Posts Tagged ‘thought reform’

Personal views become more "prayerful" in UBF

September 1, 2004

It is my experience that “prayerful” can be a loaded word in UBF. If you have been in the group long enough, and a view that you express in a sogam is not in line with the view of someone above you [most likely your view could be construed as slightly critical of a UBF leader], you are likely to be told to revise your view to make it more “prayerful”. The following is a post about my observation of such an evolution in one UBF man’s public thoughts on the Internet (at priestlynation.org):

Date Posted: 13:29:43 08/03/04 Tue
Author: Joe
Subject: Personal views become more “prayerful” in UBF
In reply to: Chris ‘s message, “”breakdown in communications”” on 09:11:20 07/28/04 Wed

>Why can we only read Brian’s view (which is not
>representative for UBF, as he claims himself), and
>never UBF’s official view?

The thing is that no one in UBF who holds any sort of position in the hierarchy, the ‘spiritual order’, really has the freedom to express their personal views non-anonymously. He writes that he has recently obtained a more “prayerful” understanding of opposing views about UBF. I know that UBF code word, “prayerful.” It means, “more in line with what my leader(s) dictate.”

He has written recently, “I know that the reason for terminating the [NAE] membership was due to a breakdown in communications, not due to allegations being true.” Yet in the past, on the same site, he had written to the effect that “he had no doubt that all or most of what former members alleged actually happened” (with the large caveat that the incidents were probably just due to “cultural differences”); that statement is no longer evident on his site. I guess this means that he has somehow obtained a more “prayerful” view.

He used to have something on the site to the effect that “some have been hurt in UBF and have left.” There is no such statement on the site anymore that I can find.

He used to have something on the site to the effect that “many of the past problems in UBF could be attributed to the actions of one man [we know who that one man is].” There is no such statement on the site anymore that I can find.

His site has seemingly drifted further and further toward the official UBF party line, or as he puts it, it’s become more “prayerful”. Whether someone told him to make it more “prayerful” or it was a decision he made on his own, this is the fate of independent thinking in all those who commit themselves to UBF. I’ve come to know that the Samuel Lee praiseology delivered by my mother at the last “UBF Founder’s Day” was not as grandiose of a praiseology until the arch-Lee-devotee, Ban Toh, got in the position of editing it.