June 20, 2006

Bad Moon Rising:
Congressmen Crown the “King of Peace”


[Note: Whenever I’m on the road, I never feel like writing new posts. Today is no exception, so its recyling time again. Being in our nation’s capital reminded me of a post I wrote (almost exactly) two years ago. When I originally wrote this piece I was living in Texas and this weird event seemed inconceivably unlikely. From the perspective of being in D.C., though, it seems almost inevitable.]

A religious leader, an ex-convict and multibillionaire who claims he's the messiah, receives a coronation ceremony in a US Senate office building where he is crowned by a Democratic congressman. The plot of another lame rightwing apocalyptic novel, right?

No. Just another day in our nation’s capital:

On March 23 [2004], the Dirksen Senate Office Building was the scene of a coronation ceremony for Rev. Sun Myung Moon, owner of the conservative Washington Times newspaper and UPI wire service, who was given a bejeweled crown by Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Ill. Afterward, Moon told his bipartisan audience of Washington power players he would save everyone on Earth as he had saved the souls of Hitler and Stalin -- the murderous dictators had been born again through him, he said. In a vision, Moon said the reformed Hitler and Stalin vouched for him, calling him "none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent."

Most of the congressmen in attendance claim that they thought they were going to an awards banquet for the Interreligious and International Federation for World Peace. While this explanation may be plausible, it certainly can’t be used by Congressman Davis. Davis, who had previously attended a three-day Moon-sponsored "God and World Peace" conference and is listed as a co-chairman of one of Moon's organizations, told Capital Fax that he thought the ceremony was similar to a ceremony found at a “fraternity or sorority meeting":

I don't know if he was comparing himself to Jesus the Christ or anything like that," Davis said, adding, "and if he was, then that was his conceptualization of himself." But, he stressed that Moon was not his messiah. "Jesus the Christ is my guy."

Davis said he "probably" met people associated with Moon "at some black church event or something with ministers and the relationship has probably grown over the years." (Moon's organization has run an outreach program to African-American activists and churches since the mid-1990s.)

Generally, whenever I'm around them, they're talking two things, peace and family values. Both are things that I have a great deal of interest in, although I probably disagree with many of their social positions."

Moon's "social positions" include a strong anti-gay agenda. Rev. Moon referred to gays as "dung eating dogs," during a 1997 speech. The day after the March "coronation," Moon said homosexuality is "worse than an animal lifestyle."

"I'm totally pro-gay," Davis insisted yesterday. "That's obviously a position that we disagree on." Davis pointed out that many black churches are also very anti-gay, but said that wouldn't stop him from going to church.

"I'm a live and let live kind of person," Davis said. "I go to their banquets and we talk peace. They've never asked me to do anything, other than give a speech, anything that I find offensive."

As Davis points out, Moon has a unique relationship with some black congregations, encouraging them to remove the symbol of the cross from their churches in “exchange for a crown.” Churches in the Bronx and in Houston have held elaborate ceremonies in which the cross was removed from behind the pulpit and replaced by, “not one but two crowns -- a larger one for a King and a smaller one for a Queen.” According the Unification News report, “It was clear to me that Rev. H. and his people and all the other ACLC clergy realized fully the historical significance of what they were undertaking and H. gave all the credit for this era of resurrection and new truth to Rev Sun Myung Moon.”

Davis, however, isn’t the only one smitten by Rev. Moon. Congressman Charlie Rangel issued a proclamation in which he praised the "King of Peace":

Be it known...I, CHARLES B. RANGEL, Member of Congress, 15th Congressional District, by the power and authority vested in me, this 16th day of April, 2004, do recognize you as "True Parents" exemplifying self-giving service and leadership and of "King of Peace" in the key areas of reconciliation and peacemaking over fifty (50) years.

The term “True Parents” refers to Rev. Moon and his wife, who are sent to redeem mankind:

Adam and Eve should have been the True Parents of humanity. A physical and spiritual ideal world (Kingdom of Heaven) should have stemmed from them. However, they fell by sexual sin.

Heavenly Father worked with fallen man to make a foundation to send a Second Adam, Jesus. Jesus, the Second Adam, should have fulfilled what Adam did not. Jesus should have grown to maturity, married a Second Eve, had children, and established a Kingdom of Heaven on Earth and in Heaven. However, he was not received by those prepared to welcome him, resulting in Jesus going the way of the cross. The cross gave spiritual salvation, but could not solve the entire problem of sin.

Since, Jesus could not fulfil (sic) his entire mission, Heavenly Father had to rebuild the foundation for True Parents, by sending the Third Adam, Sun Myung Moon. Rev. Moon fulfilled the mission of True Parents that Adam and Jesus had failed to fulfil. (sic) By uniting with Rev. and Mrs. Moon humanity can fulfil (sic) their purpose of creation and enter the Kingdom of Heaven both spiritually and physically. .

The Democrats, however, aren't the only ones to have fallen under the Rev. Moon’s spell. The Reverend -- or more accurately, his money -- has long been the object of admiration by those on the Right. He has received praise from President Bush and donated $3.5 million to Jerry Fallwell’s Liberty University. Ironically, even Tim La Haye, author of the Left Behind series, has courted Moon’s organization, seeking money from a man who claims to be the “messiah.”

What is most surprising, however, is that the event has received so little attention by the mainstream media. At a time when the words “under God” are considered to lead us down the slippery slope to theocracy, the coronation of a man who wants to scrap the Constitution in favor of “Godism” should have raised at least a few eyebrows. Even those of us who don’t subscribe to end-times speculation have to find the crowing of the “King of Peace” in a U.S. Senate building a bit, well, prophetic.

Maybe the plots of apocalyptic thrillers aren’t as ludicrous as I once thought.


comments
Collin Brendemuehl writes:

1

Certainly old news, but good to see refreshed.

Collin

http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com

posted on 06.20.2006 9:06 AM
Alexander Scott writes:

2

I think maybe your links are out of date? Looking at the last 3, the first goes to the Salon article, but I missed the Pres. relationship. The Jerry Falwell link seems to be dead. The LaHaye one goes to a website that has searches for famous people - again, either the link has died or I am confused about the point.

posted on 06.20.2006 9:31 AM
Oliver I. writes:

3

I hadn't even heard of this guy until now.

This was an eye-opening read.

posted on 06.20.2006 2:25 PM
Jeff Blogworthy writes:

4

Moon is obviously a nut - but his paper, The Washington Times, is one of the best publications going. It makes me wonder how much influence Moon exercises over the paper, or if he just gives good staff a free hand.

I think the broader question regarding Christians and Moon involves ecumenicalism in general. Where do Christians draw the line? Consorting with Catholics and Mormons is ok, but Moon is out? If so, why? I'm not defending Moon groupies, just raising the question. It seems to me that Christians need to make up their mind whether they want to remain doctrinally pure and aloof or involved in social activism which inevitably leads to ecumenicalism (at least in regard to social causes). Can we do both? Should Liberty University have refused Moon's money? Will it not be used for things that conform to Liberty's ideology - not Moon's? Is it a Christian organization's responsibility to vet every donor for doctrinal and ideological purity? Just asking.

P.S. That whole coronation thing is just as bizarre as it gets.

posted on 06.20.2006 5:25 PM
Boonton writes:

5

Wasn't there a ruckus a while back about Republican candidates accepting donations/endorsements from the Log Cabin Coalition, a group of gay Republicans? Didn't some candidates feel they had to return the donations?

Were those critics anywhere near this Moon thing? Is agreeing on some policies of a group of gays equal calling yourself a God in terms of blasphomy?

posted on 06.21.2006 8:17 PM
James writes:

6

hello00

posted on 06.23.2006 9:35 AM
James writes:

7

hello00

posted on 06.23.2006 9:38 AM
James writes:

8

hello00

posted on 06.23.2006 9:40 AM