Subject/object is not give and take
It is popular in the UC to say that subject and object interchange. In the official church Divine Principle book the authors give the impression that subject and object interchange positions. One reason they may have in doing so is because they want to respect everyone. In one sense we are all equal partners. We all can learn from each other. Parents can even learn from young children. We all should be humble to God speaking through others, no matter what their age, sex or status is. Nevertheless, this does not mean that position change just because someone is talking to another person, even if what they are saying is a higher truth than the listener has. Some church members are confusing subject and object positions with give and take action. They are two different things. Subject and object positions are static; give and take is fluid. When a parent is criticizing and spanking a child for misbehaving they are having intense give and take, but at no time do they ever interchange positions or"act" like each other. Even if the parent discovers he is wrong and acted too soon before understanding what had really happened and then apologizes when the child explains the situation, they never change positions. The child does not get to spank the parent. That is not a role they play. If a grandfather is talking to his adult son and the two of them are differing on something and the son is correct, again they never interchange positions. They are having give and take and the grandfather may or may not see the light. No matter what the outcome is, the grandfather is always the grandfather and therefore his elder and respected for his position.
Another example is a lowly private talking to a general. Even if the general listens to the private, changes his mind and does as he said because it is a good idea does not mean that any time the private interchanged positions. Ideas can interchange, but positions do not. And those positions must be dealt with correctly. Sometimes we must rebel against the person in subject position. And sometimes people exchange positions. George Bush took over the position of President of the United States after being subservient to President Reagan. When Bush became president, then Reagan went to the object position as all Americans are to their leader. The question is what does God want people in position of authority to do and how are they helped, followed or rebelled against. In the future ideal world everyone will have the same ideology and agree to the same rules and responsibilities that anyone has in leadership and to those who have to follow. Because of the Fall mankind has many views, and often never even had the correct view so they fought. The battle of the sexes has been the worst of all. The battles in the home such as those that took place in Adam's family have led to world wars. When we all agree and follow God's idea for the roles of the positions of husband and wife and parents and children, then there will be world peace. Violence came into the world because of the dysfunctional relationship between Adam and Eve. God is teaching us through Father and Mother how a true marriage works. Father and Mother have give and take, but Father is always the leader and Mother is the perfect follower. And they do it in an absolutely god-centered way. Mother has never led, protected or provided for Father. She has been completely centered on following her husband, no matter how hard it was. Father's first wife did not.
Some UC members have been digested by this feminist culture and misunderstand what equal partners really mean. Father and Mother are have equal value and are equal partners, but they have different roles and responsibilities. What one does is not more important than what the other does. The savior or messiah is two people, not one. But they are not the same. They are different and each completes the other.
An example of the confusion in the church over this central fundamental aspect of the Principle is in the church book the Causa Manual. It incorrectly explains subject and object as interchanging positions. The positions are static, not fluid. They are as different as black and white. It is incorrect to think people change roles simply because they are talking to each other as the following quote says:"It is important to stress that position does not affect value. That is, subject does not have greater value than object nor vice-versa. In addition, these positions are generally interchangeable. For example, when person A is speaking and person B is listening, then person A is subject and person B is object. Later, while person B is speaking, person A becomes object. There is a constant changing of roles according to whether one is giving or receiving." They are right in the first sentence that every person has equal value. But there is a nuance to even the equal value theory. God loves all people, but He helped David kill Goliath and George Washington to kill the British. The Divine Principle has more"value" than Communist thought. Cain and Abel have equal value, but one is better than the other. This point is not as crucial as the point that roles don't change so easily as we read above. In many cases, they are to never interchange. Gay marriages interchange the opposite sex. Have you ever seen gay bears and lions? To explain the concept of role by using the example of two people speaking is the ultimate in being unprincipled. Suppose person A is a police officer and person B is thief. In the ultimate sense, both have equal value, but when do they ever change positions? Halfway through a pursuit, they switch and the bad guys chases the cop? If I talked to the richest citizen of the world, Bill Gates, and its my time to talk, do I then become the president of Microsoft and control his bank account? In the world of nature, a book says,"Biological systems are also systems of subject-object interaction. A cell contains a nucleus (subject) and surrounding cytoplasm (object)." When does the nucleus interchange and become cytoplasm? When do protons revolve around electrons? When do children ground parents? Give and take can take place harmoniously only when roles do not interchange. Father comes to bring order to this world. Never does he say men are objects to women, our minds are objects to our bodies or Unificationists are objects to Christians, Communists or the Mafia. Father will always be the worldwide Messiah and I, for one, am glad I don't have to take that position, even if for one minute.
UC sister Joy Garratt wrote in Victoria Clevenger's Heartwing publication and later published in the U.News praise for Stephen Covey's The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Victoria praises it also saying it is "immensely valuable." Joy said she usually "just skims self-improvement books" but this one she won't even lend out. She says he gives "a lot of tools...and I highly recommend it for anyone seeking a practical, down-to-earth aid to growth." I haven't the time now to get into what Covey says in his book. I, too, was blown away by this book as millions of people are. Even President Clinton invited Covey to the White House to talk to him. Covey teaches the value of writing clear, specific goals, time management, etc. as all motivational speaker's do, but he lifts himself above the crowd by talking about writing a constitution for families, businesses, etc. which gives incredible power as America's constitution has done for giving unity and strength to America. He says that the Victorians were people interested in "character" and the 20th century is only interested in what he calls "personality."
The 19th century would call it virtues, and we call it values. They were for absolute values, and we are for relative values. Of course, Father does everything Covey says better than any person in history. Father's science conferences are about "Absolute Values." Father has written goals. The most basic one is 1-1-1.
Covey is a leader in the Mormon Church. His core value is the Victorian virtue of patriarchy. Covey doesn't tell anyone this in the 7 Habits, but I studied his other books. He is happily married and has 9 children. I always find happy families when I find someone believing in patriarchy. In Covey's book The Divine Center he says patriarchy will be in the Kingdom of Heaven, "the eternal organization will be the patriarchal family." In his book, Spiritual Roots of Human Relations, he says the father is "the head of the home.... He is the patriarch of the home." He says that this belief is being attacked by Satan, "the home and the family are being ravished and buffeted on every side by almost every institution of society and by all the machinations of Satan." He teaches that men and women have separate roles but each have equal importance. The word "equal" is feminist's favorite word, but they incorrectly define it as communists misdefine all good words. Covey explains wifely submission this way, "The wife is to obey her husband in righteousness, which I believe includes her righteousness, for she is not to be his judge. If she attempts to be his judge and to obey whatever suits her fancy, withdrawing her support or obedience when she disagrees, or if she competes with him for leadership and direction, the patriarchal concept will be distorted. If she 'punishes him" in one way or another when he's 'off base' in her eyes, her husband could likely feel that he has atoned and no longer has to change or repent. The wife is called to love and to sustain the husband, and I believe nothing will do more to encourage and chasten him in his own stewardship than consistent acceptance, unconditional love, and steadfast sustaining. If he is absolutely unworthy, or consistently makes unrighteous demands, then she might counsel with the steward over him, the bishop, but she is not to be his judge and punisher."
Covey refers to the usual passages in the Bible that teach patriarchy such as Ephesians 5:22-24 and I Peter 3:1-6. Men need to have authority in the home. He says, "Children are to obey and honor their parents. Children first need examples or models to follow. They need understanding and respect; they need clear limits, well-established rules, and consistently applied discipline. They need explicit teaching and testifying; they need order, system, and regularity; they need work and responsibility and opportunities to give an accounting; they need time for fun, free expression, and good humor."
"I have come to believe from my own experience, as well as my observations of others, that children tend not to obey their parents when the father does not in truth or in deed obey the Lord, or when the wife does not in truth or in deed obey her husband, or when the parents do not have this vision of the patriarchal family concept." There is so much rebellion in America because women are not humbling themselves to their husbands.
Father says in "Our Basic Attitude" (March 13, 1983): "What kind of husband do you women want? Do you want the kind of man who just listens to you and follows everything you say? Not necessarily. The husband should be stern sometimes, standing strong like a pillar. You may not always like him that way, but in the long run you will trust him better." UC brothers must stand up for their position as leader.
But they must earn that right too. He should treat his wife with respect. Covey quotes the President of the Mormon Church saying that men should never "express a cross word to his wife or to his children." Men must build "an ideal home by your character, controlling your passion, your temper, guarding your speech." He tells his church to "make our homes such as will radiate to our neighbors harmony, love, community duties, loyalty. Let our neighbors see it and hear it." No one must see "an expression of anger or jealousy or hatred. Control it! Do not express it! You do what you can to produce peace and harmony, no matter what you may suffer."
He continues quoting him from another speech he gave: "Say nothing that will hurt your wife, that will cause her tears, even though she might cause you provocation. Realize that those children are your eternal possessions, treasures of eternity. Do not dare to set an improper example towards them. Your are men of the priesthood and you are leaders. Never let them hear a cross word. You should control yourself. He is a weak man who flies into a passion, whether he is working a machine or plowing or writing or whatever he may be doing in the home. A man of the priesthood should not fly into a passion. Learn to be dignified." Covey says, "Husbands and wives must learn to talk through their differences and difficulties rather than either taking them out on each other or withdrawing into a silent, sullen world of quiet anger and self-pity." This is the flavor of this man's value statement. Godly patriarchy is what God wants people to write down when they write a mission statement or constitution.
Sisters must say to the their husbands and mean it, "I'll follow you anywhere." America went downhill fast when women refused to say the word "obey" in marriage vows. Father endlessly tells sisters to follow: "You women have to say to your husbands, 'If the only way you can occupy God is by choking me, then go ahead and do it quickly.' You women must obey, unite and work with your husbands to achieve the goal. Since you men are now in the objective position to God, you must make unity with your wife no matter what it takes. All the woman has to do is hang on like a clamp, as tightly as she can, to her husbands all the way to God."
Taming of the Shrew
Brother's have to do as Petruchio does in Shakespeare's play, The Taming of the Shrew. Kate is unfeminine, and Petruchio perseveres until he dominates her. He wins the battle of the sexes. He becomes her leader, and she meekly follows. Then they have love. At the end of the play Petruchio tells Kate to explain to a group of women how wonderful it is to be an object and follower to their husbands. He calls these women "headstrong." He says, "Katherine, I charge thee, tell these headstrong women/ What duty they do owe their lords and husbands":
Thy husband is thy lord, thy life, thy keeper
Thy head, thy sovereign; one that cares for thee,
And for thy maintenance; commits his body
To painful labour both by sea and land,
To watch the night in storms, the day in cold,
Whilst thou liest warm at home, secure and safe;
And craves no other tribute at thy hands
But love, fair looks, and true obedience --
Too little payment for so great a debt.
Such duty as the subject owes the prince,
Even such a woman oweth to her husband.
And when she is froward, peevish, sullen, sour
And not obedient to his honest will,
What is she but a foul contending rebel
And graceless traitor to her loving lord?
I am ashamed that women are so simple
To offer war where they should kneel for peace,
Or seek for rule, supremacy, and sway,
When they are bound to serve, love, and obey.
A little book that I recommend for UC sisters to study alone and together in WFWP meetings is Elizabeth Hanford's Me? Obey Him?. Father has said, "the primary function of Unification Church members is ultimately to educate people." The most important thing we can teach is for women to submit to their husbands. This is the basic aspect of restoring the fallen natures. Mrs. Hanford is on the right road. She not only lives her philosophy but has taught it to many others and saved many marriages.
She writes that God, "Even in the Garden of Eden ... had set up a chain of command. It required the husband to be in authority over the woman. First Timothy 2:11-13 says, 'Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to ... usurp authority over the man.'"
"There is an order of authority in the universe, and it is set up like this:
She says Christ is under God and so "It is no shame, no dishonor, for a woman to be under authority, if Jesus submitted to the authority of the Father."
"Position in the chain of authority has nothing to do with the individual's worth to God. It is not determined by one's importance. A woman is subject to her husband, but she can still go directly to God, to ask anything she needs or desires, and get it as quickly as if she were a man." She quotes Galatians 3:38 to prove we all have equal value. I go into this quote more carefully later. It is a favorite of feminist theologians to twist to make marriages come out their version of "equal."
She goes on, "God is not a respecter of persons. Whoever 'feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him" Acts 10:34, 35). God hears the prayers of a woman just as quickly as He hears the prayers of a godly man."
"Nor does a man need to be 'puffed up' because he stands above the woman in the chain of command ... Each has a blessed, unique responsibility, a purpose in life that the other cannot possibly fulfill and cannot happily exist without."
"God made the man to be the achiever, the doer, to provide for the home and protect it, to be high priest and intercessor for the home. His body carries the seed of life, and he is responsible for the children that will be born, to guide them, nurture them, direct them."
"God made the woman to be keeper of the home, to make a haven within its walls, a retreat from the stress of battle, the nourisher of the children. A woman's body is fashioned primarily for being a wife and mother. (Why, oh why a feminist think that's degrading?) Her body is shaped for the bearing of children, and never a month goes by but what she is reminded of the basic, creative function of motherhood. All the sense of her being answers to the wail of a baby, to the uplifted arms of a child. (Have you ever wondered what caused the spoiled daughter of Pharaoh to adopt the infant of the despised children of Israel? 'She saw the child: and, behold, the babe wept. And she had compassion on him' [Exodus 2:6]. The need of the weeping baby Moses overcame all the conditioning and training she had received!)." I defy anyone to find one quote of Father that sounds different than this.
A woman is different from a man. (I know that sounds like a stupid statement. But if you have read some of the writers of the current women's lib movement, you'll realize they don't believe it. They think a woman is different only because she has been conditioned to inferiority from babyhood, and exploited by it!) A woman is different in her body, in her interests, in her thinking, in her abilities: not inferior -- different."
"Women have entered the market place. They have achieved fame in medicine, in business, in the arts. A woman can choose nearly any occupation she likes. But I deny that she will find fulfillment that will surpass that which a godly Christian woman finds who, secure in the knowledge of her womanhood and its rightness, builds a home for her husband and children! Her confidence in her ability to be a helpmeet, sufficient for her husband's needs, comes as she finds her place in the order of authority."
Mrs. Hanford mentions many women in the Bible and shows that God is very strict about women following their husbands even when it seems outrageous to do so such as the case of Sarah to Abraham who gave her to the Pharaoh. Mrs. Hanford gives some good insights to help women understand what is going on between men and women. And women need help desperately because women in our culture and in our church haven't got a clue to what is happening in the core relationships of life. She teaches women, for example, that they must understand how men look at work which is totally different than how women do (of course many men are so brainwashed by feminism that their innate drive to protect and provide are buried so deep they don't care anymore and encourage their wives to work).
She writes that women "have the privilege of a husband's lifelong concern for your welfare. Can you imagine the awesome task a man takes upon himself when he assumes the lifetime responsibility of a wife and family? Food, clothing, shelter, the care and training of the children -- all these he commits himself to for the rest of his life! No matter how he feels, he must go into the world each day to earn the money to feed the family and pay the bills. A wife can -- let's face it, she really can -- if she doesn't feel well, stagger around long enough to get the kids off to school and the baby fed, and then go back to bed until supper time, when she can open a couple of cans, if she has to."
"But her husband? No matter if the company he works for lays off workers, including him; no matter if his job is replaced by a machine; no matter if he has a case of the 'blahs' or a toothache, or the flu -- it is his responsibility to put food on the table and a roof over the head of his family that day."
"An old rhyme says, 'Man works from sun to sun, but a woman's work is never done.' And it's true, believe me it's true. (How do I know? Because we have seven children, that's how I know!) but it is also true that, if I decide to take a couple of hours off to window shop, or go to the library, or sew a dress, the work is still there when I come back to it. That isn't true with a man's work. If he doesn't work, he doesn't get paid."
"A wife ought to understand how much a man gives her, when he gives her his name and his pledge to care for her until they are parted by death."
Women must understand that we live in a culture that bashes men. Men have gone into a shell and women must not correct that by filling in the void and taking charge. Often people interpret the cause of problems in the home as being men, but often we have to go further back to see that the real seeds of division started from bossy women. Even if they meant well it still causes men to give up and wimp out. Men should stand up to this but it's hard when every image and stimuli is anti traditional family.
Mrs. Hanford correctly advises women to see their part in the problem: "Men hate 'scenes.' They despise confusion and disorder. They will go to almost any length to have peace in their homes. They will let a woman have her way rather than argue and quarrel." Father says repeatedly that women start quarrels and cause divorce. She continues, "But the price a man has to pay is the price of his manhood. Before you complain that your husband won't take the leadership of your home, search your heart carefully. Do you really trust his judgment? Are you willing to commit yourself to his decisions? If not, don't complain that he will not lead. For the sake of peace, he may not fight for his authority. Your habit of bossing may be more deeply entrained than you possibly realize."
"Don't mistake a man's gentleness for weakness. Don't mistake a quietly spoken word for vacillation. A gentle man can still lead his home completely, if not as flamboyantly as an aggressive man. And a loving wife who leans on her husband will call forth his strength and manliness."
"How can you give the leadership back to him? Admit your failure. Ask his forgiveness. Then simply give him the chance to make the decisions. Send the children to him for permissions. Let him decide when you do what. (You realize this won't work, don't you, if he makes a decision and you say, 'What in the world did you do that for?!) If you stop bossing the family, he will be the boss automatically." Then she gives a testimony of someone she counseled or had read her book and how a woman had changed and found happiness. Like Helen Andelin's book it is filled with examples of people who followed these teachings and found greater love. Feminists can't do this to the degree that antifeminists can. Traditional Biblical family values work. Feminism doesn't. Some feminists say their marriage works. I find it interesting that the most famous male feminist Hollywood star is Alan Alda. His wife is a stay-at-home mom to their daughters. It doesn't matter that some feminists have good marriages. We can't judge communism as good because East Germany had great Olympic athletes. We have to look at the overall picture and be careful about our anecdotal stories. Nevertheless, antifeminists or pro traditional family teachers have more personal stories of success than antifeminists.
One insight she gives is that women can't focus on their feelings, but have to focus on God's commandments that often go against our feelings. Father teaches this same emphasis on vertical instead of focusing horizontally. This is extremely hard for American women to do and that is why they turn to feminism and the government for answers instead of the Bible which is looked at as medieval and therefore irrelevant when in fact Father is teaching Biblical truths that are simply God's truths. She says, "There is another aspect in the matter of submission and feelings; it is tinged with mystery. Have you noticed how many Scriptures there are that command a wife to obey her husband? There is only one Scripture, to my knowledge, that tells a wife to love him, and that is Titus 2:4. Why? Because, I think, in a marvelous, supernatural way, submission brings love. If you obey him, you will love him, love him more than you ever dreamed possible."
"It's a Bible principle, found in Proverbs 16:3: 'Commit thy works unto the Lord, and thy thoughts shall be established.' You do right -- you obey him, regardless of how you feel. Then your feelings turn out right -- your thoughts are established. If you obey, you will love."
"I am aware of the feelings of revulsion a woman may have toward her husband. They may be caused by poor teaching from childhood. They may be caused by a shattering incident in adolescence. The husband himself may not have been tender enough. But many a woman, who thought she could never love the man she was bound to, has discovered that when she obeyed him, she learned to love him." Father's first wife was not Biblical. It is often interpreted from the Bible that a marriage can be dissolved for only two reasons: One, if a spouse commits adultery, and two: if a man does not provide for his family. Father did not provide. His wife should have been even more forgiving than the Bible says. She did not obey Father, but became noisy and rebellious. She did not help him and tried to boss him around. Is she somehow different than most women and their marriage was different than most marriages? Father clearly says women are out of order.
All of this is very academic if we don't give stories. Father's story is the most tragic of all. Thank God that True Mother did not act like most women do and see their husbands as insensitive. She follows Father. Mother is the ultimate example of a woman who obeys and helps her husband. She is the ultimate in femininity. She is strong, but in a feminine way. Nothing is more important to her and she focuses on nothing more than her husband, not even her children. Elizabeth Hanford writes: "The past four years our church has had a women's retreat up in the lovely foothills of the Smokies. Our women look forward to those retreats, with the opportunity to get away from the cares of home or a night, talk together about mutual spiritual needs, and search the Scriptures for God's answers. There's always one session, usually very late at night, around the fireplace, often spontaneous, when we talk together about the need for a woman to obey her husband and the delight her obedience will bring."
"Each year a woman I'll call Jeanette has been there. Her husband was saved a few years ago through the ministry of the church, and they have been faithful members ever since. Jeanette would sit with us around the fireplace, listen to the discussion and (she told me later) say to herself, 'It won't work. I just couldn't do that. Me obey Walter? and him still drinking? That just won't work. I'm not going to bemean myself to anybody, especially Walter."
"For three years Jeanette said that. But the spiritual condition of the home deteriorated; Walter had increasing problems with alcohol; the teen-age daughters got more and more rebellious. The still, quiet voice of God spoke to Jeanette's heart, saying, 'Yield. Submit. Let Me take control."
"Finally, in desperation, Jeanette dropped to her knees. 'Dear Lord, You know I don't have it within myself to obey Walter. It's humanly impossible for me to let anybody boss me around. You will just have to take charge. I don't see how it can possibly work, but right now, I promise You, Lord, that I'll obey Walter, no matter what he says. I trust You to make it turn out right.'"
"She said nothing of this to anyone. But at the retreat this spring, she came to the session of husband-wife relationships. Afterward she whispered, 'I just had to come to this session, Libby. I didn't need it this time, thank God, but I wanted to hear it again, just to see if it would sound as ridiculous as it sounded every other year, before I tried it. Sure enough, it sounded wonderful and true. It really works. I love him so much more than I ever loved him before. He loves me, and we have such sweet times together, even if we are old married folks! I just couldn't see how obeying him would fix all the other problems, but it did. How I wish we could have started our lives out together that way!'"
She writes, "God commands a wife to obey her husband. He obviously meant what He said. He made no exceptions for extenuating circumstances. He promises guidance and wisdom to the woman who seeks to obey. He offers unmeasured grace for whatever trials a woman faces while He completes the needed work of conviction in her husband's heart."
"He rewards obedience with a usefulness and happiness far beyond her deepest expectation." She is a wise teacher. Mrs. Hanford says it will not only make a marriage more full of love but the children will grow up better and not be rebellious: "You don't need to fear that your obedience will lessen your children's respect for you. When you set the standard by your obedience, you can require the same obedience from them. The command, 'Honor thy father and thy mother' (Exod. 20:12) shows God requires the child to obey Father and Mother equally. He obeys his mother exactly as he obeys his father -- that's the chain of command. When a mother obeys her husband, she enhances her own authority with the child rather than diminishing it."
"If you love your children, if you covet their future happiness and usefulness, make sure they have a mother who submits to her husband."
In the UNews (April 5, 1987) Father says how important grandparents are and how this century doesn't care for them or want to live with them. It was commonplace in the 19th century to care for the elderly at home. He says that the three parts of the face"the eyes, the nose, the mouth" show"three stages of development."
"This is a precise rule. You see it everywhere. Before I existed, my parents and my grandparents existed. There are three generations. Then, who is more important -- myself or my grandparents? It is my grandparents. Why? Because they are the root or origin out of which I developed. The pupil is the center of the eye upon which the other parts are centered. Everything did not come all at once. So, which is more important? The root and center is most precious."
Now, we cannot read into Father that he says that a person's innate value increases with age. In one sense we have value the moment we're born. Period. What he's talking about is vertical positions being respected. And those positions don't interchange. People keep them. The pupil of the eye is not more valuable than any other part of the eye, but it is the center and must be acknowledged as such.
He goes on saying,"Do we need grandfathers and grandmothers? In the United States, many grandparents are sent to old people's homes. We think they have freedom and are happy there. But how can anyone be happy with all the precious things gone from his life? If you put the pupil of an eye away somewhere, then the iris and the skin are alone and useless. It is like cutting off the root of a tree. How can we live a healthy, purposeful life without our root-- our grandfathers and grandmothers -- from whom we came? The result is havoc and confusion."
Father is always teaching about family and how there must be order. I want my sons to marry women who will change my diapers when I go into my second childhood. I don't want them married to career women who pay for me to be abused by psychos at a nursing home that happens too frequently. Traditional values are women doing this job, not impersonal agencies.
Father continues saying,"Take a poll of American women and ask who would like to go live with her husband's parents and grandparents. Does anyone welcome that situation? Probably not. The women say, 'No, my husband and I just want to live together and not be concerned with anyone else.' Is that right or wrong? It is so wrong that any society with that attitude deserves to decline." And America has declined.
Father explains things always from a vertical view. He says,"Why do I tell you this? Look at it this way. There are three stages before you realize your existence. Your grandparents are like the eyes; your parents are like the nose; you are like the mouth. Would the mouth say, 'I just want to be left alone. I want to be free of the nose and eyes and function separately'? No, the whole face is more important than the mouth, nose or eyes alone. All three are included in the face, not just the mouth. Lacking one, the face can never be complete."
"People often talk about their home but they should immediately think about their grandfather and grandmother being there. Without them, a good home is unimaginable. Just as when we say 'my hand,' that automatically includes three joints, so 'my home' should include three generations. 'My arm' includes the hand, the forearm, and the upper arm. When you say 'my body,' it is also divided into three: the head, the torso, and the limbs." He goes on to give other examples of three and ends by saying that a home consists of grandparents, parents and children. In these examples there is a sense of vertical as in the four position foundation having three levels of origin, division and union. The origin would be grandparents who are at the top, the parents are the second stage of division and the children are at the bottom of the hierarchy as union or result. The relationships are more vertical than horizontal.
Father says,"Marriage is not a light matter, but should be taken very seriously. Marriage is more serious than your own life, than heaven and earth, than your entire hope and ideal. When you find happiness in this serious area, you will find ultimate happiness." The Divine Principle teaches that God is a God of order, law and principle. What are the spiritual laws and principles, the rules and responsibilities, for men and women to live by so they can have happy marriages?
We must live a principled life to be happy. The Divine Principle teaches that we are to build ideal marriages and from them will come ideal families and an ideal world. It also says we have to restore this fallen world by going in the opposite direction from Adam and Eve who started marriage in an upside-down, out of order way. Father said on Parents Day 1985 that this world is completely out of order. Men, he said, are supposed to be subject and lead women, but instead of men being"bones" and women"flesh", it is usually the other way around. In another speech, Father said that if we solve the subject/object relationship between husband and wife, we will solve all problems at the national and world level. He says,"Why do you marry? You want to receive love. Man is the center or subject and the woman is object. Women must center upon or follow their husbands. As the subject and object relationship is solved, it will extend all the way to the nation and to the world."
The ideology that men lead women is called Patriarchy. The ideology that challenges male authority is Androgyny or Unisexism or, euphemistically, Equality. The wider ideology that attacks Patriarchy and other God-centered values is Feminism (and as we will see in later articles, Communism). We will call those who do not believe in Patriarchy Feminists, and those who believe in Patriarchy Anti-feminists. The vast majority of Americans are Feminist; a small minority are Anti-feminist.
We learn in the Divine Principle (Level 4) that"all" the"disorders in the fallen world" originate from the third fallen nature of reversing dominion:
"The third major aspect of the Fallen Nature is the nature to reverse the order of dominion. The angel was ultimately supposed to be under man's dominion, yet he dominated Eve, reversing the proper order. Eve was supposed to be under Adam's dominion, yet she dominated him. These reversals of dominion resulted in the Fall. All of the various disorders in the fallen world have their origin in this aspect of the original Fallen Nature."
To restore, then, all the disorders of the fallen world, we must return to God's original order where Adam and Eve dominate Lucifer and Adam dominate Lucifer and Adam dominates Eve, i.e., God-centered patriarchy.
After the fall, women have been deceived and abused by Lucifer-type men throughout history. Since there have been countless crimes against women by men who had power over them, there is great resentment in women against men. Because of this history and also very personal resentment against men, many women find it difficult if not next to impossible to submit to their husbands. This is a tragedy in God's eyes. Until we can reverse the fallen nature in the family between men and women, we cannot free this world. At the three-day ceremony, the husband goes from the archangelic position to the position of Adam. This must be more than a symbolic ceremony if we want more than symbolic world restoration.
Rev. Zin Moon Kim wrote in the UNews (June 1995):"There must be a certain purpose, on which the subject must be centered. . . . Purpose is in the first position; subject, in the second position; object, in the third position; and result, in the fourth position. This is the order of positions." I see this as meaning that positions don't change and act like other positions. To make a diagram of this four position foundation would look like this:
Can we mix these up? For example, how about this diagram?
This is out of order. Positions don't change. Give-and-take cannot take place in disorder. Another diagram that would help clarify the four position foundation would look like this:
No interchanging in dancing
The ultimate perversion is homosexuality in which proper roles are completely spit on. These are the Last Days because the President of the United States sees this as normal behavior for some people. The UC sees this much but misses the boat by thinking other subjects and objects can mix it up. Look at the following quote of Father and tell me where subject and object interchange?"Even in dancing you can learn a lesson. When two people dance, who leads -- the smaller woman or the larger man." Did you see the word"lead?" Men lead. He says,"Automatically, the one who is the larger will be the leader. Always the anchor is the one at the center, the bigger, strong and taller person, the masculine one." Did you notice the word"always?" Men"always" lead."That is the way he takes initiative. Therefore, between man and woman, man is definitely the subject. This is universal discipline. It's not something people can decide; it's not something I decided. It is the way the universe designed men and women."
"That is why men are meant to be the ones to take initiative; women want to be lifted up when dancing. Then you feel happy. If a man is twirled around, he feels uncomfortable. That is how harmony and beauty come." At least men should feel uncomfortable. Everything is such a mess in society that the original mind is so buried in so many men and women that they are uncomfortable if there aren't any women in the local fire department. The Republican senator John Warner, is uncomfortable that women are not combat fighters. The crusade today is to get women repairing cars at the automotive department at Kmart and to get men into marriage counseling so they can repent for being competitive and having the medieval view that they are the head of the family. Men are now comfortable praising households instead of being repulsed. In the speech quoted above (AThe Road Toward the Ideal" Sept. 7, 1986), he says right after the quote on dancing,"What about you women, do you have love? You are not sure? Is your love for the purpose of yourself or for loving a man? What do you think? You American women, answer me clearly -- is your love for yourself and other women, or for a man? For men -- forever? Absolutely."
I'll answer for them. No. Even if they think they do, they don't. And Father knows it. He goes on saying,"You talk of love. Is love for the purpose of giving, or just to receive?" He says they are focused on receiving. What do women talk about together? They talk about men. What do they say? They bash them. Name me one woman you know that talks like the woman in Titus 2:3-5 who counsels women to obey their husbands. The Bible says to"reverence" them. Robert Schuller in his book on families says he once was told by a woman in his congregation that her husband comes home and calls his dog by name, smiles and pets him before he even gets through the door. What does she get? Nothing. He doesn't smile, call her by name and hug her. She said she wished she got at least what the dog got. My response is Father's. What is she doing? Is he all to blame? Women think so. The reality is that the dog sees him as his master and the man knows it. Do women give more respect to dogs or men? What do they say in this never ending battle of the sexes? The dog is nicer than the man. The dog isn't scary like the man who cruelly says the food has too many spices and he needs his shirt ironed now. If the man is confident he is too aggressive. If he's thoughtful and not sure and not quick with a response he's boring and slow. If he works hard and long to make money he's insensitive for not being home enough. If he doesn't earn enough to send her to her family reunion, he's lazy. If he leads spiritually, she feels he thinks she's less than him. If he lets her lead, she feels burdened and overloaded. Reverence for husbands? They're all a bunch of idiots, little boys messing up the house. To serve a man would be like being a degrading doormat. He would divorce her and run off with a nineteen year old he met at work. Isn't this the reality? Isn't this what's being said to marriage counselors and women having espresso together? Men are pigs. Men are jerks. A lot of this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Father says in the above speech that men are head of the family. It is principled:"each social unit such as the husband and wife and the family and so forth, must be properly centered. The family must be centered upon the head of the family. The tribe must be centered upon its chief. The society and nation have a head of state. From the very bottom, you circle upward all the way to the top. Within every social unit there is a head or a central figure." Did you see how he combined circular motion with hierarchy? In all three blessings, every relationship of subject/object is a leader/follower relationship. In the first blessing of mind/body unity father says we are supposed to"subjugate your body completely to the will of your mind, so that the body will follow the mind absolutely." Did you notice the word"absolutely"? Never do they act or interchange with the other. The Fall was caused by a woman who stepped out of her space, her boundaries and interchanged with Adam and acted like Adam by dominating him instead of him dominating her. Women must give up leadership.
Satan's tactic has been brilliant and he's won. He has reached his goal of emasculating men. They are all weak now. He has everybody feminized so he can play cat and mouse with us. Men are the bad guys. They wear the black hats. Women are the good guys and wear the white hats. There is no gray. Men and women are not both good and bad. By depressing men Satan has effectively kept them from becoming strong fighters. He has kept them from forming trinities. He has kicked out the grandfather who is being abused by sadists at the nursing home. He has turned men into teddy bears instead of God's wish they become rocks. Now men are trying to get in touch with their femininity. They have become soft. Men are innately aggressive and out to win. That's why men have a hard time having friends. The see vertically and find it hard to be horizontal. Especially now that we are at war with Satan. Men don't hug, they shake hands. The history of shaking hands goes back to war and enemies coming together to talk by having their hands open and showing no weapon. Women are innately objective and adaptable. They are not out to win or think about going from point A to point B. They live in the here and now. The future is about as important as it is to the children who hang around them. How else could women play all day with them? It would drive a normal man crazy. Satan perverts this polarity by making people think that they must become the other sex. This distracts people and prevents them from understanding the Messiah who isn't into all this nonesense.
He comes to restore the extended family and have three generations of men live together B great grandfathers, grandfathers, and fathers or grandfathers, fathers and adult sons. It's hard enough to get a husband and wife to get unity. It is astronomically hard to get men to unite as trinities because the wives do not want to stay home and take care of grandma. They want to be"public." They want to get a job and run for office. Men are so beaten down most don't give a damn about much of anything. They have so low self esteem they drink themselves into oblivion. They have no purpose. Women go nuts to see this and think they have to fill the void instead of raising their Adam. Unwittingly they make the situation worse and leave the home to get a job or build a business because they feel they will starve to death if they don't. It all gets down to not understanding subject and object. We talk in the Church about Cain/Abel and Subject/Object. Did you notice that Cain and Abel are people and Subject and Object are technical jargon? To balance out Cain/Abel we should think of Subject and Object as Adam/Eve. Adam and Eve were the first subject and object. Adam was the first leader. A diagram to explain this would be:
Angels have a position lower than Eve. The Fall was those positions interchanging. It was the perversion of an angel"acting" like a man. Restoration is the reversal of this mess. Satan has his ideology of feminism that destroys patriarchy and Sun Myung Moon has his ideology of Godism that restores patriarchy. The Third Adam kicks Satan back to his position and takes leadership.
It may appear that women are more spiritual because they can sit together and talk peacefully about men and relationships as well as recipes and babies while men talk about competitive sports, catching a fish, shooting a deer, or the beauty of the Dodge Viper. Women may seem more family oriented, closer to God and therefore should be in charge because they have read many articles in the Ladies Home Journal, especially the series called,"Can this marriage be saved?" Men shouldn't lead their homes or the nation because they read Field and Stream. It's a given today, by both men and women, that men are pigs. They can't even talk right. When they talk they scare women. Even conservative religious marriage counselors like Gary Smalley believe it too. He has a late night infomercial for his videos on how to have happy marriages. My dad saw it, ordered them and sent them to me. Satan is so smart in how he gets his message across. Popular movie stars sit with Gary as he bashes men. John Tesh and his wife Connie Selleca are on some shows. On others he has the famous football player turned sports announcer, Frank Gifford and his wife, a famous TV personality, Kathy Lee. There is a part in the video that I'll use to sum up how insidious Satan is to crush men. Gary is shown speaking to a group of couples. He has a man come up to the stage and he blindfolds him. Now he says he's going to use this dramatic example to show the difference between men and women. He has the man put out a hand and he puts a very little rock in it, saying this is the depth of men's feelings. Then he picks up a very large rock and the viewer is getting nervous because the man is blindfolded and is in for quite a surprise. Gary says the depth of feeling women have is like this rock. Then he puts on the outstretched hand of the man who is alarmed and almost drops it but finally gets it up again and equal with the other rock in the other hand. This is an insult to men.
Cut a man and he bleeds like a woman. The idea that men care less, feel less, love less and think less than women is as satanic as you can get. One writer, David Thomas, wrote an interesting book called Not Guilty: the case in defense of men in which he looks at different areas of life from the workplace to the family and looks at statistical research and personal interviews to show that men and women are both good and bad and that it is wrong for everyone to see men as inherently bad and women as good. I can't go into detail about all his angles. He did his research though. And his insights are fascinating and thought provoking. And of course heresy to liberal/ feminists that dominate the culture. Like all things there are many arguments pro and con. Feminists would look at the data he found and the conclusions he makes differently. For me to say men are just as sensitive as women and that it's time for men to stand up and start leading their families is cultural heresy, but in time it will happen. Satan cannot rule forever. Satan cannot forever crush patriarchy, i.e., vertical relationship between men and women. By disparaging the vertical, Satan has made extremely hard for anyone to see Sun Myung Moon as their patriarch. He is laughed at. He is a pig. He has no feelings. Jesus had no feelings. Jesus was dangerous. Ignoring him wasn't good enough. He kept saying he was their leader. This made people mad. I'm going to keep saying men are to lead their families and people are going to get madder at me. They're plenty mad now if you read the letters against me.
Is there any man more hated and feared than the Messiah? Is any man more cruel and harsh? Is there any man more against the family? His words hurt like swords and fire. He is hated for saying America is too horizontal unlike the Asians who are more spiritual. We are proud and see ourselves as number one -- the super power of the world. We strike back and argue,"Oh, yeah! Mr. self-appointed messiah who hasn't gone to a seminary. It was unspiritual America that saved your ass, buddy, from Hungnam prison. It was our boys who bleed and died by the thousands to save your stupid country that is dominated for forty years by the spiritual Japanese and then invaded by the spiritual Chinese and North Koreans. And of course there is no crime in Korea. And of course it is a totally pure place with no prostitution or pornography. Who do you think you are to come here and work our young people to the bone. All they get is a sleeping bag while you live in a mansion and fish all day long." The arguments go back and forth, but in the end Father is right and we are less spiritual. Our language is not as spiritual and we put our old folks in nursing homes. Father has been in America for decades and other countries cream us in money and members. We have to take the criticism that comes our way from him.
We must see the Messiah and men in general as tough, but not harsh. Men must get their balls back and stand up to women. I'm not saying to hit women, but stand up. The Messiah is like a drill instructor. We live in a time of war and we need to be trained. If we are not toughened we will be crushed by the opposition. God wants to win the championship. He needs champions. He wants women to be strong, but strong within the boundaries of what is feminine.
Feminism teaches that men are vicious. Men can't win in this terrible battle of the sexes. Women can't win. Satan has got everyone focused on women who are always complaining and getting sympathy while men are judged as monsters. Both lose. Tocqueville's prophecy has come true. Men are weak and women are disorderly. To solve the problem, people just do more of the same stupid thing that got them into this mess. If rape increases in army barracks then the solution is to get more women in there and to get more little redheads from Kansas to be drill instructors to boys from the streets of Harlem. It's a vicious circle downward.
The American UC must understand subject/object. Either women are cops or they aren't. The UC also can't say that women should not be cops but they should be U.S. senators. You can't mix it up. There is no special Completed Testament Age middle ground, high ground or outer space new way of looking at things on this issue. Either women lead men or they don't. Either women earn money or they don't. No experiments will work. All else is perversion. It's the narrow way or the wide way. And the wide way has lots of different lifestyles. Everything from homosexual marriages to Margaret Thatcher's marriage. So far the feminists have drowned out those like Helen Andelin and Mary Pride. But a backlash is coming. Some women are seeing how they have been betrayed and are going home. Books like Fatherless America are beginning to come out. People are beginning to look at the Victorians differently and see they were on the right track in many areas of life.