Archive for June, 2009
The ripples continue with a kind mention of the “People Like Us” Forum in a mainstream paper article entitled, Healing Malaysia under the column : Art of Healing By DR AMIR FARID ISAHAK. It’s a little funny because I was 2 of the events he mentioned and was in dialogue with one of the speakers he mentioned Vinoth Ramachandra for a week during a variety of occasions! (HT: Lily’s Room)
Healing Malaysia
Art of Healing
By DR AMIR FARID ISAHAK
Can’t we all just get along? Not until we get to know each other better.
AFTER the euphoria of our 50th Merdeka (Independence), it didn’t take long for us to squabble again, and the displeasure of many over the status quo was evident in the 12th general elections. March 8, 2008 was a watershed in our political history as the ruling coalition, which has governed since independence, lost their erstwhile unshaken two-thirds majority in parliament, as well as the control of four states. The repercussions still hound as the politicians continue their charades.
We are a multi-racial, multi-religious society with differing views and aspirations even within each racial and religious community. Exposure to Western ideas and ideals, the advent of the Internet and satellite TV, and access to alternative media have also changed the mindset of the people, especially the younger generation.
Malaysia’s people may be diverse and distinct, but we can definitely come together as one.
Many social/political scientists, lay citizens, and foreigners have given their opinions, and many articles and commentaries have been written. Many forums, seminars, and dialogues have been organised, and millions of emails, blog-posts and Twitterings exchanged to discuss the issues, and hopefully find solutions to our imbroglio.
I am not a social scientist or a politician, but I am very much involved in peace and unity work through my interfaith activities. Although I prefer that religion and race be considered separately, it is not that simple here. As the Malays, who constitute over 60% (and growing) of the population, are uniquely defined in our Constitution as being Muslims, there is much overlap between interfaith and interracial affairs in Malaysia.
Recently, I attended four events related to achieving interracial and inter-religious harmony in our pluralist nation.
The first was a lecture by Dr Vinoth Ramachandra of Sri Lanka. He has a PhD in nuclear engineering but spends more time speaking about religion and world peace as an Anglican lay-theologian, writer, teacher, and human rights advocate than on his academic specialisation. His lecture entitled “Respecting Persons in a Pluristic Society” was organised by the Centre for Civilisational Dialogue of University Malaya. It was well-received by the small audience and gave us some valuable lessons.
The second was a dialogue between two Muslims and a Christian, organised by the Muslim Professionals Forum (MPF) and Friends in Conversation (FIC) and held at a church. The Muslims were Waleed Aly, an Australian of Iraqi origin, who is described as a lawyer, academic, community leader, and rock musician; and Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa, a local cardiothoracic surgeon and founding member of MPF. The Christian was Tricia Yeoh, research officer to the Chief Minister of Selangor, and active member of the Lutheran Church.
The dialogue on “People Like Us: How Arrogance Divides People” was hosted and moderated by Rev Sivin Kit, pastor of the Lutheran Church in Bangsar, KL. Over 100 people, mostly youths, equally divided between Muslims and Christians, plus some of other faiths, were there. We had a frank, lively discussion on issues affecting minority-majority rights and problems. Visit http://www.ucanews.com/2009/06/19/christians-muslims-discuss-minority-issues/ for details.
The other two were the public forum and roundtable discussion featuring Prof Aneez Esmail, the Ugandan Muslim refugee whose fight against racism in Britain helped change the law. In his talk “Race Relations: The British Experience”, he repeatedly said that we should not be passive victims of any form of injustice and that a needs-based quota to help the poor would work better than a race-based one (see thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/6/24/focus/4170788&sec=focus).
There have been many similar events over the years, reflecting the general concern we have on the need to improve our relationships and have true peace and harmony among us, so that we can progress as a nation united.
But why has true harmony been so elusive? Everyone over 40 laments that when we were young, there was so much interaction between people of different races and religions, whereas the interactions we see now are only superficial, often limited to festive “open-house” and official functions. There is minimal real and deep interaction between the races outside of work, sports, and entertainment. The changes in society over the last four decades can be traced to the events that led to the May 13th incident of 1969, and the policies that followed.
I mention this not to harp upon something best forgotten for us to move forward, but because it is my observation that the reason why we cannot solve our problems is because we don’t really trust one another. May 13 destroyed the trust our forefathers had, and until we rebuild that trust, we are wont to go round in circles in our discussions, dialogues, and negotiations.
I have participated in many forums and seminars addressing these issues and found that different groups have different views about what is just and fair for them.
The Malays, being the majority, will continue to determine much of our nation’s policies and direction. But they are not homogenous in their views. The English-speaking tend to be more accommodating and liberal in their views compared to the Malay-speaking. Thus, when you attend forums and seminars conducted in English, or read only the English media, you will get a skewed view of Malay opinion, because they represent only the minority.
For example, many educated and well-to-do Malays have said that the Malays can compete on a level ground, but the majority of the Malay-speaking Malays feel that the community will be severely disadvantaged, and still need the “affirmative” policies to help them. In religion, the ideas promoted by Sisters-in-Islam may have the support of many English-speaking Malays/Muslims, but are rejected by most Malay-speaking Malays/Muslims. In religion, we find Allah has been brought to court. It is sad and ironic that we fight over the name of God who commanded us to love and respect, and not to fight and despise, one another. We should be ashamed of ourselves.
I am not taking sides, only pointing out you need to know the majority view for a clear picture of what that section of society wants. The same applies to the Chinese, Indians, and other ethnic groups. I wonder whether we really know the aspirations of the majority of their people. I don’t know what’s written in the Chinese and Indian media.
I will not delve into the other issues as enough has been written elsewhere. My point is that it is difficult to win if we cannot work as a team, and we cannot work as a team if we cannot agree on our specific roles.
Do we as Malaysians have a common dream? Can we come together, understand one another, compromise where necessary, and work to achieve it? I believe we can. But we must first really know what each community wants, and then we can have discussions on how to live happily ever after. We must also be prepared to give and take. Durian Party anyone?
Dr Amir Farid Isahak is a medical specialist who practises holistic, aesthetic and anti-ageing medicine. He is a qigong master and founder of SuperQigong. For further information, e-mail starhealth@thestar.com.my. The views expressed are those of the writer and readers are advised to always consult expert advice before undertaking any changes to their lifestyles. The Star does not give any warranty on accuracy, completeness, functionality, usefulness or other assurances as to the content appearing in this column. The Star disclaims all responsibility for any losses, damage to property or personal injury suffered directly or indirectly from reliance on such information.
For earlier posts read the following:
Ripples from “People Like Us” Part 1
Ripples from “People Like Us” Part 2
Ripples from “People Life Us” – Interlude for Comments
Ripples from “People Like Us” Part 3
I’ve met more than a few people who either have studied under Ray before or know him personally. I’ve read a number of his books, The Soul of Ministry was timely when I needed it and I have a copy of “Theological Foundations For Ministry” edited by Ray which my late uncle Justus Koo gave me before I started serving as a pastor. I was hoping if I had the chance one day whether I could meet him in person. Then I found out on Father’s Day he passed away. Looks like we will one day but not yet …
* * *
by Christian D. Kettler, Friends University
Ray S. Anderson passed away on Father’s Day, June 21, 2009. For many years Professor of Theology and Ministry at Fuller Theological Seminary, Anderson was a theologian who never ceased to be a pastor. Whether you are a clergy person or a lay person, whatever your denomination or Christian heritage may be, Ray Anderson has many exciting, and sometimes provocative, things to say. I speak from experience as a student of Anderson’s, beginning at Fuller Seminary, but extending along many years. While reading almost any of his many books, I am always struck by both a depth of insight and an almost joyful playfulness for the ministry of theology. Theology is ministry itself, a ministry of meditating upon the gospel of the unconditional grace of God in Jesus Christ, but ministry itself is also theology; true ministry, the ministry of God, always precedes and governs theology.
For over thirty years, Ray Anderson has been quietly writing a body of work that is remarkable in its ability to awaken both theology and the church to a theology that actually intersects with the ministry of the church and a view of ministry that dwells in a deep place of reflection. I regret is that I will be unable to replicate the spark of playfulness and intellectual restlessness that characterizes Anderson’s writings, lectures, and sermons. Donald Mackinnon, the noted Cambridge theologian who has received new interest in recent years, spoke of this “nervous, restless quality” even in Anderson’s doctoral dissertation (later published as Historical Transcendence and the Reality of God).
Anderson’s lectures were for many years a refuge of grace for weary students who were bounced back and forth in seminary classes, from studying academic, critical disciplines in one to learning pastoral and ministry skills in another, with little integration of the two. Most of all, in the midst of personal crises, the students found in Anderson’s lectures (and pastoral counsel) grace to help in time of need (Heb 4:16). Unconditional grace is not just a doctrine for Anderson, but the way that he responds to people, even in their weaker moments. For what Anderson means by a theology of ministry is not simply a thin veneer of Bible verses justifying the typical, prosaic ministry program of a congregation. Rather, his theology of ministry is truly incarnational, the Word penetrating deeply into our flesh (Jn 1:14), the flesh of the whole person, involving spiritual, emotional, and physical turmoils. That is where Jesus Christ meets us, and continues to meet us, not in a ministry of our own creation, but in participating in his continuing ministry, God’s ministry.
In recent years Anderson has found more dialogue with Christian psychologists than theologians (perhaps attesting to a fear among theologians of their own humanity?). This has born fruit in a remarkable issue of Edification: Journal of the Society for Christian Psychology, in which Anderson’s article “Toward a Holistic Psychology: Putting All the Pieces in their Proper Place” was followed by several responses by psychologists, philosophers and theologians. This kind of critical interaction, certainly not uncritical, demonstrates the stimulation that Anderson’s thought can provides for all three groups of scholars and at the same time benefits all of those involved in the ministry of Jesus Christ.
For all of Anderson’s commitment to community there is a freedom in his theology to be a maverick, to be oneself and go against the grain. J. G. Hamann and Dag Hammarskjöld are two iconoclasts he likes to quote. Anderson presents an interesting portrait of the maverick theologian in the midst of community; not an easier venture, as his former colleagues and students will attest!
Good theology is not just a display of erudition, as Thomas Torrance told me once. Ray Anderson was not a historical theologian, biblical scholar, or philosopher in the guise of a theologian. Unapologetically, he was a “restless” theologian in service to the church of Jesus Christ. Good theology is being faithful to Jesus Christ and demonstrating that faithfulness with the kind of “nervous, restless quality” of mind that Donald Mackinnon spoke of Anderson’s thought. But Anderson is doubling challenging in that he refuses to allow for a theology that does not partake, like the incarnation, of actual human flesh, like the incarnation; the human flesh of human dilemmas, perplexities, and ambiguity. I remember well Ray Anderson telling a class that one must always be open to a “theology of ambiguity.” How difficult was it for us conservative evangelical students to hear that! But we came to realize that the ambiguity rightly exists in our limited and fallen understandings, not in God.
Anderson’s influences were many and profound, including Edward Carnell, Kierkegaard, the philosopher John Macmurray, Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Thomas Torrance, James Torrance, and the interdisciplinary work of Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death. Ray Anderson was probably the first English-speaking theologian (in his dissertation published in 1975) to recognize the profound theological anthropology and ecclesiology in the work of the Greek Orthodox theologian John Zizioulas. Anderson provides an interesting case study of American evangelicalism at mid-twentieth century when some were trying to provide an intellectual alternative not only to fundamentalism but to the rationalistic theology that was presented by such early Fuller Seminary professors like Carl F. H. Henry. Anderson’s critique of Henry is very telling and insightful. Anderson’s place, and often a controversial place, in the modern history of Fuller Seminary modern American evangelicalism, is very much worthwhile for further study, when he and Geoffrey Bromiley sought to present Karl Barth’s theology to a Fuller evangelicalism often more interested promoting a Christian “worldview” or church growth techniques than to learn from Barth a radical evangelical theology and to build upon it.
When one reads Anderson one will be struck with the sheer humanity of his theology. The incarnation is not just an orthodox or abstract doctrine for him. I have two “Rays” that have been very influential on my life and thought: Ray Anderson and the fantasy writer Ray Bradbury, author of Fahrenheit 451 and The Martian Chronicles. His writings have a profound humanity yet always with a sense of wonder and respect for the divine. In a way, as Ray Bradbury has brought a sense of God in the humanity of fantasy and science fiction writing, Ray Anderson has brought a sense of humanity into God in the field of theology. Anderson’s writings have that same respect for humanity that Bradbury’s do for the divine.
Born on a South Dakota farm, Ray Anderson comes from the soil of the very human and practical endeavor of the farmer and transplants that humanity into the struggles of American evangelicalism as a pastor and student and teacher at Fuller Theological Seminary. While a young farmer himself, Anderson listened to one of the most successful of the early radio evangelists, Charles E. Fuller, and his radio program, “The Old Fashioned Revival Hour.” From then, Anderson and his family travelled to Pasadena, California to enroll in Fuller’s relatively new theological seminary. The young Anderson found a form of the traditional American revivalistic tradition that had become preoccupied with correcting its intellectual and cultural deficiencies, now calling itself, “evangelicalism.” These sons (at that time almost exclusively male) of evangelists sought to avoid the parochialism and obscurantism of their fundamentalist forebears while holding to fast to what they perceived to be the eternal faith. The influence of Edward J. Carnell, a restless, iconoclastic, and troubled evangelical mind and professor at Fuller Seminary, was a great stimulation to the young farmer turned seminary student to move beyond simply regurgitating the new “evangelicalism.”
Planting a new Evangelical Free Church congregation in Covina, California exposed Anderson to the very real experience of a young pastor. “Restless” is the word that seems to have continued to characterize Ray Anderson in his early days in pastoral ministry. During this time of living with the raw realities of a congregation and the stereotypical expectations of a “reverend,” Anderson found himself jotting down short “musings” as he would later call them, a theological notebook of the daring of faith that sought to think beyond the stereotypes of ministry and theology. Published much later as Soulprints (1996), this theology in the midst of ministry will be hashed out in the context of the increasingly alienated culture of the 1960s. The result was a ministry that sought consciously to be incarnational, less concerned with success than with human beings trapped in an alienating world.
Mid-life took Anderson to Scotland for a Ph.D. in theology at the University of Edinburgh under the noted theologian Thomas F. Torrance. Torrance, a student of Karl Barth’s, provided for Anderson a theology that would put words to what he had become to experience in Covina, an incarnational ministry that drove one to ask new questions of God. The result was his doctoral dissertation, Historical Transcendence and the Reality of God, published in 1975. Borrowing deeply from Dietrich Bonhoeffer and John Macmurray, Anderson sought to orientate the doctrine of God in an increasingly skeptical age to a view of transcendence that is not “other-worldly,” but based on the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ. A strikingly original ecclesiology proceeded from this, Anderson’s first major theological work.
After a short time teaching at Westmont College in California, Ray Anderson joined the faculty of Fuller Theological Seminary in 1976. As theological mentor for Fuller Seminary’s growing Doctor of Ministry program, Anderson assembled the massive anthropology, Theological Foundations for Ministry (1979). Not content with simply gathering a plethora of competing theologies for the student to be befuddled by, Anderson presented a coherent theology base on the Trinity and the incarnation, including generous selections from Barth, Bonhoeffer, Thomas and James Torrance, and others including the most ecclesiologically dynamic sections of Historical Transcendence and the Reality of God. Of special note is the essay by Anderson, “A Theology of Ministry,” in which he lays out the significance of ministry preceding and governing theology, not the opposite, based on an incarnational theology in which God is “on both sides” of both revelation and reconciliation. Reconciliation, like all of God’s ministry, is not to be left up to us! Such an anthology signaled to many that a new way of integrating theology and ministry was being proposed that did not simply try to find a lowest common denominator in ethical values or pastoral practice, but was based on the richness of the triune life of God revealed in Jesus Christ. This was a different kind of evangelical theology than the apologetics-driven heritage of the early Fuller Seminary, but one which was just as loyal to the ancient faith in the Trinity and the incarnation. Yet it was refreshingly free to acknowledge not just that Jesus Christ was God, but that God actually assumed human flesh, so an incarnational theology and ministry is not afraid but embraces the human, as messy as that might often be in the realities of ministry.
The incarnational imperative for the humanization of the world (including the church!) drove Anderson increasingly into questions of a theological anthropology. Questions of theological anthropology had begun to intrigue Anderson when he observed how little theological basis there exists with some colleagues at Westmont, whom otherwise possessed a strong, personally pious theology, yet seemed often to offer little integration with their academic disciplines. His pious colleagues seemed to be operating with more of a philosophical, non-theological anthropology than one that was rooted in the incarnation. The fruit of Anderson’s thinking came in 1982 with the publication of On Being Human: Essays in Theological Anthropology. I don’t think that Karl Barth’s profound writings on the doctrine of humanity had ever been mined so thoroughly in light of pastoral and ministry practice. Yet Anderson remained certainly his own man. As a seminarian at the time, I remember vividly the excitement of Anderson’s terse yet provocative prose, bursting with genuine theological and ministerial potential. Not easy to digest for some, but for many, Anderson’s continuing “nervous, restless quality” was the stimulation to believe in the continued healing power of a trinitarian-incarnational theology. Many a Fuller Seminary student can attest to practically stumbling into a Ray Anderson class week upon week, beaten up by life’s events, desperately seeking the grace of God … and finding it in Ray’s provocative and faithful witness to Jesus Christ.
On Being Human only served to further ignite Anderson’s creative theological juices, particularly in the implications of a theological anthropology. Anderson’s theological anthropology is profoundly relational, including male and female relationships and the family, so it was natural that On Being Family: A Social Theology of the Family, written with the family sociologist Dennis B. Guernsey, and the fruit of their team-taught course at Fuller, “Theology and Ecology of the Family,” was published in 1984. The provocative and pastoral thinking on death and dying in On Being Human led to Theology, Death and Dying in 1982. Anderson was fond of mischievously suggesting that he wanted the book to be entitled, On Being Dead, in order to harmonize with On Being Human and On Being Family, and perhaps include ethics and be called, On Being Good and Dead!
Anderson integrative interests continued to be broad and sweeping with the volume on leadership, Minding God’s Business, in 1982 and one on counseling, Christians Who Counsel, in 1990. No shoddy thinking here, Anderson demonstrated his theological bravery is taking on such “nuts and bolts” issues of ministry.
In 1991, Anderson wrote his first “popular” book, but one that is truly profound in its thinking: The Gospel According to Judas: Is There a Limit to God’s Forgiveness? Featuring an imaginary conversation between Jesus and Judas after Judas’s death, this book has deeply affected and challenged many in how shallow our view of grace and forgiveness really is. Still, many have been offended, even with the later version, Judas and Jesus: Amazing Grace for the Wounded Soul (2005). These little books still continue to have a great ministry, including, Anderson tells, even with a convicted murderer serving life in prison. Concern for the individual desperately needing the grace of God is evident many of Anderson’s later books such as, Don’t Give Up On Me – I’m Not Finished Yet! Putting the Finishing Touches on the Person You Want to Be (1994), its more technical cousin, Self-Care: A Theology of Personal Empowerment and Spiritual Healing, Living the Spiritually Balanced Life: Acquiring the Virtues You Admire (1998), Everything That Make Me Happy I Learned When I Grew Up (1995), Unspoken Wisdom: Truths My Father Taught Me (1995), Exploration Into God: Sermonic Meditations on the Book of Ecclesiastes (2006), and The Seasons of Hope: Empowering Faith Through the Practice of Hope (2008).
The church, the corporate, communal and relational nature of the Christian life and the presence of Christ today, however, was never far from Anderson’s thought and pen. Ministry on the Fireline: A Practical Theology for an Empowered Church (1993) challenged the need for evangelical theology which emphasizes a “Word” theology to embrace as well a “Spirit” or “Pentecostal” theology of the presence of the Holy Spirit in mission. Such concerns continued with what the summary of decades of Ray Anderson’s thinking on a theology of ministry based on a trinitarian-incarnational theology: The Soul of Ministry: Forming Leaders for God’s People (1997). Wide-ranging concerns from homosexuality to “The Humanity of God in the Soul of the City” are developed in light of a trinitarian model of practical theology in The Shape of Practical Theology: Empowering Ministry with Theological Praxis. Anderson’s disgust in the lack of practical ecclesiology in much of modern systematic theology reflects his desire to leave “systematic theology” behind for the sake of “practical theology.” This direction from systematic to practical theology is spelled out more in detail theologically in The Soul of God: A Theological Memoir (2004).
Anderson continued to provoke his evangelical roots (and colleagues!) with Dancing with Wolves While Feeding the Sheep: The Musings of a Maverick Theologian (2001) with such chapters as, “Was Jesus an Evangelical?”(the “wolves” are his faculty colleagues!). One of Anderson’s most challenging proposals is his practical theology for secular caregivers found in Spiritual Caregiving as Secular Sacrament: A Practical Theology for Professional Caregivers (2003).There are many treasures of ideas in all of these books, ideas that have much appreciated by colleagues and students alike through the years. Much critical thinking stimulated by Ray Anderson’s theology can be found in the two Festschriften edited in honor of Ray: Incarnational Ministry: The Presence of Christ in Church, Society, and Family: Essays in Honor of Ray S. Anderson (eds. Christian D. Kettler and Todd H. Speidell) (1990), including essays by Thomas Torrance, James Torrance, Geoffrey Bromiley, Colin Gunton, Alan Lewis, and Lewis Smedes (with a telling introduction by the president of Fuller Seminary, David Allan Hubbard and a bibliography through 1990) and On Being Christian … and Human: Essays in Celebration of Ray S. Anderson (ed. Todd H. Speidell) (2002), which includes contributions by many of Ray’s former students, including LeRon Shults and Willie Jennings and an essay on “Community in the Life and Theology of Ray Anderson” by Daniel Price (along with a bibliography through 2002). Also included are the case studies used by Anderson for many years in his theology sequence of courses.
Karl Barth, in the lectures he gave during his tour of the United States late in his life, remarks that what he desires for Americans is to be freed for a “theology of freedom.” In a way, I think Ray Anderson is the purest example of an answer to Barth’s desire for America: A theologian who has always been first of all a pastor of a concrete, local church, never deserting the church for the rarified air of seclusion in the academy, never deserting particular, actual people for abstract values or virtues. For most of Anderson’s over twenty years of seminary teaching he was preaching every week at the “high of the low churches,” Harbour Fellowship. Anderson builds upon Barth’s revolution but is distinctly a theologian for the church in the U.S. today. Much is made today of a need for a theology of “globalization” and “postmodernism” and certainly the church and the gospel are for the world. But Anderson’s roots in a South Dakota farm and an evangelical parish become real in a theology that takes very seriously actual human beings and concrete situations in the church, not to be swallowed up by what can become abstract ideals and causes, from orthodoxy to social justice.
I have just finished a work that is to be a little introduction to Anderson’s work entitled, Reading Ray S. Anderson: Theology as Ministry, Ministry as Theology. I am pleased that Ray was able to read the preface and seemed happy (and embarrassed!) by the book. “Theology as Ministry” particularly relates to the doctrines of God and theological anthropology. “Ministry as Theology” suggests the profound integration of a theology praxis to the church in its ministry and mission. But the dialectical aspect of “Theology as Ministry, Ministry as Theology” should not be forgotten. There is one ministry of God, Anderson contends, the ministry of Jesus Christ. Theology only seeks to serve that ministry. Anderson has been well known for his uses of cases studies in exploring the implications of theology in ministry. (The actual cases he uses for examinations in his courses are found in the second Festschrift, On Being Christian … and Human, edited by Todd Speidell). So at the end of each chapter I have included a case that which “fleshes out” the implications of that chapter for ministry. I think you’ll find that the writings of Ray Anderson will be an incredible stimulation to your participation in the ministry of Jesus Christ.
* * *
This looks interesting. Any effort to encourage building bridges is a good effort. While this is jointly organized by Three Muslim NGOs, it’s open to all.
Intercultural Dialogue Using Theory of Constrain
Speaker:
Zana Borisavljevic
Venue:
The Nomad Offices
Level 8, Pavilion KL
168 Jalan Bukit Bintang, KL
Date:
27 June 2009 (Saturday)
Time:
930AM – 1130AM
Jointly Organized by Muslim Professionals Forum [MPF], Sisters in Islam [SIS] and Islamic Renaissance Front [IRF]
Biography
Zana Borisavljevic is a Holistic Education and Development Consultant with over 20 years’ experience in education. She is currently based in Serbia where she works as the director of an NGO “Education Plus”, an organization offering personal and professional development programs, Parenting Courses and Youth Leadership Programs. She is also one of the founders and directors of the international education program Theory of Constrain [TOC] for Intercultural Dialogue which uses TOC logic tools for enabling dialogue and understanding between different cultures and ethnicities. During the last few years, Zana has been particularly involved in programs aimed at building bridges between young people of different ethnicities in the Balkans.
Don’t take this personally .. Imaginary Inquisition (I mean Interview)
Interviewer: "what is your theological position"?
Crazy Maker: … changing?
Interviewer: are you orthodox?
Crazy Maker: Not eastern
Interviewer: are you a heretic?
Crazy Maker: yes as far as Vipers are concerned! (HT: John the Baptist)
Interviewer: so you are emergent?
Crazy Maker: hmmm …. in relation to science, philosophy, theology or ecclesiology?
Interviewer: So why aren’t you answering the question directly? Make your yes … yes … no … no. if not it’s from the …
Crazy Maker: The Kingdom of God is like …
Interviewer: (pause)
Crazy Maker: Let me ask the question back … to you the interviewer
what is your economic position?
are you a pure capitalist?
so you are a communist?
I mean socialist?
Interviewer: (puzzled look)
me: okay…. are you making poverty history?
Interviewer: I’m talking about the matters of God here!
me: No …. ?
Interviewer:not about economics
Crazy Maker: okay …
go and sell all your wealth, give it to the poor (at least a substantial amount) and then come back and talk to me
Looks like there’s a growing momentum for more “conversations” (my preferred term 
) to help create greater awareness on crucial concerns affecting every citizen in Malaysia.
ECUMENICAL SOCIAL FORUM
” HOW MUCH RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IS THERE ?
When? 2.00 – 4.00PM, Saturday, 27TH June 2009
Where? TRINITY METHODIST CHURCH, PETALING JAYA, 6 Jalan 5/37, 46000 Petaling Jaya
Who?
Moderator
Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam
Panelists
Tan Sri Simon Sipaun (Vice Chairman of SUHAKAM)
Dato’ Ti Lian Ker (Chairman of NGO National Bureau MCA)
Mr. Tommy Thomas (Prominent Lawyer)
Mr. K. Shamuga (MCCBCHST Think Tank & Article 11)
What?
Forum Discussion
Summing Up and Closing Remarks
ALL ARE WELCOME!
Contact CCM Secretariat
COUNCIL OF CHURCHES OF MALAYSIA
No.10. Jalan 11/9 46200 Petaling Jaya, Selangor Tel: 03-79567092 Fax: 03-79560353
Email: cchurchm@streamyx.com Website:ccmalaysia.org
Many thanks to Union of Catholic Asian News for making the Indonesian version of their article available. While there are some minor differences, there’s so much similarity between Bahasa Indonesia and Bahasa Malaysia that this translation can add on to the ripples and contribute to those who are reflecting on this in Bahasa Malaysia.
MALAYSIA – Umat Kristen dan Muslim Membahas Isu-Isu Minoritas
2009-6-19 | MS07437.647b | 562 kata Text size
BANGKOK (UCAN) — Lebih dari 100 umat Kristen, Muslim, dan penganut agama-agama lain berkumpul di gereja Lutheran di Malaysia baru-baru ini untuk mendiskusikan isu-isu yang dihadapi kelompok-kelompok minoritas di negeri itu.
Forum Profesional Muslim (MPF, Muslim Professionals Forum) dan Friends in Conversation bersama-sama menyelenggarakan acara bertema “People Like Us: How Arrogance Divides People” (Orang seperti Kita: Betapa Kesombongan Memecah-belah Kita). Friends in Conversation merupakan sebuah kelompok Kristen yang membahas isu-isu sosial, politik, dan ekonomi. Kelompok ini dibentuk 12 Juni di Gereja Lutheran Bangsar di Kuala Lumpur.
Keberhasilan utama acara ini adalah bahwa kaum Muslim, umat Kristen, dan penganut agama-agama lain “benar-benar berkumpul dalam suasana tanpa ancaman dan berinteraksi sebagai sahabat,” kata Pendeta Sivin Kit kepada UCA News. Pendeta dari Gereja Lutheran Bangsar yang menjadi tuan rumah dan memfasilitasi acara itu mencatat bahwa setengah dari 103 peserta adalah kaum Muslim dan sisanya kebanyakan Katolik dan Protestan.
Dia juga memuji para peserta karena saling berinteraksi sebelum dan sesudah acara dua jam itu, dan terutama kaum Muslim yang datang ke sebuah gereja untuk terlibat. Para peserta “berhati-hati agar tidak saling menyerang,” karena bagi kebanyakan peserta, ini merupakan yang pertama kali mereka menghadiri peristiwa seperti itu, katanya.
Menurut Pendeta Kit, Tricia Yeoh, salah satu dari tiga panelis dalam acara itu, mengangkat beberapa isu yang dihadapi kelompok-kelompok minoritas di Malaysia yang berpenduduk mayoritas Muslim. Salah satu isu adalah kompetisi partai-partai politik yang didominasi Muslim untuk memaksakan aganda-agenda Islam di Malaysia.
Aloysius Pinto, seorang peserta Katolik, sependapat. Ia menunjukkan bahwa media dan kelompok-kelompok politis menggunakan isu-isu agama sedemikian rupa sehingga menimbulkan kebingungan.
Yeoh, seorang Kristen yang bekerja di kantor riset menteri utama Negara Bagian Selangor, juga mengangkat isu tentang umat Kristen tidak diijinkan menggunakan kata “Allah” yang mengacu pada Allah.
Di tahun-tahun belakangan ini, mingguan Katolik “Herald” (Bentara), yang menurunkan berita Katolik dalam bahasa Inggris, Melayu, Mandarin, dan Tamil, terlibat dalam sebuah perdebatan dengan pemerintah soal penggunaan kata bahasa Arab “Allah” untuk Allah, dalam seksi bahasa Melayunya.
Pada akhir Mei, Pengadilan Tinggi negeri itu mengumumkan bahwa Gereja Katolik tidak boleh menggunakan kata “Allah” sampai pengadilan membuat keputusan tentang soal itu pada 7 Juli.
Ahmad Farouk Musa, pembicara lain dalam acara itu, membahas perlunya reformasi bagi kaum Muslim. Salah satu pendiri MPF itu menekankan pentingnya penalaran.
Pembicara lain adalah Waleed Aly, seorang pengacara asal Australia dan pemimpin komunitas Muslim, yang menulis buku “People Like Us: How Arrogance Is Dividing Islam and the West” (Orang seperti Kita: Betapa Kesombongan Memecah-belah Islam dan Barat). Dalam acara itu, dia mengatakan bahwa banyak kesalahpahaman tentang Islam dan Muslim di Barat. Dia mengakui adanya kesalahpahaman yang bersifat kultural, namun dia menepis bahwa kaum Muslim mengalami diskriminasi di Barat.
Pendeta Kit, salah satu anggota pendiri Friends in Conversation, mengatakan kepada UCA News melalui telpon bahwa kelompok itu tengah menyiapkan dialog dan percakapan lebih lanjut dengan kelompok-kelompok Muslim. Dalam bulan-bulan mendatang, misalnya, kelompoknya berencana mengadakan sebuah acara bersama dengan Saudari-Saudari dalam Islam (SIS, Sisters in Islam), sebuah kelompok yang berkomitmen menegakkan hak-hak kaum perempuan dalam kerangka Islam.
SIS menjadi perhatian umum belakangan ini ketika PAS (akronim bahasa Melayu untuk All-Malaysia Islamic Party), salah satu dari tiga partai politik dalam koalisi menentang pemerintah federal, menganjurkan agar SIS diselidiki dan dibubarkan jika ditemukan bertentangan dengan ajaran-ajaran Islam.
Malaysia adalah sebuah negara multi-etnis, dan pemerintah menganggap agama sebagai sebuah masalah yang sensitif. Sekitar 60 persen dari 27 juta penduduk Malaysia adalah kaum Muslim etnis Melayu. Sisanya adalah kebanyakan etnis Cina dan India.
Last Thursday, I was surprised to get a call from Bangkok which resulted in the following piece from Union of Catholic Asian News. The experience of the interaction of the phone was very helpful for me personally to recall the experience of the “People Like Us” Forum, and to reflect on it deeper.
The last one week, numerous conversations and reading of other people’s feedback on the event has caused me to engage deeper in thinking about the significance, lessons and possibilities which this “ripple” can bring about in the long term.
One thing is certain, we are already working on another joint event. So, it would be very exciting to see what lies ahead.
MALAYSIA Christians, Muslims discuss minority issues
June 19, 2009 | MS07437.1554 | 566 words
BANGKOK (UCAN) — More than 100 Christians, Muslims and people of other religions gathered at a Lutheran church in Malaysia recently to discuss issues that religious minorities face in the country.
The Muslim Professionals Forum (MPF) and Friends in Conversation jointly organized "People Like Us: How Arrogance Divides People." Friends in Conversation is a Christian group that holds discussions on social, political and economic issues. The forum was held June 12 at Bangsar Lutheran Church in Kuala Lumpur.
From left: Tricia Yeoh, Waleed Aly, Reverend
Sivin Kit and Ahmad Farouk Musa at the forum
(Photo by Ben Ong, courtesy of Reverend Sivin Kit)The main achievement of the forum was that Muslims, Christians and others "actually came together in a non-threatening environment and interacted as friends," Reverend Sivin Kit told UCA News. The pastor of Bangsar Lutheran Church, who hosted and facilitated the event, noted that half the 103 participants were Muslims and the others were mostly Catholics and Protestants.
He also commended participants for interacting with one another before and after the two-hour event, and especially the Muslims for coming to a church to participate. Participants "were cautious not to offend each other," since for many it was their first time attending such a forum, he said.
According to Reverend Kit, Tricia Yeoh, one of three panelists at the forum, brought up several issues faced by minorities in Muslim-majority Malaysia. Among them was competition by Muslim-dominated political parties to push an Islamic agenda in the country.
Aloysius Pinto, a Catholic participant, agreed. He pointed out that political groups and media have been using the issue of religion in a way that has led to confusion.
Yeoh, a Christian serving at the research office of the chief minister of Selangor state, also brought up the issue of Christians not being allowed to use the word "Allah" to refer to God.
In recent years, the Catholic weekly "Herald," which reports on Catholic community news in English, Malay, Tamil and Mandarin, has engaged in a dispute with the government on the use of "Allah," the Arabic word for God, in its Malay section.
In late May, the country’s High Court announced that the Catholic Church cannot use "Allah" until the court makes a decision on the matter on July 7.
Ahmad Farouk Musa, another forum speaker, discussed the need for Muslims to reform. An MPF founding member, he stressed the importance of reason.
Christians and Muslims discuss minority
issues at Bangsar Lutheran Church. (Photo
by Ben Ong, courtesy of Reverend Sivin Kit)The other speaker was Waleed Aly, an Australian lawyer and Muslim community leader, who authored the book "People Like Us: How Arrogance Is Dividing Islam and the West." He told the forum that many misconceptions about Islam and Muslims exist in the West. He acknowledged a cultural misunderstanding, but he denied that Muslims were discriminated against in the West.
Reverend Kit, a founding member of Friends in Conversation, told UCA News over the phone that the group is preparing to further engage in dialogue and conversation with Muslim groups. In the next months, for example, it plans a joint forum with Sisters in Islam (SIS), a group committed to promoting women’s rights within the framework of Islam.
SIS came into the limelight recently when PAS (Malay acronym for All-Malaysia Islamic Party), one of the three political parties in the federal opposition coalition, suggested that the group be investigated and outlawed if it was found to have gone against Islamic teachings.
Malaysia is a multiracial country, and the government considers religion a sensitive matter. About 60 per cent of Malaysia’s 27 million people are Muslim Malays. The rest are mostly ethnic Chinese and Indians.
For earlier posts read the following:
Ripples from “People Like Us” Part 1
Ripples from “People Like Us” Part 2
The ripples continue. It’s wonderful to read more reflections on the “People Like Us” Forum.
One clarification for some who might be wondering whether this particular event is promoting Religious Pluralism, i.e. that All religions are actually talking about the same thing and there is essentially no difference in our beliefs. The answer from me is a clear NO because no one was asked to compromise any of their own uniqueness or difference or even truth claims. Of course, as the facilitator I am first to admit this was not the focus of the event which was clearly stated in the promotional flyer.
I believe there is a place and time for us to plunge deeper into those kind of theological conversations, which often is the subject matter of some of the interfaith forums I’ve attended. In this particular forum, we decided to try something different and is to me more modest goal.
But do we really need to be the same in order to live harmoniously together and work towards the common good? Waleed reminded us that night if we are all the same and think alike it’s boring. I would second that.
For me, a key issue I felt shouldn’t be missed is to confront our arrogant postures towards people “unlike” us, and work on developing a humble posture in relationship with people whom we would discover is very much “like” us in many ways, and “unlike” us in other ways. That’s not the problem, the problem is when we start to keep “looking for the speck in the other persons eyes, and forget the log in our own!”
So NO to arrogance, and YES to humility especially through self-examination and introspection. Without that humble posture, any deeper theological discussion becomes more about winning debates rather than the pursuit of truth.
I’ve commented enough for this post.Let’s return back to those who actually there and offered their feedback and take it from there. Starting with a blog post from a Christian.
My Interfaith Dialogue Experience
Once upon a time, as i was facebooking (who doesn’t), I came across this invite from a friend to attend this event called “People Like Us: How Arrogance Divides People”. What made this event even more interesting was i was invited by a Malay friend to Church. I was surprised. This made me even more curious to attend the event.
I must confess i was suspicious as to what to expect as this was my first time attending such an event. I have heard of such events failing miserably. Over the years, many people have come back either furious or disappointed because of the sense of nothingness achieved. To make things worse, many friends advised me not to go. Some said i was wasting my time. Some said that these talks were politically motivated. Others said that I should concentrate on other things, etc. (Somehow people seem to be an expert when it comes to advising others) Nevertheless, I chose to attend simply because my conscience asked me to go.
When I reached there, I was so relieved to know that I was welcomed my a familiar face. Someone from my church actually attended the event. The members were friendly towards me. We sat down and waited as many were stuck in the jam. Pr. Sivin advised us to start on our own mini dialogue while waiting… So far so good.
2 major religions, 3 minorities, 1 majority, 2 countries, 1 doctor, 1 reverend, 1 lawyer, 1 research assistant to Selangor’s MB, 3 men and 1 woman. How many people am I talking about? The answer is 4. Such diverse backgrounds together discussing on one title towards one noble perspective. The format was informal and friendly. We were not at a church neither a mosque. We felt we were at home having a family discussion. The whole atmosphere was very cosy.
I realize that deep inside I was selfish. I tend to judge others based on my background. Most of the time, we get this perception of others even before we get to know them. We are insensitive when it comes to others. We don’t bother about the background another. I feel that just because just because I believe that my way the true way to God, I tend to unconsciously treat people differently. I forget to love my neighbour and obey the golden rule.
What happened after the event was even more interesting. For the second time in my life, I’ve actually seen people having fun together regardless race, colour or religion. Everyone was equal. For once, we viewed each other the way God views us, equal. We were chatting with each other (offline) about stuff. The speakers also actually took the extra mile to stay back and interact with the others who came. Many stayed until 11.30pm, one hour after the talk actually ended. It was indeed one of the most memorable moments in my life.
Have you ever wondered how would life be like if everyone treated each other equally? Come to the next Interfaith dialogue.
I’m looking forward for a Christian to call me to a mosque, a Muslin inviting me to a Sikh temple, a Hindu inviting me to church,…the possibilities are endless. I also look to a time where youths and people of different race, colour and religion come together and organise activities together.
A big thank you to the organisers and the host for organising such a wonderful programme.
I recall Khalisah and Nour coming up to me after the event and we had a good bonus conversation on what both of them felt. They did promise to write something and they did. Read on . . . I’m grateful the forum added to their ongoing adventures in Malaysia!
The Mamak Chronicles: Following Dominos Through Malaysia By Khalisah Stevens, Nour Merza
The clichéd Zimbabwean butterfly sets off a hurricane in Des Moines, Iowa. Queen Victoria’s genetic make-up threatens the health of Russia’s last potential tsar. The ghosts of men America trains to fight communism in Afghanistan resurfaced twenty years later in New York. A series of seemingly isolated incidents setting each other off: the domino effect. This first week in Malaysia witnessed a chain of dominos clicking into each other, one by one, from Nour and Khalisah to as far as Khatemi and Ahmedinejad.
But let’s start from the beginning. Months ago, we were looking up internships in Dubai. Khalisah’s uncle told us about an organization he’d volunteered with, called Mercy Malaysia. We applied, and were accepted a few weeks later. We began looking for housing, and then Khalisah’s cousin, Winnie, called. Her roommate had moved out and she had a place for us to stay. This was the beginning of two different chains of events that led us to two equally different experiences in the same weekend.
The first branch of the domino chain led us to a young office mate at MERCY Malaysia, Ashaari. He in turn led us to a talk, entitled People Like Us: How Arrogance Divides People, that was taking place at a Lutheran church. The speakers would be a Tricia Yeoh, a Chinese Christian woman who started her own think tank and has moved on to working for the Chief Minister of Selangor, Farouk Musa, a Malaysian man who is an expert on philology, and Waleed Aly, the author of the book that the title of the talk was based on.
Hardly knowing what to expect, we drove to the house with a sign on the gate that read “The Father’s House” and a group of people with flashlights waved us in. The small house-turned-church was crowded with Malaysians buzzing with excitement. Reverend Sivin Kit took the stage and through his energy and humor he introduced the speakers, who took turns discussing what separates people, whether it being religion, history or culture.
It was refreshing to see Indians, Chinese and Malays nodding along in agreement to some key points of the talk. The speakers pointed to the fear that keeps people from crossing religious and ethnic borders and the stereotypes that bolster these fears, such as women in hijab being closed minded. They also discussed how people of different cultures can live in such close proximity without learning about each other until well into adulthood, if at all. Tricia, for example, grew up near a mosque, and when she was ten she thought that the imam was calling the adhan to the tune of the Christian song, “Gloria,” – so she would sing along to the call to prayer every time she’d hear it. Only much later in her adult life did she come to understand what that call meant. Finally, the speakers stressed the central tenant that was common to all faiths: the Golden Rule. “Do unto others as you would have done unto you,” they concluded, was the only foundation on which any sort of interfaith harmony could be built.
The people in the church who were our age are the first generation of Malaysians to be unfettered by the uncomfortable history of cultural tensions and clashes that have personified the 1960’s and 1970’s, and were keen on bridging the gaps with each other. It was heartening to see that these would be the people who would cross the sensitive barriers and topics that their parents couldn’t and take Malaysia closer to a more equal and just society.
Check the links below to read earlier posts
Ripples from “People Like Us” Part 1
(Above are the shoes and slippers of those who came for the “People like us” forum )
There have been some interesting comment bubbles at Anil Netto’s blog which I thought would be worth reposting here for the benefit of all. Let me pick out some caught my attention.
walski69 on June 17th, 2009 at 2.56pm
Beyond the river of theological difference lies an ocean of similarities. I’ve personally realized this for a long time.
Another realization is that when the differences are continuously brought to the fore, it’s rarely about faith, but more about power.
Katharina Sri (former: Noor Aza Othman) on June 17th, 2009 at 4.19pm
This is brilliant! But the forum must involve hard questions in order to speak and seek the TRUTHS, such as the opression and injustice towards women/girls, gays. non-Islamic communities, converts from Islam etc.. Islam has to be reclaimed back from the deceitful Islamists (an Arabic-led elite class that politicized Islam as a dogmatic idelogy, for the sake of maintaining or constructing dominant racist, sexist and facist power over ordinary Muslim and non-Muslims alike).
In Christianity, Reformation since the 16th. century, as started very bravely by a small priest, Martin Luther (some in the Vatrican tried to have him burnt at stake!), that gave birth to divese interpretation of Christianity, that include Protestantism, has opened the door to a not-to-be-undermined revolution, where previously the absolute power of interpretation of the bible, old & new, was with the male-dominated Pope & Vatican. I suspect that the Vatican originally was the remnant of the elite class from the Roman Empire and hence why it was also, absolutely only allowed in Latin. But the “priesthood of the believers” have allowed all individuals especially ordinary believers from the poor,women and gays, to interpret themselves accordingly to their own being, but a rational being and in diversity, that include in one’s own language. And that’s another great achievement of the Reformation where rationality is compatible with faith, not in competition with each other as what has always been interpreted previously, due to mostly blind faith and the monopoly of such interpretation in the hands of the few elites. By the way, God is not the Earth and humanity’s ‘Nanny’; when Adam wants to be free, God let the world and humanity take their own course; just as the beauty of Christianity, which is based on complete free will, to believe or not and that religion is fundamentally about our personal reltionship with God. Once one chooses to believe, depending on one’s complete free being, only then God is there, for the believers. Further, why shouldn’t I reclaim Christianity from my own interpretation, as allowed by God?
A true Malaysian on June 17th, 2009 at 7.01pm
Sometime many people tend to forget they are just fellow human beings, if emphasis is too much on what faith they belong.
How nice if all of us can put aside our beliefs / religions or have no religion at all, and live together as fellow human beings.
Come to think of this, the existence of religions in this material world is supposed to bring peace, but why conflicts still remain since long long ago?
Whose faults?
Religion or people? or,
Should we have no religion at all?Bob K on June 17th, 2009 at 7.34pm
Diverse ideas and opinions divide. Should we have no diversity at all?
greg on June 17th, 2009 at 11.39pm
Since some claim that the course of problem might be due to religion and other kinds of diversity, they wish to wish them off so that those problems wont arise. Diversity is not the problem here. the problem is solely on the people who misunderstand, misinterpret, lack of tolerance, lack of respect and worst of all claim their deviancy correct and condemn the rest. The reason for diversity is to allow human beings to get to know, understand each other coming to live in harmony. Diversity was created by God (The bible story – tower or Babel, the 12 tribes of Israel etc etc).
Another element that tarnishes the embracement of diversity is fear. Fear of ones own race, religion and culture etc will become extinct due to the presence of other groups which at times do pose a direct threat. Well basically no religion etc etc teaches us to disrespect one another. It is misinterpretations that make people think that way so why put the blame on religion etc etc??
With religion around the world the world is not so a good place what will happen if there is no religion. Well there is no other planet to go to haha. Religion teaches us good values. Thought and followed properly would do good so why remove religion. Culture give us identity of who we are and where we come from, our history, evolution and existence without it we become nobody. We become orphans.
To know ones religion is good to question it but for the reason to learn and enrich ones faith and not to find fault and destroy it. Whoever questions for the wrong reasons eventually will destroy themselves due to their own being. However in interpretation one needs solid study and deep understanding of the particular matter. Any book written 1000 yrs ago cannot be interpreted using current human mentality, understanding and way of life. The interpretation would not be accurate therefor we ought to follow people or organizations who have come up with proper interpretation for it, since those interpretations are a result of massive ongoing theological, philosophical studies carried out by experts who spent yrs and some their lives doing just that. Since it is ongoing therefore changes have taken place and will take place as time suits and thus we ought to be patient.
With our current human lacking in interpretation such interpretations can become deviant. One is like making a God of one own liking. God is not of ones own liking. If one makes a God of such then one is just creating another religion or sect. However some will find good (which is, uhmm goodlah) and some would not a cause trouble.
Sometimes when we disagree on something instead of causing trouble one should try to understand, discourse and have dialogues to fix things up. Unfortunately currently no one does that.
By the way no diversity is like having no color in the existence of life. Well for me got to places which have no diversity : heaven and hell hahahaha.
Andrew I on June 18th, 2009 at 3.22am
Imagine there’s no religion.
John Lennon put into music what most of us feel. How do you trust God’s words with man?
It’s not my faith in God that is in question.
For those who have missed the earlier posts, here’s part one and part two. We’re still sorting out the MP3s and video clips. Thanks for your patience.