yes I know what you mean! During my last visit to CheongPyeong DaemoNim mentioned in passing that when she was abroad she was sad that some times members didn't where the complete Holy Robes at Ancestor Blessings ie just the over garment. It is a form of attendence...feeling guilty I went to the store and invested in everything down to the socks. It did feel completly different wearing all the layers Holy Robes. It was deepening the feeling of reverence and respect

I'm with you as well. I know it is difficult to establish traditions - but they can have a lot of internal value and make celebrations like God's Day really something holy. Yeah, it also raises the wider question of traditions and inheritance - and how this period is the time when they will be saved or lost. Personally, I never wore holy robes - have never had any - I just remember wearing a pink han-bok (korean traditional dress)and getting majorly teased after pledge. So I think the fact that they are white and neutral is definitely a plus point.

Yes I agree also. Wearing Holy Robes gives an extra special feel to the day. I like this Korean tradition of wearing white. During one of my counselling classes last year one of the Participants came dressed in white and everybody commented that she looked special like she was on a spiritual retreat or something. Let's all wear white and stand out! ;)

I remember that we stopped wearing them because those going to Korea for the Holyday were told that holy robes were not requires -- I see this is still the case. Perhaps Korea did this for pragmatic reasons and then only just for the main meeting? Anyone know if local churches in Korea still wear robes?

I agree Nancy. It is very counterproductive to foster the view that the "outside world" is all evil since those are the people which we must build loving relationships with. It defeats the purpose of our movement to close ourselves up and although it may be very challenging to maintain our standards. By doing so, we can show a true example to others and become stronger people ourselves. I live in the metaphorical coke bottle but there are still people I see who inspire me and show me how to be a better person. One point I would add is that one can be very loving to people but should also be humble and not hold any feelings of superiority because we might be more loving. We should be proud of our beliefs and values but still respectful and humble to others.

I think we have to be very careful with the idea of being in the world but not of it. Lines do have to be drawn over how much you share the experiance of society around us. We also have to be very wise as to what will affect us and what will not. Remember that the sign saying "Danger! Do not pass this sign" is put a long way from the the danger it is warning about.

With all respect to different views but I have to say... it`s an old, old concept about home ed children isolation from society and it comes from lack of knowledge how the HE actually works and what it the REAL world and real society. The group of 20-30 immature young or very young people of same age with only one adult to guide them and help to grow (ideally) and learn how to live the real life certainly isn`t real and natural :) http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000068.asp http://www.education-otherwise.org/HE/rmount.htm http://our.gop.com/post/Nathan6/blog/homeschooling_socialization.html http://www.ahomeeducation.co.uk/what-socialisation.html http://www.homeschoolingexplained.com/home-schooled-socializing.asp etc, ect "According to a Radford University of Virginia master's thesis by Thomas Smedley entitled The Socialization of Homeschool Children , "home-schooled children were better socialized and more mature than the children in the public school." And I would advice you to do more research in this area :)

As for me, I was brought up on homeschooling, and looking back on it now, I am grateful for it. I think that it helped strengthen me as a person, so that now when I DO go out in the world, I know exactly who I am and what my purpose is. Because of the positive experience I have had growing up on homeschooling, I definitely am going to homeschool my own children. My parents taught me all the dangers of society, and growing up, they definitely were involved and protected us, which I believe is a parent's responsibility and right. Our family always served our neighborhood and community, and had plenty of opportunity to hang out with "outside" people and church friends too. Then as we entered our teenage years, our family formed WAIT, and through that experience of going out all over the world and sharing love and positive inspiration to people, we lived the way of loving and reaching out to people, whatever their background or denomination. Our family never had the "us" and "them" attitude that people misunderstand that homeschooling creates. Homeschooling is not for everyone, it's a family decision, but many studies on homeschooling have shown that many homeschooled children grow up to be well-adjusted, successful, socially powerful people in the world. All I am saying is that there is always a positive and successful way to do homeschooling that helps support a world-changing family for God. Thank you :)

We are a light to the world A light must not be kept hidden. Although care is needed not to let it be fade by harsh winds.

Nice blog, Nancy Tash and i plan to homeschool David & siblings, but not for the reason of shielding them from the world. For the same reasons you postulate, we will encourage our children to be involved in society, joining drama, dance, rugby, football and all sorts of other clubs and groups. I want my children to know the reality of the world and know how to relate to it (an important ingredient for a successful foundation of substance, i believe) The main reason we want to homeschool is to protect our children from THE EDUCATION SYSTEM itself. Here's a link to an interesting video i found posted on facebook by Grace Barata: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY If the education system were to evolve, including an implementation of Sir Ken Robinson's suggestions, then i'd happily send my children to mainstream schools

Mila - If you'll take note of the second sentence that I wrote "I’m not against the idea of getting an education at home, but rather the idea that parents need to “shield” their children from the evils of the world that irks me to no end." I have never been against getting an education at home. I think it's a great natural learning environment, provided that the parent is well-equipped to educate their child. My main problem when I see home-schooled children is that I question their parents' motives for choosing to do so.

Nigel - You're absolutely right in that we also have to be careful and cautious about the experiences that we engage in.

Mie - Thanks for your insight. It's always nice to hear someone's personal experience and good to hear a positive experience as a counterpoint.

Its an interesting topic and I can see that upon reflection, I would particularly do my utmost to protect my child from any heartbreak. One of my bitterest memories was to find out (quite by chance) that my beloved daughter had become deeply emotionally attached to someone I had never even heard of. I never preached and really believed that a little room to socialise was perhaps healthy for many of the reasons you suggest in your article. It is actually wrong to believe that emotional pain should not be avoided. As long as my child (who is always there for me to care care for) can understand why I might encourage strict rules on how to relate to those who may even scorn my beliefs on things like purity, then I have a duty to wrap them with protective love. This small comment/opinion is offered with love as a parent who may often get things wrong but keeps trying.

I love this video, We watched it on the football w/s last year

What an amazing life affirming Video. This is good for all ages, including OAPs !! Never too old to smile !! Thanks to you all for stuff like this.

having borrowed and read the book, i can confidently second all of what Nancy has stated above!

I agree that the more we are involved in dialogue the more we appreciate our own values and also respect others. An article about interfaith dialogue for the interested readers: http://fethullahgulenconference.org/houston/read.php?p=fethullah-gulen-contribution-muslim-christian-dialogue-abrahamic-cooperation

great blog - thanks!

I believe the problem relates more to the narrowing of political mainsteam ideology. The BNP is the only party left in some ways to encompass some of the more 'right wing' notions in the Principle (e.g. stance on sexuality). The BNP could never thrive if it had no single shred of the principle in it (in the same way that communism has many principled aspects). Furthermore, the modern 'equality' movement doesn't focus on true social harmony and equality, but more on how to make white heterosexual men feel bad about themselves. we should be allowed to wave our union jack, sing the national anthem, be proud of our history and heritage etc. Let's not forget that other races can be racist too, and there are plenty of sexist women in the world. Sometimes more so than white men to be honest. So naturally people go with a camp that somehow empathises with them. Nick Griffin isn't a nut-case, he just has a niche market in political ideology. Do I believe we should vote? Yes. Should Unificationists vote for the BNP? If they feel that best serves God's providence, maybe they should. Ultimately, our duty is to realise God also works keenly through politics and that we too can shape that. Perhaps not naively thinking we should make a political party right at this second. Nor that 1 party is the party for us as Unificationists. But we should make every endeavour to put God in every part of society. That is our mandate.

Steven, I think you are being a bit naive here -- or perhaps just being a bit theorectical. There is no way a Unificaitonist should or could vote BNP any more than they could vote communist. Of course Unificationists should follow their conscience and vote for whom they think will best forwards God's will and therefore theoretically they could vote BNP but I believe that if they went to a few meetings they would feel quite sick by the attitude of the people they met toward race issues. To accomplish anything you have to use some aspect of the Principle but that would not make it Principled. Nazi Germany had a very efficient army with loyal and brave soldures; Communist China tries to get rid of pornography. We always have to see the good points and the bad and make a judgement. I agree that one party does not have a right to our vote though.

Amen, Aju. thanks for a refreshingly feminine perspective on receiving ever more blessing, this time on a cosmic level. I guess this must mean Matthew knows about the 'new dress' ;)

Dear Nancy. What an opportunity (the Blessing) to remind ourselves who we are and the precious value every individual represents before God and each other. The 'White Dress' tradition in our movement symbolises that. Thank you for putting your reflection into words so nicely.

Thanks for sharing. I absolutely agree with you, Nancy, my dear sister.... I was shopping in Cardiff Queen St.for my white outfit for the blessing. It's amazing the vast amount of creams & 'off whites' you can find until you spot what you're really looking for! So, like you, I and I'm sure many other sisters/women have that'little white dress'/suit/outfit to be pulled out when necessary. I feel somehow that God likes white for the right occasion (but he likes pink even more!)

this made me smile, like really smile. definitely refreshing and inspiring, thanks nancy onni!

Good one Nancy - we'll be rooting for you!

go for it nancy - big baksu

All best wishes for it, we'll be sure to watch!

I don't think they should receive equal status. The contribution of Christianity and the Church of England in particular to the life of the country, its culture, history, values etc. far outweighs that of other faiths and so it should have a role and position that reflects this. I think other religions can over time have a comparable status when they have earned it. So it would be appropriate to have a couple of Catholic bishops sitting in the House of Lords for example as it has been many centuries since a Pope called for the overthrow of the Protestant monarchy (sadly hardly anyone now remembers why we have bonfire night - gunpowder, treason and plot.) The leaders of the main Protestant or non conformist denominations should also be represented and I think the the Chief Rabbi should also have a seat - Jews pray for Queen and country in their synagogues and financed the war against the French Hitler - Napoleon. As to the rest, I think they should wait for another century or two until they have had the opportunities to make substantive contributions and to become fully integrated into our national life. The same applies to receiving government support of schools etc. As to family law, I think everyone should follow the same, by now rather watered down, Judeo-Christian morality - polygamy should remain illegal and the benefits system returned to its original status so that men do not receive housing benefit etc. for more than one wife which at present they do. Beyond that everyone should continue to have the freedom to worship God in whatsoever way they choose as long as they do so within the law. No religion in the UK has to register with the state and be granted permission by the state to exist as in the UK the state does not have the authority to register or refuse to register a religion. In time this will change as the regime of the continent is incrementally imposed here by the EU whose culture is based on the idea that the state is our creator, the giver of our identity, the maker of law, arbiter of what is right and wrong and the legitimate recipient of our absolute loyalty and devotion.

There is always a few sec delay and a man on a big red button in the MCR on live shows for obvious reasons...can't see a problem though. How many other religions are being represented?

Well done, Nancy!

Just to throw a bit of a response to Uncle William there, I agree that every religion must earn it's right to participate in higher levels of state, such as the House of Lords and so forth, but one can't merely argue that the law of the land has to suffice for all. It is heavily prejudiced toward the Judeo-Christian tradition. A simple example being that the law does not always recognise the marriages of those of other faiths and traditions, even if said marriages have been in place for over 40 years for a couple. So there has to be some room for manoeuvre, especially from a legal point of view. But you're right that the Jedi shouldn't be allowed more say in our national government than the Jews just because of numbers, especially since their contribution is questionable at best.

Just a response to William, Jews did more than just finance the war against Napolean, they were persecuted and martyred by the British until someone pointed out that the Messiah wouldn't come (2nd coming) until the Jews were scattered all over the world, so if there was one bare spot (England - if they managed to exterminate all the Jews as they planned) then the Messiah wouldn't come back. I believe one incident of martyrdom involved about 400 Jews being locked in a building which was then set on fire. And as for the common misconception that all Jews are rich and love money, that came about because of laws saying they were only permitted to work in banking and jewelry industries, as working with money was considered base. That they achieved success with whatever they set their hands and minds to is the result of God's blessing upon them as His Chosen People, the covenent with Abraham that has continued to this day.

that's a wonderful drawing!

His meeting Mr Gorbachev and getting him to allow us to teach general spiritual values in around 10,000 schools, his work to bring N and S Korea together, his contribution to teaching some major leaders the critique and counterproposal to Marxism-Leninism (CAUSA), his world-wide interfaith work, his work to promote the value of the family, his work to promote (together with his wife) the value of women as peacemakers and his work to promote values in Arts and Culture and also the Sciences ... for a start.

I always loved True Father's idea of Homechurch, or better, the mastering of it, taking care of 360 homes, which means loving all its people dearly from the bottom of your heart.

One thing that stands out for me is when Father went and embraced Kim Il Sung in North Korea, the man who sentenced TF to death. It was an akt of true faith. I am sure there was a ral possibility that he was going to be received very diferently, not to mention the power of Father's heart to forgive and to overcome. That the “Declaration of the Era After the Coming of Heaven” would not really mean much to the average Joe - as you say - is true enough. But in the end that is the greatest achievement of our True Father; that and the way he went in order to achieve the position from which to make such a statement. It is up to us to 'translate' or 'interprete' what it meens to declare the era after the coming of heaven. Thank you for taking on that challenge, Nancy

The deeper aspect of what Father has accomplished may not be understood either, as it is about inspiring inner development in individuals. Sometimes I wonder if it is really possible to know how great a person is until many years in the future when the real fruit of what they have brought come about. Popular leaders come and go but leaders of enduring value are remembered well into the future. As Father many times says "I am talking to the future" Millions of people all over the world have been inspired and affected by the Divine Principle. As with all great thought it is difficult to assess it's impact as it affects others and has it's influence and knock on effect. For me it is about his continued teaching and living of that teaching of loving others that is his greatest accomplishment. It is his ability to have an impact on my life in a very real and personal way. Challenging people to grow, he is a man who has moved my heart and the hearts of so many others.

Father has been able to inspire people of every conceivable background, which is unique in itself. His teachings are timeless and ageless and that's what makes him great. What inspired me many decades ago, was the idea of humankind becoming one family under God. I could feel it and see it in my mind and I still think it's entirely possible if we all give our whole heart and full co-operation. What is great about Father, is that he doesn't want us to just follow him, but teaches us how to become mature and God-like men and women - His children who have grown up and take on our portion of responsiblity in realizing the true purpose of creation.

Wow, I'm inspired now because you are all inspired! He really is one of the greatest visionaries and inspirational leaders of all time. And that is besides the intangible almost unfathomable spiritual conditions which he has done. I can only hope to grasp the full meaning of his life in my lifetime.

thanks Nancy. I think I was the first follower :)

Yes I'm twittering @jeffsmind Thanks for the follow :)

Yes - good idea. Now we can find out how it *really* is in those long european meetings Simon!

Hey, I never thought of twittering from one of those meetings. I will have to try that next time I get a chance.

i love all of you but one thing have with everyone "upf" "w-carp" we can say father moon member this is living for sake of other that is awesome some time i fill good buz give someone to some i get something then i feel that good have a nice day to all of brother & sister i am from india, new delhi sameer khan i got good things for father moon l love father moon tooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Beautiful picture to match your comments...yes, let's adopt positive ways in every area of our life and culture!!!

There are differents ways parents use to educate their children depending which one is easy and/or matches with a child`s level of faith.Taking a punishment as a restoration,a prayer considering in his simplistic sense,can help a child to restore in such a way his relationship with Parents/God...but this must be given in a spiritual atmosphere with explanations so that a child can understand why.

I have never heard of that form of punishment before; on the surface of it, it sounds revolting. To impose involuntary prayer as a punishment would, as you describe, devalue prayer and not help the young child. It's somewhat analagous to a Catholic priest perscribing a penance (twelve "Hail Marys" and four "Our Fathers" every day for a week...) However, prayer can be a powerful form of forgiveness & reconciliation. I remember listening to a sermon by Rick Warren during which he talked about an occasion he confessed to his family members some of the sins weighing down his heart, after which the whole family prayed together, offering the confession and inviting God's grace. I hadn't thought about it in relation to raising my children, but perhaps this is something I will strive to do, that in the future, when they do something wrong, that I treat them fairly and firmly, with a true parental heart, but then pray together to resolve the situation and move forward.

Punishment is a very emotive term and, along with much else in human history, something that has been very misused. Punishment is not necessarily a bad thing. In our church we belive in indemnity or tangam -- and that incompasses punishment. Whether in society at large or in the home we punish with several possible aims: restitution (to pay back); deterance / prevention; rehabilitation; eductation; retribution (justice or to give what is deserved); and, often mistaken for the last one, revenge. Appart from revenge I believe all of these are valid and good if applied with wisdom and love. Of course that is the problem -- often it is with a spirit of vengance or at best not much wisdom or love. As Super Nanny and Nanny 911 show the application of love includes some form of punishment. When a child has left a mess the mess should be cleared up before moving on to the next activity. If the child does not want to do it then the tidy up is a bit of restitutional punishment. If they refuse then there is the next measured level. There always has to be a consequence -- that is educational punishment. I think we partially use the word indemnity or tangam to get around the historical problems with the word punishment. Prayer can be easy and fantastic but can also be indemnity and, in my experience, one of the most difficult forms of indemnity to do properly. It therefor can be punishment. But the mistake the parent in Nancy's blog made is prayer is not a form of punishment that can be applied -- it is only a form of indemnity that can be accepted.

Prayer is a way to connect with God and with our True Self. In it's deepest form it is pure JOY! To make this analogous to punishment is a strange idea to me. We may make offerings or some form of penance in order to heal the rift WE feel between us and God but this cannot be demanded from us. It is something we have to make from our hearts. The most important part emotionally of our children's formative years is before the age of 3 years. So how we are living and loving our children at that time will play a key part in their future and this will include how they approach prayer later in their life. Thank you Nancy for this posting.

Geoff, you say "in it's deepest form it is pure JOY!" but when it is not in its deepest form what is it? How long does it sometimes take to get to that deepest form, when you have set a substantial time condition to the prayer how does your body sometimes feel? Father used to pray in the mountains at night in Korean mid winter with the spirit of pray or die -- why did he do that? I did not say that prayer was analogous to punishment I said that prayer was indemnity and indemnity has an element of punishment contained within it. The thing that prayer (as indemnity) is analogus to is perfect communion with God which I think is that which you call prayer in its deepest form. If you look up 'penance' it the dictionary: penance n 1 voluntary self-punishment to atone for a sin, crime, etc. 2 a feeling of regret for one's wrongdoings. 3 Christianity. 3a a punishment usually consisting of prayer, fasting, etc., undertaken voluntarily as an expression of penitence for sin. 3b a punishment of this kind imposed by church authority as a condition of absolution. ■ vb 4 (tr) (of ecclesiastical authorities) to impose a penance upon (a sinner). [C13: via Old French from Latin paenitentia repentance; related to Latin poena penalty]

Hi Nige, What makes you think I was saying that you were making prayer analogous to Punishment? In reply to your question, my own experience is that there are different levels or depths of prayer and the pure joy may be reached through tremendous hardship and time or through just a whisper. I haven't found it predictable. Usually my prayer before say, a meal is not so profound and deep although I try to connect with sincerity, so I would say that it is a prayer (of offering) but I don't usually experience profound joy. But it is something maybe I could work on. Hope this goes some way in answering your question. I think this is a good thing to discuss and think about. So what's your own experience? BEST Jeff

Jeff I figured that you were either talking about me or you were talking about the parents in Nacy's blog and Nancy said that she thought they were using prayer as a punishment so that did not seem to fit. My comments were a bit more subtle about the point so I deducted you were responding to my comments. But all that is not important though it is worth being clear what you are responding to in this kind of forum because it is so easy to misunderstand and people do tend to take things very personally. Did you ansewr my question? Not really. I was responding to the title of the blog "prayer is not punishment" by giving evidence that it can be punishment, that historically it has been thought of in those terms and that there is nothing wrong with that. [from here not just aimed at Jeff] I have noticed over the years that many people in the UC have a problem with the word 'punishment' -- it seems to conjure up images of ruling by force and fear. Here are some words from Father: "Even in everyday life we can understand the need for repentance. For instance, if we hurt someone, perhaps our mothers, then we must apologise with tears. When a person does something wrong he is punished by being given some suffering and having his activity limited. By the pain of his suffering he must understand what he has done wrong" The Way of Tradition vIII, p80 #47. I take that quotation to mean that Father believes punishment is a good thing in certain circumstances. To apply that punishment the punisher requires wisdom, love, and even skill to achieve the desired outcome: true repentance. I doubt I could be brought to repentance by sitting on the 'naughty step' for five minutes but perhaps that is because I am over 50. They say one minute for each year of age so as I am over 50 lets round that down to a 40 mins. Yes, there is a chance there that I could find repentance. Actually sometimes it takes 40 days in Chung Pyung to find repentance, sometimes it can even take the suffering of Job. I suppose we could add the word 'true' to punishment to make it acceptable. Prayer can be a form of punishment but if it does not elicit true repentance then it may not be true punishment. Next question: will there be punishment in the Kingdom of Heaven?

Well this is interesting! The Bateman family had Prayer and punishment as a topic tonight as out HDH study time. After reading the article and comments my TEN year olds son's comment was "It is not punishment to be sent to talk to my father so how can prayer be punishment?" Another sons comment was to clarify this issue of Indemnity and Punishment. This went something like Punishment is what you receive if you don't understand what you have done wrong. Indemnity (Tangam) is what you do to repair what you have done wrong. The German word for Indemnity helped me a lot to understand this = weidergutmachen (spelling may be wrong) meaning is "to make good again" Making something good may be a pleasant or unpleasant experience but often the later. If we live the wrong lifestyle we will experience punishment by the way our body reacts to that lifestyle. When we understand that we need to change something because of the "punishment" our body is receiving we will rethink the way we are living this is Repentance, "rethinking". Then we embark on an indemnity condition to restore our body to health.

thank you, to both Jeff & Nigel, for expanding on this thread. reading your comments bring back many memories, particulary of the lowest times in my life when i willingly embraced indemnity/punishment as a means to return to Heavenly Father. those experiences were not easy, nor were they always pleasant, but the end result was always liberating. i guess it's like tidying a room; you could leave it in a mess, or you could invest some time to make it tidy, and although the process might be frustrating, the end result is satisfying. accept when you're FORCED to tidy your room, but i must confess i'm an OCD tidy-freak, so i actually prefer having a tidy room!

One final comment. I always wondered why, when we prayed, we said: "I pray..." what do we mean by that word. I asked Rev Kwak and without any hesitation he said that "when you pray you have to think that you are putting yourself into objective position to God. We do not (as fallen people) naturally take an objective position to God so to some degree we have to force ourselves into that position." [I paraphrased] By using the word prayer we are acknowledging there is a problem. If there was no relational problem we would (or should) use a different word.