SOUTHERN EDUCATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION

Enquirer

liTHE MOON MOVEMENT II

Neil Albert Salonen, President,Unification Church of America

Ben Kaufman, reporter, Cincinnati

Guests:

Subject:

II

FIRinG Line

Use of this material is for private, non-commercial, and educational purposes; additionalreprints and further distribution is prohibited. Copies are not for resale. All other rightsreserved. For further information, contact Director, Hoover Institution Library and Archives,Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-6010

The copyright laws of the United States (Title 17, U.S. Code) governs the makingof photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. If a user makes arequest for, or later uses a photocopy or reproduction (including handwritten copies)for purposes in excess of fair use, that user may be liable for copyright infringement.Users are advised to obtain permission from the copyright owner before any re-useof this material.

© Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University.

The FIRING LINE television series is a production of the Southern EducationalCommunications Association, 928 Woodrow St., P.O. Box 5966, Columbia, S.C.,29250 and is transmitted through the facilities of the Public Broadcasting Service.Production of these programs is made possible through a grant from theCorporation for Public Broadcasting. FIRING LINE can be seen and heard eachweek through public television and radio stations throughout the country. Checkyour local newspapers for channel and time in your area.

SECA PRESENTS @)

FIRinG Line

HOST: WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, JR.Guests: Neil Albert Sa10nen, President

Unification Church of AmericaBen Kaufman, reporter, Cincinnati Enquirer

Subject: "THE t~OON MOVEMENT"Panelists: Jonathan Kaufman, Yale University

Michael Wells, Western New England CollegePeter Neger, Yale University

FIRING LINE is produced and directed by WARREN STEIBEL

This is a transcript of the FIRING LINE program tapedin New York City on January 3, 1977, and originallytelecast on PBS on January 14, 1977.

SOUTHERN EDUCATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION

© Board of Trustees of the L land Stanford Jr. University.

© 1977 SOUTHERN EDUCATIONALCOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION

MR. BUCKLEY: The press has been greatly absorbed during the past season ortwo by the doings of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon, the head of the UnificationChurch, a Korean evangelist with ecclesiastic pretensions, who announces him­self as the catalyst of an international unification of religious movementsdestined to bring peace and freedom to the world. So far nothing much elseis new, but the Reverend Moon is twice distinctive. He appears to have anunlimited amount of money to spend, and he has attracted to his apostolate anumber of young Jews and Catholics, two religious species normally difficultfor eccentric evangelists to reach. The furor arose recently when an entireorganization devoted to kidnapping young men and women back out of theclutches of the Reverend Moon actually came to life, raising all kinds ofproblems, including, needless to say, civil liberties problems.

Here to discuss the Moon phenomenon are two gentlemen, the first no lessthe president of the Unification Church of America, Mr. Neil Albert Salonen.Mr. Salonen, who unfortunately is suffering from laryngitis today, is thehead of a number of other organizations at the same time, including the Inter­national Cultural Foundation. He is greatly incensed by what he considers tobe licentious assaults on the character of the Reverend Moon and on the natureof his movement. Mr. Salonen was educated at Cornell at the College ofEngineering, from which he graduated in 1964. He participated in a number ofidealistic organizations, becoming the head of the Unification Church ofAmerica in 1972.

Ben Kaufman, the religion reporter for the Cincinnati Enquirer, is agraduate of the University of Minnesota, where he majored in political science.He has served as a reporter in many parts of the globe, and is an officer ofthe Religion Newswriters Association and also of the National Association ofWriters in the Secular Media. As may be inferred, he is critical of theUnification movement.

I should like to begin by asking Mr. Salonen whether he himself believesthat the Reverend Moon is a messenger of God, and if so could he describe thecircumstances of Mr. Moon's afflatus.MR. SALONEN: I certainly believe that Reverend Moon is a messenger of God.When I first met him in 1969 I found that he was not only a man who lived ac­cording to his teachings, but by following those teachings, I myself experi­enced a kind of spiritual rebirth which I had only before read about. Now, Iwas raised in a Lutheran home, and my parents were good Christians. I don'tthink they were especially doctrinal, and I would have said that I believedin God and Jesus Christ, and I would have said that I had tolerance for otherreligions, but religion was not really a very important force in my life, be­cause I didn't see it dealing relevantly with the problems that we face. Afterbecoming part of this movement my relationship with God and my relationshipand sensitivity to spiritual things in general increased. And I would saythat despite the fact that I have a very particular and strong religious be­lief, it's a direct result of that belief that I've also become much moreable to respect other religions as well.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, that tells us a lot that's extremely interesting aboutyourself, but not very much about the Reverend Moon.MR. SALONEN: I thought the question was whether I believed he was a man ofGod.MR. BUCKLEY: Yes, and if so, what were the circumstances of his, so to speak,investiture?MR. SALONEN: He was born in part of what is now North Korea. At that timethe country was not divided, but it was all under the occupation of theJapanese. They were trying to install a state religion, Shintoism, so he wasraised in the underground Christian church. When he was 16 years old--KoreanChristianity, as you may know is extremely evangelical, for example, comparedto mainstream American Christianity; people spend a long time in prayer, thereare often all night prayer services, et cetera--one Easter morning Jesus Christ

© Board of Trustees of the L land Stanford Jr. University.

Well, presumably for other reasons than the fact that the Queenthe head of the church.Yes, but the state has blessed the church and the church has

directly appeared to him, and over the period of those ~ine years revealed tohim an explanation of many of the parables and symbols ln the Old and NewTestament. As a result he was commissioned to go out and spread this truthin order to gather together all religious peoples.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, why has, if on the assumption--I don't mean to use pro­vocative vocabulary here--but on the assumption that he was given that sortof a head start by God, how come he's done so poorly?MR. SALONEN: Well, of course, that's a matter of opinion. In my opinion he'sdone very well. To me there's no secret that the-- .MR. BUCKLEY: Well, you see he spent a million and a half dollars promotlngone event in Washington, and the place was only one third full. Something'swrong there, isn't it?MR. SALONEN: I wouldn't measure success in those terms. First of all, the,Washington event was on the open ground, so I don't know how you decide what sfull or what's not. We do believe that a very large number of people came,but that's not the central focus.MR. BUCKLEY: If you don't measure it in those terms, why do you spend so muchmoney trying to fill it? ..MR. SALONEN: Sir, we are spending a great deal of effort ln 120 countrlesaround the world. We've been able to bring a spiritual renewal to people whohave left other established religions or who couldn't find some moral directionin them. I think when you take almost three million young men and women w~o

are now willing to devote their entire lives to changing the fundamental dl­rection of the cultures of the world, the systems of the world, and create aunified, one-world view, I think that's tremendous progress in one man's life.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, Lenin did better than that.MR. SALONEN: I don't think he did. But I--MR. BUCKLEY: He got more than three million.MR. SALONEN: --think that Lenin is an example of a man who's done very well,and I think that it's ironic that people out of the atheistic tradition, lik~

Lenin have done so we11--Lenin and Hitler and Stalin and the others--where lnthis time there seem to be so few religious leaders, who presumably have a morecomplete or more vibrant message, and have been unable to communicate it tothei r followers.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, Mr. Kaufman, from your extensive experience observingreligious movements, what is it that Mr. Salonen has said so far that strikesyou as most interesting? .MR. KAUFMAN: I think it's an inference I draw from hlS acceptance and TheDivine PrinaipZe' s i dentifi cati on of the Reverend Mr. r100n as a messenger ?fGod or possibly the messiah promised, because this seems to be the wellsprlngof other writings and other statements within the church that condemn theseparation of church and state or religion and politics, saying they shouldnot be sep~rated as they are in this country and that.if the Re~erend Mr:Moon and the Unification Church achieve their goal thlS separatlon, posslblysatanic will end in this country. And many of the critics whom I've inter­viewed-~and I have my own problems with this--say that this is basically asubversive doctrine in the United States, to join church and state, any churchand state, and to have congressmen and senators welcoming the Reverend Mr.Moon and doing his bidding.MR. BUCKLEY: Oh, come on. It hasn't really been all that troublesome, hasit? I mean England's getting along all right and there's no separation ofchurch and state there. I'm not for it either.MR. KAUFMAN: Well, if England's getting along all right you must.be uniquein that opinion. The church there is in terrible trouble and so lS thegovernment.MR. BUCKLEY:of England isMR. KAUFMAN:

blessed the state and they're both in desperate straits right nO\~.

MR. SALONEN: Maybe I can be helpful to bring some unification between the twoof you. I certainly believe that when you talk about religion or the separa­tion of church and state, it's different in my vie\~ from the separation betweenreligion and the state. The church as an institution, as an organized body,I believe, must be kept separate from the processes of the state, from thegovernment, but the church, I believe, is the highest moral authority andtherefore it has an imperative to teach the values which then are played out-­MR. KAUFMAN: Aren't you practicing celestial deception on us here? Orheavenly deception--MR. SALONEN: Of course not.MR. KAUFMAN: --with this, because at least three young ladies were assignedto each congressman and senator to help mold their opinions by the church, orat least that was the church's goal.MR. SALONEN: This is exactly what I'm talking about. We've had a ministry onCapitol Hill for over two and a half years.MR. KAUFMAN: One for the party, one for the politics, and one for the office.MR. SALONEN: What I'm saying is that we've had people go out and try to reachthe leaders of our country and you ask--don't take my opinion, but also don'ttake the opinion of one-sided critics of the church--ask the congressmen andsenators themselves if they have ever been improperly approached or lobbiedor in any way specifically influenced. Our only goal--MR. KAUFMAN: It's the goal I fear. It's the goal I fear.MR. SALONEN: The goal is very clear. The goal is to teach them that the mostimportant thing is to seek guidance from above. Now, I think all churchesshould be up on Capitol Hill trying to inspire people to live and to act andto vote according to their consciences.MR. KAUFMAN: So this could be a Christian nation?MR. SALONEN: I believe it should be a moral nation. I don't believe thatChristianity or the goals of Christianity, the goals of Judaism or the goalsof the great Eastern religions are ultimately any different. That's why Ibelieve in Unification.MR. BUCKLEY: Were you trying to say something arresting there by bringing inthis anti-Semitism business?MR. KAUFMAN: That is part of it, because it's one aspect of what happens whenthis comes together. And of course last week, as Mr. Salonen has heard sooften, I'm sure, the representatives of the American Jewish community, theOrthodox and Protestant communities and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese ofNew York, after studying the writings of the Unification Church, roundly con­demned them for redundant expressions of anti-Jewish feeling and anti-Christianfeeling--and a great many people don't accept the explanation that these arejust clumsy translations in English from the Korean--that these are a centralfacet of the Unification Church. Not just anti-Semitism.MR. SALONEN: Well, we're certainly not anti-Semitic, and I think as a news­man it's your obligation to also indicate that we then responded the followingday, not just officials of the church, but we had an Orthodox rabbi and aProtestant minister and a Catholic priest come out and give their opinion ofour--MR. KAUFMAN: That priest is no longer functioning as a priest, according tothe church.MR. SALONEN: Well, he's still a priest. He's on leave of absence from hisarchdiocese in Dublin.MR. KAUFMAN: And from his functions.MR. SALONEN: He's on leave of absence.MR. KAUFMAN: Yes, but he may not function as a priest.MR. SALONEN: Well, I don't think that's true.MR. KAUFMAN: Because that's what he has said.MR. SALONEN: Well, it's not true.

2© Board of Trustees of the L land Stanford Jr. University.

3

Well, he's been relieved of all his--What I would like to say is this, that you have to judge

fruits. Our movement teaches harmony; it teaches respectNo, you know that's not necessarily true.You don't think so?It would be dreadful to judge Christianity by its fruits.

superficially listed a number of adjectives and then, when we were aware ofhis study and sought to discuss it with him, refused to meet with us. AndRabbi Tanenbaum refused to meet and discuss it with us. I was so shocked thatthe American Jewish Committee was more interested in pUblishing a criticalanalysis than they were in finding out if that analysis would actually standup to clarification.MR. KAUFMAN: Do you reject their analysis?MR. SALONEN: I do reject their analysis.MR. KAUFMAN: On what grounds?MR. SALONEN: And not only that, I reject the circumstances under which theydid it. I find that their intolerance or their subjective treatment of ourmaterial is fostering the same kind of religious hatred and the same kind ofghettoization of the Unification Church members that they have historicallyfeared so much themselves.MR. KAUFMAN: And how about the National Council of Churches? Do you findthat their analysis is equally prejudiced?MR. SALONEN: I find that their analysis is not an analysis that was adoptedby the NCC. Dr. Lara-Braud was speaking as an individual because the Commis­sion on Faith and Order specifically refused to adopt or act on that paper.Therefore he deceptively gave the opinion he was speaking in the name of theNational Council of Churches, when in fact he was only speaking as an individ­ual. Now, I just want to make a deeper point. We have something like 10 to12 percent of our membership people who came from Jewish backgrounds. Theyhaven't rejected their tradition. We have people who've come from all otherreligious backgrounds. They haven't rejected their tradition. I find thatwhat I sense behind it, behind the criticism and the attack on the church,are basically two points: Religious and racial hatred. The religious hatredis as follows. At a ti me when many churches and many groups are los i ng mem­bers, I think you can understand just on a human level the attitude of theleaders of those churches if another group is suddenly gathering many membersand becoming strong. Secondly, because Reverend Moon is a Korean, that onefact has made him unacceptable to so many leaders.MR. KAUFMAN: That's a new argument you're bringing up. That's something youhaven't used in a long time, is to accuse these people of racism.MR. SALONEN: I'm not the one that brought it up. Dr. Herbert Richardson,from the University of Toronto, spoke to that point--MR. KAUFMAN: But let's stick with the writings, so that the Reverend Mr.Moon's person is apart from it. He did not write The Divine Principle.MR. SALONEN: That's true. He did not.MR. KAUFMAN: Okay, so we can set him aside. If we talk about an analysis ofwritings we don't have to bring his being a Korean into it. We can deal withthe English writings and the phrases there.MR. SALONEN: I may have been jumping ahead of myself. What I am trying tosay--MR. KAUFMAN: You were.MR. SALONEN: --is that I believe the motivation behind the statement thatcame out from the AJC was the need to attack the movement and therefore aneffort to do so without following what I think would be a reasonable standardof integrity.MR. KAUFMAN: But they didn't attack the Reverend Mr. Moon. They attackedwhat is said in the writings. Let's be clear about that.MR. SALONEN: The church and the doctrines of the church, without ever agreeingto even meet or discuss those doctrines with representatives of the church.MR. KAUFMAN: But they did use your-- I mean they did not phony that; theydid not misquote the doctrines; they did not miscount.MR. SALONEN: There are a number of points. We're issuing an analysis probablylater this month. They did distort some of the quotes.MR. KAUFMAN: In other words, you did not refer to this and that, leaving the

some­of--

I think itWell, I think it has to be judged by its fruits.

/1R. BUCKLEY:MR. SALONEN:thing by itsr1R. BUCKLEY:/1R. SALON EN:MR. BUCKLEY:(laughter)MR. SALONEN:sometimes-­MR. BUCKLEY: You judge Christianity on the basis of the truthfulness of itsmessage, but certainly not by the performance of its adherents.MR. SALONEN: Isn't there also an element of judgment that's important if anybody of doctrine contains a great deal of truth but has difficulty in com­municating it to its adherents? Isn't it liable to be judged on that basisalso?MR. BUCKLEY: Not necessarily.MR. SAlONEN: I think you're wrong.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, you may be right that I'm wrong, but in fact of the mat­ter, the Christian religion understands phenomena called for instance in­vincible ignorance, the notion of preaching to deaf ears: and so on and soforth, the necessity for God's grace in order to provide receptive circum­stances. I do tend to feel that whatever arguments there are against theReverend Moon's crusade, the notion that it is anti-Semitic or even anti­Catholi: i~ a r:d herrin~. ~n the first place, you can't really be entirelypro-Chrlstlan wlthout reJectlng contrary faiths, right? But to reject a con­trary faith is not to be "anti-Semitic."MR. KAUFMAN: Yes, but it's the terms they use in the same way they vilifysome of the Christian expressions in The Divine Principle and The MasterSpeaKs. They talk about the Jews betraying Jesus, not once, but repeatedly.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, the Jews were a name of a people, and after all Christwas surrounded both by people who loved him and who carried his message to thecorners of the world, but also by people who executed--MR. KAUFMAN: They don't distinguish. They talk about the Israelites--MR. BUCKLEY: But the establishment, the establishment, the Jewish establish­ment was anti-Christ. They considered him to be a heretic.MR. KAUFMAN: Except, /lr. Buckley, if we're to draw an inference that you'redefending the Unification C,lurch on this point--MR. BUCKLEY: Yes, I am.MR. KAUFMAN: --you have to take for instance Rabbi Rudin's analysis of TheDivine Principle--MR. SALONEN: Rabbi Rudin's analysis--MR. KAUFMAN: Excuse me. Please don't interrupt me.MR. SALONEN: Well, I'd like to make a point about the importance of it.MR. KAUFMAN: I will finish before you make yours. --that he goes down-­MR. SALONEN: Well, you've made a number of statements which are apparentlyauthoritative--MR. BUCKLEY: You'll have plenty of chance, Mr. Salonen.MR. SALONEN: Okay.MR. KAUFMAN: --the number of references to the faithlessness of the Israel­ites, not some, but the general statement. In the same way there are roundgeneral condemnations and rejections of the Christian message, not always inneutral terms. And it was Mr. Buckley who raised the question of anti­Sem~t~sm. I'm choosing to say anti-Jewish, because that is opposing therellglon as opposed to being anti-Semitic, which is to condemn the person forhaving the religion.MR. SALONEN: I would say that Mr. Buckley appears to understand our view ont~e.matte~ r~ther we~l. Rabbi Rudin took the book, The Teachings of theD~v~ne Pr~n~ple, WhlCh even has a disclaimer in it, and went through and just

4 5© Board of Trustees of the L land Stanford Jr. University.

Reverend Mr. Moon aside.MR. BUCKLEY: Well now, what we're trying to say here-- Is it your charge, Mr.Kaufman, that inherent in the basic documents of any religion that rejects thereligions of others is a hostility to people who take those other religions?Because if that's all you're saying--MR. KAUFMAN: I didn't say that.MR. BUCKLEY: But I say is it inherent in your analysis?MR. KAUFMAN: Not necessarily. I was referring to the analysis made by others.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, yes. But all right, let's discuss the analysis made byothers and let's have from you some kind of a statement as to whether you findit responsible, a responsible form of cr.iticism.MR. KAUFMAN: I found it as a criticism of a document, as far as I could fol­low the citations, to be accurate. I don't think one has to have a conferencewith the author of a book in order to review the book. As far as the com­petitiveness and the tension that arises from it, Mr. Salonen and I are ofone mind. We are not arguing that point. There's no doubt that the mainstreamreligions in this country feel themselves at a loss to hold some of their youngpeople, and that the Reverend Mr. Moon's movement has drawn a lot of attentionbecause of its apparent success at drawing these young people. And you getsome harsh things said in a combative situation.MR. SALONEN: I think that explains the polemic in which the--MR. KAUFMAN: Except that does not knock down the content analysis issued bythese three groups representing mainstream Judaism, mainstream Protestantism,and the Orthodox.MR. SALONEN: You're not responding. Okay, let me--MR. BUCKLEY: Yes, but aren't those criticisms essentially based on the dif­ferences between the Reverend Moon's religion and their own? And those dif­ferences do in fact exist. Otherwise there would hardly be any point in call­ing his a different movement.MR. KAUFMAN: Well, yes and no.MR. BUCKLEY: As much could be said on the Mormon Church.MR. KAUFMAN: Well, let me try to answer.MR. SALONEN: Well, I think you've had a couple of comments. I'd like to putone in.MR. KAUFMAN: Except that he's asked me that.MR. SALONEN: There will be plenty of time.MR. BUCKLEY: Let him say it, then--MR. KAUFMAN: The Roman Church has dropped the deicide charge against the Jewswithout dropping for a moment its competitiveness as a faith arguing it hastruth. And it's the language that the American Jewish Committee--MR. BUCKLEY: If deicide is committed, how can you drop a deicide charge?MR. KAUFMAN: Against the whole Jewish people.MR. BUCKLEY: Oh, no, no. Well, it is--MR. KAUFMAN: They've dropped that. That used to be taught. It has beendropped and it is the language that the American Jewish Committee picked on.MR. BUCKLEY: The whole knowledge of corporate expiation is one concerningwhich theologians continue to argue. It has over the centuries been given ananti-Semitic gloss, when carelessly used. That much is true. But one is re­quired to the extent that one believes in the divinity of Christ to believethat deicide was committed. It was committed by Jewish executioners with amandate by a Roman governor. But that hardly permits us--MR. KAUFMAN: I thought the executioners were Roman, the soldiers.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, the soldiers were definitely Roman, but the impulse wasthe impulse of the mob. It was an ochlocratic enterprise. Measured in modernterms, Lincoln often made references to the necessity perhaps of a corporateexpiation for the sins that as a nation we committed in virtue of having con­doned slavery, not distinguishing between those who were sympathetic with theaction and those who were not sympathetic with the action. And so on and so

6

for~h. But this doesn't make Abraham Lincoln anti-American, really, or evenantl-southern, any more than it makes those theologians anti-Jewish. Now Iunders~and tha~ Moon-- F~ankly, I don't think that Moon's dogmas are particu­larly lnterestlng. I thlnk that everyone has to have his literature if oneseeks out to start a theological movement. But the kind of thing that hasattracted attention about Moon is not any theological niceties described inhis book, but simp~y the.fact that ~e has a peculiar hold over an extraordinarynumber of people, lncludlng, accordlng to the statistics I read 30 percentJewish people among his-- 'MR. KAUFMAN: Have you found any reliable statistics? I haven't.11R. BUCKLEY: There's no way of knowi ng whether they're re1i ab 1e or not butI was taking the figures of-- '11R. SALONEN: I feel something of a 1istener to this entire conversation. IfI could squeeze just a--MR. BUCKLEY: Yes, go right ahead. Go ahead.MR. SALONEN: With your kind indulgence.MR. KAUFMAN: I will.MR. SALONEN: First of all, to set the record straight as far as what thechurch believes, we do believe that there is a collective responsibility forthe deat~ of Jesu~ Christ and we believe that that affects not just the peopleof the tlme, but lt affects all of us, including myself, including yourself.MR. KAUFMAN: Equally?MR. SALONEN: Equally. Including non-believers, including those who are ig­norant. It has somethi ng to do ~Iith the poi nt Mr. Buck1ey raised. In addi­t~on, ~cco~ding to The Teachings oj the Divine Principle, we also find othert~mes ln hlstory where we feel that there was a failure. For example, at thet~me of Charlemagne, we believe that it was God's providence for the physicalklngdom under Charlemagne and the spiritual kingdom under the Pope to cometogether much more closely than they did, in order to make the foundation forthe Second Coming. Now, whether you want to believe these things or not isnot really what we're discussing. What we're discussing is that there aremany failures enumerated in the book in our view. The question is: Why dowe bring out these failures? Not to blame, not to persecute, not to havehostility toward others, but that together we might find a way to understandGod's workings more clearly so that we could respond to his promise morefully. That's the purpose; so I would say what's most outrageous about theattacks is the hypocrisy, the hiding behind words and texts and translationsand others. It's been a hallmark of the Unification Church since it was inthis country, 1961, that we're interreligious, interracial, interdenomina­tional. We've never been really in any substantial way found to be persecutingany group, speaking ill or breeding hostility toward any group. I feel thatthis is just a charge that's being raised now in order to justify a desire tohurt the movement or destroy the movement.MR. BUCKLEY: Now why would the Jews and the Catholics want to destroy yourmovement?MR. SALONEN: I feel that the spirituality that Reverend Moon teaches-- MaybeI should go back and say I don't believe as a group that the Catholics or theJews.are trying to destroy the movement. I believe that particular leaders,partlcular leaders cannot accept the fact that the traditions that they comefrom have been unable to answer the needs of a certain number of people, andthat those people have found the answers in the Unification Church. I findthat we're experiencing the same kind of historical persecution that theMormons experienced, the Jehovah's Witnesses experienced, and others. And Ibelieve that when the real fruit of the Unification Church is known, and whenwe have a larger number of members so that all the people in America have metsome, rather than just read about them in a newspaper, often in a highly dis­torted form, I believe they'll be accepted as a positive, contributing groupor subset of the entire country.

7© Board of Trustees of the L land Stanford Jr. University.

MR. BUCKLEY: Again, because of their works or because of the incandescenceof their tablets?MR. SALONEN: I would say both.MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. What is it about one of your tablets that sets it apartand higher from, say, those that we're familiar with in the Bible?MR. SALONEN: We believe that Reverend Moon is fulfilling a role similar tothat of John the Baptist, that the bridge between man and God is going to beestablished not just in a spiritual sense where Christians find rebirththrough the Trinity of Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, but that there willactually be a rebirth or a perfection on earth of Adam and Eve in a restoredform. We believe that this will make it possible for man to live in harmonywith others and in the presence of God.MR. BUCKLEY: Wish I had thought of that.MR. SALONEN: Pardon me?MR. BUCKLEY: I wish I had said that. No, the reason I say that is becausewhat you have said really isn't distinctive, is it? The only thing that'sdistinctive about it is the appearance in that paragraph of the words, "theReverend Moon." Otherwise it is not to be distinguished from any sort ofgenerally good-natured statement that might have been uttered during the past3,000 years.~1R. SALONEN: Maybe we can say this, that people have been trying to reachthe same goal for the last 3,000 years, but they've only imperfectly been ableto make any progress toward it. I believe that God works through prophets,and has, and continues to. I believe that Reverend Moon is the prophet.MR. BUCKLEY: Okay, well maybe that's exactly what we ought to focus on, thequalifications of the Reverend Moon to serve as a plausible, let alone a con­vincing, messiah. ~1r. Kaufman, are you a student of the background of thehistory and the behavior of the Reverend Moon?MR. KAUFMAN: Recently, yes, since I was invited to come here.(1 aughter)MR. BUCKLEY: Right. May I ask you this: Do you detect from the career ofthe Reverend Moon anything that sets him apart as a plausible religious leader?~lR. KAUFMAN: As a plausible religious leader? Plausible to me may be implaus­ible to somebody else. I have a resistance to all proclaimed messiahs and sonone of them is plausible to me. But one of the questions that arises--Mr.Salonen may refer to it as a libel; I don't know because in all I've read I'venot seen it satisfactorily set aside--is the question of the Reverend Moon'sjail term in Korea. I think it was 1955 and three months in South Korea. TheChurch of the Nazarene Korean Mission--and others have picked it up from them-­say it was on a morals charge that had to do with his policy at that time ofinducting men and women into his church, the expression--and if this is Korean,my Korean is inadequate--"pikarume" or blood separation-- The Nazarenes, theUnited Pres~yterian magazine, A.D. , claimed that the Reverend Mr. Moon used tosay the only way a young woman could rid herself of the taint of Eve was tohave intercourse with him, and that young men coming into the organization, ifthey were to be parents of a pure and sinless generation, would have to haveintercourse with a properly inducted young lady. He's been excommunicated bythe Presbyterian Church of Korea, in 1948; runs a school on anti-communism,and I don't know if these are qualifications for religious leadership today.I don't know that they are not, either.MR. BUCKLEY: What is your comment on those charges, Mr. Salonen?MR. SALONEN: First of all, I've visited in Korea a number of times; I'vetalked with the people who were with Reverend Moon at that time. I just cate­gorically deny that there was any morals implication in his arrest at thattime. I can explain to you what did happen, and you'll just have to take myword, at least as the explanation of the church. When our church was foundedin 1954, we had a tremendous sense of spiritual vision and there were manyrevelations received by spiritually attuned people. At that time in post-war

8

Korea there was a great deal of concern on the part of the government. Thegovernment was primarily Christian, even though the nation is not primarilyChristian--it's about eight percent Christian--and they were concerned aboutbuilding a modern nation. Ewha University in Seoul is a Methodist affiliateduniversity, and two professors there, one of whom later became a UnificationChurch missionary to this country, embraced the teachings of the church.They were then told that they would have to either resign their posts at theuniversity or give up their religious affiliation. When they chose to resigntheir posts at the university, the president of the university, a Dr. HelenKim, who is since deceased, was infuriated. About 100 students also left withthese two professors and the unofficial cooperation between various leadersin post-war Korea tried in every way to stop or destroy this church. Theyput all kinds of things in the papers. The government finally arrested Mr.Moon in 1955 on a trumped-up charge of draft evasion. This can be verifiedfrom the Seoul prosecutor's office. He was held for three months while theytried to find more evidence of any kind. When they were unable to, he wasreleased without trial. So he was in jail for three months. That's true.The official charge was draft evasion, and he was released without trial.The fact is the newspapers of the time and the religious leaders of the timeaccused and speculated all kinds of scandalous rumors, but there's no basis.If you understand the teachings at all, we teach an extremely strict and highand pure standard of the relationship between men and women, and it's out­rageous to think for even a moment that Reverend Moon would give the inter­pretation to the blood cleansing ceremony that you do, or that others have.We do have a ceremony at the time of our holy wedding, which I participatedin in 1970 with my wife, which is similar to a communion service, where weshare holy wine which we believe is the cleansing blood that we will becomenew people, the direct descendents from the lineage of God. It's a symbolicceremony, and because it's private, because the only people admitted there arethose who are participating, there have been all kinds of rumors and accusa­tions about it, but it's very like a communion ceremony.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, are you satisfied with that? Is it really necessary,actually, Mr. Kaufman, to establish what the Reverend Moon did or didn't doin 1948 or whatever? Presumably'he wasn't any more unfettered than St.Augustine in his early life, so the question is--MR. KAUFMAN: His ambitions are no less to rule the City of God.MR. BUCKLEY: That's right. No, his ambitions are greater. Because St.Augustine foresaw the continuing coexistence of the City of Man with the Cityof God. But now jumping a few years, how do you account, Mr. Kaufman, for suchhold as the Reverend Moon does have on X number of people?MR. KAUFMAN: I have my reaction and the reaction I glean from others, and Imay just capsule them because they're not here to speak. My reaction is hehas tapped in on a spiritual need that has been ignored by mainstream religionin this country for more than a decade. He's not unique. The consciousnessreligions--Hare Krishna, the Children of God--you can then go to the charis­matic movement in the Catholic Church among Lutherans--still in the closet,most of them~-Presbyterians;you can find the Jewish nostalgia for ecstaticforms of worship. He's come in at a good time and he's also come into acountry that protects unusual religious behavior under the First Amendment.In other words, he is one of many people tapping a need. It was here beforehe arrived. And he's a success to some degree.MR. BUCKLEY: Now that success is a projection of his person or a projectionof ·the regimen he espouses or a combination of both?MR. KAUFMAN: As an outsider I would say that most people probably buy thepackage and are enthusiastic participants before they've met the Reverend Mr.Moon. I think it is the salesmanship of his representatives allover thecountry that brings in people who have this particular need.MR. BUCKLEY: Why are they unsatisfied by the more orthodox evangelists who

9© Board of Trustees of the L land Stanford Jr. University.

ask for total commitments, whether through Christianity or through Judaism orwhatever?MR. KAUFMAN: What they call in Southern Ohio "Kentucky windage"--you put yourwet finger in the air and you take a guess. The Reverend Mr. Moon's movementgives them something to do. It in fact absorbs their entire being if theywill give it, from what I've seen in Cincinnati and elsewhere. This is goodpractice if you want to get and keep a follower. The less you ask of the per­son to do, the less involvement you have. The more you ask, the more full theinvolvement, to the point where it becomes a monomania in any religion or ac­tivity. I know workaholics who would probably have very similar psychologicalprofiles to some members of a religious movement, including the UnificationChurch. It gives people who are looking for a cause something to do. Mostmainline churches tell you to come back in a week and leave your money.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, maybe this is a reflection of what they think they cansafely ask somebody to do.MR. KAUFMAN: They're wrong, and they're being proved wrong all the time.MR. BUCKLEY: But it's ~lso true that members of mainline churches certainlyas a percentage of the total communion do much more than merely appear ritual­istically at church once a week. And by the same token, what I'm trying togrope for is what is it that distinguishes between, let us say, the Lutheranwho asks people to devote themselves thoroughly to Christianity and the Moonmen?MR. KAUFMAN: Because I would say that every person invited into the Unifica­tion Church, from what I can determine, becomes an outreaching member of thechurch full time. They don't continue,generally, the secular job apart fromthe church. They may within a church business, I gather. Is that correct,Mr. Salonen?MR. SALONEN: I'd like to make probably a general response.~1R. KAUFMAN: You want to come back into our conversation?MR. SALONEN: Sure.MR. KAUFMAN: But it gives them something to do full time in the name of thechurch, and you find the Catholic Worker movement to some degree absorbed en­tirely the energies of the people who found it satisfying. You find theChabbad House, the Lubavitzer Orthodox Jewish movemen4 sends out missionariesinto the secular society looking for Jews and these missionaries are fulltime, and if they can find somebody who will share their enthusiasm they willtry to graft them on full time. And there's very little chance to wanderaway from the Unification Church, many of its former members say, and thatis why I think I would like to go back to the point you made on civil liber­ties, because I think it's a point we ought to make before we leave the pro­gram.MR. BUCKLEY: All right, but before we do that, let's just ask Mr. Salonento make the comment that--MR. SALONEN: I think what you said is right, that there is a need. And Idon't think that we're saying that we created that need at all. The needexists, but I believe that in response to that need, God is raising up manyreligious phenomena. You mentioned some of them. I believe that all religionshave a role to play. I believe that there is an outpouring of the spirit atthis time. I believe that centrally the mission of the Unification Church isoutreach. You know, we've been able to bring many people into much greatertouch with their spiritual senses. When we teach The Divine Principle manypeople don't go on to become members of the church. Still we feel that themission of the church has been to reach them, to give them a deeper insightinto the nature of God, to kind of stimulate their general consciousness, soit's true our members are fully occupied. I believe the early Christianswere fully occupied. I believe every movement with a sense of mission tendsto give a kind of fulfillment that's even greater than yourself to the indi­viduals. All we're asking is the respect from others that we accord to them.

10

,J

If we're talking about civil liberties, which probably would be good to getinto now, our members go out--you've met them on the street--one by one, some­times two by two. They're not in chains. They're not unable to leave theUnification Church, if they want to. Instead they are making great personalsacrifices in order to belong. I'm proud of the members. I feel that they'veexemplified a kind of pioneering spirit and a kind of religious commitmentthat we need in America to rebuild the country. I think that the people whorun around, and hired in some cases professional criminals to kidnap them,deprive them of their rights as a person and put them through a psychologicallybrutalizing de-programming session--I think that those people are destroyingthe moral fabric of this country and also seriously endangering everybody'scivil liberties.MR. BUCKLEY: But you don't deny that there is the possibility of a prolongedor hypnotic relationship in modern society, do you, between, well, whateverit was for instance that Charles Manson exercised at the gruesome end of thespectrum, or even whatever it was that was exercised on Patty Hearst? Now,I'm giving you analogies not intending that they should appear to be invidi­ous.MR. SALONEN: I understand.MR. BUCKLEY: But it is apparently true that the regimen practiced by theReverend Moon's church is extremely hectic, leaves very little time for intro­spection"and seems to stress a kind of hyperactivity, the purpose of which,it would appear, is to cause you to draw yourself away from all previousties. It does rather odd and some unpleasant things, iike causing childrento have hostile feelings toward their own parents.MR. SALONEN: That's definitely not a teaching of the church. In fact,would like to make the point that in most cases--MR. BUCKLEY: But I was judging you by your product.MR. SALONEN: Well, there are definitely cases where that has happened.That's especially happened where parents can't accept the life direction oftheir adult children. Now, we're not taking people out of grammar school orhigh school and making them against their will members of the church. Theseare young adults who are making a commitment based on the fulfillment oftheir own needs or their own sense of values. And we're only asking thatothers respect it. If we're making comparisons I'd like to make one to SaintIgnati us Loyol a.MR. BUCKLEY: Yes.MR. SALONEN: At the time that he founded the Society of Jesus, he was heavilycriticized within the Catholic community. He was accused of taking peopleaway from their parents. He was accused of withdrawing them from other legit­imate interests in order to further some kind of political or power goal. Buthis motivation was to restore more authority into the hands of the church.MR. KAUFMAN: What are you doing to counteract this, though?MR. SALONEN. We believe that we are trying to bring people not out of theworld, but into the world with a deeper sense of purpose by working together.For example, here in New York we've purchased the old New Yorker Hotel. Itwas like a bomb shelter. Our own members have begun to transform it into aworld mission center. Right next to it we purchased the Manhattan Center.That was in even worse shape. Recently we had several performances there.Leonard Bernstein now goes with the New York City Symphony Orchestra to record.So we're trying to manifest our sense of rebuilding, revitalizing and re­storing in practical ways. Now, is that bad for the city of New York? Isthat bad for America? And is it bad for the individuals who are involved?My point is no. By working together in close association we've been able toaccomplish things that as individuals we might be unable to do. If peopledon't want to join the church it's okay, but why would they want to restrictour rights to be members of the church?~R. BUCKLEY: Well, the restoration of the New Yorker Hotel is certainly to

11

© Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University.

be encouraged, but it's hardly a cause militant.MR. SALONEN: Well, it's only one example.MR. BUCKLEY: Yes, but it's one you used.MR. SALONEN: That's right. It's one that's close at hand.MR. BUCKLEY: Well, I want to register my own feelings that I have no objec­tion at all to your church, except to the extent that it tends to destroypainfully articulated distinctions which are a part of our intellectual, andI like to think also providential, patrimony of Christianity. So I haven'tintended to be offensive toward your religion. Shall we turn to the panel,or did you want to make a comment on that last statement, Mr. Kaufman?MR. KAUFMAN: I was wondering-- One of the general themes that people whohave left the Unification Church or persons who are otherwise critical of thechurch is that these finely articulated relationships traditional to America,especially the family, are as important or more important than anyone re­ligious group. And they say that the Unification Church does destroy them,or direct that because they are satanic they are to be destroyed. Now, ifthis isn't the case, what are you doing actively to promote the relationshipof your young members with their physical parents--not the Reverend Mr. Moonand his wife--but the parents who gave them birth and raised them? What areyou doing actively?MR. SALONEN: Central to the teaching of the church is the belief in thepresence of God in the family unit. Not as an individual, not even just ashusband and wife, but as a family we come to know God's love most fully.We've had a number of programs of outreach to the parents and we've had agratifying response--many of them joining the church. The only time therehas been increased tension between a member and their parent is when theparent was unwilling to respect their choice as an individual. Even thoughthey disagree with it, if they can only respect it they have experienced tre­mendous harmonious relationships.MR. KAUFMAN: But scores, if not hundreds, according to this relationship-­MR. SALONEN: You shouldn't talk in the test tube. It is no secret that thefamily is in serious trouble in America. All kinds of families are divided.I think the fact that there's a reflection of that in the church is not some­thing we created. It's something that we've put our shoulders to the wheelto solve, and I think that we've had good results.MR. BUCKLEY: Mr. Jonathan Kaufman is the editor in chief of the Yale DailyNews at Yale University. Mr. Kaufman.MR. J. KAUFMAN: If you feel, Mr. Kaufman, that there's a threat from theMoon movement, what sort of a response do you think there should be? Shouldthey be banned in some way, or should mainline religions become more evan­gelical to appeal to this need that young Americans seem to have, or will wesee more organized press conferences with cardinals and rabbis coming out in-­MR. B. KAUFMAN: Undoubtedly. They love to go to press conferences. One, Ihave been describing the threat others have identified. I have not spoken tomy feelings on it. I have a greater concern for the protection of the FirstAmendment than I do about anything the Unification Church, the Roman CatholicChurch, Reformed Judaism, or even the American Jewish Committee might do. Ithink you will probably find the same kind of non-response from the mainlinechurches that has characterized every challenge since World War II, except tohold press conferences, and more of them. I don't think they're capable ofmeeting institutionally the challenge of a small group, and they still per­ceive of the Unification Church in this country as a cult or a sect. And theyfeel much better using those words because in their minds it reduces thethreat.MR. BUCKLEY: They certainly haven't succeeded in dealing with the cult ofthe Supreme Court, have they?(1 aughter)MR. J. KAUFMAN: But they are beginning to organize against the court in some

12

political sense. 00 you think that they should-­MR. B. KAUFMAN: Who is?MR. J. KAUFMAN: But I'm saying, do you think that that's enough, just dismissit as a cult and have press conferences, or do you--MR. B. KAUFMAN: I don't think they'll do more.MR. J. KAUFMAN: 00 you think they should?M~. B. KAUFMAN: .N? If i~ means using the courts or secular arms to competew~th another re11g10n I th1nk they have no business. I'd be fearful that can­d1dates and politicians up for election will leap on the anti-Unificationbandwagon and abuse everybody's First Amendment rights in order to gain afew votes. We've seen a lot of that religious pandering in the last fewmonths, and the smaller the unit--the county commissioner, the city council­man, and so on--the more likely. That's what I'm afraid of.MR. BUCKLEY: Mr. Michael Wells is from Western New England College. Mr.Well s.MR .. WELLS: Yes, Mr. Sa10nen, charges of fascism which have been leveledag~l~st ~everend Moon seem to grow out of the fact that everything within theUn1f1cat1gn Chur~h flows to and fr?m,Reverend Moon himself. Do you feel thatyour church rece1ves as much Oppos1t1on as it does because of America's his­toric opposition to a single powerful central authority?~1R: SALONEN: I think we have an anti-authoritarian tradition in America. Ith1nk that's true, and I think it's true for a good reason. I think the res­toratio~ of aU~horitY,in a heavenly sense in a spiritual community should notbe and 1S not 1n rea11ty a threat to that social setting. But I think itcould be construed to be so, and it is. 00 you understand my point?MR. WELLS: Yes.MR. S~LONEN: At this point I think that there's a great deal of misunder­stand1ng about the role that Reverend Moon plays in the church and the par­ticular hold he has on the assets and resources of the church. I would saythat peo~le follow Reverend Moon, not because he has any way of enforcing his1eadersh1p on them, but because they're receiving some kind of spiritual nour­ishment which is unavailable elsewhere.MR. BUCKLEY: Mr. Peter Neger is also from Yale. Mr. Neger.MR. NEGER: Yes, Mr. Sa10nen, you said that the Unification Church movementis largely interdenominational and that the many members of your church donot necessarily reject the traditions of their own religions. Isn't accep­tance of.the Unification theology, of Reverend Moon's theology, reallydoesn't 1t necessarily connote a rejection of previous religious and socio­logical traditions?MR. SALONEN: No, not at all. I'll go back then to Dr. Herbert Richardsonwho is a ~nite~ Presbyterian minister, who teaches at St. Michael 's Co11eg~at the Un1vers1ty of Toronto. And he accepts the tenets of Unification the­olog~. Now, it may mean that it would cause him to no longer accept certainpa~t1cu1ar doctrines of his previous tradition, but not as a whole, and hest111 finds himself wanting to incorporate those things from Unificationtheology into his own tradition.MR. NEGER: Yet it's also said that it may be necessary and probably isnecessary--Reverend Moon has said that it is necessary--perhaps to disobeythe traditional authority figures that we in America in particular have cometo recognize, whether it be parents or national leadership, in order to ac­cept the doctrine of the Unification Church. Now, doesn't this necessarilycounteract what you've said?MR., SALONEN: It's like the question they put to Jesus as to whether theyshould pay taxes to Caesar or not. What we're saying is that ultimate a1­l~giance is to God. Therefore, if you're a Catholic priest and your arch­b1Shop tells you not to preach a certain doctrine which you feel comes fromGod, you have to follow your conscience. But we're not saying that you'resupposed to reject his position or his person.

13

© Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University.

MR. BUCKLEY: Mr. Kaufman.MR. J. KAUFMAN: Yes, Mr. Salonen, about some of the investments you weretalking about, like the New Yorker Hotel, and so on, there have been a lotof investigations going on as to just exactly where the money goes that doespour into the Unification Church.MR. SALONEN: What kind of investigations?MR. J. KAUFMAN: Well, they've been reported in the newspapers. The IRS isinvestigating the tax-exempt status.MR. BUCKLEY: Inquiries.MR. J. KAUFMAN: Inquiries, sorry. Inquiries. Do you think that the Unifica-tion Church should playa role in investments, investing in things likefisheries down South and in renovating hotels and so on, or should the moneyjust be used to spread the message of Reverend Moon?MR. SALONEN: I think there's not a proper choice. I definitely believe thatthe church should be involved in improving the environment and also inspreading the message, which necessarily involves many physical projects.The purpose of all the investments is to strengthen the position of the churchin projecting its message. Now we have a certified public accountant. Theyaudit the books. Those reports are all filed. I've read also many reportsin the paper about investigations, but the fact is that there are not suchinvestigations going on. They are created by the newspapers.MR. B. KAUFMAN: Wait, wait, wait.MR. SALONEN: Well, it's true.MR. B. KAUFMAN: That is the kind of sweeping generalization you object towhen it's applied to the Unification Church. The Ohio attorney general's of­fice is looking into, whatever that means, or investigating at least twogroups which they identify as adjuncts of the Unification Church, but notthe Unification Church. I checked that before I came here, late last week.And one of the questions that that raises is why there are so many groups re­lated to the Unification Church which do not use the Unification Church'sname in this country at this time, and sometimes sort of disguise it, likeJudaism in Service to the World, in San Francisco. Only under questioningdid they admit their tie with the Reverend Mr. Moon and Unification Church.But we don't fabricate these things. Other people raise these questions.MR. SALONEN: I'm not accusing the press of fabricating everything they print.What I'm saying is that the fact is--MR. B. KAUFMAN: You make us sound like theologians.MR. SALONEN: Well, for example, last February Senator Dole had a meeting.It was simply a private citizens' meeting. It was not a hearing. It was notan i nqui ry. It was not an inves ti gati on. I tri ed very hard for our vi ews tobe presented at that meeting. They refused because they said, "It's not ahearing. If we have a hearing you'll get your chance. This is just a privatemeeting." That private meeting, very informal, was covered by all the net­works, by all the newspapers, and we were given no right to speak. And itwas reported by many of the newspapers as a hearing. Now the fact that itwas not a hearing really doesn't mean much in terms of the impact the coveragehad on the average American. It was extremely unfair.MR. BUCKLEY: And what do you think that his motives were?MR. SALONEN: His motives may have been fine, but I think that his choice offormat ended up being very unfair to the Unification Church. I did talk withhim later, and I am satisfied that his personal motives in at least lettingthat meeting take place were fine, and I don't think he realized the impactthat it would have on our members. There's something in America called, well,in judicial terminology they've begun referring to something which has a chill­ing effect on your ability to exercise your rights. Now as a result of thatmeeting and others like it, it becomes increasingly difficult for someone inAmerica to stand up and say, "Yes, I'm a member of the Unification Church."MR. BUCKLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Salonen, the president of the Unifica-

14

tion Church of America; rk. Ben Kaufman; gentlemen of the panel; ladies andgentlemen.

15© Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University.