Those who were expecting a sermon today on the war in Afghanistan may be disappointed. My topic this morning is Unity of Mind and Mind. The idea I’m working with is how to apply the principle of restoration to one’s internal world. The same principle can be applied to Afghanistan.

First, I want to read again what Father Moon said about loving Satan just last spring. He said "Heaven's strategy is to allow itself to be struck first, and then to use this as a condition to take something from the other side. Satan strikes first, but in the end he has to pay reparations. Heaven teaches us to love even our enemies. In fact, Heaven ultimately requires us to love even Satan."

As a community of Unificationists, we have little to offer the experts in terms of military strategy and tactics. What we do have to offer is the other side of the military equation: the way of restoration, the way of Jacob and Esau embracing at the Ford of Jabbok. Our own Bill Gertz, America’s best known Unificationist writer, has called for an "faith based anti-terrorist initiative." Others have called for a "critique and counterproposal to terrorist ideology." I think our movement is uniquely suited to bringing forth such an ideological solution to the problem, and I sincerely hope that one will emerge just as it emerged in the movement for Victory Over Communism some 30 years ago.

But that is a topic for another sermon. What I want to address today is how to apply the principle of restoration to one’s internal situation. I think the war of Afghanistan has stirred up a lot of feelings for many of us. And indeed, I think there is a parallel between how we go about solving that situation and how we go about restoring ourselves.

It seems to me that Father is of two minds on this question of loving Satan. In the reading we saw that just last May he declared, "Heaven teaches us to love even our enemies. In fact, Heaven ultimately requires us to love even Satan." However, he has also said quite the opposite. In 1981 he said "Jesus taught that we should love our enemies, so doesn't he mean we should love Satan? No, he means you should love the person who has become a victim of Satan.

So which is it? Are we supposed to love Satan or not? One way of solving this problem is to say that by loving Satan’s "victims" we in effect show Satan the true standard of loving one’s enemies. Indeed, in context, this is what Father was talking about in 1981. Satan’s victims doesn’t just mean the families of the those who died in the World Trade Center. Having compassion for them is easy. It means loving those who have been so victimized by Satan’s ideology of hate that they would commit such an unthinkable crime.

Father teaches that we must love even the enemy who has raped and seduced our wives and daughters. If another man seduced or raped your daughter, could you love him? I hope you never have to face such a dilemma.

Consider the situation of UC parents whose hopes for their daughter are dashed when that daughter falls in love too early, outside the faith, and loses her Blessing? Could you love such a man, or the grandchildren of such a union? It’s something to ponder. But I can tell you from personal experience, that it is possible to learn to love such a person. I can also tell you that after the pain and the agony begin to subside, one realizes that the experience of loss--and of learning to love even the enemy on such a personal level--can bring you into a deeper sympathy with the heart of God than ever before.

Okay, let’s take it one step further. If we are supposed to love our enemies of love, what about loving the enemy within, our internal enemy? Can we go that far? Father says that Heaven calls us to love even Satan. I asked Father once, "where is the secret hiding place of Satan?" He answered in a flash, "that hiding place is in your mind." So we are supposed to love even Satan, and Satan lives in our minds. Now that is something to think about.

The introduction to Divine Principle states that the good mind and the evil mind cannot co-exist in their present form.

"We find a great contradiction in every person. Within the self-same individual are two opposing inclinations: the original mind that desires goodness and the evil mind that desires wickedness. They are engaged in a fierce battle, striving to accomplish two conflicting purposes. Any being possessing such a contradiction within itself is doomed to perish. Human beings, having acquired this contradiction, live on the brink of destruction."

How do we reconcile these two viewpoints:

I submit that just as in the external world, the answer lies in separating the sin from the sinner—loving the sinner, but hating the sin. As long as the sinner does not change his behavior, we need to oppose his actions. In some cases we may even be justified to use force if a sinner remains unrepentant.

So how do we deal with the enemy within? How do we make unity between the good mind and the evil mind? I think it means suppressing the evil or Cain-type mind when it is at war with us, but also discovering the grain of goodness within it that can be brought into harmony with God.

Father talks about rising above "brotherism" to "parentism." So let’s look at this first from the standpoint of the brothers, and then from the standpoint of the parents. What are some of the characteristics of the Abel-type and Cain-type views of life. Let’s start with the Abel type:

And how about the Cain-type view of life? First let’s use Abel’s viewpoint to describe Cain’s attitude, and after that we’ll use Cain’s own language.

Cain doesn’t seem like such a good guy, does he? But whose words are we using to describe Cain’s attitude here? We are using Abel’s words. This is still brotherism—taking Abel’s side against Cain. How about if we take the same issues and describe Cain’s attitude with Cain’s words?

So what should the parents do when the children are fighting? They try to help them make peace. First they help them see each other’s viewpoints. They try to help them remember the good things about the other guy. They try to help Cain see that Abel really is upholding important family values. And they try to get Abel to see that Cain is holds important values that Abel too should inherit in order to become a mature son of God. But of course, if Cain has a club in his hand and is coming after Abel with murder in his eyes, the parents have to stop Cain, even if they have to break his arm to get the club away from him.

So how does this apply to the "enemy within?" I think it applies this way: When the so-called evil mind is in danger of causing me to sin, I should repress it. But I should also recognize that every one of the seven "deadly sins" is rooted in original human nature.

What I am getting at here is that almost every impulse of the supposedly Satanic side of ourselves has a germ of goodness in it. And that is the key to restoring the so-called evil mind or Cain nature. Take sex as the most obvious example. When we were not yet blessed in marriage, we needed to repress our sexuality. But after the blessing, we could express it freely. In fact, lately it seems that Rev. Moon has been encouraging us to express our sexuality more freely—more often, more intensely, with more variety—as long as it is with the same partner and centered on True Love.

Many times Rev. Moon talks about sex, food, and sleep being our enemies. In that case I’m very glad that he’s emphasizing loving you enemies these days, because sex, food, and sleep are probably my three favorite things in the universe.

All of this of course, comes down to the relationship of mind and body. Sometimes Rev. Moon says the body is our enemy, or that the subjugation of the body is the purpose of religion. But again, doesn’t that mean we also have to love our bodies? We do need to give our bodies adequate food, sleep and medical attention, after all. The idea is not to kill our body or get rid of our bodily desires, but to bring our body into God’s service. So actually, sleep and food are only bad things if they are indulged in excess.

Rev. Moon referred to "natural subjugation" of one’s "love enemy." What he means, I think, is the establishment of natural subject-object relationship based on love. In this way, the "artist formerly known as Satan" is transformed into light-bearer known as Lucifer. I think that is the meaning of the declaration of Satan’s surrender to God. And since the ceremony of God’s Coronation, Rev. Moon proclaims that Satan’s sovereignty is ended, the sovereignty of God is established, and each of us should now report to God not from the position of a beggar or petitioner, but proudly in our own names without relying on mediators.

So what should I do with that little voice in my head that says, "Oh, think I should get some sleep now." Should I shout "Get behind me Satan" and subjugate this voice with cold showers and floor-pounding prayer? Should I give in and go to sleep when I have a project to finish before tomorrow? I think what is in order is to acknowledge the fact that I am tired, maybe even take a break for a few minutes to exercise or get a snack. But then go back to work. I need to acknowledge both the Abel type energy that wants to get the duty accomplished no matter what, AND the Cain type energy that wants to honor the body. If I simply force my body to keep going, the likelihood is that I will get drowsy, do poor work, and maybe even give up and doze off entirely. But by honoring my body as well as my mind, the mind achieves the "natural subjugation" of the body. Just like Jacob and Esau embracing at the Ford of Jabbok.

So much for unity of mind and body. But what about the unity of mind and mind? Many times, we have two minds about something. For example, let’s say you need a new car. One part of you wants a flashy little sports car that goes really fast, has a super sound system, leather seats, a sun roof. Another part wants a practical, cost-effective vehicle, with no unnecessary frills. What do you do? If you go to one extreme or the other, you know the other part of you is going to make you regret it, either by making you feel guilty for extravagant spending, or by making you resent the fact that you didn’t at least get a decent sound system. What I did in this case was to set up a dialog between the two voices inside my head. I took them both with me to the car dealer, and we settled on a not-quite new Jeep, no leather, no sun roof; but I did make the dealer put in a CD player. My sensible wife was so pleased that at my lack of extravagance, that she—not I—went out and for my birthday bought me the hot orange flames that now adorn my doors. So by honoring both sides, I ended up in a win-win situation on several levels.

Okay, that was easy. How about something more difficult? How about the part of me that loves my wife and is absolutely faithful to our marriage, versus the part of me that still likes to look at other women and knows that men are simply not monogamous by nature? Does the lustful part of me have any place in this? Or is this simply an absolutely evil energy that needs to be gotten rid of? This may sound a bit radical, but I think the lustful part of me must be accepted. This does NOT mean that I should act out what it wants to do. But one thing I know for sure, is that no matter how hard my "faithful" self ties to get rid of it, no matter how many conditions my "faithful" self pushes me to make, that little devil on the other side always pops up again. So I’ve decided that both sides are going to have to co-exist within me. I’m still committed being faithful to my marriage, of course, but the lustful part of me still lives. How do I bring it into God’s service? Well, that’s something Susan and I as a couple—as well as I within myself--are going to have to work at. She likes that passion which this sexual side of me brings, but she doesn’t like its self-centeredness, impatience and pushiness. And she absolutely abhors its wandering eyes. For now, the wisest thing for me to do is to learn to accept both sides of myself and make my choice to remain faithful authentically, without denying either energy.

One could go on and on with these examples.

I’m sure you can come up with lots of examples within your own mind of feeling two opposite ways about the same issue. What I want to suggest is this: it’s not necessary—nor is it possible or advisable—to affirm one side totally and get rid of the other side. Rather, the wise thing to do is stay in touch with both sides, appreciate both points of view. Make the decision from a position of holding the tension between both extremes. Of course, in allowing yourself to appreciate the Cain said, don’t be tempted to violate your basic value system. But also don’t be fooled to think that Cain is going to go away. As Father says, the only way that Abel can come to God is with Cain. And that means loving the enemy within.

 Download entire page and pages related to it in ZIP format
Table of Contents
Copyright Information
Tparents Home