Sivin Kit’s Garden

Archive for the ‘Books’ Category

Some timely words for everyone of us ..

What a joy during Advent, my own Christmas gifts to myself which I managed to collect yesterday 8 December. I’m not sure when they arrived. The order was placed on 21 November 2009. So, it’s a pretty nice short about two weeks.

Thanks to my fellow book addict Alwyn Lau who pointed me to “The Book Depository. Free delivery worldwide on all our books.“  Yes, folks, as you can see the FREE DELIVERY part was what drew me in.  So I thought I’d give it a try.

A minor hiccup happened during the ordering process was sorted out within 24hours and a couple of emails.  So, not bad for customer service.

Anyway, the bottom line is the books arrived in good order and in good time. I’m a happy customer.  Not bad for a first date.

It will be interesting to see what are the reactions to Samir Selmanovic’s ideas and his book. I’m looking forward to read them

I’m still reading Changing the Conversation: A third way for congregations and using the book as a point for self-reflection.   The blog posts here slows me down and pulls me back to the chapters I’ve already read which is good.  So, there is a back and forth movement.  I’m already into the chapter “Conversation Four: Who shall lead them?”.  But as far as the reflections here is concerned, I’m still at the introduction I can relate a little to Robinson’s personal story and initial musings.

As I moved into ministry, I continued to imagine the church as a way beyond predictable polarities, beyond stereotypes and smugness that often accompanied them.  This was not always an easy path.  It meant that I emphasized Christian formation among those often preferred activism; on the other hand, it meant that I emphasized cultural engagement to those who tended to see their faith as limited to the personal and familial.  Many people, including those in congregations, like to put others – perhaps especially clergy – in one category or another.  I took Scripture very seriously and was a biblical preacher; but I took social justice very seriously as well.  I believed in prayer to be important and powerful; but I thought that careful cultural analysis was as well.  I wanted to walk about Jesus and about welcoming persons who were gay or lesbian; but I cared about families and what it took to main and sustain families.  I understood the church to be a new family that transcends categories of race, class and gender. (p. 3-4)

It’s becoming harder to describe the kind of ministry I am engaged in or what kind of church BLC is.  Especially when questions posed to me tends to come out from a “predictable polarities” framework. One common one I get is, “Is your church spirit-filled?”

Well, every two Sundays and one Friday per month, we do consume spirits (I mean wine) Sometimes the way the BLC family and friends laugh is like they are drunk or something.  Okay . Just kidding.

I know where the question is coming from, I used to ask the same thing . and behind the questions is the expectation that I if we are Spirit-filled we’d have much prayer for faith healing, loads of speaking in tongues, loud music, intense preaching, excited church members on fire for the Lord, and so on.

Others might ask, “Are you Bible-based?” (as opposed to wishy-washy liberal?) Or there would be comments like, “Oh, you guys are political!” (as opposed to we just pray?) or the “pomo” church (huh? as opposed to believing in absolutes?) What does all this mean? But you see, the fun thing for me is, I know where all these polarities are coming from . we are all products of our own background (or in some cases baggage).  The fact is the whole growth in one’s vocabulary in faith, ministry, mission and social engagement will be different for all of us.

I recall the yearning to move beyond polarities growing increasingly stronger as I finished seminary education (and I say then was when I started to do theology!).  The years of youth ministry and student ministry encounters especially beyond denominational boundaries already laid the foundations on a practical and relational level these polarities won’t work.  And are thoroughly dated.

The challenge was that the literature most Christian in Malaysia are reading do not provide the needed frameworks to break out of that.  Why? It’s simple.  Because we were and still are trapped by many of the polarities superimposed on us or willingly embraced by us from the outside especially the English publishing world.

I saw that too in other language groups.  If it’s primarily Tamil speaking, then some of the battles are imported from India.  If it’s Mandarin or another Chinese dialect group, then it’s the currents in Hong Kong or Taiwan. If it’s Bahasa Malaysia speaking, perhaps influence from Indonesia? Then let’s not forget, the past at least more than 10 years, how much the more renown churches in Singapore have impacted churches and leadership in Malaysia for better or for worse.  History will be our teacher.

I recall, during cultural nights in overseas events or consultations, I’ve always found it hard to really portray what is “authentically” Malaysian?  I’m a Malaysian, no doubt about that, I’m supposed to be ethnically Chinese (well perhaps more percent than my father and grandfather), I’m a Christian (that’s clear), but then we don’t have a distinctly strong “national identity”. Or maybe the “identity” is a work in progress working towards becoming one which can hold paradoxes and move beyond polarities?

Applied to being a Christian, and serving as a pastor-leader in the Malaysian context, I do sincerely think “holding paradoxes and moving beyond polarities” is perhaps a second nature for some of us intuitively.  And what we need to do is to make it clearer, and more visible, so we can name what we are thinking and doing, or reframe all our efforts in ways which truly reflects the reality and carves possibilities for the future. As a minority less that 12% of the population, I think we have no choice.  It’s urgent.  Then within the 12% so many of us are already tempted to stay stuck in former ways. So, it’s even less people who might see this as critical.

The Christian Federation of Malaysia will be having it’s National Christian Conference on the 28-29 May.  This is a more institutional driven event where representatives  from the Roman Catholic Church, Council of Churches of Malaysia, and the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship will come together.   I fully am aware of the possibilities and limitations of such a gathering, but it’s something concrete to work on.

On a more academic level, participation in the drafting of a response for A Common Word and the Edinburgh 2010 Study Process for ASEAN and Sri Lanka with the theme “”Mission as Reconciliation in Pluralistic Contexts” would be episodes I’m looking forward to for expanding my horizons and deepening my own quest thus far. Of course, a burning question I always thrown in especially when I’m engaged in more macro big picture kind of events, “What does all this mean for the local congregation?”

That question will merge with the ones below. Because we truly living in a both local and global context.  And that is my governing center for theological, church and mission engagement. Opps, I noticed I’m getting ahead of myself here. 

Is a third way possible?  Is there a way beyond the polarized alternatives of either liberal or conservative. left or right, red or blue, traditional or contemporary, praise or classical?  And if it is possible, is that third way merely a compromise between extremes, a muddle in the middle, or is it a vital center and a new framing of the conversations? (p. 4-5)

It was encouraging to read some of the proposals mentioned by Robinson in the book.  Because apart from Michael Foss, I’ve read all the authors at some point the last 9 years!

In congregations such as these. says (Diana Butler) Bass says, “church is the sacred space where saints and sinners gather to hear God’s word, engage in practices of prayer and service, and be transformed  through participation.  There is no spiritual test to come in, no intellectual position to which one must agree.  This is the vision of the comprehensive church: a congregation not torn apart asunder by the riptides of cultural extremism but a place where Christians practice frame all of life and, in the words of the old hymn, ‘heal the sin-sick soul’.” (p.5)

I love the word and . Knowing where to place it is so critical.

(Darrel) Guder’s  missional church cannot be reduced to either liberal or conservative, left or right; it is something new.  It is a congregation that relates to its community and setting while taking Christian formation seriously.  “The word mission  means ’sending’ and the church is the primary way in which God’s sending is happening, “says Guder. “Mission no longer begins when we cross a culture or national boundary.” Mission happens today in the context of a Western society that is “radically secularized.” (p. 5)

I would like to add Mission happens today in the context of a society that is already “radically pluralized” and in some situation like Malaysia increasingly “Islamized” (especially when religion is used to serve political ends!) and perhaps getting more polarized again (unless we arrest the situation together!)?

Michael Foss, a Lutheran pastor, speaks of developing “culture of discipleship” in congregations as a paradigm shift from a “culture of membership” to a “culture of discipleship.” (p. 6)

I confess, I’m still wrestling intensely how this can work out with grace and gratitude at the center, combined with urgency and discipline, and yet without slipping back into any form of rigid legalism or moralism.

“Increasing numbers of us have been talking,” says (Brian) McLaren, “about what a post-conservative, post-liberal convergence would look like in the American church.  We have become convinced that this convergence would entail the rediscovery of the local church as a missional, disciple-making community engaged in transformative spiritual practices.” Elsewhere McLaren writes of what he calls “generous orthodoxy,” another attempt to reach for a new language as well as a new reality.  The term “generous orthodoxy” suggests a faith and church with a strong center and yet minds and hearts open to the other. (p. 6)

I think this development in the American church is a good and needed one.  Personally, I’m of the view that those of us in the more post-colonial context would find it easier to engage in the wider conversation with those whom Brian is talking about.  At least, that is the way I feel. But the polarizing forces are very strong in my limited observation of the English speaking world especially in the USA context.  And then, it gets consciously or unconsciously exported to us here again.

Well, in good Malaysian English, “What to do-LAH?”  So, it’s going to be there. The focus and responsibility is still ours in how we will respond. These are my baby steps offered for those who are interested to eavesdrop.

I’ve always loved the word “conversation”.  I prefer it over other words like “dialogue” or “movement” (depending on which end of the spectrum one is in whether activism or quietism or whatever pole one chooses.

Happy Birthday Bangsar Lutheran Church! It’s fascinating after all these years, I find myself returning to the basic questions and ongoing reflections that landed me here in the first place.

Someone asked me the other day, “Do you think a lot?” Well, I guess I do. But the thinking and the doing – the reflection and action process is not far from each other.  It’s more like a unending spiral which is ongoing. Apart from my own personal journal, this blog has served the purpose of documenting some of the results of those reflections or simply the process of asking fresh questions again (and again . and again).

I stumbled on this book by Anthony B. Robinson the other day. Changing the conversation: a third way for congregations doesn’t come across with an impressive cover or a hip presentation, but somehow the words, “changing”, “conversation”, “third way” leaped out for me.

I’ve never managed to do a series of blog posts through a book.  But as a Birthday present to Bangsar Lutheran Church, I would give it a try . ok! It’s more than a try, it’s training myself to walk through a book and sharing my reflections with others based on my own conversation with the author of the book. This has been my practice for years, i.e. seeing reading a book more like a conversation with the author over a mere acquisition of skill or knowledge.

So here goes.

Changing the culture of organizations, groups, and institutions –  and even societies – is about changing the conversation.   Those  leading change use new language (or rediscover older language), introduce different topics, formulate new agendas, and offer alternative ways of framing issues and situations.  One might understand the Christian faith itself as, in important ways, an ongoing effort at changing the conversation and thus changing the way we understand our lives and the way we live in the world. (p.1)

I recall my first attempt in this was in my wrestling with the whole “baptism in the Holy Spirit” and “speaking in tongues” piece in my journey.  I was never comfortable with the term even as a teenager who experienced the phenomena and speak in tongues(perhaps the Lutheran DNA was stronger than I thought).  I was also never sold on the idea that everyone must speak in tongues whether as an initial sign or a symbol of spiritual advancement. And yet, I did not and still do not deny the powerful experience this was for me personally, and the helpfulness of the spiritual language during a phase of my own spiritual walk.

It was John Wimber and authors linked with the Vineyard movement which provided some new way of “framing” the experience, and reading some Lutheran Charismatics which helped me out. In a way, I wonder whether that small step itself was already an experiment in learning to use new language in one’s faith journey?

Another highlight was of course my three favorite courses in Seminari Theoloji Malaysia, i.e. Church History, Christian Theology and Christian Spirituality (I’d throw in Christian education too as a bonus!). Apart of introducing me to the how wide and deep our Christian heritage at its best was, it was fascinating to discover how those who have gone before us have understood and practiced what it means to follow Jesus in their time and age. This was when I began to understand what words like “Ecumenical”, “Evangelical”, “Catholic”, “Pentecostal”, “Charismatic” means in their historical context, and also my horizons on what are the nuances for today.  Of course, most of us in Malaysia are more muddled when it comes to these terms, and some might even feel what’s the point of knowing all this.  But for me, it expanded my vocabulary  and in a strange way, I believe made me more open and yet discerning at the same time.

One more which I think moves one more to the future. I believe credit must be give to the “Emergent”/”Emerging” conversation which to me helped to connect the more personal struggles between polarities, as well as theological wrestlings with the church and world realities. Brian McLaren and Todd Hunter were and still are wonderful models whom I’m tremendously grateful for. And the main thing I learnt from them was the importance of stepping back, explore the possibility of reframing the questions before us, and in conversation with others experiment with new ways of working out what we intuitively and imaginatively are talking about.

In Malaysia, the proximity between mainline denominations (of which I’m part of through the Lutheran Church in Malaysia),  Mega-churches, and Independent Charismatic churches as well as those who are under Pentecostal denominations are much closer. In fact, I think the reality is most Christians in Malaysia would fall more under the Evangelical-Charismatic spectrum (for lack of better terminology). The fact that I’m using such language demonstrates how trapped we are by these categories.

But hopefully, as a student of history I’m smart enough to not ignore that reality.  But as one who seeks to move forward, I’m not satisfied with being imprisoned by framing our spiritual journeys, and faith communities, and common witness in this way. Good for understanding, but there must be a better way.

That was at the heart and most central (apart form 101 other factors) to why officially BLC started on April 1, 2000, and on the day Sunday April 2, the small worship gathering started in our living room at No. 4A, Jalan Utara, Petaling Jaya.

Last night, I was asked if I had a choice to go back in time or continue where I am going now, which would I choose?  The answer was obvious, I would never go back even though there were many fond memories, precious lessons, and treasured friendships. It’s never been easy, and there has been substantial grief as well in the process of taking baby steps forward. In short, the experience of the promise of freedom is mixed with heartfelt pain. Even the experience of the lows are part and parcel of what changing the conversation involves. Moving towards a third way can be lonely at times. 

But one is never really alone.

I’m looking forward to read the book. I recall using a quote by Skye Jethani in an article I wrote entitled I Shop Therefore I Am: Consumerism and Its Impact on Christian Life and Ministry  for “Church & Society in Asia Today” – A Periodical concerned with Christian Ministry and Mission in Asia Today.

“My concern is not materialism, strictly speaking, or even the consumption of goods-as contingent beings, we must consume resources to survive. The problem is not consuming to live, but living to consume.”

The opening by Skye on Van Gogh was a great introduction. There’s been a lot of criticism in relation to “Consumer” mindsets on leaders of churches.  Jason Clark is one of the few who daringly has been alerting us about how it has infiltrated those whom are over reacting against so called “institutional” church forms.

I get the sense that underlying many decisions  and conversations Christians make today, after the layers of theological sophistication, or personal rationalizing, there is likely a dose of “consumer” Christianity lurking behind the scenes.  Even if it’s wrong to generalize, but then again, experience tells us this is a big elephant in the room.

I’ve always felt drawn to Parker Palmer’s writings. A recent email asking for recommendations for books on Vocation, Calling, and Discerning the steps one should  take in the future.

So I found myself coming back to this topic, and to this book. Here’s an excerpt On the importance of listening deeply to find your true vocation.

I’m still at page 17, but so far I’ve already come across treasures of wisdom and insight.

“Vocation does not come from willfulness.  It comes from listening.  I must listen to my life and try to understand what it is truly about – quite apart from what I would like it to be about – or my life will never represent anything real in the world, no matter how earnest my intentions.” (p. 4)

Last year, I sent out an email asking for some trusted individuals to give me some feedback on what they think I do best.  I found their answers very affirming, and most helpful.  It was part of my own quest to listen.

As the year started, I found myself plunged into a number of unexpected scenarios and activities.  In many ways, I wonder whether the unexpected intrusion helped reinforce some of the themes raised in the earlier email replies.  And yet, the temptation of being distracted away from my primary concerns was also real.  So, here I sit engaging in the process of listening again.

“Vocation does not mean a goal that I pursue.  It means a calling that I hear.  Before I can tell my life what I want to do with it, I must listen to my life telling me who I am.  I must listen for the truths and values of the heart of my own identity, not the standards by which I must live –  but the standards by which I cannot help but live if I am living my own life.” (p. 5-6)

One of the tools I’ve been using for perspective on myself is a simple timeline.  The time line from birth till today is sketched with highs and lows, significant people and events, major milestones and some mistakes, etc.  It helps me not only listen to my own life, but also visualize the whole journey thus far.  Looks like I need to do an updated version as I approach 40!

“. . .  if I am to let my life speak things I want to hear, things I would gladly tell others, I must also let it speak things I do not want to hear and would never tell anyone else!  My life is not only about my strengths and virtues; it is also about my liabilities and my limits, my trespasses and my shadow.  An inevitable though often ignored dimension of the quest for “wholeness” is that we must embrace what we dislike or find shameful about ourselves as well as what we are confident and proud of.   That is why the poet says, “ask me mistakes I have made.” (pp. 6-7)

Something triggered lately which opened a can of emotions and shadows.  No one likes to revisit their mistakes. Who would want to have their liabilities and limits smashed in their faces again and again.  Worse if it’s trespasses and that which is shameful.  But, there is grace in Palmer’s words here.  An offer of healing of the wounds generated by all these “mistakes.”

I used the word “redeem” in a number of counseling sessions recently.  This word “redeem” is precisely what I need to hear too.  How is it going to happen is what I’m keeping watch now.

“The soul speaks its truth only under quiet inviting, and trustworthy conditions.” (p. 7)

It’s a gift when it happens.  It’s pure grace! And it’s great when it does.  While it maybe rare, and it might be hard for some of us to find these conditions, but when it’s present it does wonders.

For me, it comes often through people.  When I was younger, I thought being open and vulnerable would invite others to provide such conditions.  Alas!  my naivety needed some major crushing.  But before one lands up being a cynic, there is still hope.  Perhaps, a second naivete.

At least, that’s where I am now.

Furthermore, I’m learning more each day even when one is alone.  This is especially a learning curve for extroverts, solitude allows for these “quiet inviting, and trustworthy conditions” to emerge.  Then one can listen in safety.

“Today I understand vocation quite differently – not as a goal to be achieved but as a gift to be received.  Discovering vocation does not mean scrambling toward some prize just beyond my reach but accepting the treasure of true self I already possess.  Vocation does not come from a voice “out there” calling me to become something I am not.  It comes from a voice “in here” calling me to be the person I was born to be, to fulfill the original selfhood given me by God.” (p. 10)

A gift oriented life is so much more liberating than a goal oriented life!

“We are disabused of original giftedness in the first half of our lives.  Then – if we are awake, aware, and able to admit our loss – we spend the second half trying to recover and reclaim the gift we once possessed.” (p. 12)

I hope I don’t have to wait to long to “get it” And this makes me look at my kids this afternoon in a new light.

“From the beginning, our lives lay down clues to selfhood and vocation, though the clues may be hard to decode.  But trying to interpret them is profoundly worthwhile – especially when we are in our twenties, or thirties or forties, feeling profoundly lost, having wandered, or been dragged, far away from our birthright gifts.” (p. 15)

Well, the young man who wrote me is in his twenties.  I’m still in my thirties heading to forty soon. One of the gifts I’ve had was the chance to be invited to decode the clues of my life at a relatively young age.  I think it helped me avoid some unnecessary knocks, but I still had some necessary ones though.  The exercise of interpreting these clues is one fascinating activity, and with some help very rewarding.

“The deepest vocational question is not “What ought to do with my life?”  It is the more elemental and demanding “Who am I? What is my nature?” (p. 15)

We are having our church AGM tomorrow.  I wonder how this vocational question applies to our church community thus far.  The personal and communal has many areas of convergence when it comes to the big questions on big picture issues.

I hear the “ought” question all the time.  It’s flooding the airwaves of most people’s minds.   And yet, what is needed is the more “elemental and demanding”  question.  Why?  Because it goes deeper, it digs into the longer term more important themes then what’s urgently craving for our attention and gratifying at first sight.

“True vocation joins self and service, as Frederick Buechner asserts when he defines vocation as “the place where your deep gladness meets the world’s deep need.”

Buechner’s definition starts with the self and moves toward the needs of the world: it begins, wisely, where vocation begins –  not in what the world needs (which is everything), but in the nature of the human self, in what brings the self joy, the deep joy of knowing that we are here on earth to be gifts that God created.” (pp. 16-17)

Well, that’s where I stopped before dinner.  And it’s a good place to stop, or to start depending on what I’m referring to.

I like the movement using the words  “starts with” and then “moves toward” . it’s one which I can relate to and I think is most gracious and redemptive.  We always start somewhere, and we’re never in a vacuum.  But where we start does make a difference.

I like the joining of self and service, and the meeting of gladness and need.  It’s so liberating.  It’s good to know, we don’t have to be a grouchy bunch of people.  There’s enough out there already. 

I’m so excited to get my copy today! Check out the Voice website for more information. I love the subtitle, “The Liberating King and the Church” partly because the word “liberating” has been buzzing in my mind for quite a while. The idea of bringing scholars and writers/artists together for this Scripture project is a step forward in making the message and the voice of the Scripture known to more people who might have otherwise missed it And even for those like me to hear the Voice afresh!

Once I dig deeper into my “fresh copy” I hope to share more of the treasures which has emerged .

I got a copy of this book years ago at the Lutheran World Federation HQ, and I scanned through it here and there.  But last week was when I got to dig into some gems.  Sometimes when it comes to books the relevance of it comes more because we are at a different stage of life and thought, and also the fact that the context we are living in has changed tremendously and thus we see some light.

For those who prefer a regular book review go here. Below is an excerpt:

“For Altmann "liberation" provides the same key to understanding Luther’s doctrine of grace as has "acceptance" for so many North Atlantic Christians under the influence of Paul Tillich. He lays out the various approaches to Luther in modern scholarship and critically focuses on their usefulness and limitations. While Luther’s approach to society is not without its difficulties and ambiguities, it also challenges the passivity of Latin American Lutherans and the narrowness of all churches.”

Granted Malaysia and Asia has a different context with Brazil and Latin America, but in relation to North America and Europe I’ve found interacting with them refreshing.

“Throughout Latin American History, the church has been predominantly an instrument of domination.  In this historic hour, can we be an instrument of liberation? . when the church is willing to enter into its prophetic mission, to engage in transformative action, it is drawn into the conflicts that characterize our present situation  both outside and within the churches.” (p. 69)

I wonder whether in our Malaysian context the temptation is more on the church has been predominantly an instrument of being dominated or allowing domination by certain powers out of our fear of being drawn into conflicts.  Especially since we may see ourselves as a minority within a minority without power and limited influence.

Often, we are forced to speak out when we are pushed into a corner due to questions of basic religious freedom and practices. But in the wider scheme of things, there might be a sense of powerlessness or we say our hands are tied. Now, I feel it’s only fair to say I’m speaking out of the experience of the Protestant churches and our Roman Catholic friends have a different track record on voicing their concerns and playing a more prophetic role.

But the ground is moving, and to be fair there is an increasing openness both in clergy and laity to engage the issues.  The overall socio-political climate has changed especially maybe to the surprise of many that the power of the ballot evident in the recent March 8th General elections set into motion changes which we are still monitoring from politicians to the public.

We have a mix of newer church leaders especially in higher positions whom would have a more critical stance when viewing how the church can and should respond.  Of course, many church members have already taken the plunge in terms on personal involvement. But we are still working through a more integrated posture of how each of us in our different spheres of influence may play our role.

“Luther never meant to make the church and the state autonomous entities. It was the responsibility of the political authorities to achieve economic, political, and social reforms that would also affect the church; and it was the task of the church to confront political authorities with God’s will.  The so-called two kingdoms can be distinguished regarding their tasks and their means, but they overlap in time and space.  Furthermore, they have a common foundation – God is the Lord of both – and a common goal – human well being.

Church and state limit and bind each other reciprocally.  The state limits and regulates the church as a social institution (for example, in matters of property); the church proclaims God’s will to the state (for example, criticizing it’s arbitrariness or calling on it to work for social, political, and economic transformation).  Luther himself felt compelled to address the political authorities often.  Whether his economic, political, and social demands that fell into each category – the reformer could never be accused of, and never sought, political neutrality or abstention.” (p. 71)

While this has immediate relevance even for us in Malaysia, the additional challenge is more on the role of other religious communities.  And in our case the role of Islamic Institutions both government linked and non-government organizations. 

From the perspective of the church, we can and must voice out our perspectives whether through the widest body of representation like Christian Federation of Malaysia or even a local church (and everything in between) depending on issues.  I noticed in the case of the recent ISA detentions even different Muslim groups voiced out their positions . While having a unified voice is an ideal, but at times our silence maybe too loud.  The MCCBCHST CALLS FOR THE REPEAL OF THE ISA was sorely need to at least make some needed noise!

It would be good at some point where all religious communities can have the space to provide input in their views on “What God’s will is” proclaimed to the state.  It’s one vision we need to work harder on. But this would require and demand much from each faith community internally and our relations externally with “others.”

But as we work on that, the ruling government and the loyal opposition needs to be kept in check less they use religion for their own political mileage.  I’m not naive to think that this temptation is not ever present.  But it’s one reality we will need to face as we cross different bridges coming our way.

Altmann highlights an interesting point clarifying that Luther was no doormat theologian.  This is shown in Luther’s 1530 interpretation of Psalm 82.

“According to Luther, this is a political psalm.  This first verse describes God as “standing up",” that is, as a judge in the midst of the congregation, to judge the "gods",” that is the political authorities, the princes.  The judgment of them takes place from within the congregation; that is, the church transmits the judgment of the Word of God concerning political authorities.” (p. 79)

There are moments where one does get the impression politicians in power do operate in a “god-like” manner.  Notice, I didn’t say “godly” manner! There seems to be an air about them in the decisions they make, and no matter how much noise is shouted from the ground, they do not appear to be listening.  In fact, more than once ordinary folk and even informed citizens are talked down upon as mere pawns in the political game.

Perhaps in Luther’s time, the Church even in it’s early days of reformation wasn’t as marginalized as today whether by secularism or in our case in Malaysia as a minority faith community.  But then I wonder is there a place for the Church is “transmit the judgment of the Word of God” and what would it sound like and look like?

“Luther understands 82:2-4 as a description of the political office.  Each ruler should have these verses written “in his room, over his bed, at his desk, and also on his clothes.” Luther distinguishes three tasks of a ruler: (1) to guarantee the free, critical, and prophetic preaching of the gospel; (2) to defend justice and the rights of the weak and abandoned; and (3) to guarantee the order, peace, and protection of the poor.” (p. 79)

All three areas highlighted above draws us to consider the role of the government in terms of religious freedom, the judiciary, good governance and welfare of all (especially the poor).  These are the hot topics we face daily depending on which hot button is pushed by any particular episode.

In our 21st century post-colonial developing country sophistication, and after 50years of Independence we are still caught in the whirlpool of these issues in Malaysia.  In parliament yesterday, a “I’m a Muslim first, a Malaysian second” member of parliament showed how much work we need to do in the mindsets of even the so called “educated.” Questions still abound in the recent appointment of the Chief Justice of Malaysia and many are wondering what has happened to the so called “Judicial reforms” promised. The use of the Internal security act on powerless individuals and the arrest of a child sows seeds of doubt “the guarantee of order, peace and protection of the poor”.

It’s strange how words written hundreds of years ago by a German Augustinian monk turned reformer of the church and I would add ripples which reformed even society has so much relevance in a south east Asian young postcolonial nation. I admit, there is a certain simplistic connection I’m drawing but then again this is an exercise in creative critical thinking .

“Luther sets the true preacher, who does not defend his own interests and who does not compromise himself for fear of personal consequences or the persecution he may have to suffer, “So then, this first verse, ” Luther writes,

. teaches us that to rebuke rulers is not seditious, provided it is done in the way here described: namely, by the office to which God has committed that duty, and through God’s Word, spoken publically, boldly, and honestly.  To rebuke rulers in this way is, on the contrary, a praiseworthy, noble, and rare virtue, and a particularly great service to God, as the Psalm here proves.” (p. 80)

Of course, Luther during his time has not come across the various laws and acts which deals with defamation and sedition in Malaysia!!! But that does not wipe out the deeper challenge he brings with his exposition of Psalm 82, and once again reminds the Church and her leaders the public nature of our faith and message.  In a climate of much fear and distrust, we are confronted with what are we going to do?  How shall we stand up and speak up?  Not just for ourselves and our interests but for the interests of others . Easier said than done? Sure, but if that’s the excuse for being indifferent and apathetic then we seriously need to pause and reexamine ourselves.

After the pause, may we draw courage from Luther’s example in life and his radical attempts to work things through in his time, to act rightly and be empowered as a faith community to think and work together to play our part in inviting others to have a foretaste of the “Shalom” promised to us from the future. We won’t get the full course yet, but a preview tasting is most welcome.

There are times especially in crazy times like this in Malaysia, one reads and reflects on a theme by a timely book.  Schreiter’s book on Reconciliation does that for me.  I’m still dwelling on a number of the insights raised from it, and in some cases haunted by what I’ve discovered.

Here’s a book review for those who might find my thoughts scattered and unscholarly What’s coming up is the stuff which resonates with me right now. By the way, I confess that it’s been quite a while since I posted up the books I’m reading.  So, it’s good to make a come back.

“Reconciliation is an intensely sought but elusive goal.  Part of the difficulty is the sheer enormity of the task, so great that it seems well-nigh unachievable.  For it is not only a matter of healing memories and receiving forgiveness, it is also about changing the structures in society that provoked, promoted, and sustained violence.  Reconciliation is also elusive because people sometimes seek the wrong things from the wrong people at the wrong time. . Our impatience at getting beyond the sometimes unbearable burdens of the past may actually impede any possible reconciliation process as much as support it.” (pp. 1-2)

One of the first reminders I got from dwelling in Schreiter’s thoughts is how surface our definitions of Reconciliation is, and how shallow our approaches towards it’s outworking are.  When our understanding of Reconciliation is reduced to a handshake or a simple saying sorry without the necessary changes and hard work which accompanies it, we are not dealing with the root of the matter.

Most of the time, in our ignorance or blind spots, we fail to confront the structures which created the conditions for animosity between people, fragmentation and even violence in society.  So, even when we have some level of success individually in terms of healing and forgiveness, we are then sucked back into the vicious cycle of lies, deception and pain all over again before deeper healing and wholeness takes place.  This is especially true when we take a wider social and communal perspective.

Perhaps, like in many things, we are too much in a hurry . or we too are in denial.

That’s why Schreiter’s preliminary clarifications on what Reconciliation is not, helped clear my head a little bit more.

“To trivialize and ignore memory is to trivialize and ignore human identity, and to trivialize and to ignore human identity is to trivialize and ignore human dignity.  That is why reconciliation as a hasty peace is actually the opposite of reconciliation.  BY forgetting the suffering, the victim is forgotten and the causes of suffering are never uncovered and confronted.” (p.19)

It’s painful to hear the stories.  It’s hard to swallow when we only seem to crash into so called “failed” attempts in dealing with suffering and evil. It’s getting our hands dirty again and again in digging up the causes we wish were not there, but are nonetheless staring us in the face.

“. liberation is not an alternative to reconciliation; it is the prerequisite for it.  Thus, we do not call for reconciliation instead of liberation; we call for liberation in order to bring about reconciliation.  Not liberation or reconciliation.  Rather, no reconciliation without liberation. Reconciliation can only come about if the nature of the violence perpetrated is acknowledged, and its conditions for continuing or reappearing are removed.  Liberation in not just liberation from the violent situation, but also liberation from the structures and processes that permit and promote violence.  To choose reconciliation as an alternative to liberation does not acknowledge the deeply conflictive realities that create the chasms that reconciliation  hopes to bridge.  It also presumes that violence is quickly and easily overcome.” (p. 22)

Okay.  Confession time.  The paragraph above has been and still is haunting me.  As a follower of Jesus, and a pastor, I’m bias towards all things related to reconciliation. And the picture is usually one of gentleness, and humility, and bordering a kind of softness which is more like “nice-ness”. But Schreiter’s words cut through to me, and totally disarmed my naivety!

What is said above, not only applies socially in society, but as I read it, flash backs of different scenarios of pastoral ministry hit me again and again.  Too many tend to bypass the “liberation” phase .. it’s too tedious, it’s too hard . is there an easier way?  A way where no one needs to be blamed, no one has to take responsibility, let’s all be happy clappy and get over with it?

Cheap efforts only yield to cheap short lived reconciliation, in fact, perhaps it’s more like an illusion of reconciliation than the real thing.  It’s fake, it’s a lie.

As people of the Way, and who seek the Truth, and aspire to see Life flourish . even in the midst of this imperfect world, we cannot settle for anything less .. we are heading to the gateway of reconciliation, but not without the muddy rocky road of liberation. Brace yourselves, it’s going to be rough.

One more paragraph .. which is one which encourages me, because it resonates with some of my long held intuitions.  But now it’s put into words.

“. reconciliation as a managed process falls short of the Christian understanding of reconciliation in significant ways.  First of all . we do not bring about reconciliation, especially in the profound and complex situations described above; it is God who reconciles.  This is not said to create an attitude of acquiescence in the face of violence or fatalism in the midst of political oppression.  It is, rather, to acknowledge the enormity of the task of reconciliation in situations where the social order has shifted radically and dramatically.” (p. 26)

God is not a cop out.  God is not an object of blame.  But now, God acts as the initiator and agent of change.  Not our idol-constructed ideas of God, not our domesticated deity.  Nope, we’re talking about the Real thing . I mean the One who is real . the one who reconciles ultimately.

“. this approach to reconciliation (as a managed process) reduces reconciliation to a technical rationality; it becomes a skill that can be taught to deal with the problem that can be managed. . but it departs significantly from a biblical understanding in which reconciliation is not a skill to be mastered, but rather, something discovered – the power of God’s grace welling up in one’s life.  . Reconciliation becomes more of an attitude than an acquired skill; it becomes a stance assumed before a broken world rather than a toll to repair that world.  Or put in more theological terms, reconciliation is more spirituality than strategy.” (p.26)

There are numerous strategic turns and moves that are needed in the current Malaysian scene.  I believe the Church as well as churches or congregations have a partnering role with fellow comrades in Civil Society. A distinctive contribution we bring is the dimension of spirituality.. in many ways, especially with those whom also value the role of religion at its best and not worst, the spiritual dimension no longer has to be marginalized in the socio-political-cultural landscape which is confronted with tectonic shifts and at times seemingly insurmountable challenges. Bad religion needs to be confronted, but life giving spirituality needs to be nurtured to replace it!

For me, I found myself experience prayer on the streets of Bukit Aman and near Pudu Raya, in the stadium at Kelana Jaya, in the sanctuary of the Father’s House, and the solitude of my own heart.  But no longer is it  an expression of  a spirituality of escapism and excuses, it’s a genuine attempt towards an incarnational spirituality of engagement. I’m no hero, I’m no pioneer, I’m but an ordinary follower of Christ, a pastor trying to figure out how to be faithful in my calling here and now . standing on the shoulders of true giants who’ve shown me it can be done. So help me God!