We learn in the Divine Principle (Level 4) that "all" the "disorders in the fallen world" originate from the third fallen nature of reversing dominion:
"The third major aspect of the Fallen Nature is the nature to reverse the order of dominion. The angel was ultimately supposed to be under man's dominion, yet he dominated Eve, reversing the proper order. Eve was supposed to be under Adam's dominion, yet she dominated him. These reversals of dominion resulted in the Fall. All of the various disorders in the fallen world have their origin in this aspect of the original Fallen Nature."
To restore, then, all the disorders of the fallen world, we must return to God's original order where Adam and Eve dominate Lucifer and Adam dominates Eve, i.e., God-centered patriarchy.
After the fall, women have been deceived and abused by Lucifer-type men throughout history. Since there have been countless crimes against women by men who had power over them, there is great resentment in women against men. Because of this history and also very personal resentment against men, many women, including some sisters in our church, find it difficult if not next to impossible to submit to their husbands. This is a tragedy in God's eyes. Until we can reverse the fallen nature in the family between men and women, we cannot free this world. At the three-day ceremony, the husband goes from the archangelic position to the position of Adam. This must be more than a symbolic ceremony if we want more than symbolic world restoration.
In the August issue of the Unification News, John and Marilyn Morris submitted an article which they said was written in response to our first article in the June 1994 issue. In it, they try to push the idea that in the Completed Testament Age our church has moved beyond patriarchy.
They believe we can get to a point of just circular motion in which there need not be any leader or follower-only circular give and take. They mistakenly define patriarchy as a "straight line" relationship that can never have circular give and take. Somehow they think the following quote from the Principle backs up their idea:
"Any movement that goes in a straight line will finally come to an end, and no being performing such movement can exist eternally. Consequently, in order to exist eternally, everything moves in circular motion. In order for revolution to occur, the action of give and take between a subject and an object must take place."
We would ask the Morrises to take a look at their chosen quote and read the end of it: "In order for revolution to occur, the action of give and take between a subject and an object must take place." You cannot skip the subject and object part and get any eternal circular motion. Father is constantly drawing that vertical and horizontal line on the chalkboard in his speeches and making this point. The Morrises had no quotes of Father or the Divine Principle to back up their anti- patriarchy-no leadership-no follower family because they wouldn't be able to find any.
The Morrises say: "Sanity in marriage does not come from wives obeying their husbands, but from both obeying God." First, this is the same old argument of feminist theologians. Therefore, the Morrises are not beyond feminism or patriarchy but are simply teaching feminist values. Second, let's look to True Parents. Father consistently says that wives are to follow their husbands, and True Parents walk their talk. Mother is a perfect example of an obedient wife. Our families are supposed to be like True Parents' family. Third, if "both" a husband and wife are "obeying God," they would have the husband as leader and the wife as follower. That is God's paradigm for the family. That's the truth. The truth hurts, and we're sure that it is painful for women still harboring resentment, but we challenge women to give up their resentment and choose true joy. True love, true life and true joy for women come in the love of and serving of their husbands. Unlike the Morrises, we provide quotes of Father to back up our thesis. Father endlessly says that men are to lead. Here are just two of countless examples: "The husband is the head of the household" (10/21/78) and in 1973 he said, "When you are blessed in marriage, you women must be absolutely obedient to your husbands. You must know that. In your public career in this movement-your mission-you must be cooperative with your husband."
The Morrises say, "What was subject to us was not the husband's role, but the relationship itself." This sounds good on the surface. Communism and feminism's talk of equality for all sounds good on the surface, but in reality it is completely unworkable. Aubrey Andelin, in Man of Steel and Velvet, writes: "Advocates of the `share alike' philosophy demonstrate an unusual lack of insight into human behavior as they ignore completely the serious social problems which arise from this blurring of the male and female roles. Countless children grow up in environments where the distinction of the sexes is so obscure that no clear-cut example exists for them to follow. Many homes lack definitive leadership, and the very differences that should be emphasized are purposely minimized as men act like women and women act like men. This in turn can lead to underdevelopment of the child to his own sex and in some cases to homosexuality."
Frances Schaeffer, in The Great Evangelical Disaster, echoes this thought: "If we accept the idea of equality without distinction, we logically must accept the idea of homosexuality. For if there are no significant distinctions between men and women, then certainly we cannot condemn homosexual relationships."
C.S. Lewis, one of the greatest Christian writers of the 20th century, says in Mere Christianity: "In Christian marriage the man is said to be the `head'. Why should there be a head at all-why not equality? The need for some head follows from the idea that marriage is permanent. Of course, as long as the husband and wife are agreed, no question of a head need arise; and we may hope that this will be the normal state of affairs in a Christian marriage. But when there is a real disagreement, what is to happen? Talk it over, of course; but I am assuming they have done that and still failed to reach agreement. What do they do next? They cannot decide by a majority vote, for in a council of two there can be no majority. Surely, only one or other of two things can happen: either they must separate and go their own ways or else one or other of them must have a casting vote. If marriage is permanent, one or other party must, in the last resort, have the power of deciding the family policy. You cannot have a permanent association without a constitution."
Helen Andelin in Fascinating Womanhood gives the following as some of the Bible verses on patriarchy: "The father is the head, president, or spokesman of the family. He was appointed by God to this position, as clearly state in the Holy Scriptures. The first commandment given to mankind was given to the woman, 'Thy desire shall be unto thy husband and he shall rule over thee.'
"The Apostle Paul compared man's leadership of his wife to Christ's leadership of the church. `For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church. Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.' He also instructed women to reverence their husbands and to submit themselves to their husbands. The Apostle Peter said, `Ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands.' (Gen. 3:16, Eph. 5:23- 24,33, Col. 3:18, 1 Pet. 3:1)
Mary Pride writes a whole book (The Way Home) going into Titus 2:3-5, explaining how women are to be submissive and how they are to teach and support other women to do likewise. The following is a small part of what Phyllis Schlafly says of patriarchy in The Positive Woman: "Any successful vehicle must have one person at the wheel with ultimate responsibility. When I fly on a plane or sail on a ship, I'm glad there is one captain who has the final responsibility and can act decisively in a crisis situation. A family cannot be run by committee. The committee system neutralizes a family with continuing controversy and encumbers it with psychological impediments. It makes a family as clumsy and slow as a hippopotamus (which might be defined as a racehorse designed by a committee)."
The Morrises have in their title the phrase "beyond patriarchy," but there is nothing beyond Patriarchy. There is nothing beyond the man being the head of the household. Patriarchy is it! The change to the ideal world comes when Lucifer's evil domination of mankind changes to Father's true love domination through Adamic patriarchy. Weldon Hardenbrook, in Missing From Action, writes: "It is imperative that American men understand that Jesus attempted not to destroy or to replace the patriarchal function of men, but to explain its full meaning. His teachings on virginity, equality of the sexes, loving one's enemies, the value of human life, humility, good works, and the absolute sacredness of the marriage bond served to complete the proper patriarchal image of pre-Christian Israel. Jesus came not to abolish patriarchy, but to reveal it. In all honesty, apart from Christ, men will not be adequate fathers. It is only in Him that the fullness of the Father is disclosed.
"Being the kind of fathers men are supposed to be means that they must return to patriarchy. Therefore, men should reject the historically inaccurate assertion, so naively believed by Americans of both sexes, that patriarchal families were oppressive families in which women and children suffered at the cruel hands of despotic men. An objective look at the period in American history when patriarchal families were the norm tells just the opposite story. It plainly demonstrates that spouses and children felt far less oppressed and far more content than their modern counterparts.
"This antipatriarchal propaganda is part of the Victorian myth that disgraces not only the pre-revolutionary colonial family, but the entire Judeo-Christian tradition, whose influence provided family order for the entire world. "Alternative" families are not adequate replacements for traditional families. They are Band-Aids on cancer. Patriarchy is the only workable blueprint for the family. The American home has no chance for survival without it."
Adam and Eve lost true masculinity and femininity. The result of disrupting their subject-object relationship was violence between Cain and Abel. To end violence and crime we need to restore men and women's relationships.
Daniel Amneus, a professor at the University of Southern California, writes these profound insights into the peaceful nature of patriarchy in his book, Back to Patriarchy: "Where are the high crime areas of our society-and where are there large numbers of families headed by women? The two questions have a single answer: matriarchy and violence are twins. The boys' vice-principal of your local high school, the man responsible for discipline, will tell you that the troublemakers are the boys from fatherless families and that the boys from motherless families are not a problem at all. Boys from fatherless homes frequently fail to learn what it means to be responsible and civilized men. They often grow up lacking self-respect, respect for authority, self-reliance, dignity, and magnanimity, incapable of doing the work of society. Girls from fatherless homes all too frequently produce fatherless families themselves, thus perpetuating matriarchy and violence into the next generation.
"The association between crime and matriarchy is obvious, though the feminists and welfare bureaucrats would prefer that the public didn't notice it, since patriarchal families would mean the demise of feminism and the erosion of the welfare empire. These people would much prefer that the public think crime is the result of poverty-and that, to eradicate it, taxpayers must dig deeper into their pockets for more money to finance Great Society and Head Start programs and larger AFDC payments, which, of course, have the added consequence of enlarging bureaucracies. If crime were caused by poverty, the American-Chinese, who have been against heavy odds in our society for over a century, ought to have had one of the highest crime rates. They don't. They have the lowest crime rate-and they have patriarchal families. Much the same is true of the Japanese and the Jews-both groups with low crime and a patriarchal family structure. High crime and delinquency-and illegitimacy-come from those areas where there are enormous numbers of families headed by women...."
The ideology of Feminism is the ruling ideology of America. This is Satan's ideology. We must not be digested by this culture. Larry Christenson, in The Christian Family, writes: "Women can contribute much as teachers of children and of other women. They can pray publicly, but they are not to formulate doctrine or to set themselves up as leaders over men in the church.
"How much evil has come upon home and church because women have lost the protective shield of a husband's authority! We have let Satan beguile us into believing that it is degrading for a wife to be submissive and obedient to her husband's authority. The whole teaching is dismissed as a foolish vaunting of the `male ego,' a Neanderthal vestige which our enlightened age has happily outgrown. The Bible, however, has no desire to exalt any ego, male or female. The Divine Order set forth for the family serves the elemental purpose of protection, spiritual protection. A husband's authority and a wife's submissiveness to that authority, is a shield of protection against Satan's devices. Satan knows this, and that is why he uses every wife to undermine and break down God's pattern of Divine Order for the family."
The Morrises say Father ended all leadership in 1981. What he was saying in the quote they gave is that he is against bureaucracy-not leadership. Their quote is from Parents Day 1981 and exactly four years later on Parents Day 1985 Father emphasizes that men are "bones" and women are "flesh" and society is "upside down" because women don't follow men. Father is very clear on this. He says men are to go out in the world as leaders and also provide for their families while the wife is to create a loving home. The following are two quotes of Father showing his romantic, poetic ("whispering sound"), sensitive understanding of the beautiful intimacy between a husband and wife in harmony. With Mother he has a tender, loving and divinely ordered relationship. When Father goes out to sea, Mother helps him to prepare. she is always a supporter in Father's life mission: "When Father, verging on seventy years old, wants to go out to the ocean, Mother prepares all his equipment with her whole heart. She even prepares the supplies needed in case he stays out overnight, and prays for the accomplishment of Father's will. What a beautiful helper and supporter she is!
"A wife shouldn't think that she fulfills her responsibility by just preparing a meal when her husband comes home from work. The most important thing is to share a time of confidential talk of love at the dinner table. If she comforts her husband's hard work of the day with the whispering sound that she had in their first meeting, his fatigue will fade away and their conjugal love will become deeper."
Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew ends by Petruchio telling Kate to explain to "headstrong women" how they are to live with their husbands. He says: "Katherine, I charge thee, tell these headstrong women/What duty they do owe their lords and husbands." She responds: "Thy husband is thy lord, thy life, thy keeper,/Thy head, thy sovereign; one that cares for thee,/And for thy maintenance; commits his body/To painful labor both by sea and land,/To watch the night in storms, the day in cold,/Whilst thou liest warm at home, secure and safe;/And craves no other tribute at they hands/But love, fair looks, and true obedience-/Too little payment for so great a debt./Such duty as the subject owes the prince,/Even such a woman oweth to her husband./And when she is forward, peevish, sullen, sour,/And not obedient to his honest will,/What is she but a foul contending rebel/And graceless traitor to her loving lord?/I am ashamed that women are so simple/To offer war where they should kneel for peace,/Or seek for rule, supremacy, and sway,/When they are bound to serve, love, and obey."
