14. Controversy with the Church

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to the MICHIANA PASTOR’S STUDY GROUP

Culver, In., February 25, 1958

Dear Friends,

We have had some interesting happenings here recently. The enclosed [following two—Ed.] letters will bring you up to date on it. The decisions made, I think, are best for both our church activities and the local study group. The attitude and atmosphere of our local people is excellent.

I was somewhat surprised, however, to learn at our pastor’s social meeting in South Bend Monday that one of our pastors is going around telling some of you that you are in danger of being thrown out of the denomination if you continue attending our Urantia study group meetings. Of course you know there are absolutely no grounds for such a statement.

To make doubly sure of this, David Schlundt⁵ and I talked with President Henry Kroehler, who was at the meeting, and he agreed that we had a right to study any book we so desired in our study group and were doing nothing contrary to the rules of the Evangelical and Reformed Church. Further, he assured us that at any time he or the Synodical Council thought we might be doing something contrary to the polity or doctrine of the church he would let us know and we need fear no secret action against any of us.

I’m sure the agitating pastor means well but it is difficult to understand any fellow minister who tries to tell any of us what we may read or discuss, using subtle threats to make us conform! For the record, may I caution each of us again: Let us read and evaluate the Urantia Book not as revelation but as any other book. Let us use as the norm of our evaluation the doctrinal statements of the Constitution of the Evangelical and Reformed Church (Sections 3 and 4). You Congregational brethren can just ignore the foregoing suggestions which apply to us E & R folks. I know that none of you plan to even mention the Book to your congregation.

Herb Meussling will no doubt be sending out the assignment for discussion next Monday at Paul Santa’s Church. See you at that time. In the meantime, be assured that you have nothing to fear.

Cordially yours,
Meredith

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to JAMES E. WAGNER

Culver, In., February 18, 1958

Dear Dr. Wagner,

Henry Kroehler brought me word that one of our elders had written to you concerning the Urantia Book. May I assure you that my concern regarding the harmony and proper teaching of the people of Grace Church is identical with your judgment and Henry Kroehler’s. In fact, I had decided on this policy before Henry spoke to me.

There are two reasons why I introduced the entire congregation to the Book. First, it is a most unusual book and we have people who would enjoy studying it. And second, to form a study group of certain select people as a clandestine group is an underhanded and cowardly procedure. In a church fellowship you can have no “secret” groups. When I introduced it I, of course, told them not to accept it as revelation but those who were interested should read it critically like any other book.

Now that everyone knows about the Book, I intended to mention it no more. Since an elder has protested, this procedure will be most carefully observed, for I have no desire to disturb anyone. To overteach people is almost as bad as to misteach them and I want no part in either.

I should like to defend the elder who took this somewhat brash action in bypassing our local consistory and the Synodical Council. He is a fine man and I believe he has a good heart. I am rather certain he did not act entirely on his own but was guided or undergirded by a minister of our region who has steadfastly refused even to read the Urantia Book in critical evaluation.

When Louis Hammerschmidt gave me a copy of the Book several years ago, I looked it over and came to the conclusion almost any minister would arrive at: “This is for the birds.” My guess was that it was a form of Far Eastern mysticism or even a modern Gnosticism. As I find some of the Far Eastern philosophy interesting, I started reading it. The more I read, the more amazed I became. When the Book was finished I knew it was one of the significant books of our time.

Naturally, I started a rather thorough investigation of the origins of the Book and found that everything seemed to stand investigation. Incidentally, Dr. William S. Sadler, one of the most respected psychiatrists in the country (he taught at McCormick Theological Seminary for almost thirty years), was the leader of the small group of people to whom the papers were given. Dr. Sadler has written two books exposing and refuting mediums and spiritualism and holds the same opinions today. He even called in the expert exposer of fakes, Howard Thurston, to help solve the mystery.

Of course the only way to evaluate the Book is not by what it claims but by what it says. As you probably know we have a group of ministers in this section of the Synod who have been studying the Urantia Book critically for some time. It holds up under every test we apply to it.

Two of these young ministers were rank liberals before they read the Book and after reading it came to the conclusion that the evidence for the concepts of orthodox Christianity are so overwhelming that they have come back to them. One of the Congregational ministers, who is an individualist of the first order, says with a smile and some seriousness, “I’m mad at the Book because it says the things I’ve been claiming for the last twenty years.” The greatest point of skeptism of the group now is, in one fellow’s words, “It’s too darn perfect to be true.”

We had planned to introduce you to the Book but first we wanted to put it in the hands of some of our young and capable theological professors. I’m sure you have a Christian concern for us. One of the finest services you could render is to help us discover where we are being misled, if we are.

Our greatest problem is to get ministers and other capable people to take it seriously enough to read it critically. The Book appears so preposterous when you browse through it that most men will not read it unless they have a friend in whom they have confidence who assures them it is worth reading. To date, I know of no one who has completely read the Book who takes it lightly.

I should like to urge you to select at least three young theologians like Moss or Shinn and ask them to read the Book critically and share their evaluations with us. We should like to meet with at least one of them. Unless they have read the entire Book and are intelligent enough to understand its concepts, it would be a waste of time to meet with our group because they are not so much interested in the Book as revelation as they are in the quality of the concepts and insights of the Book. Probably you should suggest to these men that they start reading the life of Jesus and then read the rest of the Book—but if they read it all, the procedure is not too important. I would be happy to send them some materials which would help them in their evaluation.

That you may get the feel of the quality of the Urantia Book, I am sending you a loan copy. Would you please read from page 1495 (“John the Baptist”) to the end of the Book. It would be good if you would check it with The Harmony of the Gospels. The light it sheds on difficult passages, where only one gospel records a story, etc., is most amazing. We hope, in particular, that it may be possible for a number of young, brilliant theological professors to guide us in this matter.

Cordially yours,
Meredith J. Sprunger

[Copies to Grace Church Consistorymen, members of the Synodical Council and pastors in the Michiana Urantia Study Group]

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to the ELDERS of GRACE CHURCH

Culver, In., February 22, 1958

Dear Friends,

After thinking it over, it seems to me that publishing the action of our Wednesday Consistory meeting in Grace Notes is not a loving thing to do. It would unnecessarily humiliate certain people.

Some people living at the competitive level of life, I know, will regard this decision as foolish. But I make it because I refuse to contaminate my mind with negative, low-level thinking and blight my soul by stooping to the procedures of political expediency.

I would rather be defeated and remain loyal to the Way of Love and the Way of Truth than to win by these low-level tactics. I invite you to join me in dedication to the Way of Love and pray that we may be strong enough and big enough to follow this way regardless of consequences. If you do so, you will always have an inner radiance and joy that nothing can take from you.

Cordially yours,
Meredith J. Sprunger

---

UBH DONALD B. HAND to HENRY G. KROEHLER and the SYNODICAL COUNCIL

Culver, In., February 25, 1958

Dear President Kroehler and members of the Synodical Council,

Two weeks ago you brought to our attention a letter which had been written by one of our elders to the President of our Denomination complaining of our study, with Dr. Sprunger, of the Urantia Book, and intimating that some measure of censure by the higher echelon of our church should be applied to us.

At a special meeting of the Consistory on February 19 the matter was presented and discussed fully. The identity of the elder was not disclosed so that there would be as little cause for personal emotion as possible. From the discussion which followed, may I summarize the feelings of our Consistory: The action of the elder, although sincere, was ill-advised and certainly in direct contradiction of the Constitution of the Evangelical and Reformed Church; furthermore, it was an undemocratic request calling for an authoritarian motion not only unwarranted but also inimical to the principles of our democratic processes, both state and church.

As a result of the discussion, the following actions were taken:

1. Motion made and seconded: “It is understood that every member of Grace Church shall recognize the lawful authority and procedures of the Evangelical and Reformed Church. Any complaint shall be brought first to our local Consistory. If the decision of the local Consistory does not satisfy the person or persons carrying the complaint they may appeal to the Synodical Council. If the decision of the Synodical Council is not satisfactory an appeal may be made to the President of the Denomination.“If any member desires to bring a charge against the minister, this charge shall be made in writing to the Synodical Council of the Michigan-Indiana Synod. Any member not following this lawful procedure shall be liable to the judicatory action of the Spiritual Council of Grace Church.” Supported 13 to 1 (Ballot vote.)
2. Resolution offered and supported: “It is understood that Dr. Sprunger will refrain from mentioning or teaching from the Urantia Book in any of his pastoral duties. As a private citizen of this community, however, we have no objection to his conducting a study group on the Urantia Book in his home, the parsonage, at 215 N. Slate Street, Culver, Indiana.” Supported 11 to 1 with two abstaining. (Ballot vote.)

Dr. Sprunger announced that since he considered this a controversial matter and not necessary to the welfare of the church, he would not conduct a study group in the parsonage even though there was only one vote against it.

Following these motions, the Consistory members expressed their individual confidence in the efforts which Dr. Sprunger has made to bring us a larger and more meaningful vision of the truths in our Bible and a way in which to apply these truths to our daily lives. We reject any suggestion or pressure which would limit a minister or layman in respect to what he may or may not read or study in an honest search for truth, feeling that though a strong progressive approach to Christian thinking may step on some toes, such an approach is more desirable than that of preserving the “status quo” in which one progresses rapidly backwards.

Assuring you that we are not headed in that direction under our present leadership, and hoping that this satisfactorily explains our disposition of the problem, I am

Sincerely yours,
Donald B. Hand
President of the Consistory of Grace Church

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to the MEMBERS of the SYNOD

Culver, In., February 25, 1958

Dear Friends,

It is almost certain that you will hear about a situation which came up in our church and in our Michiana Pastor’s Study Group. In addition to the Michiana Study Group and the Synodical Council, I am sending about a dozen of you men in the Synod whose judgment I highly respect copies of a few letters which, I think, will be self-explanatory.

I want you to have firsthand information in the matter because it raises a fundamental issue of freedom of thought and discussion. No one of our Pastor’s Study Group is remotely thinking of differing with the doctrinal standards of the Evangelical and Reformed Church. But neither do we think any individual, regardless of high office in the denomination, should be permitted to threaten our right to free discussion. In case you should hear about it, we want you to know the facts in the matter.

Cordially yours,
Meredith J. Sprunger

---

UBH HERBERT MEUSSLING to WILLIAM F. HARRAH

Niles, Mich., February 25, 1958

Dear Mr. Harrah,

Please accept my sincere thanks for the specially bound set of Urantia papers. It was very kind of you and but confirms the high regard which those members of this church who are associated with you at National Standard have for your generous nature.

This book is still a great mystery to me. However, I cannot deny that it makes sense in so many ways. It is fair to everyone. Its source of information is certainly in advance of our present age. The scope of it is so tremendous that it requires an elastic mind to approach it. I envy you your close experience with this phenomenon.

Because of the many checks within the Book itself, there is small possibility of a new religion growing out of this. I would rather believe that its expression (purpose?) will come through individuals in expanding numbers who will bring its concepts to bear upon all phases of man’s development. Should the Book prove to be only a human concoction, it still must be admitted that there is more intelligence here than can be honestly ignored.

It will be a pleasure to continue a study of these papers now that I have the convenience and comfort of the four volumes. . . .

May you receive daily God’s blessing.

Sincerely,
Herb Meussling

---

UBH LOUIS HAMMERSCHMIDT to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

South Bend, In., February 26, 1958

My dear Sprunger,

I read your communications, which you were good enough to send me, addressed to the Michiana Pastor’s Study Group, Dr. Wagner, and to Rev. Kroehler, and am decidedly interested in this unusual and unexpected situation. I can, in a measure, appreciate how some individual layman might question the matter, but how a minister could raise a question is beyond me.

I am pleased that you have not dropped the issue, and it should not be, because certainly there is no violation of any Christian denomination to be broad-minded enough to read with interest or critically, a book of the character of the book Urantia.

I am sending your correspondence to our good friend Harrah, as I know he will be interested, and I would be pleased to have you keep me advised of further developments.

With best wishes.

Sincerely yours,
Louis Hammerschmidt

---

UBH HENRY G. KROEHLER to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Jackson, Mich., February 26, 1958

Dear Meredith,

The enclosed [see following—Ed.] letter, as a reply to Mr. Hand and an acknowledgment for the information from him, is self-explanatory.

I would, however, like to ask a question in regard to the letter which you circulated to your study group. As far as I can see the contents of the letter are quite proper. Now it seems to me as I read through the letter there is a slight hint to the effect that you and others might possibly feel persecuted in this matter. I know that you would want to avoid anything of a persecution complex. I am just wondering a little whether your expression “using subtle threats to make us conform” might possibly imply something of a feeling, on your part, that any threats would tend to make you more adamant. You know, of course, that no such threats will be forthcoming from me. I feel very kindly and congenial toward you as well as to the others involved in this study group.

If at any time, as I stated in South Bend, I find it desirable to talk with any of you concerning this study, I shall do it in that spirit. I would just hope that you do not feel that there is a degree of unfriendly pressure brought to bear upon you.

My best wishes to you.

Sincerely,
Henry

---

UBH HENRY G. KROEHLER to DONALD B. HAND

Jackson, Mich., February 26, 1958

Dear Mr. Hand,

First of all, let me express my appreciation for the contents of your letter of February 25. I also want to add that I thoroughly agree with the procedure which you have outlined in regard to the matter of complaints. At one or two points I would think perhaps a different wording would be more desirable. Yet I think the general spirit of the procedure which you outlined is wholesome.

It seems to me that you are perhaps somewhat unnecessarily severe in the censure against the elder involved in this particular instance when you speak of his action as “an undemocratic request calling for an authoritarian action.” I agree that the contact was made through the wrong channel but I am not aware of any request for any authoritarian action. Rather I am quite certain it was primarily an expression of concern.

I also want to share with you and the members of the consistory in the expression of confidence in the work which Dr. Sprunger is doing in your midst. Dr. Sprunger knows that the concern which was expressed in this regard in no way reflects any hesitancy in expressing our appreciation for the excellency of the work he has been doing. I gather, however, from your letter that there might be some thought to hinder “a strong progressive approach to Christian thinking.” I feel that I need to assure you that in the Evangelical and Reformed Church there has always been an encouragement for such thorough Christian thinking and that I am sure we shall continue with that particular emphasis. Nevertheless, this will in no way imply that legitimate objections will not be raised against the development of any unchristian thinking in our congregations.

With these comments I want to assure you again that I have every confidence that the congregational life in Grace Church will continue to develop in every Christian sense as it has in the past.

Sincerely,
Henry

---

UBH WILLIAM F. HARRAH to HERBERT MEUSSLING

Niles, Mich., February 26, 1958

Dear Mr. Meussling,

Thank you so much for your most kind letter, and I was glad to order these specially bound books for you, for the big book is so very inconvenient and tiresome to handle.

There is one special point that troubles me, and that is the absolute prohibiting of the giving of much needed information as to just how these papers came through. Of course, fortunately, I did have some contact about twenty-five years ago when there was not so much restriction. I mean, I was in touch with those who had the direct contact with the individual involved. Of course I can see how logically he would not want to appear in the picture at all, but if there were not so many restrictions, at least more clear and understandable information could be given to honest seekers after truth.

Personally I just am not able, within the limits of my mentality, to comprehend how a book like this could have been written by anyone or even several human individuals, and as my good friend, Mr. Burns (attorney), said shortly before his death, “There is just one point that absolutely has me stopped, and that is the completion of this very great piece of work and the publication of the Book, yet with not a dollar of profit desired or anticipated anywhere along the line.” If someone was making a financial gain from this Book, you and I probably wouldn’t give it much, if any, attention. It seems to me, and it may possibly to you, that the vocabulary and the phraseology is indeed unique and quite removed from our usual experience with reading matter.

I have always been given to understand that there is no thought or intention of trying to build up a new religion based on these so-called revelations. If they were endeavoring to work definitely along that line, again I am sure their probability of success would be greatly reduced.

There are, as I understand it, a few groups in various parts of the country, as far away as California, of individuals who have at some time or other had contact with the Forum meetings in Chicago, and who have been anxious to continue their study of this matter; but that is, as I understand it, the nearest that has so far developed, working toward systematic research or study activity.

Taking it as a whole, as far as I have been able to comprehend it, the Book is principally of a very broad historical and informative nature, giving further enlightenment in regard to many matters and more details than we get from the Bible.

I assure you that if I ever receive any further helpful and enlightening information, I shall be glad indeed to communicate with you.

With all good wishes.
W. F. Harrah

---

UBH INVITATION from HERBERT MEUSSLING

[pre-March 3], 1958

* * *
Discussion and investigation
of some of the concepts
of the Urantia Book will be held on
Monday, March 3 at 10:00 CST.

We will meet at the Congregational Church
in Roseland, Indiana. . .

If you have the Book, read critically Paper 141.

Extra books will be available at the meeting.

We will eat lunch at a nearby restaurant.

* * *

 

---

UBH HENRY G. KROEHLER to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Jackson, Mich., February 27, 1958

Dear Meredith,

Your letter and note of February 23 disturbed me somewhat. It seems to me that you are attempting to fight back at something when there is actually nothing to fight back against. I assume that now inquiries will be directed to me and I shall need to go into lengthy explanations concerning the whole matter. As you well know by this time, I do have a few reservations in regard to the statements in Mr. Hand’s letter. They are in a sense minor and yet could possibly have serious implications. I am just a little fearful that your letter to these various pastors will actually cause this to become something of a major issue. I may be wrong in my judgment in this regard and I certainly do not wish it to become that.

In a way I feel that I should now also follow up your letter with a further word of explanation to these pastors. For the time being, however, I shall not do that.

I do not believe that Ed Brueseke was interested in doing anything particular in this regard, with perhaps the exception of inviting several theologians to study the Book through the Commission on Church and Ministry. I had a chance to speak with him briefly on the subject at the South Bend meeting the other day. I believe that I am interpreting his intentions correctly.
So what I am really saying in this letter, Meredith, is that I wish you hadn’t sent the information to the other pastors.

Sincerely,
Henry

---

UBH BOB WILKINS to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Tiffin, Ohio, February 28, 1958

Dear Dr. Sprunger,

We received a copy of your letter today that you had sent out to the Urantia study group. It certainly is disappointing to think that a person in the group that you would naturally think of as a friend would throw in a sneak punch like one of the elders did.

We were very sorry to hear that this thing happened and I know that it is discouraging to you. It seems a shame that there has to be a few narrow-minded individuals around that are always trying to stir up something that wouldn’t affect them at all except at their own election. In a way I feel sorry for them, but you, like myself, are in effect a salesman and you sure have a selling job to do. All this is a challenge and I’m sure time will heal any wounds that have been opened.

Keep up the wonderful job that you are doing.

Very truly yours,
Bob Wilkins

---

UBH EDWARD BREUSEKE to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

South Bend, In., February 28, 1958

Dear Meredith,

First of all let me thank you for sending me copies of your letter to Dr. Wagner and the study group, and a copy of Mr. Hand’s letter to the Synodical Council. I am glad to know that the channels of communication are again open between us on this matter. For your information I am enclosing a copy of a letter I wrote to Muessling yesterday. [See following.]

If we are to hope to understand each other, we must first trust each other and for the record let me spell out a few things to clear the air. Since we last wrote to each other about this Urantia Book and at your suggestion dropped any further discussion of it, I have given the matter very little thought, except to discuss it with Harold Wilke after you had introduced the book to him (when he was in Culver, last year). I also showed the book to a few ministers and theologians. . . .

I frankly was too busy to think about it at all, until Don Calvert came to me greatly disturbed, 1) about the zeal with which some members of the Urantia study group witnessed to the effect of this “new revelation” on their ministry, 2) about the growing rift in our ministerial fellowship because of the obvious cleavage between those who went for Urantia and those who didn’t, and 3) the almost certain disintegration of our earlier theological study group, because of this new development.

Since Don spoke to me . . . I have talked with Lowell Dittmer, for whom I have a special concern as a new minister—by Synodical assignment. I learned that he had been given or loaned a Book but I don’t believe he has taken it too seriously.

I next tried to talk to Dave Schlundt since he came early to our meeting last Monday. We certainly didn’t have ten minutes together before others started to come and our conversations had to stop and it is good they did, for Dave became very emotionally disturbed at my suggesting at all that you couldn’t really believe Urantia and remain a minister of the Evangelical and Reformed Church—that there was a real antithesis between accepting Urantia as in any sense valid and authentic revelation and being in harmony with the mainstream of the Christian Faith. . . [balance of letter missing].

---

UBH EDWARD BREUSEKE to HERBERT MEUSSLING

South Bend, In., February 27, 1958

Dear Herb,

Thanks for inviting me to your meeting on Monday. I must, however, decline your invitation for at least two reasons: 1) I do not at the moment have the energy needed to engage in what is likely to be exhausting argument rather than exhaustive study, if I am present. 2) Whatever I would have to say would most likely carry little weight, since I would appear in the eyes of some as “the devil’s advocate,” while I myself would be thinking all the time of the Book itself, as the devil’s tool.

As you know, I have had a copy of the Book almost since the day it was published. I have read enough of it to know that this purports to be a new revelation, which certainly presumes to be more authentic at points than our historically conditioned Holy Scriptures. Indeed the one thing that puzzles me most is how men who will subject the traditional Scriptures to the most merciless criticism, can give this any credence at all, without first running down the historical origin and development of this Book.

More than a year ago, Meredith tried to interest me in taking this Urantia Book seriously. I told him then as I started to tell David Schlundt Monday that I had a clear conviction that any minister who accepted the claims and teachings of Urantia as authentic would sooner or later have to leave the ministry of the Evangelical and Reformed Church. I still believe this and that is why I hope those of you who are studying this Book will really study it, which means subjecting it to the rigorous criticism of honest doubt.

If you will study it critically (and you can’t do that without consulting qualified Biblical scholars and theologians, as I suggested to David Schlundt) I have no doubt as to where you will come out. Certainly no one is going to censor you for reading a book or even for being tempted to fall for a heresy. But in the long run you’ll have to choose between the Holy Scriptures and Urantia, between revelation in history vs. revelation via mysteriously delivered papers, between the basically “wordless” person-to-person communication of God in Christ and the all-too-wordy, pseudoscientific pat answers of the “midwayer” “who was there.”

My interest in all this is personal rather than official. Naturally, as chairman of the Commission on Church and Ministry, I am bound to wonder what this augurs for the ministry and the church. Until now I have done nothing but hope and pray that this will pass, except for the letter I wrote to Sprunger a long time ago, and the development of the past week, including my conversations with Lowell Dittmer, Dave Schlundt, Don Calvert, and now this letter to you. My hope now is that those of you who have put some stock in these “papers” will reject them out of your own study. I am sure that my studying with you would not do much good at the moment, since whatever rapport we once had seems to be gone. If your group is interested in really finding out what a competent scholar thinks of all this, I will use whatever influence I have to see that our Commission on Church and Ministry brings such a person to this area at our Commission’s expense.

Sincerely,
Ed

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to EDWARD BRUESEKE

Culver, In., February 29, 1958

Dear Ed,

Thank you for your kind letter. First, I should like to make clear, as I have many times before, I am not interested in studying the Urantia Book as normative revelation but as a source of wisdom and insight adding to the richness of our Christian philosophy of life.

My central concern is to assure freedom of thought and discussion among our ministers. Any attempt to curtail this freedom, I will oppose regardless of cost to my personal well-being.

The question of my theological orthodoxy is another matter. I am happy to be questioned about it at any time. The doctrinal standards of the Evangelical and Reformed Church express my own personal convictions.

Our study group has been quite concerned about the break in fellowship and this is why we decided to invite everyone in our old study group to attend and speak freely about the Urantia Book and other books which we may find interesting. The reason we have not done this before is because you have been emotionally disturbed about the Urantia Book and we did not wish to disturb you more. Now we feel that fellowship is even more important than your being upset by our freedom of discussion.

Regarding the references to a minister in my letter to Dr. Wagner, one of our elders told a group of our people discussing the matter, “One of the ministers of our region told me the Book was a lot of poppycock.” This is all I know about it. Who the minister was I do not know but I’m rather sure he hasn’t read much of the Urantia Book.

What of a significant nature could be accomplished by showing ministers or theologians a copy of the Urantia Book, I wouldn’t know. Any one browsing through the Book would assume it was “poppycock.” We would certainly be more than happy to have a number of competent scholars read the Book and after they have read it, share with us their evaluations. We would want to meet with one of them in person. It is important that young theologians like Moss or Shinn be consulted.

Thank you again for your letter, Ed. I appreciate your concern but think your anxiety regarding the freedom of objective study is dangerous. Will also share copies of this letter with Dr. Wagner, Henry Kroehler, and Harold Wilke.

Sincerely yours,
Meredith

---

UBH JAMES E. WAGNER to HENRY G. KROEHLER

Philadelphia, Penn., March 5, 1958

Dear President Kroehler,

. . . I write you now with respect to the situation involving Dr. Sprunger. I read with considerable interest your letter of February 14 reporting a conference you had had the previous day with Dr. Sprunger on the “Urantia” book and movement. It seemed to me that you had moved again with wisdom and with the “Christian concern” which one of our By-laws enjoins upon us in all instances where we are dealing with a fellow minister. Certainly, as I think I made clear in my previous correspondence with you on this matter, it was a source of real distress to me that I felt obligated to take up this question with you at all.

I am now even more greatly distressed by two developments which have come to my attention since receiving your letter. First, I am informed that on Sunday, February 16, as I understand, Dr. Sprunger preached a sermon in the church at Culver in which references were made to “traitors” and “quislings,” etc., which references appear to have been easily understood as directed really toward those who have been disquieted by Dr. Sprunger’s interest in Urantia. I have no way of verifying this information. If anything of this sort did take place, it would seem not at all consistent with what you left Culver understanding Dr. Sprunger’s attitude to be and it certainly would not be in keeping with the fine spirit which I myself have always thought Dr. Sprunger to be possessed with. And certainly, beyond all possibility of doubt, anything of this sort cannot help but result in widening any breach which may at present exist or be incipient in the congregation at Culver. This is a matter which it seems to me you will have to concern yourself with further, unpleasant as I know such further concern will be to you.

Second, today (February 20) I have a letter from Dr. Sprunger himself reporting his having had the visit from you and saying in the second sentence, “May I assure you that my concern regarding the harmony and proper teaching of the people of Grace Church is identical with your judgment and Henry Kroehler’s. In fact I had decided on this policy before Henry spoke to me.” But then as I read on through his letter I discovered somewhat to my amazement that Dr. Sprunger had duplicated copies of this letter addressed to me bearing my name at the top of it and the salutation “Dear Dr. Wagner” and a footnote to the letter says, “Copies to Grace Church Consistorymen, members of the Synodical Council, and pastors in the Michiana Urantia Study Group.” One of the most obviously unfortunate aspects of this duplicated letter is that it would tell its recipients nothing of the careful and brotherly correspondence which had gone on between you and me in this instance, nor of the strategy which I resorted to in having two responsible and competent members of the faculty of the theological seminary of which Dr. Sprunger himself is a graduate read the Urantia material and give their judgment upon it. I am greatly distressed at this, since none of the recipients of Dr. Sprunger’s letter, except yourself, will probably understand how carefully we proceeded in this matter.

In the course of his letter to me, Dr. Sprunger proposes that the Urantia Book and other pertinent material be submitted to “at least three young theologians like Moss or Shinn and ask them to read the book critically and share their evaluations with us.” As a matter of fact, we have already done something quite like this in asking the two theologians we did ask to evaluate the book. It does not seem to me that we are at all obligated to trouble either ourselves or another group of busy teachers with the responsibility of this kind.

In the last paragraph of his letter Dr. Sprunger tells me, “That you may get the feel of the quality of the Urantia Book, I am sending you a loan copy.” He goes on to say, “Would you please read from page 1495 (John the Baptist) to the end of the Book. It would be good if you would check it with The Harmony of the Gospels. The light it sheds on some difficult passages, where only one gospel records a story, etc., is most amazing. We hope in particular that it may be possible for a number of young, brilliant theological professors to guide us in this matter.” At this point I simply have to respond that I do not have the time to give a careful reading of this ponderous volume and I do not at all claim to be an expert theologian and, therefore, would not consider myself competent to evaluate the Book from the standpoint of the great Christian doctrinal tradition. That was precisely the reason why I, rather than trust my own judgment, chose the procedure of submitting this volume to the study of two competent theological professors.

I turn now to another consideration which grows out of your letter and Dr. Sprunger’s. You had mentioned the fact that “he has had seven or eight pastors read the Book who also seem to have become quite convinced of its inherent value. They meet fairly regularly once a month to discuss its message.” Dr. Sprunger refers to what I take to be this group when he speaks of “pastors in the Michiana Urantia Study Group.” This is one of the alarming aspects of what has developed in this connection and seems all the more to make it a matter of proper synodical concern.

Your letter mentioned, on the basis of what you learned from Dr. Sprunger, that “he has also formed a study group in the community, which has regularly been meeting to discuss the Urantia Book.” “They have up to the present time met in the basement of the parsonage. He agreed that it would be advisable not to have the group meet there nor in any other church building. This group includes people of the congregation as well as other people from the community and he definitely also plans to continue being a member of this study group.” The trouble with this situation is that even though he participates in a group meeting outside the church and in a group made up not wholly of members of the congregation, Dr. Sprunger cannot possibly divest himself of his identification as pastor of Grace Church and as an ordained minister of the Evangelical and Reformed Church. I do not believe that either Dr. Sprunger or the synod can overlook this very obvious fact. All of this leads me to recall the phraseology of the “Form for Licensure,” in which every applicant for licensure, first step to ordination, stated, “I hereby testify that I accept the doctrinal standards of the Evangelical and Reformed Church as authoritative interpretations of the essential truth taught in the Holy Scriptures and promise to preach and teach the same. I also promised that I will submit to all admonitions and decisions of those authorities so long as I remain a member or an officer of the Evangelical and Reformed Church.” It seems to me here is a basic obligation that neither Dr. Sprunger nor any other minister ordained by the Evangelical and Reformed Church can afford morally to forget.

This whole matter is a very difficult and painful one. If Dr. Sprunger is disposed to persist in his advocacy of this Urantia Book’s teachings, we could get into a prolonged and agonizing theological dispute. His letter seems to me to indicate no inclination to respect the judgment already expressed on this book by the two theologians to whom it was submitted. My hope and prayer is that Dr. Sprunger himself, on second thought, may come to feel that this seemingly esoteric interpretation of the gospel, if it is not an addition to the gospel, can only eventuate in trouble for the congregation, for the Michigan–Indiana synod, and for the church at large. If there is any truth in the report of the nature of the sermon preached in Grace Church last Sunday or the Sunday before, it would seem that the inevitable kind of trouble has already begun to break loose. At this point I can only counsel you and your associates on the synodical council to advise further with Dr. Sprunger in the hope of forestalling further trouble.

I intended when I began this letter sending a copy of it to Dr. Sprunger. In view of the fact that according to his own letter to me, copies of his letter to me were sent to members of the synodical council among others, I am taking the liberty of sending copies of this letter to the other members of the synodical council also. Indeed, it now occurs to me that it would be wise to send to each of them a copy of an excerpt from my January 23 letter to you, which will indicate the judgment on the Urantia Book expressed by the two theologians to whom it was submitted.

With kindest personal regards,

Yours sincerely,
James E. Wagner

---

UBH [Excerpts] DR. WAGNER to PRESIDENT KROEHLER

January 23, 1958

As I wrote you previously, I submitted the Urantia volume and a miscellaneous collection of materials which had been given to me by the elder from Dr. Sprunger’s church, to two members of the faculty at Mission House Seminary whose names, I will ask you, for obvious reasons, to keep confidential if in my previous correspondence I indicated the two I had in mind. They are both men in whom I have as full confidence in their theological competence and Christian conviction as I have in any of the theologians of our Church. I chose them, moreover, because they are of the same seminary and graduate school as is Dr. Sprunger and could, therefore, be expected to study this material with the fullest possible sympathy for the man and the views to which be seems to be committed. The reaction to the Urantia teachings which these two theologians concur in is reflected in the following paragraphs:

“Much of the material strikes one as Gnostic. The Church rejected Gnosticism because it substituted speculation for faith and pretended to know more about Jesus Christ than the commonly accepted tradition of the Church. One can only read this material having a warning of Paul in mind: ‘Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.’ (Col. 2:8)

“It would be an interesting study for a retired professor of Church History to evaluate the similarities between the Urantia Book and the ancient Gnostic systems. In want of a better suggestion, the problem may also be suggested for investigation in an S.T.M. [Master of Sacred Theology] thesis.

“I personally have a hard time penetrating the depths of the Bible and appropriating its rich vocabulary. If I should spend further time acquainting myself with the ‘gobbledygook’ of the Urantia Book, I would be ready to have my head examined!

“As Protestants we have no ‘Index’. There is no objection to reading this book. But one may also recall: ‘All things are lawful for me; but not all things are expedient.’ (I Cor. 6:12).

“We must remind readers of the book that the Church acknowledges God’s final revelation in Jesus Christ. To claim that the Urantia Book is a new revelation is to excommunicate oneself from the fellowship of the Church.

“This Book adds absolutely nothing to our faith in God as Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier. It is superfluous.”

One of these theologians added to the above paragraphs in which both concurred his own comment in these words:

“I do not see how one can harmonize the Urantia Book’s teachings with the Biblical message. The Church, throughout its history, has strongly resisted a diffusion of the Revelation. Christianity stands upon the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. While the Evangelical and Reformed Church allows considerable freedom of interpretation, it has clearly stated in the Constitution that this freedom is to be exercised responsibly within the context of the Scriptures.”

---

UBH LOUIS HAMMERSCHMIDT to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

South Bend, In., March 5, 1958

My dear Sprunger,

I certainly appreciated your sending me your recent correspondence concerning the Urantia Book, and I am not surprised to see you take the tolerant but determined stand, and I wish you every success. May I ask if you receive any reply from Dr. Wagner, that you would send me copy?

I am enclosing herewith correspondence received from our mutual friend, Harrah; also a letter from and to Rev. Meussling, that I know will be a comfort to you.

I was indeed pleased, but not surprised, to learn the reasonable attitude taken by Rev. Kroehler.

I shall be pleased to have you keep me informed of this situation, as I feel in the end it will prove successful.

With best wishes, and hoping to see you in the near future.

Sincerely yours,
Louis Hammerschmidt

---

UBH JOHN L. LEVY⁶ to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

San Francisco, March 6, 1958

Dear Dr. Sprunger,

I was recently shown a copy of the Urantia Book and found myself very much interested by its approach and by some of the statements I found there. While I was only able to glance at it briefly, I gathered that there was real wisdom and insight there and much of unquestioned value. I must admit, though, that I found the approach taken to be rather disturbing and confusing.

I was given your name as someone who might be able to tell me something of the book, and would appreciate any information you might give as to who wrote and published it, for what purpose, any organizations that are involved, etc. I would also like to know where copies may be obtained.

Very sincerely yours,
John L. Levy

---

UBH THE PLYMOUTH PILOT CREATIVE LIVING COLUMN

By Meredith Sprunger

Circa March, 1958

A UNIQUE BOOK

This is my last column in The Plymouth Pilot. I have enjoyed writing these articles for the last couple of years and much appreciate the kindness which The Pilot and many of you have shown toward me. The pressure of other duties has forced me to discontinue writing the column.

In this farewell column I should like to introduce you to the most unique, stimulating, and constructive book which I have ever read. This book is entitled The Urantia Book. . . . There is a copy in the Plymouth Public Library if you should like to look at it.

It claims to be new revelation. This is not new; there have been many such claims in the past. The thing that is startling is the quality and profound insights of the Book. I would caution you to read it not as revelation but critically as you would read any other book.

Just as students of the life of Christ recognize the superlative quality of his character even though they may reject his divinity, so mankind is destined to recognize the unparalleled quality of the insights of the Urantia Book—even though they do not accept it as new revelation. Evaluated on the basis of spiritual insight, philosophic coherence and reality-centeredness, it is far superior to any book with which I am acquainted.

I know of no one who has read the Urantia Book in its entirety who has differed, essentially, from this evaluation. I know of around a dozen ministers in several denominations who have read it and concur in this opinion. Ministers, generally, I find are afraid to read the Book. They usually browse through it and make the pronouncement, “Hogwash.” I did the same but went ahead and read it anyway and was amazed at its contents. Most people should begin reading around page 1495 in the life of Jesus and read to the end of the book.

One would expect that any authentic revelation would be continuous with, not contrary to, previous authentic revelations. Although the New Testament presents a loftier view than the Old Testament, it is continuous with it. You will discover this same parallel between the New Testament and the Urantia Book. Many of the things Bible students have wondered about and yearned to know are clarified in the Urantia Book.

As you read the Urantia Book try to do so with an open mind and listen for the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It stands or falls on its own inner validity or lack of it. If you only browse through the book, reading a chapter here and there, you will in all probability reject it. If you will read the entire book, you will almost certainly understand its immense significance.

You will discover that it does not advocate a new religion. It cautions repeatedly concerning the dangers of fanaticism. If your religious convictions are mature and if you have grown in reasonable spiritual insight, inspired by the teachings and person of Christ, you will find that reading and even accepting the teachings of the Urantia Book will not change any of your fundamental religious convictions. It will confirm many things, which, through the guidance of the Spirit, you had surmised to be true. You will at last have a religious outlook that is worthy of the superlative teachings and personality of Jesus concerning God as a loving Universal Father. Although the book may not change your fundamental convictions, it will add tremendously to your knowledge of God. Good reading and God bless you.

---

UBH HENRY G. KROEHLER to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Jackson, Mich., March 17, 1958

Dear Meredith,

. . . I wonder whether we might have just some personal correspondence. For some time I debated whether I ought to send copies of this correspondence to Dr. Wagner. But now I would first of all have some exchange of ideas just between you and myself without drawing anyone else into our thinking. If we can reach some kind of conclusion on this matter, then perhaps later we can share the conclusion with others. . . .

My concern at this particular point might be stated as follows: In a measure you are still recommending reading the Urantia Book to other pastors. In view of the fact that at the present time the book is labeled as being outside of the doctrinal standards of our Church, it can hardly be recommended as a source for insight in relationship to the Christian faith. I am stating this not in terms of voicing a conclusion but rather as sharing ideas on which I would like to have your reaction.

Now it may readily be that further study of the Book on the part of other theologians may reverse the present position. Offhand I do not think that that will happen, yet I present it as a possibility. In the meantime, however, it is labeled semi-officially as being contrary to the doctrinal standards of our denomination. This does not mean that a person should not read it or even study it, but in my present judgment it would mean that a person should not recommend it to anyone else as a book that contributes to our understanding of the Christian faith.

Because I am searching for the best and most helpful manner of expressing my thinking, I am suggesting that this particular correspondence be just between us. Similarly, your response to me I would also like to keep just between the two of us. I hope that you may find time in this particularly busy season to give some thought to answering my letter.

Sincerely,
Henry

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to HENRY G. KROEHLER

Culver, In., March 20, 1958

Dear Henry,

Thank you for your letter. I see little point in discussing the Urantia Book. It is clear that the professors who evaluated the book read very little of it and frankly admitted they did not understand what they read.

If there should come a time when you or others have read enough to pick out specific heresies, I would be glad to discuss them.

I don’t think you will find them.

Naturally I shall recommend the book to other ministers but shall never try to tell them how to evaluate it.

Cordially yours,
Meredith

---

UBH E. J. A. KOCH to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Detroit, Mich., March 20, 1958

Dear Dr. Sprunger,

Thank you for sending the Urantia Book. I have been reading it topically as certain chapters attract me, but I am really starting from the beginning. Found the chapters on the Sevenfold Bestowal most interesting. Likewise the essays on the twelve apostles. When I had the book in my hand soon after it was published, it was on a loan basis for only a few days and in a busy season such as the present one, and so could really not do justice to it. Believe I bogged down in the introductory material which I have now read with considerable profit. I find the book not only interesting and exciting, but at times edifying and always stimulating.

My organist in Elmhurst had access to the book through people who were evidently close to Dr. Sadler, and I believe were close to, if not members of, the Urantia Society in Chicago.

I believe a book like this must be studied carefully by persons competent to read it, who also have an open mind, and are psychologically ready for its offerings, before it is recommended too widely, even among the clergy. Readers should also have the mental capacity and critical faculty to examine it with real scrutiny. While some of the younger theologians should be encouraged to give us their opinions, I also feel that some theological professors are most unqualified as professional theologians of the Church to evaluate it for their fellow pastors. I think you know what I mean. I am not at all inclined to let professors or any other particular professional or ecclesiastical personnel decide not only if it should be read, but even to pass authoritatively on its inherent claims. I am not sure who can make such a decision, unless it is the individual who reads it, doing so with a devout mind and heart, amenable to the Holy Spirit, who in the last analysis is the one who confirms God’s word in the heart. I know this runs all the risks of subjectivism, but it is less hazardous than theological or ecclesiastical authoritarianism.

I do think the Church can hold all of us accountable for what use we make of this material, and here we must all be most conscientious and cautious. Most of us who will stick with a book like this have probably had occasion to explore and evaluate other esoteric materials, without in the least doing any violence to the Confession of the Church and our message.

I am pleased to have this opportunity again to examine this book. Best wishes for the holy days and season ahead.

Sincerely yours,
Ed

---

UBH EMILIA RATHBUN⁷ to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Palo Alto, Calif., March 20, 1958

Dear Meredith J. Sprunger,

Mr. Levy has brought your letter of March 10 to my attention. I am very much interested and alerted by the Urantia Book. We, in our work, have had experiences and leadings which make you and the Book important to us. Please mail me a Book either C.O.D. or I can mail you a check if you prefer.

I am enclosing a copy of our summer activities and a report of our work this year. We are a lay movement here with considerable vitality. We are not interested in numbers, but in depth; and have a very deep sense of being a part of a larger movement. We are looking for the rest of us now—you can see why we are so interested. . . .

Sincerely and in fellowship,
Emilia Rathbun

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to EMILIA RATHBUN

Culver, In., April 2, 1958

Dear Mrs. Rathbun,

Thank you for your interesting letter and the material on the Sequoia Seminar. After reading the material, it seems to me that you have a very significant group. You will find the Urantia Book tremendously stimulating and helpful.

It is a book which I find most ministers at first are prejudiced against (because it claims to be new revelation) and afraid to read. We have a ministers’ study group that meets in South Bend and our biggest task is to get ministers to take it seriously enough to read it. Once you get them to read it, they are deeply impressed. We also have a study group among the teachers at the Culver Military Academy and another here in town.

Since you are especially interested in the life of Christ, perhaps you should read that section of the Urantia Book first. Your first impression might even be better if you started reading where the New Testament story begins, his baptism. I should like to impress upon you that you cannot form an adequate evaluation of the Book until after you have read all of it. And think it over for six months.

Under separate cover I am sending you a copy of the Urantia Book. You may send me a check for it. Am also sending a brief condensation of the Book which may help you get a quick total picture of the scope of the Book—but the condensation will not convince you concerning the authenticity of the Book. This comes through a critical examination of the Book itself. . . .

I shall be most interested in your reaction to the Book and in the response you find if you introduce people of your seminar groups to it this summer.

Cordially yours,
Meredith J. Sprunger

---

UBH K. DAVID SCHLUNDT to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Goshen, Indiana, April 5, 1958

Dear Meredith,

Last evening I had an experience which, on top of others, has brought me to a solid conviction I want to share with you.

It was my last meeting of the year with my junior confirmation class, ages twelve to thirteen. Since I have experimented with a good bit of different materials with them throughout the year in an effort to build an ever better curriculum, I decided to see how they would react—if at all—to the little paper you did for our confirmation, “The Story of God and Our World,” based on the Urantia Book. I only told them it was a summary, done by a fellow minister, of something else. I asked that they would give to me their honest and forthright reaction. As usual they did.

After I had read a page and a half they insisted that we stop and talk about it. Now in what follows, Meredith, I do not wish to imply any criticism of your writing ability. I certainly could not have done better and I doubt that anyone could. In a sense this will be my point. I had only three present last evening, but they are a good cross-section of the usual confirmation class. The one boy is very bright, so much so as to present a problem in any confirmation group. . . . One girl is about average, the other below in interest. Both girls turned up their noses and agreed it was fantastic. The boy’s criticisms were interesting. “Junk!” he said, “Very poorly written. The thoughts behind it may be OK but the way it is put is terrible.” He went on to say that it was all too real, i.e. literal. I did not read any further but went on, to the boredom of the girls, to talk of symbolism with him, which he can more than grasp. For example, in defining an angel, he said, “An angel is something that is ‘nothing.’” He meant this constructively. After a time what I had read was becoming acceptable to him as he saw the necessity of describing the unknown with word symbols from the known. But the paper itself remained trash to him.

Now here’s my point. In relation to the cosmology and pre-history of the Urantia Book, I am convinced (not only by this incident) that a condensation or summary is worse than useless. It is downright destructive. I recall my own reaction reading the “official” Summary prefaced by your excellent Evaluation when you first gave me the Book. Had my respect for your judgment been less, I would have chucked the whole preposterous mess right then and there, calling it Gnostic, esoteric gobbledygook, as our brothers who do not apparently respect your judgment have done. Any attempt to summarize or condense the Urantia Book, or have someone read a summary before the Book itself, would be like my trying to convince someone that Van Gogh is great by a sending him a sketch I had hastily made. The greater the masterpiece, the greater the folly of trying to pass a foreshortened substitute. Indeed, many philosophical and religious insights can be pulled from the book and used profitably, even as a preparation for the Book itself. But I do not believe huge numbers of the “details” can or should be. It is like a Van Gogh. You must see it all before it is believable, even though you may talk about color before seeing it. The Urantia Book among other things is a remarkable work of art, indeed without parallel. Read a summary. Then turn to the book itself. Two worlds. The Book has an immediate “atmosphere” on any and all pages that cannot be imitated. I cannot explain it, for it is much more than style (what style for example?). It is there. I experienced it from the beginning. I still do.

Our problem is to get people to read the Urantia Book itself or not at all. I know full well any summaries or excerpts are not meant to be a substitute, but this is clearly the way they tend to be used. May I suggest that from this point on when a book is given to someone any summaries or excerpts be withheld until after the book is read. In the “official” booklet of excerpts that you have tended to give with the book, I believe the following could be profitably used: your Introduction and Evaluation, the titles of the papers, reading suggestions, and the last page, the Urantia Brotherhood. Chuck the rest until the person has read the book itself. Send or make verbally no summaries. I do believe, however, further introductory material dealing with basic philosophical and epistemological principles could be used. In time I will try my hand at this myself for discussion with the group—but I hope you will try, too.

Think it over.

Sincerely,
Dave

---

UBH E. J. A. KOCH to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Detroit, Mich., April 7, 1958

Dear Meredith,

I am enclosing herewith $8.00 for the Urantia Book, as you suggested. I am afraid you are going to come up short on this. I will speak to you about this again at synod. . . . Haven’t had much time to read. Sort of envy you the experience! . . .

I believe I mentioned that my organist at Elmhurst handed me the Urantia Book to read. Had it only a few days. About the time when this Book was being prepared I had a strange experience.

At the time I didn’t think anything of it. A strange man and his wife attended my Lenten service at Saint Peter’s. After church they lingered. The man wanted to talk. I said some things in my sermon which prompted him to inquire about my insights. I don’t recall how I answered him, but our conversation led to matters which prompted me to tell him a few things—from my experience—of an “extracurricular” nature. In this context he asked me if I had any close acquaintance with one of our Eden professors. All I could say was that I had met him but that I didn’t claim him as a personal acquaintance; nor had he been my teacher. . . . Well, he confided that he had been very closely associated with him in a series of meetings—Indianapolis, I believe. He spoke very highly of him, as a very extraordinary person, and then added, that these were very important and unique meetings, and that the world would sooner or later be hearing about them. Evidently they have been dealing with some important data. He was reluctant about saying more. It was obvious, though, that some ideas expressed by me caused him to mention both this professor, and these meetings. The context of our conversation and that mysteriousness (both nearly forgotten) came back to me when I read of the manner in which this Book was prepared. It’s merely a hunch. My memory even is vague. The man lived in Lombard or Glen Ellen, and he was a layman. I don’t remember meeting him after that. The incident may be utterly irrelevant to the Book in question. But it popped into my mind. Thought you would be interested in this.

Sincerely, and thanks.
Ed

---

HMSA RACHEL GUSLER to MARTHA SHERMAN

Chicago, April 10, 1958

Dear Martha,

One night not long ago I wrote Dear Martha on this sheet of paper as well as “Dear Ones All” and “My Dear Ones” on two others for Phil’s and yours . . . but the letters have remained unwritten. . . .

I have attended Forum only once or twice since early December. Am enclosing the ’57 4th quarter report⁸. I think it will be of great interest to you both.

Mr. Sprunger, who has the class in Indiana, is now meeting elsewhere than in his home and has interested a group of ministers in [the book]. Someone reported him to the church authorities higher up, but since he is doing no wrong, the class goes on. The group expects to join the group here for one Sunday afternoon soon.

The Glenview group which was meeting in the Community Church there has become a Society and is not meeting in the church any longer. You remember, that group was started by the son of the Burtons.

There is a class for beginners which meets before the Society at 333 [N. Michigan Ave.] on Sunday afternoons.

Dr. Sadler said one Sunday that he didn’t think the organization of Societies would ever become a church, for those who gave us the Papers are definitely opposed to it. I hope not, but sometimes I wonder.

There are a retired Presbyterian minister and his wife who attend regularly Sundays. . . .

Please return the papers, etc., I am enclosing. I do not expect and do not deserve a letter at present so am enclosing a return envelope. . . .

With truly deep affection,

Rachel

[Marginal note: Guess the Index will be available this summer. I’m giving you one.]

---

UBH K. DAVID SCHLUNDT to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Goshen, In., April 11, 1958

Dear Meredith,

Indeed I now remember your saying the very things I wrote you at the last meeting together, which only goes to show that words and thoughts mean little until one has become experientially aware, at least for one such as myself. Please remember this as you continue to function informally as our group leader. You have been with this much longer than the rest of us thus many things that have become clear and experientially valid to you are as yet only on the thin edge of our thinking, not yet a genuine part of ourselves. We have all sensed that you are far out ahead—of the rest of us, at least. In spite of this you cannot give us your experience, your internally validated thoughts, your inexpressible intuitions and sureties. Rather do I ask of you patience and understanding as each single one of us gropes through this totally unanticipated confrontation in our own individual ways, and at our own speed. Indeed I now remember your saying the very things I wrote you.

I have come to feel a bit rushed of late, and after talking with Boyd the other day I am sure he shares this feeling. The initial conflict with “men in authority” had much to do with this. So long as the pressure was on I felt the need to make decisions at least in a fairly “public” sense as quickly as possible. I will never as you know cease to fight without qualification for the right to read, possess, discuss, study, and believe as I feel I must. This was my deep conviction before I ever saw the Book, and most certainly afterwards. But this is one thing, and an endorsement of the Book as being what it claims to be is another—even quietly to a friend I might introduce it to.

As you well know, I do believe the Urantia Book is genuine. The more critical I become, the stronger it becomes to me. I have no trouble with its basic insights, even most of its un-basic ones. But the Book itself as an extraterrestrial revelation presents a much more difficult situation. I dare not shortcut my own integrity, intellectual, emotional, or otherwise. This whole matter involves tremendous personal responsibility. I want time—not to let it sit on a shelf, but to actively study and test it in my own life, and gradually in the life of my congregation. You yourself when you gave the Book to me and others said that we should take a year before any really final evaluations. You’re right, psychologically and spiritually. I predict that in a year every member of our present study group will be more than ever behind it. But we must grow into it through the most intensive kind of individual study, prayer, self-criticism, etc. The way is every bit as important as the goal. We are not all at your level yet. I am still fragmented. I continued to have attacks of radical doubt, and I must go through them, not around.

I want others to read and study and test this Book—even more, its insights. But if I sign my name to any letter of introduction, I insist that it be made very, very clear that I am unwilling to grant the Book is what it claims to be. Understand that I have the courage to face what others may think of me. I am sure at present. I must know how it looks six months from now. This is too big to jump at and run with. It must have the test of a reasonable length of time. This opportunity you have had. Help us make sure we have the same.

I would even suggest you encourage us to go more slowly. I guess I feel that you have rushed us a bit too. Remember, this may only be my emotional reaction to your being the one to introduce me to it. I told you I might hate you at times as I struggle emotionally with it. Excuse me if my own inner struggle and resulting occasional hostility splashes over on you at times. Nothing personal is meant by it. Yet Boyd also feels rushed, so maybe you are unconsciously getting over-enthused with our apparent progress. Let’s not overdo the mission work yet—as a group that is. May the little we do be quiet and careful. As individuals we can of course do as we wish, but as a group—something else enters then. I feel we must talk this over much more thoroughly as a group. I am presently inclined to think we would do well to cut off any group mission work by mail until next September.

I think, for example, that a devil’s advocate approach to the Book as a whole—that is, in relation to its basic assumptions—would be most healthy in our group study. I do this often myself, but would like to see it done in the group too. For example, why really do our critics call it Gnostic? Can we be accused of an Arian heresy as well? Why does Kroehler call it a hodgepodge? I want to understand our critics. I want to be able to grapple with attack, because I have first attacked it myself. Naturally my own view of the church makes heresy a meaningless accusation, but we must evaluate where we stand socially and historically. I do not want to walk into this with my blind spots if it can be helped.

Thanks for your time and thought.

Cordially,
Dave

---

UBH EMILIA RATHBUN to MEREDITH SPRUNGER

Palo Alto, Calif., mid-April, 1958

Dear Dr. Sprunger,

Thank you for your generous sharing of material on the Urantia Book. It has come as a great affirmation to us. For some time we have been getting strong leadings here that we have a very significant and extended work to do. The conclusions which we have come to quite independently of the Urantia Book, and which are from the “other side,” check perfectly with all findings on the subject in the Urantia Book.

Particularly am I impressed with the part on Jesus, as that is our work and what we are most interested in. We are beginning to contemplate the possibility of an action on a large scale. We are pondering and getting leadings on whether to bring together leaders of various movements with constituencies of their own—do you know much about the extension of the Urantia Societies and do you feel Dr. Sadler would be interested? Do you have any leadings in the direction of a national move of any kind? I mean on a top scale and how it is to be accomplished? We have accepted with a great deal of hesitancy even the thought; I feel that with the modern knowledge of the dangers of the unconscious and its projections one tends to be very conservative. We are all very normal people, holding respectable positions in the community, and yet we have a world of the spirit which few people would understand. We feel we have quite a bit of the leadings—the important job seems to be to get the group together who is at the level of contemplative prayer and who have been thoroughly “cleaned,” as we term it. We feel sure we will get the instructions for further steps. We have a very devoted intelligent normal group here working to discover God’s will for this age. We are willing to go to the limit to be used and feel we are.

How do you work the Urantia Book into your church structure? What do you feel the role of the church is in this crisis? Do you have a method or process for producing leadership of the spirit?

Could you come or send someone to one of our seminars? Perhaps we should attempt to follow out the question of why our paths crossed. It was a long way to go to Puerto Rico to get your name—we feel no one passes our path without it being significant. We work very closely with the other side. Perhaps you can get some leadings on these questions.

I feel that you will understand the spirit of this letter and the urgency of God in these times. There is great need to raise up a mighty instrument of single-minded souls to be used by him for a modern miracle—perhaps unspectacular but again showing that devotion to God makes a difference in human life. It is so little demonstrated that people no longer distinguish who God’s workers are. We are not ready but we’re looking for the group.

Sincerely,
Emilia Rathbun

---

UBH MEREDITH SPRUNGER to EMILIA RATHBUN

Culver, In., April 20, 1958

Dear Mrs. Rathbun,

Thank you for your letter. You probably will not fully appreciate the Urantia Book until you have had opportunity to give it a complete reading. It is truly an amazing book.

Regarding large-scale action, it is wise to make haste slowly. Your idea of bringing together the leaders of various progressive movements of the world is good. But this is something that cannot be rushed if solid results are to be achieved. It is my conviction that all of these movements will be integrated by a common interest, eventually, in the Urantia Book. As groups become acquainted with the book they will naturally get acquainted with the Urantia Brotherhood and thus become acquainted with all groups studying the Urantia Book throughout the country. When these groups send representatives to the Triennial Delegate Assembly of the Brotherhood, there will be the kind of meeting which you suggest.

At present there are four official Urantia Societies (there is one in Los Angeles) and at least nine study groups throughout the country. Before a Society can be organized at least ten people must have read the entire Urantia Book and believe its teachings. The Urantia Brotherhood wishes to build solidly rather than rapidly. I know that the officers and members of the Urantia Brotherhood, including Dr. Sadler, are most happy to cooperate with all people of good will. But because of a limitation of time their activities center around the Urantia Book.

Our pastor’s study group is asking these same questions you bring up about spreading this fellowship on a national scale. But we realize this is something which dare not be pushed too fast. Those people who are ready for it will find it—thus it will steadily grow. Meanwhile it is good for us to have nationwide contacts and prepare for the day when a nationwide emphasis is necessary. Sooner or later the Urantia Book will get national publicity; this may force certain decisions. I believe it is wise to keep it a silent movement as long as possible. This seems to be God’s way of bringing about growth on each level of life.

We have a study group on the Urantia Book in the community but I am keeping it separate from my activities in the church. The church is almost always a conservative social institution. If we do not force the issue, I think the church will accept the Urantia Book over a period of years and be transformed by it. Although I have done much research in many fields to discover laws and techniques of spiritual growth, I would not claim any unique method of acquiring spiritual insights, growth, or leadership. I think the next great field of conquest for man is discovering mental laws and forces which we hardly know exist. Psychology is still in the alchemy stage of development.

Am afraid the cost of my coming to the West Coast would be prohibitive. There is a significance in the people that come into our lives. The spiritual intelligences of the universe have a way of bringing like-spirited people together. We may have to wait to understand its significance.

I believe you have found the group with which and through which tremendous things will be done for our world. My suggestion to you would be this: get at least ten of your number to make the complete reading of the Urantia Book and consider the possibility of forming a study group or a Society. If you have people who are deeply spiritual and dedicated and have scientific interests and discipline, start research to discover mental and psychic laws—this is man’s next big evolutionary step.

If there’s any way in which I can be of help, let me know.

Cordially yours,
Meredith J. Sprunger