Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Our hearts are with True Mother and the movement at the present time. The concerns we want to convey here are an expression of care for the health of True Parents’ movement, and for its impact on how the next generation understands and relates to the Divine Principle and True Parents. 

As many of you are now aware, on the 26th August 2025, a significant memo was sent out declaring FFWPU EUME HQ’s official position towards ESGD; we are responding directly to all the key content, and attaching the original document which has been circulating. As it is a public memo, it is important for us to challenge certain narratives, and to provide relevant context to understand its implications.

1. We support True Parents

— We uphold the unique position of True Mother

It is a mischaracterisation in the memo that we do not accept the position of True Mother:

“… it has become clear that ESGD as an educational institution does not fully accept the position of our True Mother and her teaching. Because of this we are unable to endorse all the content of the education given to the participants. Within FFWPU EUME, our educators carry the clear responsibility to uphold and support True Mother’s leadership, and teaching and passing on the providential responsibility to the young participants”

We certainly uphold True Mother’s unique position. The Unificationist idea of the messiah being True Parents – a man and a woman – has always been at the core of our teachings. We have always tried to support Blessed Children to build an authentic and grounded relationship to True Parents; both True Mother and True Father. 

What we are concerned with, is the narrowing of our culture regarding the image of True Parents which has evolved. We also question a narrow approach towards ideas of “supporting True Mother’s leadership” and “passing on providential responsibility”. We are concerned that “Unity with True Mother” is being misused to control and silence. Each of us has a personal and unique relationship with True Mother; this should not be judged superficially. We want to contribute towards a space where True Parents are respected, but where their names are not taken in vain or worshipped (“I am appointed by/united with True Mother – if you do not submit to me, then you are going against True Mother”).

Connected to this, the ‘Chambumoron’ is far more than just the purple book: “The Value of True Parents in Heaven’s Providence”, though even that appears to have been immediately revised. It is inaccurate to say these are ‘True Mother’s teachings’, if they are primarily being created by various theologians. Last year, several EUME leaders apologized for the education that was given at the pilgrimage in Korea in the summer 2024, without explicitly saying what was problematic. It appears that teachings are ‘official’ and authorised until they are challenged, then they are denied, and then subsequently watered down for a western audience.

There remains a lack of transparency surrounding the ‘officially authorised’ new education, which continues to be a source of confusion.

— We do not accept the ‘new material’ denigrating True Father

Sadly, we have observed an unchallenged denigration of True Father; sometimes subtle, sometimes explicit – this is of great concern for our spiritual culture. True Father being undermined is not a separate issue; it is a part of the DNA of the Chambumoron. Since the controversial lecture about ‘Father’s tail’ by Kim Jin Chun (19th April 2022), there has been a growing culture where the alleged sexual misconduct of True Father is implied: ‘Father went to Heungnam to pay indemnity for his mistakes’. Unificationist history is being revised in a way which diminishes the role of True Father and confuses the different roles that True Parents have; it is simply not the case that ‘True Mother was always in the background’. There are statements such as: ‘True Father’s biggest failure was not to proclaim OBD’, whilst at the same time ‘True Mother couldn’t tell True Father she was OBD’. There are many more examples like this which should be engaged with on a deeper level than they have been. Father’s legacy is not being handled with the respect and care it deserves; this is at the core of the issue, and is a collective sin which we want to confront.

— Honest discourse and transparency

We made efforts to contribute a substantial commentary of some contradictions of the Chambumoron teachings and education. Matters of core beliefs are important; the prominence, and impact of ‘Chambumoron’ on the spiritual culture of the movement has made engagement unavoidable. Discourse with the new teachings was welcomed and encouraged by leadership. Indeed, the EUME FFWPU president explained publicly on the 6th October 2024 that “[Mother] asked us to study the Chambumoron, not drop everything else.” Yet, our engagement was condemned publicly as not accepting ‘True Mother’s teachings’. From our experience, it seems that if you do not adopt the new beliefs you have the choice of either being publicly persecuted or privately alienated. So, was it ever really a discourse? 

Many members have shared and expressed similar doubts and haven’t received satisfactory answers from those promoting the ‘new teachings’. Nobody from the leadership has publicly acknowledged these widespread concerns. It is alarming that the leadership has unilaterally shifted the ‘discourse narrative’ to one of ‘going against True Mother if you don’t fully embrace, believe and teach the Chambumoron’. 

Since posting our statement in October 2024, we received a wide range of responses from all over the world. We are confident that we could make a contribution to the ‘discourse’; that we could represent the views of many, and that we could offer a reasonable and valid perspective for others to consider. Interestingly, a common critique we received was the suggestion that leaders can have their private concerns but that they should not be discussed or shared openly with members. Indeed, many have said they ‘agree with the content of the statement’, but not the public discourse. We do not see this as a healthy approach. We would rather support a culture where engaging honestly and sincerely with reality is not condemned but encouraged.

We are open and transparent about our approach to education and our mission. The core of our education is based on the Divine Principle and True Parents’ words. If this is the education that the EUME leadership cannot endorse, they should be clear and specific about it and apply such standards to all of the European community. We have a sense that the greater issue is with what we do not teach, and that we are critically engaged with the institutional culture.

2. The context of our ‘independence’

— Independent out of necessity

Despite the memo being factually correct about our organisational independence, we would not want this to be understood as a reason or excuse for our mistreatment or any undue mistrust towards us. 

“For many years, ESGD served as an official department of FFWPU EUME and supported the faith development of many young people across Europe and they continue to do this. In recent years, ESGD has become more independent and is no longer an official department of FFWPU”.

The process of becoming more independent has happened out of necessity, in response to decisions out of our control. In 2012, the 2nd generation foundation in Europe was carelessly damaged by the European FFWPU leadership at the time – this has never been accounted for. We were removed from the European Youth Department and STF based on false accusations and the desire to seize control of the ‘youth area’; the EYD collapsed within a few months as a consequence. Meanwhile, we carried on the work of the ESGD and of the 2nd Gen Blessing Department. In 2014, with strong encouragement from the European FFWPU continental leader, Rev. An, at the time, we began establishing our organisational independence as ESGD.

Simultaneously, we continued healthy cooperation with the European BFD in the 2nd Gen Blessing area. Several years later in 2020, after creating and leading the 2nd Gen Blessing Department for over 20 years, we were removed by the European BFD without warning, adequate explanation, justification. We are not claiming to be an exception, but rather that we are a Unification Church cliché – ‘unity with the central figure’ has long been a means to control and damage good projects and initiatives. This marked the end of our position within the official structures of the FFWPU. Throughout this whole period, the institutional structures have changed – numerous other Youth projects and organisations have been established and funded by the FFWPU; we have never been an obstacle to any official initiatives or organisations.

— Commitment to the community

Rather than give up, our choice was to independently continue the work we believe in, together with grassroots support.  We accepted that our Blessing education was not ‘official’ anymore, and we were committed to carrying on providing an alternative educational culture and space. Grounded spirituality, critical engagement, and honest reflection are a necessity for many in building a stable and healthy faith, particularly in challenging times.

Also, to be clear, we have never been funded or employed by EUME HQ: we have always been self-sufficient. We gratefully received subsidies, to reduce participant fees, on our summer workshops between 2020-2023; in a similar way as other independent initiatives for youth. At present, we are only able to continue because of a strong network of support and their ongoing donations. We remain committed to supporting Blessed Children to develop their Unificationist faith, succeed in the Blessing, and find their place in the movement. The contribution we can offer is an expression of love for the community and True Parents.

— Part of the community of central Blessed Families

In this sense, we reject any notion that we are independent from the core community of central Blessed Families. The memo states: 

“It is important to affirm that ESGD staff and followers are very much part of our wider community and share the same roots of faith in our Heavenly Parent and True Parents”.

We find this distinction unhelpful and inaccurate. ESGD and many connected to our work, are very much a part of the community of central Blessed Families, not a part of ‘our wider community’. 

It is concerning if dedicated members can be suddenly categorised as part of the ‘wider community’ despite their faith and dedication remaining steadfast. This memo is certainly ‘othering’, and distances those who may have legitimate concerns to the fringes. Furthermore, it is saddening and divisive to define those without the ‘correct beliefs’ as merely sharing the ‘same roots of faith’; particularly in a time when there is an obvious lack of clarity on the ‘new teachings’, and when discourse has been invited. 

We appreciate that this memo seeks to appease our critics without outright and explicit condemnation. However, in the present culture of the movement, it has the potential of further fuelling an atmosphere of fear and division. We have never referred to brothers and sisters as ‘followers’ and we reject any characterisation of us as a schism. We are simply holding our ground and representing legitimate concerns.

3. EUME leadership’s response

The Luzna ban

“As FFWPU EUME, we will continue our sincere efforts to engage with ESGD and remain hopeful that our relationship can be renewed in a way that best serves the next generation and we hope for their cooperation.”

Unfortunately, we have not experienced sincere efforts to communicate prior to the memo being sent. In May 2025, after Shin-Chul’s message, we, as ESGD, were ‘indefinitely banned’ from using the Luzna seminar center by the national leader of Slovakia. We were previously banned by him in November 2024, but this was eventually lifted by EUME regional leadership after 90+ letters of support for ESGD were sent. We were hoping that the rationale for the previous decision to lift the ban would be reapplied, but there was no meaningful action on the matter. 

On the 20th August 2025, we took initiative to directly communicate with the sub-regional leader, D. S., and requested that he take a position on the ban. We expressed the need for a decision by the 25th August, otherwise we would need to find alternative arrangements for our scheduled programme, ‘Signature’. 

In a phone call on the 25th August, D.S. assured us that together with the other signatories (EUME regional leader M.B. and the other sub-regional leader U.A.), they supported the ESGD programme to take place in the Luzna center. The Slovak national leader, however, publicly wrote on the 8th September that EUME leadership is not supportive of ESGD using the Luzna center, otherwise they would have already made such a decision the same way as in December 2024. 

At the same time the vast majority of members from the Luzna community expressed in written their support for ESGD programmes to continue to take place in the Luzna center (a positive relationship of 20+ years, including 15 years of the DONE programme). When we pushed for an answer, the ‘26th August Memo’ was sent to us as their response on the matter. 

On the 25th August, the Slovak national leader started to publicly attack the ESGD and its individual members. After the ‘26th August memo’ was sent, his campaign escalated; the memo was used as proof of support from EUME leadership for his actions. He has been posting false accusations, untruths and hearsay regularly for about 4 weeks (his behaviour even falls within the legal definition of libel). Despite the EUME leadership being informed about it, they have yet to take any meaningful action. This situation in Slovakia is relevant as an example of how EUME leadership is handling the implications of the memo, and for the conduct of leadership which appears to be acceptable at this time. Furthermore, there has been significant misrepresentation of the ‘Luzna ban’ from some members of the newly established EUME Youth Dept. Leadership who have also endorsed the memo.

On the 15th September, when we had already found an alternative location for the new Signature programme, we received ‘conditions’ to use the Luzna seminar center. The ‘conditions’ reflects a depressing culture of control, dogmatism and cancelling others that appears to be increasingly normalised in our community. The ban continues.

In the context of the current painful circumstances in Korea, the renewal of our movement should be encouraged. Measures should be taken to prevent the abuse of power, even in nations with relatively small membership. We may be disempowered, but we are not powerless.

— Faith over fear

The memo certainly invited a new wave of accusations amongst vocal ‘EUME youth leaders’. However, we acknowledge there are other voices amongst the leadership and community, and we are hopeful that the culture can improve step-by-step. We appreciate the public memo written by the recently appointed UK FFWPU national leaders. This is significant as it is the first public acknowledgement which challenges the ‘We cannot co-exist’ message, which missionary Shin-Chul presented in his public talks in the UK earlier this year.

We are also grateful for the widespread support and understanding from many brothers and sisters that we consistently experience. As challenging as it is, we want to carry on contributing to the unfolding situation in our community. We will carry on offering what we can, to those who resonate and who are open. We encourage you to be engaged and to constructively voice your concerns in your communities and beyond.

We carry on.

Sincerely,
The ESGD team

12th October 2025