Saturday 3 October 2009

This is why we fight

In recent times, there have been some frustrating complications with church relationships and all, leaving me a bit frustrated and concerned. That same mood was carried with me into the Rosie's street ministry today, with me almost having to half drag myself out in the cold to serve the streeties.

However, during the night, I was brought back to reality, when one of our team members recounted how someone had been suicidal. She subsequently just sat and heard his story, prayed with him, and gave him a referral to LifeLine for support. After that, he said, in his own words, "This was the first time I've felt part of something".

At that point I realised - we get caught up in the details of life, in our frustrations and annoyances. We lose sleep over things that don't go our way, and our preoccupation is so often our struggle with life.

Yet, at the end of the day, we fight the good fight, not to put up a brave front to impress, or to polish our lives to sparkling perfection. We are fighting, contending, struggling for something bigger, greater, and beyond our own narrow little lives. It is the least of these that we are to struggle for: for the lives that Gods wants to touch and heal, for the broken people that He wants to comfort. We are fighting for the gospel, and for the ones that God loves.

This is why we fight; and believe it or not, God is on our side we are fighting on God's side.

Friday 2 October 2009

Sad news - but inevitable?

I just received this mail from FORGE Australia:

For the last twelve years, Forge has sought to serve the Australian church by inspiring and training leaders to engage the first world as a mission field. We have had the privilege of working with many individuals and churches, helping catalyze missional initiatives and challenging the ecclesial status quo. Through God’s graces, we have seen significant shifts in the mindsets of Australian Christian leaders and for this rich and colorful journey, we are eternally grateful.

More recently, over the last two years we have been involved in a process of organizational reflection and future planning, seeking to identify what our contribution could be to the Australian church in the years ahead. After some long conversations and considered analysis of our position, we believe that the best way forward is to scale back all of our organizational operations for the foreseeable future."

As someone whose faith has benefited richly from the FORGE ministry, I'm really sad to hear this. I have been inspired, challenged and humbled by the many faithful members of FORGE. Seeing their zeal for missions in the West has rekindled a new flame and passion within my own heart for my neighbours and friends.

It is ironic, that the end the of the day, their basis for existence is to some extent the cause of their closure. In particular, they write:

Our current decentralized organizational structure has made it difficult to move ahead cohesively. The challenges associated with transitioning Forge to be an effective training organisation for the new context proved too costly.

FORGE has always pushed for a return to "Acts-style" churches, without the central administration and structure seen in "traditional churches", but rather an organic approach to church life. Thus, it doesn't come as a surprise that as FORGE grew, their commitment to "organic" administration meant that they did not have the administrative structure to support that growth.

While I'm sad to see FORGE Australia go, I think there's a great lesson in this - that at the end it's not all about "returning back to the good ol' days", it's about reaching people with the Gospel for the glory of God - and faithfully using whatever is available for those ends - even if they involve elaborate hierachies ;).

Saturday 29 August 2009

Language, Culture and the Death of Me

We recently had a barbie where both English and Chinese services came together to "interact". First off, people who organised it, like Kat, Andrew and co., as well as others who pitched it are to be commended for their work - thank God and thank them that it was a great delicious event :).

*warning: Rant ahead*

My reflections however center on the irony of the event, most visibly demonstrated when the 2 services were asked to participate in certain activities together. These activities included the English service members, being asked certain "trivia" questions, in CHINESE, with no translation provided. Phew, thank God for that; I've always struggled with trivia, but not understanding the questions fixes all that!

The most ferrous-filled irony of the night occured when someone was speaking in Chinese about how great it was that the Chinese and English could come together to interact (or something to that effect), again with NO translation. When our Pastor and some other members asked that English be used or a translation provided, someone cheekily said "Sorry, my England no very good". Laughs all around, then back to a foreign language.

Ah, yes, the irony of saying "We love your participation, but we don't really care". /rantmode

And so a crossroads is once again met - having come with a real desire to support these initiatives, does one persist in faith, or shake the dust off the soles of my shoes? Is it a relationship that is in need of resuscitation, or are we beating a dead horse? (note: forgiveness and persistence are 2 very different things!)

Sunday 19 July 2009

Emerging Churches - More Wesleyan than the Methodists?

In recent times I've had the opportunity to attend a FORGE conference and get my hands on some material by Hirsch and Frost, and essentially get a bit more up to date with the whole "emerging church" movement.

Much ink has been spilled over reservations about the whole movement, particularly over their interactions with more "traditional" mainline churches. I share the sentiments of many others (Glen has written some excellent comments here), feeling that they have many good things to offer, but do often come across as being a bit arrogant in the simplistic neglect of tradition. Nonetheless, I'm inspired by their commitment to serious discipleship (something which has definitely lapsed in many churches) as well as their intense missional focus, particularly in their service to the poor.

No doubt there are some questionable characters in the movement (I'm not a fan of McLaren), but amongst the more balanced people, I've been interested to find how much they have in common with the spirit of Wesleyanism. For example, in The Shaping of Things to Come, Hirsch and Frost write:

...what the church needs to find its way out of the situation it's in at the beginning of the 21st Century, is not more faddish theories about how to grow the church without fundamentally reforming structures. What the church needs is a revolutionary new approach.

They advocate that the church need to restructure itself around the concept of mission (rather than worship, which is very prevalent today), on the basis that:

...the missional church represents God in the encounter between God and human culture....it is a visible manifestation of how the Good News of Jesus Christ is present in human life and transforms human culture to reflect more faithfully God's intentions for creation.

In other words, our construct of ministry and mission should not and must not be centered within what we call "Church". "Ministry" is not just about ushering, leading worship or playing the piano - it is also very much (and more so!) about MISSION - our engagement and interaction with the world the other 6 days of the week. For many, it is thus lamentable that church structures and organisations are so church-centered - we encourage people to attend prayer meets, cell groups, sunday schools, choirs, courses, seminars, workshops, meetings, etc, hence effectively taking people OUT of their community and keeping them IN the Church.

Hirsch and Frost see this church centered functioning as a logical outcome of "traditional" ways of church organisation and institutionalisation, and hence call for a radical restructuring of our churches, at points calling us to return to "primitive" Christianity.

What struck me was how similar this sounded to the Wesleys as they began their ministry. Chilcote, in The Wesleyan Tradition, comments on the Wesleys' beliefs:

The church of England in the Wesleys' day was an institution in need of repair...It had become distant from and irrelevant to the world it was called to serve during a time of tremendous change. Its forms and its structures had become so inflexible and devoid of life that the weight of its "institutionalism" was quenching the Spirit, suffocating the life of God's people....It needed to rediscover itself and reclaim its identity as God's agent of love in the world. The Wesleys believed that God raised them up to resuscitate the church.

Commenting on the Wesleys' understanding of the function of the church, he says:

Their ecclesiology (understanding of the church), therefore, was essentially missiological (formed around mission)... All of their energy was directed toward the empowerment of Christ's fiathful disciples in ministry to God's world. Indeed, they all viewed evangelism and mission...as the reason for their existence.

Given that the Methodist Church today has become more well known for being "Methodical" (in terms of beauracracy and red tape, rather than in the pursuit of holiness), I can't help but wonder whether the much maligned "Emerging Church" movement actually better embodies what it means to be a Methodist than many Methodists, by demonstrating a stronger passion for a more missional, discipleship oriented, and contextual approach to church life.

However, perhaps more importantly, how do we as a church rediscover what it means to be "missional" - what sacrifices and pains will it take, and will we take them?

Wednesday 15 July 2009

Review for "ReJesus - A wild messiah for a missional Church' by Hirsch and Frost


Hirsch and Frost are concerned only with 1 word - J.E.S.U.S. Call them what you may, but their premise is simple: the modern western church has strayed far from the teachings and values that its founder Jesus Christ embodied - he has been domesticated to fit our agenda. Echoing characters such as Barth, they declare that Christ must remain central in the faith, as nothing can be known/felt/done apart from Christ himself. To make their point, they go through 7 chapters that discuss (in order): how Jesus impacts theology/missiology/ecclesiology, how he impacts individuals and how he impacts communities. They explore the false images we've made of Jesus, and how the Shema provides a holistic model for discipleship in the form of monotheistic ethics. They go on to discuss the importance of intersecting orthodoxy, orthopraxy and orthopathy, and finish off with a discussion on ecclessiology (which is admittedly very functional).

In general I'm quite wary of these kind of books (that proclaim that 'everyone is wrong and we just need to get back to basics'), as they often have a blaise disregard for the value of tradition and history. The authors constantly affirm the value of tradition, thankfully, but provide few insights into how this may be reinterpreted in the context of a renewed Christologic focus, so as to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

This, however, does not hurt their main, and very timely message - that we need to rescue the gospels (and Christology) from the dungeons, and place them and their central figure back at the center of our existence as the church. In doing this, they rightly argue, the church will rediscover what it means to be "missional", in every sense of the word, as they embody the values of their Lord. Rather than the tame, gentle, huggable, nice lady-like Jesus of our paintings, they present a challenging, radical, loving, confrontational, non-conformist and passionate Jesus. This they do very well, with a good mix of anecdote and story to add some personal flavor to their writings, leaving one with the challenge to read the Gospels more intently, keeping our eyes and heart open to the person they testify to.

Ironically, the book is short on the very material it seeks to promote - Christology. There's plenty of discussion around the impact that Christology would have, but not much exploration of the man himself - but perhaps that is too much of an ask for a book only 200 pages long! In addition, attempts at serious theological reflection (such as the section on ecclesiology) are pretty flimsy, but then again, this book is more about the importance of prioritising Christology than an actual discussion of the subjects themselves.

All in all, ReJesus is a good read that will no doubt stir the reader to rethink and reflect on putting the Christ back into being Christian, and learn to read the gospels more robustly, leading to a reinterpretation of the identity of the church. In a sense, what Barth did as a theologian, Hirsch and Frost are doing as missionaries. It gets pretty draggy and repetitive at points, but remains a great starting point for discussion on ministry.

Thursday 2 July 2009

Biblical Preaching by Haddon Robinson


This book is immensely practical - it takes you on a step by step journey through the preparation and delivery of sermons. It covers topics ranging from selection of a text and its exegesis, to the development of a homilectical theme, and finally to the to nuances and issues in delivery of the message (Eg: body language, voice etc).

The breadth of topics Robinson tries to cover seems intimidating, and one wonders whether the book becomes a jack of all trades, without really detailing any particular step. Robinson however makes up for this, by ensuring maximum clarity by keeping the points simple, and filling the pages with examples. He also makes it a point to direct the reader to more indepth resources at the each chapter, if one wishes to pursue it. More worked examples, however would have been useful.


One glaring deficiency in the book, however, is how a clear theology of preaching is not outlined. Although the book sets out to be more practical than theoretical, it would not have hurt to have discussed the biblical and theological basis for speaking the word of God (beyond the few paragraphs mentioned in the introduction and the final chapter).


All in all, this stands as a clear and valueable introduction to the preparation and delivery of sermons. Whilst you won't get a comprehensive exploration of preaching ministry, you will be getting a solid, and all-round guide to get started in this ministry.

Sunday 21 June 2009

So I watched Constantine...


A bit of an oldie I know, but I never got round to watching it. On the whole, I'll say it's a pretty bad movie - crappy plot, and filled with horrible theological concepts (kind of like those movies that potray Chinese as yellow skinned slanty eye people with pig tails?).

Anyway, there were actually 2 bits in the movie that I liked (spoilers ahead):

1. When Gabriel pins Constantine to the ground, he/she/it (angels are neuter) comments on how humans just need to repent to enter into the bosom of God, and how privileged and loved we are above all of God's other creations. It then caps it off by saying "It's not fair".

At this point I was groaning from the badness of the movie, but this little bit perked me up a little, simply because it reflected the awesome theological truth - that the Son of God should give His life for fallen humanity, that He should take on the form of the human and no other creature. Yes God loves His creation, but there is little doubt that humanity has a treasured place in that. And furthermore, at the end of the day, the Gospel of Jesus Christ ISN'T fair - in no way is there any "fairness" in us being reconciled to God by the suffering of God Himself!

2. As Lucifer tries to drag Constantine to hell as punishment for his sin, God stops him in his tracks and lifts Constantine to heaven, much to Lucifer's chagrin. At this point, Constantine gives Lucifer the birdie, and was really a LOL moment for me.

You see, I couldn't help but reminded of how we often get caught up into appearance and etiquette, thinking that God is looking out for the well mannered nice person, but has no interest in the ruffian who swears and is ill mannered. But at the end of the day, we come back to the parable of the Good Samaritan, where the evil, uncouth Samaritan is praised as living closer to God's command to "love thy neighbor", than any of the Jews coming before him.

It's so tempting to measure holiness (particularly in our conservative Chinese church) by, in a sense, "niceness". Yet, perhaps God is sometimes less concerned about whether you are nice and polite, than whether you are living out His command to love God with all you've got, and love your neighbor like yourself.

Saturday 13 June 2009

A Review of God's Politics: Why the Right is Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get it

"We are the one's we are waiting for" - this pretty much sums up what Wallis is arguing for in this book: a desire for the church to rediscover it's duty to engage with society, and push for social reform on critical issues of peace, justice, international aid, etc. Whilst the mention of 'politics' and 'God' is bound to raise suspicion given the necessity of the separation of Church and state, Wallis is clear to emphasize that he is not promoting the development of a "Christian nation (as some fundamentalists insist on)", but the development of a political stance amongst Christians that is congruent with the values of our faith, achieved not through coercian but through accepted means.

The book is targeted at Christians, and discusses the foundational concern that (in the US at least) religion has been hijacked by political groups for their own means. Christians are often pressured to believe that if they want to be faithful, they MUST vote for the republicans, as if God is pro-war, pro-rich, etc. On the other hand, the democrats have been fearful of touching on the matter of religion, thus alienating an otherwise significant voting group. Wallis attempts to point out how Christians have to lift themselves out of the "Left" vs "Right" dichotomy, and begin to establish a politic that reflects scriptural values, such as that of the family, whilst being progressive in engaging with society, such as caring for the poor, fighting racism and sexism, etc.

Wallis calls Christians to step out from apathy, to begin engaging with their role as responsible citizens who have to speak as a common voice, and hold politicians to account on their commitments. Through the use of multiple case examples, he demonstrates that when Christians and other religious folk band together on moral issues, such as black civil rights and the abolition of slavery, their voice over time is heard by the powers at large, and that change can come.

The main downside of the book is that it seems a little self indulgent at times and repetitive. Wallis inserts one too many examples of how he and some other leaders wrote this letter, made this statement or did this work. On the other hand, these little snippets do provide some thought as to how Christians can speak up about these issues. Even then, he doesn't spend enough time fleshing out the alternatives to the abuses that are seen daily in the political arena. In addition, Wallis does ignore the (thankfully rare) scenario where evil just meets any attempt at meaningful engagement face-on with a hammer. However, I suspect that Wallis' approach is something meant for the Church in a democratic environment, rather than in an oppressed one.

On the whole, God's Politics makes a fascinating read for Christans who are thinking about how their faith interacts with their public life - to neither divorce them nor create a false simple unity. Whilst it seems to wander a little bit, by the end of it the reader is left with a sense of hope (a rarity in these discussions), that the Church can continue in the footsteps of other "prophetic" voices such as Martin Luther King and William Wilburforce, to make a meaningful impact on society.

Friday 8 May 2009

A review of "Medicine as Ministry" by M. Mohrmann

First off, it is worthwhile to note that Mohrmann is one of the few people who have the background, experience and training to write a book about theological ethics and medical practice - she is shared between a professorial chair of paediatrics, and an associate professorial chair in religion, at the university of virginia. Thus, unlike many doctors who do not have the breadth of knowledge/reading to comment in an indepth fashion on ethics, or the theologians who largely remain strangers to the world of medicine, Dr Mohrmann is able to unite the best of both worlds, and hence what she says has a very practical, yet deeply reflective element to it.

On to the book - this is not an exaustive treatise on biomedical ethics. As the title "reflections on suffering, ethics and hope" suggests, it is a book exploring what it means to be a doctor in a suffering world, and how we react to it.

Rather than offering a case-by-case discussion of the various areas of controversy, Mohrmann chooses instead to focus on the question of what "ethics" means to christians, and where this "ethics" comes from. The book, in rough order, reflects on the meaning of the trinitarian God for ethics, and necessity of engaging with the rich narratives of our patients' lives in order for medical practice to truly reflect what God intends it to be. Her arguement centers much on the narrative nature of human experience, and the need for broader engagement with the community of a patient for true healing to occur.

This book is more thought provoking than answer giving, as Mohrmann freely challenges our views of health, life and dying, even suggesting that we have idolised life itself. Nonetheless, Mohrmann is able to keep the book thin and make it a light read (I finished it 3-4 hours).

People looking for straightforward analyses of specific moral dilemmas and answers to life questions need not read this book - it is meant to stimulate thought on approaching our ethics differently, and in the process of doing so, enable us to fulfill the commandment to love our neighbours more meaningfully.

Wednesday 29 April 2009

On Swine Flus, SARS and perspective

This article from The Age pretty much sums some of the things going through my mind as people squeal in fear from the possibility of a pandemic from the H1N1 flu outbreak that will kill us all:

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/fears-distorting-reality-20090429-ancz.html

Some extracts:
...why do the deaths of only some people from obscure diseases cause us to panic? And how can we be so unfeeling when we have the power to save the lives of millions by relatively simple, inexpensive precautions and treatments?....

...it seems that only when we perceive that infectious diseases threaten "people like us" do we respond with real urgency. The millions killed by TB, AIDS, malaria and other mass killers are doomed to fit the stereotype of people who live and die like that. We can accept it as the way of the world. Aboriginal Australians are just as much victims of the indifference that flows from such stereotyping.

In all reality, we only have 7 confirmed deaths from the Swine Flu (based on WHO analyses - Mexican databases aren't exactly stellar), in a country that is known for its gross inequities and dodgy standards of health and living. In contrast, the normal flu kills 250-500,000 people a year, of which 2000 are in Australia. Yet, all of the sudden, we have the leaders of the known world speaking up and declaring that they will spare no expense to contain this outbreak.

I admit the need for an effective public health response, and even acknowledge that there is more to gain from stoking people's fears and insecurities, hence keeping them on the alert, as compared to calming them. It's good to take appropriate measures at disease containment, for epidimiological reasons, but probably more so for political ones (this is already turning into opportunities to score political points if you read the news).

However, despite all the fearmongering about it being the "next big pandemic" and how we are "overdue for a massive outbreak"that "threatens the existence of humanity", in all likelihood this H1N1 virus thing is going to become something of the past, just as SARS did. Does anyone remember the HK flu from the 1960s that killed over a million people worldwide-no? In addition, the world of international communications and public health is incredibly different from what it was in the century of the last pandemic. Just google something like "Developments/achievements in the last 50-100 years" and you'll see what I mean (this includes the internet btw).

And so I come back to my original point - lots of fearmongering and scares at "possibilities" that are in reality mere shadows, revealing a distinct lack of perspective on disease and illness. This is in stark contrast to our ignorance at the daily epidemics and massive numbers of deaths in poorer nations around us. I believe these events do something more than threaten the health of us all - they reveal the hypocrisy and lack of perspective in our lives, how we spend with reckless abandon at anything that immediately threatens our welfare, but live in gleeful ignorance what happens beyond our own world (I'm just as much guilty of this). I cannot help but think about God's anger - not expressed through disease as a punishment, but against us, for our indignancy, and our love for evil, not good.

PS: For those who are freaked out by the WHO near declaration of a pandemic - look up the definition first, see see how vague it is. The only thing that separates a "pandemic" from something like the normal flu, is the fact that it's new to populations.

Monday 27 April 2009

A Review of The Living Word of God: Rethinking the Theology of the Bible, by Ben Witherington III



In this book, Witherington writes in response to 2 unhealthy patterns and attitudes to the bible he sees in today's world - on one hand, we have the fundamental conservatives who insist that everything in the bible is literally true, and understand the "authority" of scripture in a straightforward, literal sense, as demonstrated by Christians who insist the world is flat and square because Revelation speaks of how "angels came from four corners of the earth". On the other hand, we have the liberals, demonstrated by Erhman and his new book "Jesus Interrupted", pointing out that the bible is full of contradictions and cannot be trusted.

In both cases, Witherington argues, there is ironically the same problem - a straightforward, simplistic approach to scripture that neglects fundamental issues that arise in the study of any piece of literature (religious including). In both cases, there is a neglect of the complexity of scripture, with both groups forgetting that texts can and should primarily be understood as they were meant to be understood - eg: we should not be reading a comic strip as if the statements within where academic literature.


For example, liberal theologians often have an issue with the chronological differences between the four gospels - forgetting that biographies written 2000 years ago were not seeking to establish historical chronicity or accuracy, but rather sought to demonstrate and describe a persons life in particular themes. In essense - biography is different from history (especially ancient biogrpahy and ancient history).


Witherington spends much of the book look at specific issues and case studies - for example household regulations found within colossians and whether Paul is inadvertently promoting slavery and patriarchal systems, and discussing how a surface interpretation of the text will not suffice to do justice to it and the theology drawn from it. He also devotes 1/4 of the entire book to a QnA section, where he answers some of the most common questions he receives from the general public about the bible.


This book probably underachieves - it is entitled "rethinking the theology of the bible", but in reality Witherington does little more than to put forth a solid, well thought out argument for the proper and careful exegesis of scripture and its application to Christian life. His arguments are nothing groundbreaking, and would be what you expect from any reasonable book on hermeneutics.


Where it does shine, however, is the (rather slim) chapter on postmodernism - and a brief commentary on self proclaimed postmodern christians, such as Brian Mclaren, Rob Bell and Dan Miller. In this, he effectively argues that they aren't true postmodernists, demonstrating that Christians, both professional and lay, often have a misconception of what true postmodernism is, and how it impacts the way we read scripture. Alas, this chapter is rather short.


In summary, "The Living Word of God" puts forth a good case for the need to properly and carefully handle the Christian scriptures, and warns against the fallacies committed by both liberal and fundamentalist camps. It is a book that is perhaps written more for the student who is beginning his/her journey in the study of the scriptures, than for the seasoned and experienced exegete. Nonetheless, the QnA sections, the Case Study sections and a few others do provide some gems and food for thought for someone more experienced.

Here it is from koorong.com.au

Monday 13 April 2009

Camps, Love and Couples


Our mid-year church camp's theme is "true love awaits", and as the name suggests, it's about "how to love". As one can guess, the promotion so far seems to suggest that while it is not exclusive to couples, it is significantly focused on these relationships.

Apart from the obvious theological issues of asking an anthropocentric question of "how do WE love", I have been wondering whether this is an insensitive and inappropriate theme for a combined church camp.

Within any church, including ours, there is a mixture of singles and couples, and I do wonder whether having a COMBINED camp that focuses on couple relationships does little more than to rub in the fact that the singles are single. Yes they have said that the camp is not just for couples, but the promotional material seems to suggest that singles are more of a "not uninvited" group.

Perhaps it's just been the way it's been promoted, and the actual camp isn't about about couple relationships. But looking at the way it's been going, it seems like it's going to be more segregating than unifying.

Monday 30 March 2009

The Great Divorce

OK, so maybe it isn't as great a divorce as I make it out to be, but it's still there. Anyway, on to my point:

People in our church have recently been talking alot about change. I'm not sure if it's just some pseudo-Obama fever, or just plain frustration with what's been essential stagnation over the last few years, but the sentiment is there nonetheless.

We have a new pastor, who goes on about how she's going to bring big change. We have a chairperson talking about how change is going to happen in the church this year, and the small group coordinator talks about how change is good. Our sister service, the chinese congregation, is also now shifting their service time to the arvo. (the list goes on)

Whilst I'm not against change, what I do get concerned with is blind change. Yes there may be a need for a move out of a particular situation, and sometimes the move brings some fresh air. However, more often than not, this move is done on the basis of a "good idea" (or something gathered from an experience/book somewhere). There is a prevailing experimental attitude that goes: "this isn't working, so let's try something else and see if it works".

I find it fascinating that the underlying assumptions driving this attitude is rooted in a pseudo-scientific/modernist concept: That there is something that works/is true, and our duty is to explore and experiment until we find out what it is (in contrast to perhaps pre-modern approaches where pure tradition, rather than pragmatism, was the aim of the game).

At the same time, however, Church ministries ignore the other elements of this underlying methodology: namely the concept that it is the combined progress of a body of people that counts. In other words - Churches/ministers tend to want to do 'research' on their own, without the necessary engagement with what others have done elsewhere/before them.

A classic example is the relationships between adolescent behavior and knowledge. Research into adolescent behavior over the last few decades has demonstrated a very weak link between knowledge and practice - ie: for the adolescent, knowledge is not power. In a health setting, it means that providing education on safe sexual practices, safe eating, safe driving, etc, will NOT produce significant behavioral change.

It's not difficult to see how this can easily apply to the church setting as well - we enjoy going on from the pulpit and sunday school classes that youths should read the scriptures and the bibles for their spiritual growth, etc etc - and we all know how that turns out (anecdotally, it would seem that the average youth has immense problem sticking to a disciplined, regimented schedule of daily scripture readings). Recognising that the provision of information does not necessarily lead to behavioral change within this population would lead one to conclude that many of our current methodologies do not work too well.

Whilst we recognise that God is the one who "makes the seeds grow", we also have to recognise that in our ministries, we essentially stand on the shoulders of giants. Where would we be if we did not recognise the contributions of Calvin and Luther to our understandings of salvation, or Tertullian and Augustine to the language of the faith? It is perhaps time to recognise that God has not left us to grasp at straws in the dark, but has made available to us a wealth of resources and tools that enable us to be more effective at discipling the people of the nations. It is perhaps time to heal the great divorce between ministry and research.

(Maybe it's time for Pastors to get UpToDate subscriptions :P jkjk)

Sunday 22 February 2009

Oh please

Some are familiar with the fact that I'm becoming a bit uneasy with movies like SlumDog Millionaire - as to whether they are exploiting the extreme poverty of people for our first world entertainment. I was watching another of these movies last night (Blood Diamond) and the reporter in it sums up my thoughts exactly: We write and take all these pictures of suffering people, we draw a tear or two, maybe even get a cheque written. But in the end - no one really cares. No ones really going to stand up and do something about it.

As a disclaimer, I believe movies like slumdog millionnaire and blood diamond can be useful if they are used in the context of a holistic education on events or realities in the world, reminding watchers that for 99.999% of the people involved, there isn't a happy ending. Together with these movies, audiences need to be made aware of the need to do something about these issues - be it through pressuring the government, to raising awareness, to actually getting out there and doing something. Unfortunately, the "unhappy" message doesn't get transmitted to most of the people watching these movies (after all, people are going to the movies to be entertained, not challenged).

So what we end up with is the "pornography of poverty", where the events of another world are turned into our entertainment. Where what is a serious matter is turned into an object to be devoured by audiences for their pleasure.

The title of this age article couldn't have said it better..."Do the SlumDog!" So now the concept of slum dwellers living and dying poverty is a colloqual term for a hip and fashionable dance. Please.

(PS i have written to the Age about it)

Friday 6 February 2009

Confessions

I confess - I'm not itching and raving to drop everything and go work in a developing world.

I know how much of a need there is - I've spent 3 months living with the people (mud huts and all) in the poorest regions of India (it isn't much, but it's something). I've read article after article quoting international statistic after statistic, with plenty of case commentaries to demonstrate the difficulty of the situation. Mentors and friends have shared stories about the challenges and trials of working in these areas. I have been moved to tears by sights of poverty and hopelessness.

Unyet, I don't feel like dropping everything I have and heading over there ASAP.

Don't get me wrong, I have immense respect for people who sacrifice much to work overseas, and believe there is a genuine need for all Christians (including myself) to be involved in global missions, in whatever capacity. However, at the same time I can't help but feel that we have "glamorised" the overseas experience, and fixated our eyes on it, while Rome burns.

You don't need to be a genius to realise that our society is cracking at the seams - our health systems are breaking, families are being destroyed, street violence is on the rise, and so on. In many ways, the developed world is a ticking time bomb; we have archaic systems and mentalities in place that are woefully inadequate to meet the changing needs and demands of society, yet this is a society that is integral to the global village (the recent economic crash is a typical example of the central role developed nations play in the world).

An example has grown out of my experience in community pediatrics over the last one month. It has been decades since the concept of the "new morbidity" has been put forth, when pediatricians began to notice the replacement of "developing world" diseases such as meningitis, with developmental problems - learning disabilities, behavioral problems and so on.

"Bah" you may say, "having difficulty learning is nothing when compared to starving to death". In some ways that is true, but consider this - in todays highly educated, competitive and academically oriented culture, a learning disability is going to have massive social repercussions, much more than in a more traditional culture. The label of "dumb" rapidly progresses to bullying, school dropouts, and eventually substance and drug abuse, unemployment and involvement in street violence. Child Safety Commissioner Bernie Geary is quite certain where many of these kids end up: prison. It doesn't take long to see what a social disaster this could become, with up to 20% of Australian kids now having a functionally significant learning impairment. Can we seriously make a value distinction between the impact of starvation and the impact of violence/substance abuse/imprisonment?

In many ways, I can't help but feel that this is going the way of Christian evangelism: for years it was "the West to the Rest", but now, for a variety of reasons, it's very much "the Rest to the West". Unless we keep vigilant on what's happening at home, we could easily end up on a downhill slope in society. Already Keating and Hertzman (1999) have noticed this "paradox of modernity" - that Marmot's social ladder of health is beginning to falter in our modern world.

And so the next time you are tempted to think that the third world is only place needing prayer and transformation effected through the work of the body of Christ, remember events such as this merely scratch the surface of a deeper disease beginning to eat away at the roots of our society.

Wednesday 28 January 2009

Where art thou

I've been absent from this blog for a while, for good reason! Here's a quick update on what's been shakin'

1. Been completing my Christology and Church History essays. For the former, I explored Barth's theology. It was fascinating how he thought "outside the box", and essentially reorganised systematic theology as we know it. For the former, I explored the events surrounding and leading up to the synod of Dort, where the Arminians were charged with heresy by the Calvinists. It was an interesting exploration that I'm still continuing - simply because it really goes deeper than "do we have free will"?

2. I've been busy with my medical elective at the Center for Community Child Health. I really thank God that I've had the opportunity to sink my teeth into a real public health project - a fairly major one too! On top of that, the clinics I've been attending, split between Developmental Pediatrics and Adolescent health, have been fascinating and really interesting, in that they combine the best of two worlds - clinical medicine and social medicine.

3. I'm getting reading for a summer intensive subject called Adolescent International Health. At the moment I'm wondering whether to put my Masters of Public Health on hold, and instead use the subject for credit towards a G.Dip in Adolescent Health and Welbeing. I would love to do the former, but the fact that a fair bit has to be done on campus is a bit of a deal breaker.