Dr.Seuk: “I apologize for the leak, but my convictions unchanged”(26-09-23)

[최종근]

Chairman Seuk Joon-ho: “I apologize for the leak, but my convictions remain unchanged”—How will he respond to the claim that “The Second Advent” in the ‘Divine Principle’ has been replaced? (2026-09-23)

A “Review Report on the ‘True Parents Theory Textbook’” prepared by Chairman Seuk Joon-ho on September 13, 2026, spread through a KakaoTalk group chat and was posted anonymously on a café, causing the controversy surrounding the “True Parents Theory Textbook” to escalate throughout the entire Unification Church.

This report pointed out that the content of the “True Parents Theory Textbook” is biased toward downplaying True Father’s life and achievements, and that there are movements to discard or revise the ‘Divine Principle’.

As the controversy spread, Chairman Seuk Joon-ho issued an apology on September 16, 2026, in a statement titled “Greetings to all leaders and Blessed Families,” regarding the external leak of the report, as follows:

“I was astonished to hear that my ‘Review Report on the [True Parents Theory Textbook]’ had been leaked. This report was intended solely for submission to leaders and the authors.”

◆ “The apology was only for the leak”—he did not compromise his convictions

However, this apology did not mean that he was retracting the contents of the report itself.

On the 17th, through a post published on the blog “Peace Observatory 2027,” Chairman Seuk Joon-ho apologized for the leak of the report while clarifying his position: “This apology does not compromise my ‘convictions’; it is an apology for the leak itself.”

▶ ‘Peace Observatory 2027’ (2026-09-17)

https://m.blog.naver.com/PostView.naver?blogId=peacemaker2027&logNo=224414718101&navType=by

Chairman Seuk Joon-ho also requested action be taken regarding the post that published the report.

In response, on September 19, 2026, the [Unification Church Anti-Corruption Monitoring Committee], acting on Chairman Seuk Joon-ho’s request, deleted a post titled “Unification Church leadership argues over ‘True Parents Theory Textbook’—Will they retract the ‘Only-Begotten Daughter’ doctrine? …shifting blame to Kim Jin-chun,” which had been created on September 16, 2026, and posted an apology.

However, the fact that the post was deleted does not mean that the controversy surrounding the “True Parents Theory Textbook” has subsided. Rather, it is expanding into a more fundamental issue.

◆ Announced during an all-night prayer service at Cheonshimwon? — Is “the Second Advent” being replaced by the “True Parents Theory”?

Recently, claims that the content of “the Second Advent” in ‘Divine Principle’ book has been replaced with the “True Parents Theory” have been spreading via KakaoTalk.

“The Second Advent” is the final chapter of the ‘Divine Principle’ Part II and is a crucial doctrine dealing with the time, method, and place of the Christ’s return. It is alleged that such content was announced during the Cheonshimwon all-night prayer service, but I hope this is not true.

Below is the full text of the message circulating on KakaoTalk.

Last night (the 17th), during the all-night prayer service at Cheonshimwon, Mr. Lee Beom-seok, the Japan Regional Director, mentioned in his message that in the new Principle Education textbook, “the Second Advent” from the ‘Divine Principle’ has been replaced with the “True Parents Theory. Is this true?

If this is true, it could further accelerate the division within our church. The future looks very bleak, and I am truly concerned about whether we will be able to maintain the church organization as it is.

◆ “Suggesting an intent to erase True Father’s achievements”—“serious bias” pointed out in the report

The review report on the “True Parents Theory Textbook” prepared by Chairman Seuk Joon-ho contains the following passage:

“The descriptions in *The Great Epic of the Korean People* also exhibit such serious bias that it raises suspicions of an intent to diminish or even erase True Father’s life and providential achievements.”

Based on this, Chairman Seuk Joon-ho called for a balanced record to be maintained and also raised concerns about efforts to discard the ‘Divine Principle’.

Even if, as Chairman Seuk Joon-ho stated, this report was intended solely for leaders and authors, it has already been leaked to the outside world; given the gravity of its contents, it should have been properly communicated to the general membership.

Furthermore, rumors have spread that during the all-night prayer service at Cheonshimwon, it was stated that “the Second Advent” in the ‘Divine Principle’ book had been replaced with the “True Parents Theory.”

While apologizing, Chairman Seuk Joon-ho clarified his position, stating, “I did not compromise my beliefs; I apologized for the leak of the report.”

If that is the case, in keeping with those convictions, we would like him to take a clear stance regarding the claim that “the Second Advent” in ‘Divine Principle’ book was changed to the “True Parents Theory.”

This is because what church members want to know most is not the form of the apology, but whether ‘Divine Principle’ will remain the standard for church education going forward.

2026-09-23

Choi Jong-keun

[Unification Church Anti-Corruption Monitoring Committee]

(*As this document was generated by AI, it may contain typos or mistranslations.)

At a time when the Unification Church is fracturing—with doctrinal disputes compounded by disciplinary actions and even expulsion—there is an article I would like you to read in conjunction with this.

The following is “A church without tolerance has no future,” an article from the Faith Forum by Lee Jae-young, Professor Emeritus at Sun Moon University.

I am publishing the original text verbatim in the hope that all members of the divided Unification Church will read it.

―――――――――――――――

〈Professor Lee Jae-young, Faith Forum〉

A church without tolerance has no future

Looking back at history, whenever powerful nations or communities triumphed and prospered, they were guided by a spirit of tolerance and inclusiveness. Conversely, when they lost their tolerance and embarked on a path of exclusion and purges, they declined and suffered defeat.

Tolerance is not a weakness that involves turning a blind eye to others’ mistakes. It is the wisdom to accept different people, cultures, and opinions and transform them into the strength of the community; it is one of the most important virtues a leader should possess.

After conquering Persia, Alexander the Great did not destroy all of its local institutions and culture. He utilized the local administrative system and talent, and even adopted some Persian customs.

Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire, too, waged brutal wars during their conquests, yet they implemented a policy of inclusiveness by recognizing various religions and appointing engineers and administrators from the conquered territories. This tolerance became the force that united diverse ethnic groups and cultures within a single vast empire.

However, when his successors lost this tolerance and fell into internal strife over power and spoils of war, the empire fragmented.

Historically speaking, communities have prospered when they embraced people and declined when they excluded them. They triumphed when they were tolerant and suffered defeat when they lost that tolerance.

The history of religion is no exception. When the Church preached the Gospel and embraced the poor and marginalized, it became a light to the world.

However, when the Church used doctrine and religious law as tools to maintain power and condemned those with differing opinions as heretics or sinners, it left behind historical stains such as the Inquisition and the witch hunts.

During the Reformation, the Catholic and Protestant camps could not tolerate one another, and many peasants fell victim to the German Peasants’ War. The moment the church loses its tolerance and takes the role of judge, faith ceases to be a path of love and becomes an instrument of violence.

This is also the issue that today’s Unification Church must deeply reflect upon. The church must not become an institution that creates laws and regulations to label people as sinners and condemn them. National laws are enacted through national consensus and due process, and are subject to the judgment of judicial bodies.

However, the church’s laws and regulations are largely created by church leaders, interpreted by those same leaders, and used by them to decide on disciplinary actions or expulsion.

If the person who creates the law, the person who interprets it, and the person who passes judgment are all the same, there is a high risk that the law will degenerate into a means of safeguarding power rather than a standard for upholding justice.

Furthermore, if the leadership creates the causes of conflict through flawed policies, personnel decisions, opaque administration, and self-serving decision-making—and then prosecutes church members who protest these actions as violators of church regulations—the burden of responsibility is reversed.

Even though church members who have been harmed by circumstances created by the leadership are raising these issues, the leadership, without reflecting on its own responsibility, invokes church law to cast them as sinners. This is not justice; it is shifting the blame.

We must not attribute every conflict within the church solely to individual disobedience or betrayal. If someone rebels and leaves the church, before asking, “What is wrong with that person?” we should first ask, “Did our leadership or our system drive that person into such a situation?”

Behind an individual’s mistake may lie the responsibility of structures or leaders that created or exacerbated that mistake. Nevertheless, leaders hide behind the rules they themselves created, punishing only the other party and expelling them from the church.

Among the “sinners” created in this way, there may even be more people who spoke truths that were uncomfortable for the leadership than those who actually committed sins.

Of course, a community needs order, and those responsible for obvious wrongs—such as violence or embezzlement—must be held accountable.

However, criminal matters should be left to the laws of society and due process, while the church should help the individual repent and be restored.

This is because the church’s mission is not to single out and expel sinners, but to embrace even sinners and help them be born anew.

Rules should exist to sustain people, not to exclude those who challenge the authority of leaders.

Jesus welcomed tax collectors, prostitutes, the sick, and the marginalized—people whom the religious leaders of his day condemned as sinners by invoking the Law.

To those who sought to stone a woman caught in adultery, he said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” He also taught, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”

This is a declaration that all religious laws and regulations must exist to sustain human life.

If it is true that a local church recently expelled a member who protested the appointment of a church leader and locked the church doors, it is truly regrettable.

If there were issues with their actions, the matter should have been resolved through dialogue, persuasion, and reasonable procedures.

Expelling someone from the church solely for protesting is, in the end, tantamount to declaring, “If you do not obey us, leave the church.”

The church is not the property of its leaders, nor are its doors open only to those who obey them.

If people are made sinners by laws created by the leadership, condemned by regulations created by the leadership, and further expelled from the church in the name of the leadership, then it is no longer a community of faith but a religious domination.

Repeated expulsions may temporarily strengthen the leadership’s power, but the church will gradually shrink.

The peace gained by expelling people is not true peace, but merely silence. The church must accept and embrace people until the very end.

It should accept those who criticize, those who protest, and even give those who have erred an opportunity to repent. Judgment must be left to heaven, and the church must open the way to love and reconciliation.

When there is tolerance, the church gains people and regains its strength. If it loses tolerance, it loses people, and ultimately, the church itself will be defeated.

For the Unification Church to rise again, rather than creating new laws or disciplinary regulations, the hearts of its leaders must first be transformed. The church must open its tightly closed doors, listen to the voices of those who oppose it, and pave the way for those who have left to return.

A church that condemns people has no future.

However, a church that loves and embraces people to the very end has a future in which they can begin anew.