, perhaps a bit different than we’re talking about here as far as experiencing a fatherly love.

But I can clearly draw a distinction when I think of following brotherly love in that way, and then it makes me think and feel in terms of an expanded consciousness, in terms of “All right, now that I know how I feel about my Father and that love that I direct toward Him, how can I then do the will and about-face and start to feel that way toward my brothers and sisters as one who would be a provider, as one who would be a counselor, as one who would be everything that I could possibly be for the individual. It does seem to transcend the feeling of just brotherly love.

Q: Well, it seems as though the fatherly love would be the more mature, more well-thought-out love, so you’re saying the love that you feel for the Father is also fatherly love?

Q: I guess that’s where I’m going. Now it’s a matter of taking that love that we feel for the Father and being able to manifest it in our daily life toward each other, which I think is one of our assignments this week, in seeing the Christ within each other and to me, that transcends just what I traditionally think of as brotherly, or being a good friend. I think seeing the Christ in someone and responding to that transcends that brotherly feeling and does approach more of a fatherly feeling.

I feel that when I truly do attempt to see the Christ in someone; and it’s not to say that by feeling fatherly love we feel better, or we feel more spiritually advanced or any of those things whatsoever. It’s more just a feeling of, really, overwhelming in a sense, of the reality of our universal citizenship. I think someone touched upon it, I think it might have been Larry. When we look at each other and interact with each other with the eyes of universal citizens, that, too, transcends just a pure brotherly affection that I think we feel for each other. When we realize through our love that we are loving another child of God rather than just a friend or a brother or a sister…

Q: It transcends their faults and makes it so much easier to not then be prejudiced, to not hate someone for their beliefs or for their sexual preferences or whatever, it makes it much easier to see it on a universal level.

WELMEK: Let us expand upon the point that David has made, and it is directly related to what your text is trying to say. Would each of you say that as your understanding of the Father grows, that you feel more love and more of His wisdom and understanding and guidance in your life?

And do you, as you look around this room, or think of others that you know, is there any of your brothers and sisters whom you feel understand you as deeply or will be as forgiving or as merciful or as devoted to you as this new image of your Father will be? And so it is. As your awareness of the Father, as your God-consciousness grows, you become more filled, more aware of the fatherly attitude. What Jesus wants us to do, is as we increase in our understanding of this Father’s love for us, to in turn, take this attitude towards our brothers and sisters. Would you not say that this is to take our level of service to our brothers and sisters a step beyond what you would have earlier envisioned as the golden rule, or treating others as you would like to be treated?

Do you not feel that your consciousness, that your vision, that your expansion of this fatherly love has been increased? Then I would suggest that this is what we are saying, and this is an excellent way to try to understand this difference. In your text, the pursuit of righteousness, the pursuit of humility, all of these are necessary to increase your understanding of God-consciousness. These will all help you to know God more, to grow in His love; and as we have just said, as you do that, you increasingly understand fatherly love. And as you increasingly understand it, so it is your responsibility and your privilege to in turn bestow this type of love upon your brothers and sisters.

Q: Is it fair to say, then, that through our association and our interaction with our brothers and sisters, if we perceive them with the highest concept that we can, that being a child of the Father as we are, that we will understand the Father more consciously. We are then, in essence, living our faith, rather than just through worship and through prayer? You have said to all of us that doing the Father’s will, now, is worship, is prayer, is forgiveness, but you’ve also included how we perceive and act with our brothers and sisters. I don’t know if until now perhaps the full clarity of that has really begun to dawn on me as to why you include that so much in doing the Father’s will. I’ve never quite understood what is meant that we can only know God through faith, but we’ll come to know Him by living our faith. But it seems at least it’s starting to become clearer to me now what that means.

WELMEK: Think for a moment in your text, did our Master say that he was a revelation of the Father?

Q: Yes.

WELMEK: And when you look at the Master, tell me what qualities do you see in him?

Q: Love and mercy…patience, generosity, kindness…understanding, frankness, but he always knew how to say it without . .you know

Q: He had tactfulness.

Q: Also, the Father, because He was always to provide whatever the human needed at the time.

Q: What their real needs were, to see what they were and provide them.

WELMEK: And was he more patient and more merciful and more understanding of the apostles than they were with each other?

Q: Big time.

WELMEK: So you would agree that he expressed fatherly love towards the apostles? And towards others, for that matter. But I speak of this group because he was more intimately associated with them.

Q: Welmek, as Mary was reading that reference naming characteristics, it seemed to me that there’s a real strong correlation between what we’re talking about as fatherly love and characteristics of true character.

WELMEK: You are asking?

Q: I guess commenting or thinking that maybe as we look at this, as you develop these characteristics of sharing fatherly love that that is a big part of what we’re talking about when we’re looking at developing good character.

WELMEK: I would say there are definite relationships, but there are also some slight differences. I would rather not pursue this at this time because I still wish to follow up on the assignment you were given a while back about discerning the characteristics, the traits of true character; and I would like for you to think more about this and have some discussion before I would offer what I believe they are.

Q: So really then, getting back to what you were saying Dave, having your faith and living your faith is really two separate things. And when Welmek or any of the teachers speak about feeling God’s love and then letting that love flow through you, to me that’s what that means, how you engage your brothers and sisters, how you attempt to have the same affection, fatherly affection, for them as you feel for the Father. To me that’s what they mean when they say feel it and let it flow through you.

Q: I think we’re saying the same thing. I wouldn’t say they’re two separate things, I would say that the acting it out is an extension of the worship or the faith itself. It takes more than just faith is what I’m saying. If we are to know God consciously, we must know Him through the decisions that we make, the actions that we take with our brothers and sisters. I don’t think that we can come to know the Father isolated in worship or in prayer. It think it takes an actual commitment to go out as Jesus himself did, and to meet as many people, to get to know people and understand people and to then provide for those people what it is they need. When we look at everybody we come in contact with, what is the one thing everybody needs.

Q: Love.

Q: They need love that is true. But they need a better understanding of who they are and their relationship to the Father and to the universe. And we can provide that, not only through words, but through our actions, the way we treat other people.

Q: So the best way to grow closer to God then is to be like Him.

Q: That’s the bottom line.

Q: I think it has to be a little bit more than like Him, because the monks and missionaries that sequestered themselves in the mountains to just pray and go after.. they think they’re doing the right thing. But they don’t exhibit any brotherly love, let alone fatherly love. The service isn’t there, the outward manifestation, the interaction that one gets, like Jesus

Q: Which is a part of what we haven’t fully understood about the Father, is that He isn’t off by Himself, not interacting with us. He’s right here with us, a part of what we do, and I think that’s been a part of what a lot of us through our other teachings previous…we struggle..

Q: That’s very true. Remember, the text says that the spirit fragment literally goes through every experience with us.

Q: So the outworking of our belief in these Godly attributes is the evidence of our faith then.

Q: And I think somewhere tied up there is God’s will. Somewhere in there.

Q: Remember, I think it was about a month ago, Welmek made the comment and so does the book for that matter, that we do not live up to the faith that we have. As a matter of fact, I think that’s even a morontia mota. And I’m beginning to get a little clearer insight I think as to what that really means, that we’re not living up to the faith. Because I believe that we all worship sincerely, and I believe that we all love God deeply, but how does that translate then when we go to work or when we come home or when we’re at church or wherever we happen to be.

Q: Everything gets diluted.

Q: It does. It gets de-focused. It gets de-energized.

Q: And if we truly want to feel the love of the Father working through us, the more we do, the outreach, the more we feel. The more something is active, the more you know it’s there.

Q: I don’t think this means that we have to be as Jesus was. Jesus was one of a kind. I believe the text said he is not the example, he is the hope. But each of us within ourselves are asked to do the best that we can; and so in any situation we find ourselves in, if we’re really trying to do the best we can, then I think we live up more to the faith that we have. I think that’s what we can be held accountable for, especially those of us who have been privileged enough to not only come in contact with the text, but now contact with the teachers themselves. We are very fortunate in many ways.

WELMEK: Let me ask another question. Are we agreed that Jesus showed, exhibited, manifested fatherly love for the apostles and other humans on this planet?

Q: Yes.

WELMEK: Was Jesus the biological father of the apostles?

Q: No.

WELMEK: And what does that say to you?

Q: You don’t have to be a parent in order to understand how to exhibit fatherly love.

Q: That really helps me, because I think I was looking at it as if to say to myself “I’m going to have a limited perspective just because I don’t have that parental experience.” But I think after tonight that really helps me to know that I can also love in that way whereas before I wasn’t sure that I, you know, it was like I lacked something.

WELMEK: You must understand that your text places great emphasis upon the parental experience because most humans on this planet do not pursue God-consciousness with much effort, if at all. And so as we begin, we must look for a frame of reference. We must look for analogy, we must look for the experience that most humans have, and most humans have a parental experience in the sense of fathering children, and if not that, they certainly have the experience of being a child.

Therefore, everyone can relate to this experience to some degree or another. But as you can see, what we are truly talking about goes way beyond the biological experience of procreating children. If, as was earlier mentioned, that you could only experience this, or it was somehow aided by being the biological parent, then how is it that so many fathers and even some mothers abandon their children? Is the biological experience strong enough to hold them?

Is it not clear that they truly do not understand fatherly, motherly love and do not have this attitude? If any child were placed in your custody for any reason, or through some experience you grew close to them and you developed this attitude towards them, would you abandon them? Once you feel that love, would you not do whatever you could to help them? There is still another aspect that I wish to explore that we have not touched upon yet. Can anyone think of another characteristic or aspect of fatherly or parental love that has not been discussed yet?

Q: One of the points that I’ve noticed, I don’t remember where in the text, that the Father will judge a person by the intent of the deed as opposed to brotherly love looks at just the acts of the person, in considering what they feel toward that person.

WELMEK: That is a good point. As you say, we must judge the acts of our brothers and sisters. We must judge their deeds and the consequences of their deeds; but the Father looks deeply into their motives. Does your text not tell you that if you could truly discern the motives of your brothers and sisters, that you would first feel compassion and then learn to truly love them? Do you understand now more what that means? What about the aspect of loving discipline? What are your thoughts about this?

Q: Well, the real word for discipline has to do with teaching. So loving discipline means it has to do with trying to show someone a better way of living or a better understanding of God through teaching. The traditional description of discipline always seems punitive or I always used to think it was punitive. So the approach for loving discipline is with an attitude of, once again, uplifting and guiding that person toward a higher understanding of action or belief or faith or whatever.

WELMEK: And so is this not something you try to do with your children? Do you not try to guide them? Do you not sometimes have to withhold certain things from them because you know there are important lessons to be learned or that there may be a greater reward at a later time? And so when you interact with your brothers and sisters and get to know them on more than a casual basis, would you previously have thought that you would exhibit loving discipline or guidance to your brothers and sisters?

Q: Not previously.

WELMEK: And now do you see that even with them this is something that you may manifest as you try to practice fatherly love towards them?

Q: How does one do that with an adult?

Q: Could you give an example?

WELMEK: Have you not found in your relationships with good friends that there are some times when you must disagree, when there are some times that you cannot do what they ask you to do because you do not feel that it would be in their best interest?

Q: Yes.

WELMEK: And would this not be the same thing as what you do with your child?

Q: Yes, some think of it that way.

WELMEK: I understand. I am asking you to begin to think of it that way. You must understand that no matter how old a person is, you are all young children. Whether you are five or whether you are 100, from our perspective, there is not such significant difference in most cases. (laughter)

Q: And this is a frightening thought. (laughter)

WELMEK: Therefore, as you meet each person, can you not see that person and can you not think that they are surely not yet perfect and there might be some spiritual lessons that they need to learn?

Q: I can think of an example when a co-worker may make a negative comment or a comment about someone or have a negative attitude that you feel is not morally right or something, if you go ahead and just agree with him when you know you really don’t feel that way because it’s really wrong. I think that while it might take a little courage to not agree with him, by stating your opinion contrary to what that person has said it might help them in the long run.

WELMEK: I agree. You must make the distinction in your mind when you are raising a young child, you have certain prerogatives over that child to discipline them in ways that you will not have with your brothers and sisters. Nor am I suggesting that you go out and necessarily give advice when it is not asked for.

But what I am suggesting is that just as you relate to your children and as they petition you and as they talk to you, you weigh in your mind what is it that they are asking, what is the value of it, what should my response be, how can I best guide them, I am suggesting that you take the same frame of mind and begin to see your brothers and sisters in that same way. What is it that they truly need?

How could you possible help guide them to become more God-conscious? This is what I am suggesting. This is an aspect of moving beyond just brotherly and sisterly love and beginning to look at your brothers and sisters from even a fatherly point of view. Do you understand what I am saying?

Q: One of the things that came to my mind when Mary was talking about discipline as actually teaching was, I immediately reflected upon our prison system and how it’s not accomplishing this. Rather than rehabilitating the people, these people are not getting any attention at all and simply sitting in cells and going back out into the world and doing the same thing, if not worse, than when they went in. It made me realize that we have a long way to go to achieve fatherly love on a planetary scale.

Q: I think we do that in lesser ways to each other all the time. (?)..our associations, judgments, all kind of (?) that we take

WELMEK: You must become more devoted to your brothers and sisters, just as you are devoted to your children. You must be more forgiving, you must be more understanding, you must be more merciful. Again, all of the attributes that you can think of that you have in the way that you feel towards your children, in time, you will learn to see everyone in this way; and that is the goal. First, your God-consciousness helps you understand the Father’s love for you. This increases your awareness of fatherly love. But as was stated earlier, you must now practice this presence of God. You must practice this fatherly attitude because that is what will permanently make it part of you, part of your consciousness. Can you imagine what your world would be like if each of you approached another with this attitude?


Q: Welmek, I have a question. Why is it that if..there have been times in my life when I have attempted to do something like this, where maybe someone has asked me to do something that I felt if I did it they would not learn the lesson that maybe they should or this was something that they should or could do for themselves and that it would be better if they did.

But when I refuse, no matter how nicely it’s put, it’s misinterpreted; and the person that you believe you’re helping does not believe that you are and in fact that you are unfriendly or not cooperative or downright mean at times. So the problem with this is, I may judge the situation and act according to what I feel is best for that person, but that person may react in such a way that maybe they won’t even talk to me again or something. Do you see the problem?

Q: But Welmek, doesn’t that have to do with the ability to understand and discern that person? I’ve learned a lot with working with families of the children I’ve treated; and I’ve grown a lot in understanding their lives and all the pieces have come together for them. And it’s really altered in some respects how I’ve approached them. I think once I was able to approach them with more understanding that way I could be more compassionate and to the best of my ability try to share what love I had. And the relationships I’ve had and the role I’ve had in interplaying with those people has been easier.

I think that what I’ve offered is more appropriate and better received. I think that’s a growing process and we’ve got a long ways to go but I think that’s the key. It takes time, though, and it takes patience and listening to get to that place, taking time to really understand the circumstances. Because I don’t think it’s easy for us on a brief encounter or even with friends we have all the time, there’s so many things that we don’t share with each other that we can’t fully understand each other.

WELMEK: I agree with what you say. It is truly an evolutionary process, and you will make mistakes along the way. Again, I only ask that you begin to perceive things in this way, and that you begin to try and to do the best that you can. Let me ask regarding the earlier question, if you had a child who wanted something and in your judgment, you did not feel that it was appropriate, and the child said “If you do not give this to me, I will run away.” or “I will not do my chores.” or “I will not do well in school.” or whatever it might be, you have a difficult decision, do you not? You must decide whether the importance of the lesson that you are teaching will outweigh your allowing the child to intimidate you with this proposed behavior. And what would you do in that situation?

Q: Are you asking me since I came up with the original question?


Q: What I did in that situation on a number of occasions when the children were small, was to indicate to them that I would feel very badly if they left, that what I was doing was intended for their own good. The first thing I did was not to lose my temper, so that there was no anger involved in it. Really, I wound up having to do very little in the way of discipline in a certain respect; it was mostly allowing the child to understand why I was doing what I was doing and with all the threats of running away or doing this or that, none of that ever occurred.

WELMEK: And so if you would take this risk with your child whom you love very deeply, why are you so concerned about how this friend might react? Must you not make the effort to do the best you can and to do what you think is right? Would you allow (tape turned, words lost)

Q: . ..but it is just that social reaction to it, family reaction to family members sometimes creates difficulties and misunderstandings.

WELMEK: I understand. I am simply suggesting that it is difficult; and sometimes it is required of a parent to exercise such a loving discipline to teach what is right; and I’m simply suggesting that you understand this with your child and so you must see that you must deal with it in essentially the same way with your brothers and sisters. If they were to pout or they were to react in such a way, would you not see this, if it were done by your child, as immature behavior?

Q: Of course.

WELMEK: Then why do you not think, then, that adults cannot manifest immature behavior?

Q: I do think they can; well, I do on frequent occasions. It is simply that when I do this form of discipline with my child, I do have more control. When exercising this kind of discipline, even in as loving a manner as possible with this other adult, I have no control over them at all. They can withdraw totally from the relationship with hurt feelings or whatever, and misunderstandings of what I was trying to do if I didn’t make my reasons clear. I suppose I wonder how to get around that kind of problem.

WELMEK: If you cannot get around the problem with your children because of a level of immaturity, then I would suggest there is no miracle, there is no way to get around the immature reactions of some of your brothers and sisters. You must simply make the effort to do the best you can and in a loving way explain to them just as you would a child why you cannot fulfill their request and that you still care for them as a person and you hope they will understand. And that is all that you can do. You cannot, as you say, control their reactions.

Q: Welmek, does the Father use loving discipline with us?

WELMEK: What do you think?

Q: I don’t know. I don’t believe in the wrath of God.

WELMEK: Have we said anything about wrath?

Q: No, but I’m just trying to interpret it into what people are inclined to think, that if you do something wrong, for instance, that you’re going to get cancer and die or that your son could die or things like that. I don’t believe that the Father works in that way. I would believe that we might not get what we pray for because it’s not best for us. Would that be loving discipline?

WELMEK: Exactly.

Q: What about having to bear out the consequences of our wrong actions, even though we’re sorry for them and we have achieved forgiveness. I always think of that as sort of the way the universe is set up, that even if we’re sorry for our sins, that we still have to bear out the consequences of our actions; and I think of that as a form of loving discipline.

WELMEK: There are consequences for actions. This is justice; and justice does reign in the universe. However, there is also mercy; and as you recall, your text states that your goal is to combine mercy and justice to arrive at fairness. Is this not what you would ask of others, that they treat you fairly and would not your goal be to treat others fairly? Then wisdom will help you learn how to combine justice with mercy, but your comment is correct that sometimes, depending upon the situation, its severity and other factors, that justice will eventually unfold. However, it may also be tempered with mercy.

Q: So are you saying that.. I was thinking of a situation where someone maybe through misguided thinking there’s something that turns out wrong but what you said caused me to think about someone who, like Linda said, is pouting or stubborn with their philosophy of life, you know what I’m talking about. And the consequences of their actions are tempered by mercy, I understand that to mean that that would still fall within the description of loving discipline.

Q: But aren’t those consequences due to the person choosing their own will rather than the Father’s will? You see what I’m trying to say?

Q: Yes, but kids do that all the time.

WELMEK: And so do adults. (laughter)

Q: Don’t you feel like if you’re administering this loving discipline you make pretty sure that you’re right and that they’re not the ones that are right?

WELMEK: Of course this would be your desire and your intent. And there are times when you may not fully understand a situation; and later you may look back and you may say “Perhaps I was too hard” or “Perhaps I was too easy in that situation.” and that is how you learn. The next time you will do better.

Q: As long as the intention was well-meant. That’s what’s important.

WELMEK: One of the ways to understand and to be most assured is to look at the situation. When you administer this loving discipline to your child, do you not often feel love for your child as you have to tell them that you must withhold a request of theirs? And so, if you do not do it in anger or vengeance but rather your attitude is one of feeling love for them but knowing that you must help them grow, that you must help them learn a better way, if you feel that love as you discuss the situation with them, would that not be a good sign that you are operating with the best of intent and that there is a good likelihood that you are on the right track and trying to approach things in the proper way?

Q: Is it also possible that even if you have not chosen the ideal way, that if whatever you do is done with love that the person that you’re trying to affect is not so severely…it’s not detrimental, even if it wasn’t quite right, it’s not as detrimental because it was done with love and that person knows it.

WELMEK: Have you been a perfect parent and always made the right decisions?

Q: No.

WELMEK: But do you love your children?

Q: Of course.

WELMEK: Do they know that you love them?

Q: I hope so. I’ve got one here, you could ask.

WELMEK: You are right in what you are saying, that as they grow older and they mature, they will recognize that you are not perfect and that you tried. But as long as they know that you did it from an attitude of love and you did the best you could, they will always appreciate and they will love you for your efforts.

Q: I need clarification. I have been known to be as deaf as a door many times. As I look at the comments being made, I’m trying to imagine examples. If someone were to come to me and ask for spiritual insight or my understanding of the Father or if they ask of me anything that I perceive has spiritual meaning or value to it, I do not foresee a situation where I would withhold what I feel to be true and correct. I guess I don’t understand the problem.

If someone were to come to me and ask me to do something that I didn’t feel was either wise for me to do or for them to do, I suppose I could see withholding my services or my suggestions. Where I’m not clear is what situations that might be. Perhaps maybe if Linda could share a situation where she felt that she had to exercise loving discipline, maybe that could help me. Where I’m confused is, is there a situation where we would exercise loving discipline in a situation where one of our brothers or sisters needs spiritual guidance? Would we ever withhold that spiritual guidance as loving discipline?

Q: David, first of all, not everyone asks for spiritual guidance. In this case, a family member that asks repeatedly for money because they have not learned to control their spending habits.

Q: And that I understand, because that really does not have a spiritual value or meaning as such.

Q: Well it has meaning in that I would like to see this person develop a method of self-control; and so that to me, does have a spiritual connotation. It may not be the greatest spiritual value in the world, but it is a means of coping with the world and it is a beginning in a certain level of understanding that this person does not have. So when the money was refused, my name was Mud. Now this is just “How can you do that?” Well, you know, there are just these situations. I don’t always refuse, it depends on the situation the person is in; but I was attempting to help them achieve a positive quality that they had not developed.

Q: In loving discipline then, is it advisable to explain to the individual why you are administering this discipline?

Q: I did. That did not help.

Q: But then I would say at that point I don’t see what is left for us to do other than to continue to exhibit love and to do everything consistent with what we feel that we are. And if that other individual gets mad and never communicates with us again…

Q: But I think with the situation here, we’re trying to hurdle a brotherly/sisterly love into an entire ethical love and you can’t transcend that with that obstacle in place.

Q: Well, you can feel that fatherly love, but the other individual is not going to be able to feel that fatherly love.

Q: I can’t . . that’s an obstacle for me too.

Q: When you said your name was “Mud” were you talking about just with that one person or other family members?

Q: Virtually the entire family. It spreads through the entire family.

Q: Well, that seems to be their problem.

Q: But going back to your comment that that’s an obstacle for you. You, in your mind, perceived the reason why it was best not to just hand out the money because you would not help them manage money or eliminate the bigger problem.

Q: Right.

Q: Yet you still love them?

Q: Yes.

Q: Even they may turn around to you and say that they don’t love you.

Q: But I think we’re trying to get from one level of love to the other level of love. And that’s where the hurdle is. For me, that’s the situation. I don’t know about Linda.

Q: But I’m curious in your comment, what would the obstacle be as far as keeping you from feeling that paternal love for this individual. Because is there really any difference in that person’s behavior than as we pointed out earlier, a young child’s behavior. They don’t understand why you don’t let them go to the store; therefore, Daddy hates me or I hate Daddy. You know that really doesn’t in the bigger picture, in the paternal sense of the picture, that really doesn’t change anything. In this situation you know this person is still a child of God. You know that they still have the Father fragment, you know that Jesus knows them by name just as he does you. We know these things. I guess if anything, it would generate compassion.

Q: It does. But it does not help the person either. And that was the original intent, was to try to help the person. It was more a frustration on my part that an attempt to help in a way that I thought would be beneficial did not work.

Q: But doesn’t that go back to the same thing that it says in the book that the act is ours, but the consequences are God’s? There’s only so much that we can do with our understanding of a relationship and in a situation for a person. Even with all the intent and the benevolent love that we want to bestow, the response is still up to the individual. Whether or not they grow still depends on other factors that are outside of our control. If it’s that way with our children, it’s even more so with adults and people that we may or may not know as well as we think we do.

Q: In a way, loving discipline might be equated to prayer, inasmuch as you are desirous of an outcome that will lead this person into a fuller consciousness not only of the Father but of themself, in this case helping to manage their own money so that they can grow from that. Yet, like prayer, it takes time; and until the person is ready to receive the prayer, it just is sort of suspended, that prayer, that . …it’s there for them, the energy is there for them, but until they’re ready to use it, until they’re ready to understand it, there’s not much else that can be done.

Q: Well, you never know really. Just because they don’t respond at that time to what you’re trying to do for them doesn’t mean that they won’t appreciate your efforts further down the road.

Q: That’s my thought. I mean, it seems to me that if you did what was best for that person, maybe their immediate situation will cause them a lot of frustration and ill-will, but maybe that will help them realize that their reliance on others is going to cause more problems for them than if they would just learn themselves to not be in that position and be reliant upon someone else. Like Mary said, it may take time to manifest itself, but what you did was probably the most beneficial.

Q: And that doesn’t mean you take away your availability. Like you said, when your children were small you didn’t get mad with them when they responded this way. You were still there cooking for them, cleaning them and loving them and all the other things that you do, so..and that seems to be kind of a difficult thing for me to do with discipline. I’m almost . . even when I know I’m right, I almost have to stand back. I feel sometimes I have to stand back and let this thing work itself out. Actually, I’m realizing now that I don’t have to just stand back and work itself out. I can still be a friend and do things with them, and talk and maybe just change the subject with that person instead of dwelling on that particular issue.

Q: And you really helped me last week talking about, you pointed out the things people were saying to me at work shouldn’t bother me unless I feel some personal responsibility, some real responsibility for what they’re saying. It seems to me that you’re feeling a little bit more personal, not necessarily guilt, but emotion about your decision than you should be.

Q: Well, when it’s a close family member I guess you get more involved in a way. You want to do more and it’s more important to you almost to succeed in doing it.

Q: Especially when the other family members hold it against you. I guess it’s true whenever we feel we do the right thing not everybody’s going to like it and sometimes we’re persecuted for what we do, what we feel is right.

Q: I think sometimes what’s hard is that there’s kind of a loss with that or several losses, and I think that’s sometimes hard to deal with and I guess maybe it just now occurred to me that I need to, in my situations, have a longer-range view and have more patience. I guess I hope when I take a step to deal with a difficult situation that it could be resolved and everything could be my ideal. It’s hard for me to wait it out and deal with that and still have the hope that it will be resolved.

WELMEK: And so does this not relate back to a discussion we had a few weeks ago? Did we not discuss that Jesus is exhibiting this attitude of being a loving father towards the apostles and his own family and others? Did not the apostles often misunderstand his loving discipline? Did not his own family, at times his own mother, turn from him because she could not understand what he had to do and what he knew was right in his own mind?

And it was mentioned that did he not drink deeply from the cup of human sorrow when this happened? But as we discussed what sorrow was, it was not pity, but rather it was more of a realization of the way things are and an acceptance of the way things are. And then is it is overcome by the hope that at some future point that relationship will be improved. And so it is. Sometimes we must see things as they are and we must accept that as a reality and move forward.

I would also suggest that in mentioning that it’s prayer related, it is definitely related, particularly in this sense. I would think that almost any time you feel you are in a situation of administering a loving discipline towards a child or adult or whomever it might be, when you have finished with your exchange with that person, it would seem that you would immediately want to say a prayer that that person could be given the understanding and insight that you still love them and that you only want what is best for them. Would not you want to immediately for them after you have had the communication with that person?

Q: That’s the ideal.

WELMEK: Are there any further questions about the nature of fatherly love and brotherly love?

Q: I would like to ask along the lines of discipline, can you share with us an example of when you have administered this discipline? Loving discipline?

WELMEK: On several occasions, at these meetings I have first told you what it is that you need to do and I have given you the four things. And I have repeatedly told you how important these are. And yet on many occasions you have come back to me and said “Well, what is next?” or “What will we do beyond these things?” I know that you are curious, and I know that you wish to know what lies beyond; but I also know that in order to accomplish the tasks that we will have in the future, you must first be more developed in the things that I have asked you to do.

And so while, on the one hand I might be tempted to reveal some of these things to you, I assess that it is premature and that you still need more personal development before these things can be revealed. So in that sense, I manifest a loving discipline towards you because I know how important these things are and I know that you need further development before you can take on more tasks.

Q: Welmek, I have a question but it’s not related to the subject, so I will ask others if they have questions relating to the subject, to ask first. But I would like to get this question in for a person who called last night. I received a call from a man named Art Kronert from Alexandria, VA, and in the 1920s and 30s his uncle Emil Bergman in Dresden, Germany, was channeling, receiving communication from Lucinda. When he was reading our transcripts, we had at one meeting Lucinda come to us and he was curious to know if this was the same Lucinda that was communicating with his uncle in the 1920s and 30s.

WELMEK: I cannot comment on this specific situation. As I have stated many times, over the years, over the centuries, there have been many attempts on a personal basis to communicate to individuals. The individuals must decide by the content and the experience if the phenomenon is real. I cannot comment on this specific situation. So do you sense that you can now go out and as you encounter other individuals, your brothers and sisters, do you not begin to see this attitude of fatherly love? Do you begin to glimpse what it involves and do you think that you can carry this attitude with you?

GROUP: We’ll try. I think so.

WELMEK: That is all that I ask. I would again make the same assignment as I made last week, only this time as you go out during this week and you encounter your brothers and sisters, attempt to recall what we have discussed. Attempt to be more aware of your consciousness of the Father’s love for you and see if you can manifest this or experience this even for a short time in some encounter with one of your brothers and sisters. And we will take some time in our next session to discuss your experiences. Are there any further questions this evening?

Q: Can you tell us what teacher Ham is up to?

WELMEK: Our brother Ham has been given many assignments, most of which are more of an administrative nature. He is still very involved with this mission and will continue to be so.

Q: I have another question, Welmek. Something that I’ve noticed about the mission. Most of the other teachers have taught by giving a lesson on a particular topic and then having the group ask questions. You have always conducted this group differently, and I was curious as to why.

WELMEK: Each teacher is allowed some freedom in how they present the lessons. If you think about it, it is really not so different. We discuss things, and based upon that discussion, I ask that you read and study the transcripts and that you come back with your questions. And so I use the discussion upon selected topics as my presentation, so to speak.


Q: Welmek, this is something that has been bothering me for a while. It concerns the forgiveness of Judas; and it states in the book that the worlds have found it hard to forgive him. [UB 139:12.14] Based on what we’ve been talking about, I guess I’m having a real hard time understanding this statement in the book. It’s kind of confusing after we talked about all the forgiveness that we’re supposed to extend to our brothers and sisters. Why was that statement put in there? Could you give me some clarification on that?

WELMEK: Are you saying that the statement is that the world, meaning the humans on this planet, find it hard to forgive him?

Q: No, worlds, plural. I think maybe what they’re referring to is the inhabited planets of Nebadon, perhaps, or maybe even Orvonton. I don’t know. The word in the text is “worlds”.

WELMEK: If you can imagine such a beautiful being as Jesus, the Creator of our universe, our loving father-brother, someone that you love so deeply, and respect and call Master, if someone were to hurt such a person, would you not think that it might take time for you to go through the necessary adjustments to reach complete forgiveness?

Q: Yes. But then did Judas fully understand the implication of what he was doing? I think a lot of it has to do with his motive, his intent. I can’t judge it. But my question is did the worlds observing the scenario, the things that transpired, could they not see what a really pathetic human he was?

Q: I think they could see that. I also think Welmek’s point is that they understand Jesus more than we do. They know who he is, what his purpose was, far more than we do, even now. And because they love him so deeply, I’m sure that seeing Judas’ self-direction, his own ego take precedence over the Creator of this local universe, it had to be a very bitter cup for them, for all of our brothers and sisters to witness. All of our brothers and sisters, none are perfect, and it takes time for all of us to go through the process of forgiveness.

Fortunately for them, it probably is a little less time-consuming than us; but then again, I don’t know if that is necessarily true. They don’t have the contrasts, as I understand it, as we do, so perhaps on the other hand maybe for some of us who have been in contact with the text and have lived a life on this planet and understand maybe he motivation, maybe it’s easier for us to understand him than someone who lives on a planet in Light and Life. That’s so far removed from them, that for something like that to happen would be a culture shock.

Q: Well, you know, what you said is when I first read the book many years ago, I really understood it. And then based on what we’re discussing, when I went back and read it again I had a really hard time trying to sort it out.

Q: They didn’t say that they didn’t forgive Judas, but they did have difficulty.

WELMEK: All of your comments are significant. Have I not said to you at times that while I was a human and lived on a world, that still it is sometimes difficult for me to understand human behavior on this planet? Secondly, have I not said, as you mentioned, that I and my associates and many beings are not perfect, that we still have a long way to grow and to develop? And so, if you look at us in that frame of reference, it is simply a general comment that reflects the different experiences of many people, many spiritual beings, with many different frames of reference and many different levels of experience.

Q: Have you and your associates decided on a proper term for us to use in addressing you? During the Andrea meeting, we couldn’t agree on “beings”, “unseen friends”, “people”. Have you come up with a term yet that you would prefer us to address you by?

WELMEK: Perhaps we should all start a contest? (laughter) What will be the prize for the winner?

Q: How about the prize being a visualization?

Q: Or a trip to Salvington.

Q: A trip to Hawaii.

Q: How about Jesus himself coming and talking with us?

Q: I’ll settle for Big Mac. (laughter)

Q: But Welmek, the contest needs to be on your side because it was your associates that didn’t like the term we were using. We’re asking what you would like us to use.

WELMEK: I would say that my associates have not yet come up with a term that seems satisfactory, and I would also suggest that all of you have minds and you could utilize this and also try to think of some words that might be more appropriate.

Q: May we use “unseen friends”?

Q: How about our helpers?

Q: How about our brothers.

Q: But then we don’t know whether they’re visible or invisible.

Q: Unseen brothers and sisters…elder brothers…spiritual brothers

WELMEK: This will give you something else to think about this week.


Q: Welmek, I had a question about a difficult concept, and without getting into a really long discussion of it, could you just maybe help sort out or explain a little bit on the concept of time. As we talk about time or as we conceive of time in a linear pattern, past, we live in the present and the future is yet to be. Yet Jesus’ discourse on time and some other things the book has talked about, it’s more of a circular pattern and it seems from (?) a certain degree that time is existing..the past, present and future are all happening at the same time. Could you just maybe draw a brief, better clarification of the concept of time?

WELMEK: From God’s point of view, all things happen, in a sense, at the same time. But in the worlds of time and space, it is not this way. There is a sensing mechanism of duration. As you leave your physical bodies and awaken on the mansion worlds and progress beyond that, you will be able to look back and have the experience of a different sense of time; and you will then begin to understand the relative way of understanding time. But right now you only have one experience of time, and therefore how can I explain to you how it changes when it is beyond your experience?

Q: Well, the way you perceive time, do you ever perceive the past, the present and the future all at once? In the same manner?

WELMEK: No, as I said, that only exists at God’s level.

Q: Yet you can see more of the future than we can. You perceive more of the future.

WELMEK: I do not see the future. I can look at situations, and based upon my understanding of events and of human behavior, I and my associates after long years of observation and experience, can project with relative degrees of certainty what a particular reaction or outcome might be. But that is really not seeing the future. It is only based upon experience.

Q: Let me just ask another question. I’ve had experiences in my life where I’ve had either mindal impressions or dreams or whatever, of situations that have come to pass in the future. I just kind of wanted a better understanding of that phenomenon, like you’ve been here before, you’ve lived this situation before. I quite frankly don’t understand how my mind can know or put me in a situation months down the road. I just don’t understand that at all.

WELMEK: I do not understand what you are suggesting. Are you suggesting that you can see future events?

Q: No, I can’t see the future, but there have been some situations in my life where I’ve had this mindal impression of something, and then months later the reality came about.

Q: Like deja vu.

Q: Yes, like deja vu. I don’t understand that phenomenon at all.

WELMEK: I cannot comment with any specificity. I will only suggest to you that the Adjuster works within your mind, and sometimes there may be some help in preparing for situations that it is likely you will encounter. I cannot say more than that.


WELMEK: And so it seems time to bring this meeting to a close. I would like you to again think about this assignment of trying to see your brothers and sisters with an attitude of fatherly love. And next week, we will discuss some of your experiences attempting to do this.
Secondly, I wish to move forward with the prior assignment about what each of you would list as the ten most important character traits. We will also begin discussing this at next week’s session.

Q: I’ve been carrying my list now for about five weeks.

Q: Then you’ll be well-prepared, Mark.

Q: Maybe after this discussion, we should go back and look over the list and see if there’s anything…

WELMEK: How many of you have shared your list with your brothers and sisters and talked about their ideas and prepared ideas? What about this?

Q: You told us we couldn’t cheat. (laughter)

WELMEK: I would suggest to you, as I hope you learned earlier this evening, that thinking about things is very important. It tills the soil, so to speak. It makes ready for the seeds of truth to be planted. It makes you more ready to easily accept it.

If I were to leave tomorrow, what would happen? Would all of you stop thinking about these things? Would all of you stop trying to grow spiritually? I would encourage you to be more open and share more with your brothers and sisters in this group. Learn to rely upon each other. As we discuss ideas in these meetings, are there not good and valuable and truthful ideas that are stated by your brothers and sisters at these meetings? And so must all truth only come from me?

Each of your brothers and sisters is indwelt by our Father. Each has the Spirit of Truth. Each is trying in their own way to grow and to learn and to understand life and the universe. Each has a unique set of experiences. I would encourage you to get to know each other better and to learn to open up and share ideas and experiences with each other. It will greatly contribute to our spiritual unity in this group and for this group to be strong and to fulfill many tasks in the future. The greater our spiritual unity, the greater our bond, the more we will be able to effectively (do) this task.

Let whatever attitudes of a negative nature that you might hold be released. Learn from what we have discussed. Forgive, be merciful, approach each other anew, approach each other with this fatherly attitude. If you can do that, it will bring the group closer together and form a bond and a unity that is greater than what you can even possibly imagine; and it will strengthen each of you individually.

You have much to think about. Go in peace this week. Discuss the ideas. Think about them. Talk about them with your Father, and we will discuss them next week.

GROUP: Good night, Welmek.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Email this to a friend
Twitter Tweet
Share on Facebbok
WhatsApp -Share document