421 CHRONICLESnlowing the lead of Atlanta, pacesetternof the New South, a town that billednitself in the hateful 60’s as “the city toonbusy to hate.”nThink about that. As my friend FrednHobson once observed, that’s a prettynsorry reason not to hate. Not toonproud, too decent, too self-respecting,ntoo Christian — just too busy. Comparednto that, Fred remarked, even hatenhas a certain integrity. I once angerednsome Atlantans by writing that everyntime I look at their city I see what anquarter of a million Confederate soldiersndied to prevent. Well, that’s thenkind of thing I had in mind.nBut let’s be fair: the absence of hate,nfor whatever reason, is rare, and precious.nAnd, as big American cities go,nAtlanta may be onto something. Lastnspring, I read an interview in the PannAm in-flight magazine with a blacknOn ‘Bribemasters’nMichael Warder’s recent article aboutnthe Unification Church (June 1988) isnso full of falsehoods and distortions it isndifficult to know where to begin tonrespond. Given that he left the movementnmore than eight years ago, it isnhardly surprising that his evaluation is sonfar off base.nMr. Warder’s absurd commentsnabout food, schedules, and financesncome from his distorted memory of ansimpler time. The movement that henleft has now gone on to become a partnof mainstream American life. Besidesnthat, the way he critiques the religiousnpractices of church members, e.g.,nprayer, fasting, witnessing, etc. gives thendistinct impression that he has littlenrespect for serious religion of any kind.nIn the final analysis, Mr. Warderncomes across in a way that reveals himnfor what he really is—an embitterednapostate who seeks to appease his consciencenby attacking what he once believednin. One wonders if he has tonminister from Boston who spoke of hisnhopes for his city. Why, he askednrhetorically, should Atlanta be “thenonly model city for black people” innthe US?nDo you have any idea how strange itnis to hear a Bostonian use the capital ofnGeorgia as a good example? True, thenman was black. The millennium hasn’tnarrived; the lion hasn’t lain down withnthe lamb; no white Bostonian othernthan Robert Coles has yet been heardnto utter a good word for the South. Butnlet’s savor this anyway.nAnd let’s hear two cheers for thenmaterialism which certainly has somethingnto do with that outcome. Ournpolity is explicitly committed to thenpursuit of happiness, which usuallyntranslates, North and South alike thesendays, as the pursuit of wealth. Andnthere are worse ends for a society tonPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESn’y;^-^ncontinue to justify himself in his ownnmind for the testimony he gave againstnRev. Moon in 1982 in exchange fornimmunity from prosecution for himselfn—John T. BiersmannDirector of Public Affairsnof the Unification ChurchnNew York, NYnIt is incredible, Mr. Editor, that youngave space in your magazine to such anpiece of bigotry, which would be comicalnif our position as non-liberal-nDemocrat media were not so tragicneven without the strife, discord andnhatred which Mr. Warder has sown.n— Robert J. MortonnEditor-in-ChiefnNew York City TribunenNew York, NYnMr. Warder’s attack on the UnificationnChurch has two aspects, only one ofnwhich concerns me directly. Much ofnhis tirade is directed against thennnpursue: strength, for example; usually,nin practice, even virtue. Selling outnyour principles isn’t bad if they’re obnoxious,nand principles often are.nThe older I get the more wisdom Insee in Samuel Johnson’s observationnthat a man is seldom more innocentlynengaged than when he is making money.nIt can’t be accidental that the mostnsuccessful multiethnic society on earthnis the one that probably best exemplifiesnstodgy, money-making, bourgeoisnvalues — I’m referring of course tonSwitzerland. Atlantans’ smug vulgarityncan be insufferable, but perhaps that’snthe price we have to pay for communalnharmony and the envy of Bostonians.nJohn Shelton Reed is executive directornof the Save the Hookworm Federationnand writes from Chapel Hill.nChurch’s beliefs and practices, particularlynthe role of the Reverend Moon innshaping the lives of the faithful.nMore disturbing to me is the chargenthat conservatives who work fornChurch-owned publications are makingna “sham of their principles.” As farnas I can see, the Washington Times andnInsight resemble Commentary farnmore than a religious publication. Thenstaffing would suggest the same. Theneditorial board of my own publication.nThe World & I, solicits articles andncommentaries from writers and scholarsnacross the political spectrum. Wenencourage contentiousness, not ideologicalnconformity. Indeed I wouldndefy Mr. Warder to find any party linenin our intellectually broad and physicallynspacious magazine.n—Paul GottfriednThe Worid & InWashington, DCn