Hitler
Mein Kampf (My Struggle, or My Battle) is an anti-Semitic racist diatribe showing his hatred and fear of Jews saying such things as "We cannot bargain with the Jews ... Therefore, I am now convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator by fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord’s work." One book wrote: "a few days after publication of the second volume of Mein Kampf Hitler turned a Nazi Christmas celebration into another virulent attack on Jews. ‘Christ,’ he said, ‘was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews.’ He was not the apostle of peace. His life’s purpose and life’s teaching was the battle against the power of capitalism, and for this he was crucified on the cross by his archenemy, the Jews. ‘The work that Christ started but could not finish, I – Adolph Hitler – will conclude.’"
If Rev. Moon is read without taking his words out of context and compared to evil men like Hitler, there is no comparison. The writings of totalitarian writers are diabolical. And their lifestyle reflects their demented teachings in their books. Rev. Moon’s life has always been peaceful and forgiving of those who attack him, even if they beat him to near death. The world did not read Hitler’s book and the world did not see the evil in Marx and Engels’ books and millions of people suffered horrible deaths because of it. The books of critics of Rev. Moon are diabolical in advocating violence against minority religions and their actions of violence have caused more harm than good, regardless of what some former members say they are thankful for going through the brutal and terrifying experience of having goons force them into small rooms and take away their freedom and start attacking their religious beliefs.
Rev. Moon talks about a future ideal world in which everyone will enjoy and he always says the means to it is peaceful and tolerant of all religions. Hitler and Marx and Betty Underwood push violence. Take your pick. Who’s right? Who’s of God? We can learn from this sorry episode of intolerance in American history and read Rev. Moon more carefully. On Mein Kampf one book says, "The Germans who did not trouble to read the book and the politicians outside Germany who dismissed it as a turgid and repetitious political tract made a great mistake. Few people read it attentively, and there is no evidence that Baldwin, Chamberlain, Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin, or any of the political leaders most directly affected did anything more than glance at it. If they had read it with the attention it deserves, they would have seen that it was a blueprint for the total destruction of bourgeois society and the conquest of the world." I pray that world leaders and everyone reads Rev. Moon’s books instead of relying on Time magazine articles written by liberal journalists who haven’t taken the time to read him carefully.
Maclean’s moon article
In an article in Canada’s weekly news magazine Maclean’s titled "Sun Myung Moon Embraces the High and Mighty" it is amazed that world leaders and famous people appear with Rev. Moon at events he puts on for his organizations. They can’t figure out why world leaders would damage their reputation by attending Moon’s conferences which they hate. They think it is because he "has orchestrated a remarkable campaign to win main stream respectability and political influence." First it is young college students who haven’t got a brain and are brainwashed by Moon, now it is world leaders who are mesmerized by this charlatan whose only motivation is to use them and then kill them when he takes over the world. It would never occur to the media that he was trying to do good and is altruistic. World leaders such as the former head of state of Canada as Governor General of Canada tell the press he came because "he is impressed by Moon’s dedication to the course of peace and international harmony." He is also quoted as saying he likes the church members he’s met: "I happen to know in a personal way many people who are adherents of the Unification Church. They seem to be leading exemplary lives – Canadians, American, Japanese and others." The article goes on in amazement that so many world leaders associate with Rev. Moon.
Former U.S. president George Bush and his wife Barbara spoke at rallies in Japan. The critics write that "it is wrong for respected public figures to lend their names to organizations linked in any way to the self-styled Korean prophet." He is not self-styled – God has chosen him.
Then they quote Steve Hassan who they call a former UC leader (the church denies any of his claims of leadership and his story of being an insider) saying "They are giving credibility to a group that wants to create an authoritarian dictatorship." No, it isn’t, Steve.
Any leadership in the future will be nonauthoritarian. It will be voluntary – not coercive as dictatorships are. The church has always said it will be democratic.
Bush is quoted as saying, "until I see something that troubles me, I will continue to encourage them," Bush declared. He also praised what he called the group’s ‘great emphasis on family.’"
One Church leader blasted the magazine for fomenting "public hysteria" about the church and maligning Governor Schreyer:
One book says on cults, "Cultists spend their days recruiting converts and raising funds. Living communally in rigid obedience to leaders, members work seven days a week and are constantly fatigued. Health is neglected; no attention is given to education outside the cult. [The Church owns Bridgeport University and a seminary that members are encouraged to attend or to attend other schools. Rev. Moon is for education] Caught up as they are in a momentum of control and submission, they find it nearly impossible to leave the cult."
Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre is the mass killing of French Protestants by Catholics which began on August 24, 1572 that started in Paris and ended in the countryside in October. There were approximately 13,000 victims in what is remembered as a crime against humanity.
Underwoods
In their book they give some of their past history. It turns out that the husband, Ray, was a Quaker conscientious objector and got out of fighting in WWII. His son tried to get out of fighting in Vietnam the same way. Has there ever been any persecution of groups like the Quakers that will not use violence in self-defense? Of course. Some of the early Christians for one. Then we read that Barb had an affair with a married man. The whole family is deeply liberal and feminist and therefore Rev. Moon seemed just "Victorian" as Betty said. They use the force of the state to use conservatorship that the judge should not have allowed it is for people who are mentally incompetent such as brain damage or senility. Barb was an adult and made conscious decision and was coherent.
When the members came to see her during her stay with her parents she was turned off by them in that they talked war talk, but not about her feelings or if there was anything she needed. She yelled at them. She saw the love of her parents and caring and that these members were all business and not human.
One professor wrote about Moon saying, "When viewed in relation to the millennial traditions of America, the eschatology of the Divine Principle appears as the least in a series of eschatological visions of the future we should both work and hope for. The eschatology of the Divine Principle is centered on the vision of unification, a vision which is at all times powerful...
"It is my conviction that we are witnessing the emergence of a significant religious movement which may enrich the whole range of Christian traditions and, if successful, could chasten the provincialism of American millennialism with a needed internationalism."
One author says, "Before we can seriously discuss conversation to new religions, we have to consider the charge that they are sinister organizations that brainwash their member. In North America and Europe many newspapers have told bizarre stories about life in new religions. Such stories depict cult members as mindless zombies. Supporting this view, ex-members speak on T.V. and radio talk shows about having been trapped by cults and subjected to sleep deprivation, protein-deficient diets, and isolation from family and friends. Similarly, the media spotlight parents who describe tragic stories about misled children they have attempted to rescue without success.
"Such stories raise the question of whether brainwashing really occurs in cults. To begin to answer this question, we must consider the history of brainwashing as a theory of religious conversion.
"The term brainwashing was first used to explain religious conversion by the British psychiatrist William Sargant, who wrote Battle for the Mind in 1957. This book is the main source of the term as used today. Sargant argues that evangelical conversions form St. Paul to Billy Graham can be explained in terms of psychological processes that he says are akin to what was called 'shell shock' during World War I. Shell shock is a psychological process that can be engineered to produce personality changes, and Sargant claims that 'brainwashing' to produce a religious conversion is a similar process. By equating brainwashing with shell shock and relating both to religious conversion, Sargant was intentionally associating the conversion process with disease.
Commenting about Methodism in his conclusion, Sargant says "this is no longer the eighteenth century. Then it did not seem to matter what the common people believed because they exercised no political power and were supposed only to work, not think; and because they read no books or papers. But religious conversion to fundamentalism seems out date now; ... the brain should not be abused by having forced upon it any religious or political mystique that stunts reason." He indicates that he considers fundamentalists —by whom he means evangelicals— to be dangerous people. He says that people like Billy Graham abuse people mentally and gain followers by brainwashing.
"Since Sargant wrote Battle for the Mind, evangelical Christians in Britain and America have increased, so has their political and social influence, while unfavorable criticisms of them have conversely decreased. New religions, however, continue to stand accused of brainwashing and mind-abuse— and, ironically, evangelical Christians are among the first to make such accusations.
"Flo Conway and Jim Siegelman have produced a variation of the brainwashing thesis, arguing that groups like the Moonies (members of Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church) use conversion techniques that place people under pressure until they snap, thus making personality changes possible. Evangelicals welcomed Conway and Siegelman’s book Snapping because it was a direct attack upon the Moonies and their leader. They completely ignored a short statement on page 46 that equates the conversion practices of the Moonies with those of evangelical Christians. In their latest book, Holy Terror (1982), however, Conway and Siegelman press their attack upon evangelicals directly, insisting that conversion is a form of snapping or brainwashing not only among would-be new religionists but also among would-be evangelical Christians."
EVIDENCE AGAINST BRAINWASHING
"We reject the brainwashing thesis not only because it represents an attack upon religious conversion generally but also because there is considerable evidence that people join new religions of their own free will.
"We have four main sources of evidence about recruitment to cults. First, there are testimonies by ex-cult members who have totally repudiated the beliefs of the cult but strongly deny that they were trapped by techniques of mind control. Second, there are many parents, relatives, and friends of cult members and ex-cult members who seem to understand that the person they knew whose to join the cult freely. Third, there are many studies by social scientists indicating that individuals have different conversion careers, which would suggest that the conversion careers, which would suggest that the conversion process is voluntary. Finally, accounts of the cult members themselves often indicate that their decision to become members in new religions followed a long search not only for meaning but also for the resolution of major life crises.
THE QUESTION OF DEPROGRAMMING
"Those who assume that members of new religions are in fact brainwashed sometimes attempt to undo the brainwashing by means of a process call 'deprogramming." Deprogrammers claim to 'rescue' people from cults by using a variety of techniques to coerce them into renouncing their former allegiances. We have questions about both the premise and the effectiveness of deprogramming, however. Saul Levine, a professor of psychiatry in Toronto, writes that although there are many reports of individuals having been successfully deprogrammed, he has himself seen only one such case. Indeed, Levine not only suggests that it is doubtful whether deprogramming helps many people; he also points out the way in which it is likely to harm the victim.
For deprogramming to work, subjects must be convinced that they joined a religious group against their will. They must, therefore, renounce all responsibility for their conversion and accept the idea that in some mysterious way their mind was controlled by others. But this idea has some very unsettling implications. If one has lost control on one’s mind once, why can’t it happen again? What is to prevent another person or group from gaining a similar influence? How can deprogrammed people ever be certain that they are really doing what they want to do? By its very nature, deprogramming destroys a person’s identity. It is likely to create permanent anxiety about freedom of choice and leave the deprogrammed subject dependent upon the guidance and the advice of others.
"Fundamentally, deprogramming denies choice and creates dependency. It robs people of their sense of responsibility. Instead of encouraging people to accept the fact that they chose to join a religion or realize that they make a mistake, it encourages people to deny their actions and blame others. Thus, deprogramming is not only psychologically destructive but profoundly unchristian. The Bible repeatedly emphasizes human accountability and calls us to choose between good and evil. Deprogramming denies our responsibility to make such choices.
"CONCLUSION: Once we reject the idea of brainwashing and the claims of deprogrammers, we are able to return to the question of developing an appropriate Christian response to new religions.
"Canadian religious studies professor Rodney Sawatsky, who is a member of the Mennonite faith, offers some useful insights into the tremendous persecution endured by the Unification Church. He asks:
"Why is it that Unification members are being persecuted by deprogrammers, by some psychiatrists, by the media and even by the law? Are not all religions free to exist in America? Are these people any more brainwashed than Billy Graham converts, or Jesuit priests, or soldiers? It is very doubtful. The problem with the Moonies is that they are challenging the status quo. They are giving their whole lives to their faith. They are seeking perfection, the kingdom of God on earth. When the majority culture likes to think that "I’m OK, You’re OK," that it is indeed building God’s kingdom, Mennonites, Mormons and Moonies come along with an alternative proposal—and persecution begins."
"To join a cult is to turn inward, psychologically and spiritually, to seek reassuring answers to questions about self-worth. Self-purification consumes the cultist’s time, energy, and thoughts. Trapped by the demands of the cult leader, whose approval is required for self-respect, he is prevented form genuinely contributing to social needs, although altruistic and idealistic goals may have been important motivations to join the cult in the first place.
"The cult represents a spiritual protest against a secular milieu. It also represents a protest against the failure of the traditional church to fill spiritual voids, to provide answers, to instill fervor. And, of primary importance to many members, the cult also represents a quest for the intimacy of true based on a shared ideological identity. For the natural family the Unification Church substitutes an "idealized" family and set of "perfect parents" that promise eternal relief from loneliness.
"Despite (or perhaps because of) pressures to achieve scholastically, today’s young individualistic generation exhibits a stubborn anti-intellectualism. To join a cult is to leap into a mythological world which denies reality in exchange for the apparent transcendence of illusion. Few young people have the sophistication of skepticism to see beyond the attractive illusions or the understand how intense emotional involvement can cloud and distort their perceptions.
"But most importantly, to bright, idealistic young people suffering from guilt and boredom of their privileged upbringing, the cult world (with its tentacles of deception and control hidden behind the sincerity of its adherents) presents the opportunity to engage in heroic missions in the context the what appears to be a life-and-death struggle for meaning. Whatever suffering occurs within the cult in the accomplishment of these missions is given the highest theological value.
"This priority is very evident when we consider that the same congress which approved the United States Constitution also passed the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. Article 3 of this ordinance states: "Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."
"The Founding Fathers believed that education should include not only the teaching of knowledge, but religion and morality as well. Today, however, the U.S. Public school system devotes little effort to the education of moral values. Religious teaching in the schools has often been replaced with secular humanist principles which are, in essence, atheistic. While many oppose the re-inclusion of religious principles in the American public school curriculum because they do not want their children to be indoctrinated in the beliefs of a particular denomination, the fact is that the Founding Fathers set out from the beginning to make the teaching of religion a unifying cultural factor in education and to exclude any emphasis on a particular creed or doctrine. They sought a universal religious code that would be acceptable to people of all faiths.
Antonio Betancourt, Executive director, The Summit Council for World Peace, wrote a letter to the editor of Macleans saying, "Rather than seeking objectivity as would be expected, your cover story disparages Rev. Moon, organizations he founded and those who choose to associate with them, including Canada’s former governor general Ed Schreyer. With that as a given, no wonder you made no effort to give the perspective of the Unification Church. The net result is to foment a sense of public hysteria based on unchallenged allegations and pure antipathy. I am further aghast at how easily you impugned the integrity of Schreyer, who has distinguished himself for decades in the service of Canada. You have also chosen to ignore evidence of the Summit Council’s substantive role in facilitating peace and stability in Northeast Asia, among other regions, so it would not distract from your caricature, heavily laden with discredited cliches of Moon and his church."
Senator Hatfield
Senator Mark Hatfield has said Barb lost her "intellectual freedom" in the UC. "It is an enlightened warning to each and every household." She says while away from the church she realized she was a "slave" and that "most of my life in the Family, I hadn’t ever closely examined the Principle, hadn’t had time to study or look into theological questions, weigh other viewpoints." She focused on being "obedient" and not thinking and following Abel. Because she had spent years not actually saying UC in fundraising and witnessing she felt the church believed in "heavenly deception." She hated being dishonest and was guilt ridden. She writes how the ends don’t justify the means. Her life was "limited and restricted." When she was forced to be with her parents, she felt they loved her more than the church that called itself a family. The members and leaders didn’t care for her and only used and abused her by working her like a slave and treating her as a cog in a machine that has no heart and no person has individuality. She was influenced also because a few of the former members who worked on her had been early members and leaders there.
I don’t believe that the UC should fundraise anymore because it has such terrible baggage. And no one will ever say the name of the church and Sun Myung Moon and they should hand a flyer out explaining what the money is going for with pictures of Father, etc. The past history of controversy is so great that they should focus on jobs and businesses and not regiment people and drive them endless hours as it seems they are still doing in 1995 when the Macleans article came out and several ex-members told the usual story of months of grueling fundraising. When the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts or the local high school band or the Jehovah Witnesses or Mormons come to the door everyone accepts that. There are scam artists ripping off elderly people and other too. When someone donates and buys something and later finds out that they gave to something Rev. Moon is behind they feel cheated and lied to and that is one of the worst things any one can do in America. The Boy Scouts are still persecuted by the gays, and Promise Keepers are criticized by the feminists but no one criticizes them for deceiving anyone in how they get their money.
Legally it is probably all right to sell things to help any organization, but in the case of the UC it isn’t good to fundraise anymore. We need an image different from rose selling and communes and single people pushed to the limit without time off. The Cain/Abel philosophy or restoration has been taken too far and there needs to be more freedom.
Republic of Heaven
Bruce Casino wrote an excellent article called Thoughts on Unification Theology and Democracy: The Republic of Heaven on Earth? He began by quoting Rev.Moon: "True Democracy is the way to win over dictatorship and personality cults. We find in Abraham's Lincoln's speech the eternal truth 'a government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.' The democratization of our nation is, therefore, the topmost priority." ("Citizen's Federation for the Unification of the Fatherland: Founder's Address" May 15, 1987)
Casino writes, "There is a need within the Unification movement to articulate the political ramifications of Unification theology so that the movement's efforts in the political realm are securely rooted in its theology."
"The articulation of this political vision is also required in order to respond effectively to attacks on the movement asserting that it intends to establish a global political dictatorship. An article in U.S. News and World Report, for instance, asserts that 'Moon's bid for political power is disquieting because the church's theology runs counter to America's democratic tradition.' Michael Warder, a former member, is quoted in the same article as stating: 'Within the Moon movement, there is no foundation for the ideas of freedom, the rule of law and the dignity of the individual as they are understood in the West.' The article also contains an allegation that the Unification Church is attempting to create 'a centralized world theocracy.' The movement is regularly accused of using certain of its activities and organizations as stalking horses to involve conservatives and liberals in its allegedly totalitarian plans."
He says that the church does not take a stand on politic issues: "there is at present an unfolding of a general Unification utopian vision with the realities of the political and social world. ... Until recently many member's conception of the ideal world has consisted largely of fuzzy generalizations about a place where no passports are required, everyone is happy, and the sun always shines."
Casino argues "that close examination of fundamental Unification concepts leads inescapably to the conclusion that democracy is mandated by the religious doctrine of the Unification movement. More specifically, those religious tenets support a republican, democratic system modeled after the American constitutional system, with elected representatives and a separation of powers between legislative, executive and judiciary." He argues against the "media criticism" that says Moon's goal is for a "monarchic feudalism."
He says, "the republican and constitutional form of democratic government is the form of the Unification ideal. Perhaps the kingdom of Heaven could also be called the Republic of Heaven on Earth. According to the Divine Principle, 'Democracy came about in order to replace the political dictatorship of monarchism and to win the sovereignty back to the hands of the people' (Divine Principle, p.445)."
In regard to all the quotes that anti-Moon writers use, he says, "The U.S. News and World Report article cited previously attributes certain ostensibly anti-democratic quotes to Rev. Moon as provided to that magazine by former members: 'The whole world is in my hand, and I will conquer and subjugate the world.' 'We must have an automatic theocracy to rule the world.' 'History will make the position of Rev. Moon clear, and his enemies, the American population and government, will bow down to him.'"
"These and similar quotes are cited repeatedly by those claiming the movement is anti-democratic. These quotes are described by officials of the church as inaccurate translations of Rev. Moon's words in Korean. The thrust of these remarks apparently was that the United States and the world would eventually come to respect the Unification movement and be grateful for its efforts. Any 'conquering' is to be done by love and service in a democratic context. The 'theocracy' remark seems to refer to the Latin root of the word meaning 'God's rule,' that is, the fulfillment of the prayer Jesus taught to Christians, 'Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.' To the extent that it refers to a political concept it is a mistranslation out of sync with Unification dogma."
Experts on Korean-English translations
"Linguists who are experts in the Korean language have criticized the misuse of the spontaneous translations offered by Rev. Moon's interpreters. Casino quotes from two experts who have "analyzed the "Master Speaks" series of Rev. Moon's talks and compared them with the tape recordings of those same speeches." These two experts are professors at two prominent universities. W.E. Skillend is a Professor of Korean Studies at the University of London and the other Korean expert is Mark Setton, a lecturer in the Korean language in the Faculty of Oriental Studies of Oxford University. Professor Skillend writes that "The transcripts in the series 'Master Speaks' are essentially little more than paraphrases of Reverend Moon's speeches. They do not in any way pretend to be verbatim translations."
He goes on to say, "The transcripts are not a reliable record of what Reverend Moon said on the occasions of the talks which they purport to record. The tremendously disparate natures of the Korean and English languages and cultures renders translation extremely difficult ... This problem is further accentuated by the fact that the subject matter of 'Master Speaks' involves theological and philosophical ideas which are necessarily complex." He concludes by saying, "I find it extraordinary that anyone, particularly any court of law, should seek to rely on the 'Master Speaks' transcripts as evidence of the teachings of the Unification Church, and irresponsible that any news media should do so" (Affidavit of W.E. Skillend, April w5, 1989.)
Professor Setton of Oxford writes of how difficult it was for Mrs. Choi (pronounced Chay) and the other interpreters for Rev. Moon to translate on their feet from Korean to English: "The interpreter consistently demonstrates a tendency to gloss over detail while elaborating in her own terms on what she deems to be the central themes of the message. The interpreter seems to have been more concerned to be true to the spirit rather than to the actual content of the material, as well as to amplify passages that have particular emotive value. One reason for this could be that she perceived her role as providing religious inspiration rather than giving an accurate account of the content. Consequently, in some cases, it is difficult or impossible to recognize not only corresponding sentences but whole paragraphs in the Korean transcript on the basis of the English transcription."
Rev. Moon rarely speaks from a prepared text that is carefully translated beforehand. He has spoken every day for over 50 years and the church is beginning to translate all this massive material into English since recordings have been taken since 1954. There are over 200 volumes of material each at least a book length. Rev. Moon constantly encourages members to learn Korean so they can understand him completely.
Rev. Moon is an exciting person to be around. There is tremendous energy and passion for God and the noble ideals God constantly reveals to him. He speaks for long hours every day. Professor Setton notices the spontaneous atmosphere around the translator and says that this makes it even harder to translate precisely: "interpretation is aggravated by the absence of carefully structured form and content as would be expected in a more formal presentation. It is rapid, highly colloquial, marked by frequent ellipses and lacks the emphatic pauses characteristic of formal speech."
Spontaneous and emotive
"The spontaneous and emotive nature of his speech also tends to ambiguity and lack of structure. There is usually no attempt to enlarge on the meaning of technicalities and esoteric expressions relating to the teachings of the Unification Church, and consequently this often becomes an additional task assumed by the interpreter on the basis of her own understanding of the Reverend Moon's theology."
"In conclusion, even the most able and well-trained Korean-English interpreter ... would encounter great difficulties in rendering the Korean in such a talk into English in view not only of the genealogical and structural unrelatedness of the two languages and the problem of the extemporaneous nature of the Reverend Moon's presentations and mode of speech but also due to the complexity and specialized nature of the subject." (Affidavit of Mark Setton, March 28, 1989).
Casino writes, "As Setton notes, the spontaneously translated passages 'reflect only to a very limited extent the original meaning intended by the Reverend Moon or distort the same.' It would behoove the Unification Church to have a re-translation done of the passages often cited as anti-democratic by the media if the original Korean tape recordings are available."
"Indeed, a re-translation of all spontaneous translations would no doubt produce fruitful insights. In any case, the 'anti-democratic' quotes have been taken out of context and are highly suspect since they are not verbatim translations of Rev. Moon's words."
Mr. Casino's article is full of many angles like the ones you have just read. There are so many good points that it is tempting to quote his entire speech. When we get the chance we'll type the whole speech and put it as a link here. Check back later.
Andrew Wilson on Theocracy
Bruce Casino is a long-time American leader in the UC. Another leader is Andrew Wilson. He has a Ph.D. from Harvard and has worked for years from his office at the headquarters for the UC as a writer and scholar. He says of Casino's article: "I agree that Unificationism supports democracy as the ideal form of government." He goes on to say, "Casino includes in his article an excellent excursus on 'Anti-Democratic Quotes' and points out the difficulties of translation, particularly of the extemporaneous translations used in a sermon setting. In this regard, I want to throw some light on the infamous quote 'We must have an automatic theocracy to rule the world' from Master Speaks, "The Significance of the Training Session," given at Belvedere on May 17, 1973. In 1984, in connection with a court case in the United Kingdom, I had the paragraph in which that quotation appears transcribed from a tape of that sermon and carefully translated from the transcribed Korean text. Mrs. Won Pok Choi's original extemporaneous translation, the Korean text, and the translation of that text appear on the next page."
We're not going to type out and show you the different versions. Let's go on to Wilson's comments on them: "Four points about this passage and its translations stand out. First, it is evident that Mrs. Choi's extemporaneous translation diverges from the Korean text at many points. As expert linguists have noted, a single passage taken from such translations cannot be relied upon unless it is supported by many other passages and is in line with the general trend of thought."
"Second, the impression in 'Master Speaks' that the Rev. Moon seeks to organize his own political party to defeat Communism and rule the world is false. He actually said that he wanted to organize a coalition of Christians into a political force in order to dissuade people from Communism. In fact he has done this through CAUSA and AFC, joining with like-minded Christians to form a formidable conservative force in American politics. His method -- coalition building -- is entirely consistent with his respect for democracy."
"Third, the Reverend Moon never said 'we must have an automatic theocracy to rule the world.' Instead what he said was: 'God is active in the realization of all human affairs,' surely not a controversial statement."
"Fourth, the phrase in Master Speaks 'the sons of God must rule the world' is again a misquotation. What the Rev. Moon actually said was that democracies should 'produce a succession of uncorrupt politicians.'"
"Thus, a retranslation from Master Speaks demonstrates that, in this case, the accusation is utterly baseless."
Dan Fefferman
A long time leader in the UC is Dan Fefferman. He writes that the UC has been predominately focused on anti-communism for most of its life. Now that communism is declining, the UC needs to focus on social issues. That is the job of the members. Rev. Moon does not focus on all the mundane issues that people debate. He doesn't comment on the raging debate over minimum wage or how we should reform the tax code. He is the Messiah who speaks about his revelations from God on the very core of life -- the family. His speeches are meant to explain the basic values of life, such as the nature of God, what masculinity and femininity mean, and how human history has been guided by God to reach His goal of a unified ideal world. His speeches are usually about religious issues. He explains who Jesus is and what the Bible means. When he speaks to congressman in the Capitol or members of the Politburo in Moscow he speaks philosophically.
Fefferman writes, "in the midst of our anti-Communist efforts, we have not yet taken the time to carefully define our positions on domestic policy issues. We brought important, sometimes essential, elements to the anti-Communist coalitions in which we engaged: youthful enthusiasm, plenty of warm bodies for rallies, an ideology which transcended mere nationalism and emphasized love, and (especially in the last decade) money. But when we look around ourselves now, and ask 'What do we Unificationists believe about the issues?' -- abortion, affirmative action, the budget, the courts, deficit spending, drugs, education, the environment, foreign aid, the military, monetary policy, pornography, prayer in schools, taxes, trade policy, welfare -- we find our social vision still somewhat unclarified. While it may be easy to agree, for instance, that abortion is wrong and prayer is good, we may find it more difficult to achieve a consensus regarding what the government should do about abortion or prayer in public schools. Yet it is essential that we begin to define our positions on the entire range of social concerns which affect this country and the world if we are to retain the vital prophetic character of Unificationism as a religious and social movement. Moreover, we are already committed to social activism through our participation in a variety of institutions and coalitions, such as the Washington Times, the American Constitution Committee, The American Freedom Coalition, CAUSA, the Washington Institute, and others. If we do not bring to these efforts a clear understanding of where we as a movement stand on the issues, we will be led by practically anyone with vision and commitment on his or her own issues of most intimate concern."
He says the UC must define "Unificationist social theory. In the spirit of what Unificationists call the 'Children's Course" it is up to us, ourselves, to accomplish this work. We cannot afford ot wait to let others do it for us." After many years of study and prayer we have written this book that we feel addresses many of the social issues Mr. Fefferman mentions.
Gordon Anderson on personality cult
Another leader in the American Unification movement is Gordon Anderson. He has held the title of Secretary-General of the Professors World Peace Academy. In an article called "Bringing Unificationism to Eastern Europe" he said some very insightful things. Unificationists must give leadership to this world. When the Soviet Union and other communist countries fell, followers of Sun Myung Moon were finally allowed to enter and witness. Anderson gave good advice when he warned that members should not teach that "messianism" is a "cult of personality. Human rights are highly prized and democracy recently won. To speak of a political system which would not have these rights, or a new political messianism, or cult of personality around the Reverend Moon would be tantamount to evangelical suicide."
UC Not a Personality Cult
He teaches that members must be grown up and mature and not have any part of them that is psychologically dependent: "Providentially, blessed couples of the Unification Church are in the position of 'tribal messiahs' ... Unificationists must themselves be freed from psychological dependency before they can help East Europeans to overcome it. Yet many church members" look to the UC to give them lots of money or headquarters to take care of them.
He writes, "It is precisely because Unificationism has a teaching of true parentism which goes beyond the supernatural messianism of traditional christianity, that it has the religio-social elements necessary to address the problem of physical salvation. True parents nurture, guide, and love their children, they do not oppress them by what is frequently called 'paternalism.' True love and true parenting can provide discipline and order without violating human rights, and can operate perfectly well in a democratic political system."
Failure of Socialism
"The failures of all forms of socialism in the twentieth century reveal that to hand over the care of others to 'higher institutions,' does not save us; for the people in those institutions have their own sinful nature. History has forced us to realize that there is an enemy within each of us which can only be eliminated by changing ourselves. We must either face ourselves and take responsibility or live with the consequences of deferring our responsibilities to others or ignoring them. Government throws back at us in the form of higher taxes, reduced efficiency, and impersonal care. Mother nature throws our pollution back in the form of acid rain, toxic water, and toxic soil. The enemy, it turns out, is not capitalism, but what people do with the freedom capitalism requires."
"The socialist world has collapsed, with the 'proletariat' facing its own sin. In a society where everyone has become dependent on the state, which in turn is made up of all the people, no one takes responsibility." Anderson ends by saying that Unificationists who go to such places as East Germany that have lived their whole lives under a socialist personality cult of communist leaders, need to give "concrete" solutions to their problems. He writes, "Today Eastern Europe has concrete social needs. It will not be enough to teach workshops. Religious instruction must be complemented by concrete social activity. Eastern Europe needs books, teachers, and dedicated examples of productive and Godly living. We should raise money to send our books to libraries ... we should send our best teachers and professors to transmit the democratic tradition." We plan on translating this book and our other books into other languages and sending them to libraries around the world. We hope you feel my books are important and will help us distribute them.
Any quotes that anti-Moon writers find that seem to say he is against democracy and for totalitarianism are simply read out of context. If he sounds critical of democracy it is only because he is sometimes critical of how people have used their freedom. He is for freedom and for voluntary persuasion to educate people on how to use their freedom. The only case I have found in all my reading of church literature that may be seen as anti-democracy is an article by a top leader in the UC. Zin Moon Kim is very close to Rev. Moon. He has held many of the highest positions in the church from Korea to America. In an article titled "Ideal World and Modern Western Democracy" he seems to look at democracy with total disgust. He puts down capitalism and democracy as full of contradictions and selfishness. Like Marx, he blames capitalism for creating "great gaps between the rich and the poor. Pervasive individualism causes moral and ethical problems." I'm not going to quote all his criticisms. They are the same that all socialists make. But I will quote one passage and refute it. He says, "History bears witness that a good monarchy is better than a democracy, especially in elevating people's moral and ethical standards, because the vertical standard exists in a monarchy but not in a democracy, and within the capitalism which is based on it, come from the collapse of the vertical and horizontal family ethic."
The problem with this statement and all the rest he makes is that he gives no example of some wonderful monarchy for us to look at and even worse he gives no alternative. He concludes by saying that "today's democracy and capitalism are based on a nearsighted individualistic and materialistic way of life, their adherents will have eternal regret." What are we supposed to replace this with? He says that we must clearly understand "Unification Thought, which critiques and puts all areas of human thought into a Principled perspective." Democracy and capitalism have to do with politics and economics. He recommends the book Essentials of Unification Thought: The Head-Wing Thought. He says it contains 13 chapters. "We can surely solve all kinds of social problems by applying the wisdom of Unification Thought." He comments on each chapter. For economics he says UT "solves the problems of capitalism by clarifying the origin of 'mine' and that 'mine' is also 'ours.'" The chapter "'Politics' demonstrates that the true country should be based on the family system."
We're sorry but we don't understand one word of this. And we would very much like to read the two chapters so we could know why he feels democracy and capitalism are so bad and just what it is that he has as an alternative. We have never seen any economic system or political system that has beaten capitalism and democracy. Apparently Mr. Kim has. But unfortunately he leaves with nothing. He concludes by saying that "The theories of Economics and Politics are not yet published." We especially don't understand why he is so against democracy when the official text of the Church teaches that democracy is from God. Human history, it teaches, has progressed higher over time and finally God could speak to the founding fathers to replace monarchy with democracy. There are many books that show democratic nations are far less aggressive and more prosperous and good than authoritarian nations. I guess that in Mr. Kim's zeal for vertical respect of leaders in the UC organization that he has missed the point that there are vertical leaders in democratic nations too. And there is a hierarchy in capitalist business.
History is moving toward democracy
Like I said, Zin Moon Kim, seems to stand alone in UC writings in seeing that God is for a monarchy. I hope he clarifies what he means by monarchy. I hope he writes detailed chapters on economics and politics. Until then, I don't think he is worth listening to. Another Korean leader that has held one of the highest positions in the church is Rev. Ahn. He is the premier lecturer of the Divine Principle in the church. Rev. Moon has asked every member in the world to attend his lectures. He had an article in a church publication called "Forty Years of Principle Study: Becoming Liberated From Satan." He is a scholar as well as a teacher. He joined the year the church was founded in 1954 and taught the Principle ever since. He says, "America has three fathers. The first is George Washington, who liberated America from British rule. The American Revolution led to the French Revolution and the liberation of the colonies in Latin America. After the First World War, the European monarchies became democratic. After the Second World War, colonies gained their independence. As a result of the Third World War, communist countries are changing. Thus, George Washington as the first father, began the movement of liberation from monarchy."
I rest my case for democracy and that the UC is not for a world authoritarian state where there is no freedom.
Rev. Moon believes that the best economic system is Free Enterprise. The other name for free enterprise is capitalism. He made a strong statement on economics to the Soviet Union when communism fell. He gave an interview to the Soviet newspaper, Za rubezhom, saying, "I would like to encourage the efforts you are making in business and commerce, to develop a wider-based individual incentive system. When people are stimulated, they are inclined to work hard and produce more. This is the secret of success of the free enterprise systems."
ETERNAL HOSTILITY
At the following website http://www.ifas.org/books/980126.html is the following positive review of the paranoid anti-right wing book Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy by Frederick Clarkson:
"The radical religious right is a well-organized, well-funded political force in the United States. The movement has a clear ideology based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. The radical religious right also has a clear political agenda: the replace ment of traditional American secular constitutional democracy with some form of theocracy. And despite the fact that the movement consists of a minority of eligible voters — around 15 percent by its own estimates — the radical religious right presents a c lear and present danger to the future well-being of every American who does not subscribe to its views.
"Although religious political extremists are still relatively small in number, one should not be deceived. In the German elections of 1930 the Nazi Party drew only about 15 percent of the vote. Yet Hitler took power in less than three years, even in the fa ce of two strong, well-organized parties, the communists and the socialists.
"In order to provide tools to oppose religious political extremists, Frederick Clarkson's book provides well-researched, well-argued, and well-written information. Following in the footsteps of such scholars as Russ Bellant, Chip Berlet, Sara Diamond, Skip p Porteous, and Rob Boston, Clarkson lays out a detailed and frightening analysis of what we face in dealing with the radical religious right.
"He devotes chapters to such subjects as the radical religious right's two centuries-old refusal to accept the firmly established constitutional principle of separation of church and state; what the true political status of their movement is, and the somet imes little recognized importance of Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church in it; Christian Reconstructionism (which provides the underlying theocratic ideology to the movement); an analysis of its main political fronts, such as the Christian Coalition, the American Family Association, Concerned Women for America, Paul Weyrich's Free Congress Foundation, and umbrella groups such as the Coalition on Revival; as well as the new male-chauvinist front, Promise Keepers.
"Clarkson also devotes a chapter to the growing role of violence in the promotion of the far right agenda (a matter of increasing importance since Richard Neuhaus, Chuck Colson, Robert Bork, Cal Thomas and others of their ilk now tell us that if they don't get their way through the ballot box, violence will become "unavoidable," and that's all right because its use will be pursuant to God's will.)
"The proposals of what to do about this clear and present danger is surprisingly thin. In the last chapter, Clarkson writes about "Defending Democracy: Rethink the Strategy." He presents a number of important measures, from registering more voters, conduct ing more research on the radical right, and identifying and exposing the "Christian Right's contradictions and weaknesses." But a good defense will take you only so far; it is the offensive tactics that are so essential.
"In the political game, having an offense good enough to win means having a strong ideological base, as does the radical religious right. To get more people to vote, and vote for democracy, we have to offer something positive to vote for, not simply someth ing negative to vote against. In my view, a political ideology built around the promotion of traditional American constitutional democracy is the key to victory.
"Nonetheless, Clarkson has made a major contribution to the necessary work of analysis and exposure of the radical religious right and its agenda. We, the American people need to mobilize in defense of our traditional secular American constitutional democracy before it is too late."