Thanks for taking the time to put us in the picture, Simon. Yes, we first generation certainly know what it means to make the right or wrong decisions in our lives and to some extent, so does the second generation. For those of you who are not sure, ask your original mind and heart. Deep within us, we know the way we should go and when it's the right choice, you receive energy, creativity, a peaceful mind and a heart full of love and gratitude. Have a good trip home where your loving wife and children eagerly await you.

We sat up all night in the UK watching this on live web link. Thought it was difficult to hear the English translation as it went on as it was very quiet. Great to see TF anytime, sorry I couldn't be there...

I normally have a good internet connection but when I tried to connect to the webcast I could not get any connection. "Typical" I thought -- something important and technology lets you down. I tried all sorts of things to get a connection -- even tried calling the service provider. After 40 mins and out of desperation I called my pastor, Franklin, thinking that if I cannot make a physical connection at least I can make a spiritual one. The moment Franklin answered the phone the cable modem connected. I was just in time to see Hyung Jin nim's prayer. I am sure there is a lesson in there somewhere.

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.

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.

nice article. and good to clear that one up. thanks

I totally agree. On the topic of blood transfusions, I read an article in the New Scientist from 2008 asking how effective blood transfusions really are. It's a practice that has been going on for such a long time without question, few people dared to challenge it. Nevertheless, anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that transfusing blood may do more harm than good, except in the most urgent cases where loss of blood would lead to death. Data about people with particular medical conditions was examined, comparing those who received donor blood with those who did not, and it was found that there was a statistically significant benefit for those who received no transfused blood. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't donate blood - on the contrary, I encourage it - I just think that unless one's life on the line, perhaps it's not always necessary to receive donor blood.

Well done for clearing that blood thingy up, Matt & Nancy. Yes, let's dispel all the myths so we can live with the truth. It makes life a lot more simple. What's the next myth to tackle? How about finding out why burial is recommended rather than cremation. If there's a choice, I think I would prefer the latter, as it takes up less space. I seem to remember reading something about 'Dust to dust and ashes to ashes'. Perhaps you would like to research that subject some time. It's good to really understand things properly, isn't it?!

hi Mama Hartley With respect to burial and cremation, please refer to The Tradition, Book One - Chapter 23: http://www.unification.net/tradition/tt1-23.html Amongst other interesting traditions relating to death (e.g. euthanasia) this is what is says about cremation: "According to the Principle, death is the time when both the spiritual and physical bodies return to their original source. The spiritual body goes to the world of the spirit. We can say that the physical body returns to the material world through its eventual decomposition. The practice of cremation is not in accordance with the Unification view, as it does not allow the physical body a natural return to the physical (material) world." On another thread, WHY IS THERE ONLY ONE VOLUME OF THE TRADITION? If it's called "Book One" you'd expect there to be at least a "Book Two" but I've never come across one. Any ideas?

Why only vol 1 of The Tradition? Because it was written by Rev Kwak when he had more time on his hands. He always had the role of passing on tradition to the the UC at large. I suppose that task falls to Hyung Jin Nim now. But I agree about cremation. I rather like the Japanese idea of one pot and one grave for the whole family. Far more pragmatic yes but still family / fore fathers centric. There is so little space in Japan that I think it is law to have your remains cremated (Chizuko thinks so anyway).

I'm pretty sure I've seen a volume 2, but its a very different format - being a collection of father moon's quotes similar to most modern hoon dok hae books. Or perhaps my memory is confused.

The great Rev Ahn was once asked about burial and cremation - he was a stickler for sticking to the Principle. When asked what the difference was he simply replied, "Cremation is quicker"

http://www.unification.net/tradition/tt1-23.html Thanks Matthew (",) Thanks Matt&Nancy (",)

The great urban myth of the early Divine Principle workshops in the mid-1970s is that men and women must not drink from the same cup. Like if something was being passed around, whatever gender took the first sip determined who would drink. We took the issue to Rev. Sudo. He said, as he had so many times while lecturing, "The Fall was not food."