As for a specifically Malaysian discussion, keeping multiple perspectives in mind is one difficult task. I try by not having a “divisive” mindset even though there is place for “distinguishing” the differences.

In short, as alluded in your comment - a divisive attitude must be repented of while differences need not be feared. “Labels” must be held on to “loosely” (recognizing its limits and yet liberating us to dialogue freely - with humility and a tinge of humor?).

Sure we need to walk our talk … a talk only posture is perhaps like most activist rightly says is a waste of time. But while considering our walk, we need to talk because (1) we’ve been a little too busy and may have forgotten the people walking with us, (2) It’s good to double check with our walking companions whether the direction we are going is right (3) The talks allow for relationships to grow too.

I noticed references made about the Malaysian Church .. and I wonder, how often do we think of our work locally as Malaysian. Most of the time we refer to our manifestations as the English churches, Chinese churches, Tamil churches, OA churches et al. Could this unconscious divisive attitude be one of the reasons why we feel so hobbled sometimes?

One thing I couldn’t help noticing was how Sivin tends to use the term “Chinese” in contrast to the other participants preference for the term “Asian”. Perhaps we Malaysians are more bound by our ethno-centricity than we would like to?