Create Ideal Families


One of the biggest reasons the Unification Church has no spirit for witnessing is because many of its leadership has been brainwashed at the Unification Theological Seminary.  Professors Boslooper and Thompson were passionate feminists.  Now the seminary has Dr. Jennifer Tanabe, a member and feminist, teaching that women should lead men in society -- just as she does.  Sisters should not spend time on getting Ph.D.'s and having careers.  The only career a woman should have is homemaker.

Jennifer should quit her job and go home. She should stop being unprincipled by being subject over men at the Seminary. She is taking a job away from a man, demoralizing and emasculating the brothers in her classes and being a satanic role model for sisters. She should have a big family -- at least 12 children. If she is unable to birth that many, then she and her husband should adopt children from outside the church. And the UC should stop the cruel practice of giving away their own children to couples who suffer from infertility.


I pray that my three eldest sons who are now old enough to be married will find wives that believe deeply in the values taught in my books such as eating low-fat food, women being full-time homemakers, and believing in laissez-faire capitalism. They must make their husband and children the focus of their entire life. They must adore children and want to have at least 12 children. Adopting some children from outside the UC would be fine. I hope the Unification Church stops having leaders match strangers and lets unmarried members match each other in old-fashioned courtship where they and their parents decide. In this year 2000, my eldest sons are 18, 19, and 21. If anyone reading this knows of young sisters who would be interested in marrying a man with the true values I write of here, please email me at and I will give you their email addresses. If you are an eligible sister reading this and would like to know more about our family, please email a picture of yourself.

These sisters must be virgins who are absolutely loyal to true parents, believe passionately in traditional biblical family values, and be excited about joining our family's crusade to build ideal communities. They must be spiritually strong. There can be no divorce or disunity. Any woman who decides to marry a son of mine will have to sign their name to this document. One of the purposes of this little book is to serve as a summary of our family's core beliefs. It also serves as a kind of prenuptial agreement.

My sons cannot marry a feminist. These women must follow my sons absolutely. godly patriarchy is a sacred law of the universe. If you are a young sister contemplating marry a son of mine, you must understand and agree to every word written here and in all my books. For example, if you marry and later file for divorce, you will not get custody of the children. I want my sons to marry women who understand in their hearts and minds that children are better off with their father. If the father is the rare criminal, then the children should stay with the Father's family. In other words, if you marry my son and get a divorce, your children will live with my son and if he is deemed to be an abusive person then I and/or his brothers will care for the children until he shapes up. My sons are pure, wholesome and loving young men and it is unthinkable they would ever be mean-spirited, but if they ever do, their children will stay with the man's side of the family. This is not just my opinion. I am not interested in my opinion, but only what is God's opinion. Marriage is a serious business. Children are precious and need maximum love. Children who are raised by single women are worse off than those raised by single men. Patriarchy is the cornerstone of a happy marriage and productive society.

My sons plan to marry and raise their families next to each other. We will build a small cohousing community of ourselves. We would love to live with others. If you would be interested in living with us and help us create a capitalist community, please email us.


Let's play with numbers. I have 8 children. I am teaching them to have an average of 12 children. For the sake of easy mathematics let's say that each of them duplicate this plan and have an average of 10 children. Let's give 40 years as a generation. If my 8 children have 12 children each (adopting if they have to), then I would have 96 grandchildren. Let's round this off to 100. If those 100 go out and witness and find a mate and in turn have an average of 10 children, then I will have 1000 great-grandchildren. Each generation it grows by a multiple of 10. In 40 years I have 100 grandchildren. In 80 years I have 1000 great grandchildren. In 120 years I have 10,000 descendants who have my values. Then 100,000. Then one million, 10 million, 100 million and one billion. What if others joined in this campaign to have larger families than any other group in the world? It would take only a few generations for Unificationists to dominate the world. We would eventually be the majority and vote in all Presidents, Congressmen and the Supreme Court would be ours. We would rule. If only my family kept these numbers crunching, my descendants alone would be an empire and guide this world hundreds of years from now. Because the values I teach are absolute and true then that will eventually happen. The argument that there is overpopulation is bogus. This earth can handle many more people before we have to have zero population growth. And besides, creating more Unificationists in large families should not be a burden because their existence is a problem, but they are problem solvers.

The only way brothers could earn enough money and support large families is for them to help each other in communities where they can live frugally. In cohousing communities, brothers would help and encourage each other to earn higher incomes and be more efficient with their money. Because sisters would not be feminists who dream of fulfilling Rev. Moon's goal of them being U.S. Senators and business leaders like Josette Shiner who was the managing editor of the Washington Times, they could help each other to raise larger families. Josette should have had or adopted enough children to have a big family and stayed home.  She should be with other women helping each other raise their children in a community in which members live side by side to each other.  By living in communities, members would lead an efficient life and be able to have 12 children. Sadly, the leadership has even taught against adopting outside children.


Eugene Curtin is quoted at in an article titled "Second Generation Summer Camp" (August 11, 1999) saying that he spent three days at a UC youth camp: "My conclusion is that the UC as currently constituted cannot survive in the West. I cannot imagine that many of these kids will seriously consider the whole matching-blessing tradition. I don't think they are about to pay much attention to the latest Rev. Kim who flies in from Seoul. They are deeply western.

"A freer, American form of the faith might survive, but I'm not sure what that would be or how it would emerge." Is this true for most of the second generation? Are they not interested in the matching? What is an "American form of the faith?


Dan Fefferman gave a Sunday sermon titled "The Phoenix" at the Washington, D.C. church on Feb. 23, 1997 saying, "To be honest, our Unification community in the Unites States has been going through a very dry spell of several years. We have not succeeded in bringing new members, we have failed to meet many of our goals. And even though there have been substantial victories such as Mother's tour and the establishment of Parents Day as a national holiday, important sectors of our American movement are seriously discouraged. This is our honest situation."


It is refreshing to hear such candor and to acknowledge that that there has been a failure to gain members. He goes to say, "Japanese culture tends to place the group first. American culture emphasizes the individual. Thus, oriental culture stresses loyalty, filial piety and obedience. American culture stresses honesty, integrity and creativity." Of course Korean culture is like Japanese.

 Dan says, "Essentially, these differences stem, I think, from the difference between Confucian culture and Judeo Christian culture. Confucius taught that filial piety is the first and highest duty, and that from this, all other duties flows. But Jesus taught that the most important thing is to become a son of God -- that we should love God even more than we love our families. He even taught us to deny and hate our parents in order to follow him."

"A few weeks ago we heard a sermon in this church from a distinguished UTS professor who stressed that filial piety is the supreme value. This was a very important sermon. But while I listened to it, I couldn't help thinking. 'OK, I agree-- absolute trust, absolute faith, absolute obedience to God and True Parents" these are all very important. But I felt in my heart of hearts that something was still missing.


"As I thought more deeply about this problem, I discovered the missing piece. The missing virtue in the formula of 'absolute trust, absolute faith, absolute obedience' is Conscience. Father knows this, and that is why he has taught us that conscience must come before teacher, conscience must come before parents, conscience must come even before God.

"We need filial piety. Absolutely. As we have been taught, if Isaac had not demonstrated absolute filial piety to Abraham, the foundation of faith could not have been established. But filial piety is a coin with two sides. If Abraham had shown filial piety to his Father, Terah, we'd all be back in Ur of the Chaldeans making idols. If Moses had shown loyalty to his King, who was also his adopted Father, the Israelites would never have entered the promised land. If Mary had remained a dutiful betrothed wife to Joseph instead of going to Zechariah's house, Jesus would never have been conceived. If Martin Luther had maintained his vow of obedience to the Pope, the Protestant reformation would never have happened. If the Founding Fathers of America had remained loyal to the English throne, God centered democracy might never have become a reality.

"These examples show that many of God's champions were exactly those people who had the courage NOT to go the way of filial piety, but to go the way of conscience. As Martin Luther said, 'Here I stand, I can do no other.'

"So we are faced with the fact that Conscience and Obedience are sometimes hard to harmonize. How are we to reconcile these two viewpoints? I'm afraid I do not have the answer. But I am very glad that Father has left us both his teaching on absolute obedience and his teaching on conscience, so that we can continue to ask the question.

"Now someone might say, 'But now we have True Parents. Thus there is no conflict between conscience and filial piety. We must always follow True Parents no matter what.'

"But, is it always that simple? Let me remind you of what Father said, as quoted by Pastor Schanker earlier this year.

"The day and the moment will come when even God seems to be saying 'I don't know you.' At that time you will feel that you are utterly alone in all the universe. If under those conditions you still do not give up, but insist, 'No matter what God thinks or what True Parents say to me, no matter how unsympathetic the church members are, this is the right way and I will go on anyway.' Then at that moment you are elevating yourself to the highest level of faith. Once you reach that level you can be trusted unconditionally by God and by me, and eventually the whole world."

"I submit to you, brothers and sisters, that we must understand the concept of absolute faith in light of what Father has said here. Ultimately, absolute faith means absolute faith in your own conscience."

This is an excellent sermon and I encourage you to read it all. I agree with Dan that we need obedience tempered with brains. We are not supposed to go through life with blind faith acting like robots -- especially in this time of transition. We can't leave our brains at the door. We must love and respect True Parents and our elders. They must also love and respect us. The Bible says we are to honor our parents, but it also says parents do not have the right to upset and abuse their children. One elder brother questioned my logic in that I write so strongly about patriarchy and then I criticize father. There is a method to my madness. Brother Dan says it very well. There are two sides to the coin. Patriarchy does not mean dictator. Christians teach that patriarchs serve. They are not insensitive dictators. It is a benevolent dictatorship. On the other hand, hierarchies are natural and leaders are to be respected.


At a Web site ( Eugene Curtin, a journalist in the Midwest, and a member of the Unification Church, reviews In the Shadow of the Moons: My Life in the Reverend Sun Myung Moon's Family by Nansook Hong. He writes:

Early in this account of her traumatic life as a member of the Unification Church's True Family, Nan Sook Hong recalls a tale from her family's past.

She recalls her grandmother's virulent opposition to her daughter's involvement in Rev. Sun Myung Moon's fledgling church. In 1961, so the story goes, Grandmother Hong was hammering on the doors of the church, unsuccessfully trying to prevent her daughter's marriage to a man she did not know but who had been chosen for her by Rev. Moon.

Hong reports that Rev. Moon remembers to this day the angry old woman beating his chest with her fists after the wedding ceremony was completed.

Rev. Moon was the winner that day.

But Grandmother Hong may well have the last laugh. Her granddaughter's indictment of the True Family; of her former husband and erstwhile heir- apparent to the Unificationist throne; of his drinking, drug use and cavorting with prostitutes; of Rev. and Mrs. Moon's paralysis in the face of their son's depredations; and of their incredible willingness to fund his rampages; all of this, 37 years after Grandmother Hong pounded fruitlessly on Rev. Moon's door, could spell the death knell for the Unification Church in the West, and perhaps worldwide.

Nansook Hong's memoir is devastating.

While it frequently lapses into stale and questionable criticism of church practices and motivations, and while some of it seems to have been written by the anti-cult crowd that is currently holding her hand, this indictment of the church and the family that personifies it screams for a response.

We read here of Hyo-Jin Moon's squandering of vast amounts of money, handed to him easily and airily by his mother. Up his nose, in the form of white powder, went the fruits of the labors of thousands of dedicated missionaries slaving long hours in baking heat and freezing cold selling trinkets and flowers. His endless forays into the bar scene of New York City, his $150 tips, his extra-marital affairs, his furious rages and his mad acquisition of guns, all continued long after his much-publicized and tearful confessions.

We read that Mrs. Moon once handed Hong $100,000 and told her it was "seed money" for her family. Hyo-Jin told her to place it in a safe deposit box, which she did. What church member who has ever sold flowers from dawn to dusk will not resent the fact that Hyo-Jin took that $100,000 and transformed it into a $30,000 gold-plated gun for his father and used the rest to buy motorbikes for himself and his brothers?

Hyo-Jin, almost at will, flew here and there to pursue his affairs. From girlfriends in Korea and California, to a church sister working at the Manhattan Center, Hyo-Jin indulged his sexual urges. It was from Hyo-Jin that Hong received a venereal disease and many beatings.

All this, and so much more, Hong recounts in detail that rings as true as a gold brick at Fort Knox.

But that is not the worst of it. It has been an open secret for years that Hyo-Jin is an embarrassment to humanity. What is especially dangerous for the survival of the Unification Church is Hong's depiction of Rev. and Mrs. Moon as regal figures, unconcerned about the behavior of the crown prince. While exhorting their followers to strict standards of propriety, standards those followers tried hard to observe, the Moons turned a blind eye to their son's astonishing perversions.

Indeed, they funded him without cease. The "Son of the Messiah," as Hyo-Jin liked to refer to himself, was denied nothing. No grossness, no betrayal, no sin, ever caused the easy flow of money to dry up.

The blame for Hyo-Jin's behavior, according to Hong, was laid at her feet by her mother- and father-in-law. Did she not know that she was supposed to act like a lady during the day but like a woman at night? If she satisfied her husband better, perhaps he would not wander so much. It was her duty to change Hyo-Jin, to rein in his obscenities. That was why she had been chosen to be his wife.

Hong was 15 when she was given to Hyo-Jin in holy matrimony. He consummated their marriage that afternoon, in the eyes of American law committing statutory rape. Thirty years old, now, Hong marvels that a 15-year-old child should have been expected to control a man who the Messiah himself could not handle.

Well she might wonder.

There is much for Unificationists to wonder about in this book.

Hong relates her amazement as she discovered that the True Children did not know the words to Pledge, words she had long mastered. Most of them do not speak Korean, something ordinary members are urged ceaselessly to learn. None of them, she said, could be described even as ordinarily pious.

"The evil at the heart of the Unification Church is the hypocrisy and deceit of the Moons, a family that is all too human in its incredible level of dysfunction," Hong writes. "To continue to promote the myth that the Moons are spiritually superior to the idealistic young people who are drawn to the church is a shameful deceit."

It will not do for Rev. Moon to insist that church members not question his family's affairs. He is answerable, for his claim on the lives of the young missionaries who worked for his cause day and night, rests entirely on his position as the True Father.

The legions of idealistic youngsters who flocked to his banner in the 1970s and 1980s did not do so because he is a dab hand with the tuna. They did so because he claimed to have formed the first perfect family, the foundation stone on which a new world would be built.

He has since been abandoned by Ye-Jin Moon, his daughter and oldest child. His oldest son is dissolute in the extreme and was never called to account. The Moons' parenting skills appear to reside on the low end of human achievement.

That must be explained. It must be accounted for. If the Moons continue to take the regal approach and thumb their noses at the untold sacrifice of thousands of their followers, the church is surely doomed.

Toward the end of her book, Hong suggests that the Unification Church will indeed be buried with Rev. Moon. She may be right. Yet, ironically, if the church survives it could be in large part because of the book she has written.

In these pages perhaps lie the seeds of a new Unificationism, one which abandons the idolatry of the True Family and pursues instead the building of loving, God-centered families. In the Principles of Creation, the Fall of Man and the Mission of Jesus, derivative though Hong insists those teachings are, we have the potential for a serious philosophy.

It may well be, however, that like a butterfly discarding its chrysalis, Unificationism will have to join Hong and break from the True Family if it wishes to fly.

Our brother is correct in saying that her book "screams for a response." I believe he is also correct in saying that there will be a "new Unificationism" that "abandons the idolatry of the True Family." He says we have "the potential for a serious philosophy."

Prev Home Next