June Discussion Topic
Mark et al,
The first proposal for the June topic was Building a Decentralized Grassroots-up Movement. When it got a little more specific -- "responsibilities, reporting lines, decision-making authority" etc., it began to sound like an alternative organization to the existing Family Fed. Frankly, that's the last thing we need right now.
Decision-making authority should lie within each family; indeed should be claimed by each family, in the process of building their own foundations of faith upon which they can become owners and co-creators with God.
That is the first and most urgent step to be taken right now. It's part of the transition from servant/followers to become said owners/co-creators/ and sons and daughters of God. This process should have begun in the 1990s. The founding of the Family Federation was meant to mark that. It's my strong conviction that Father meant the "federation" part of the title quite literally.
Families would then respond to God's calling as to where they devote themselves to contribute to the expansion of Cheon Il Guk. Steve Salowsky made a very helpful post recently listing five or six areas of endeavor that would continue work begun and modeled by Father. There are certainly many more.
Families called to similar kingdom-building tasks would naturally connect and cooperate together. This would mark the start of expanding networks -- families to clans, to tribes etc.
The role of a group like this should be as facilitator, a type of midwife, helping to birth these initiatives through promoting useful communication and cooperation
I think the appropriate lens to vies our circumstances is that of the early Christian movement in the first few generations -- house churches, tight communities, intense spiritual life; little islands that gradually became more and more interconnected in a natural development, drawn together by their shared, radical and transformative faith.
Yes, of course, "decision-making should lie within each family". That is what I have been fighting for for many years. Nevertheless a real "family federation" network is still going to have some kind of structure, meaning leadership, democratically elected as respresentatives. It would be an interesting exercise, for FFWPU to refect upon, to propose such a structure and see where FFWPU falls short. It would also clarify that members of the founding family have no leadership role in it but merely advisory.