Category Archives: Justice

Top 10 English Posts of 2022 on michaeljfast.com

Posted on by

It’s always interesting to look back on the past year and see how writing went. In 2022, I had a chance to write 44,200 words that 3881 people thought worthwhile to read. I have enjoyed interacting with many of you on here in this past year and look forward to seeing where 2023 takes us. Here is a countdown of the Top 10 posts that I wrote in English. As you may have noticed I also write in Tagalog. To see the Top 10 Tagalog posts of 2022, please click here.

10. How I learned that paying attention to social justice is discovering how to listen with God’s ears. Something puzzling has been popping up in my social media feeds in the past little while. There have been debates about the role that justice, or more particularly social justice plays in the lift of the church. It’s puzzling to me because for the past number of years social justice and related issues have been central to my life and ministry.  But I guess it hasn’t always been that way for me. I remember many years ago when I first heard the phrase social gospel wondering what it meant and why it was considered important to some and unimportant to others. This initial curiosity led me down a path towards developing practical theologies that help the church engage society. 

9. What does it mean to be a man, part 2? Masculinities in the Philippines. In a previous post, I introduced the idea of masculinities. In it I mentioned that masculinity should really be masculinities because there is not one standardized way to be a man. In this post I will expand on that in talking about how crossing cultures also increases the complexities surrounding the subject. Our specific focus will be on masculinities in the Philippines. 

8. My thoughts on Kristin Du Mez’ “Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation.” Kristin Du Mez’ Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation is a New York Times bestseller and has been the center of an online debate from the moment it first came out. Du Mez is a professor of History and Gender Studies at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA. I had a chance to read it a couple of weeks ago after borrowing the ebook version from the Saskatoon Public Library. Here are some of my thoughts about it.

7. Lucy Peppiatt’s Rediscovering Scripture’s Vision for Women: Fresh Perspectives on Disputed Texts. If you are like me certain things are important when making decisions. I like new ideas, especially new theological ideas. But one deal breaker for me is when new theological ideas have no basis in the bible. I want to see how the new idea interacts with the text before making my final decision on it. Here is a little about my journey through the thorny issue of men & women & the church. 

6. Is it ok to call my Pastor “Pas”? Pastor is a socially and culturally constructed word that means something different today than it did in the Bible times. In no place in the Bible are we commanded to call someone a “pastor.” In no place in the Bible in the role of pastor a professional role. (And while we’re at it let’s get rid of the notion that “the pastor is the highest calling.”)

5. My wife, Eva, is now blogging. I am pretty excited today because my wife’s new blog, Beneath My Shell, went live just a few moments ago. Eva blogs her thoughts about her life as a missionary midwife living in the Philippines. Please head on over a take a look at what Eva has to say. You will love her first story!

4. Did you know that Matthew 18’s instruction to “go, confront him when you are alone” isn’t the only Christian way to deal with conflict? Ask any Christian how to deal with conflict and they will pull out Matthew 18 because it lays out what many see as THE way for Christians to deal with interpersonal sin. For years the church has laid out the process of talk to the person individually, then if things don’t work out bring someone as a witness. Then, if things still don’t work out, bring the matter before the church and if that doesn’t work out then expel the person from the church. It’s pretty standard but what if I told you that this wasn’t the only biblical way that God’s people deal with sin? There are actually countless examples of other ways of doing the same thing that may be more relevant in other cultural contexts. 

3. What does it take to be a man? An introduction to masculinity studies. For the past year I have been promising some posts on masculinity. Masculinity is in its most basic sense the “possession of the qualities traditionally associated with men” or “the approved way of being an adult male in any given society.” While these definitions may seem simple at first, there is a lot to unpack. Here is an introduction to the topic.

2. 3 Types of Evil. Evil is much more complex than simply being personal. In fact there are three types of evil, or sin, that are discussed in the Bible: Personal evil, natural evil, and structural evil.

1. Emic vs Etic: Understanding how insider & outsider perspectives interact when doing theology. An example from the Philippines. There is a debate about the validity of using an emic approach in seeking to understand a culture on its own terms. In fact, this debate is behind the development of ethnoscience worldwide.  What is often missed in the debate is the reality that all forms of science are emic in that whatever frameworks or structures are developed are developed from the emic perspectives of a specific culture. They merely become etic once applied to another culture.  

Do you have a favourite post from 2022? Why not comment below and tell us why?

If you haven’t taken the chance to subscribe please do so using the links provided.

Remember sharing is what friends do.

Image by Ella Christenson on Unsplash.

Paano ko natutunan na ang pagbibigay pansin sa katarungang panlipunan ay pagtuklas kung paano ako’y makinig gamit ang mga tainga ng Diyos.

Posted on by

Read in English.

May nakakagulat na lumalabas sa aking mga social media feed nitong mga nakaraang linggo. Nagkaroon ng mga debate tungkol sa papel na ginagampanan ng hustisya, o higit na partikular na hustisyang panlipunan sa buhay ng simbahan. Ito ay palaisipan sa akin dahil sa nakalipas na mga taon ang katarungang panlipunan at mga kaugnay na isyu ay naging sentro ng aking buhay at ministeryo. Ngunit sa palagay ko ay hindi ito palaging para sa akin. Naaalala ko maraming taon na ang nakalipas nang una kong marinig ang mga salitang “social gospel” na nagtataka kung ano ang ibig sabihin nito at kung bakit ito itinuturing na mahalaga sa ilan ngunit hindi mahalaga sa iba. Ang paunang pag-uusisa na ito ay humantong sa akin sa isang landas patungo sa pagbuo ng mga praktikal na teolohiya na tumutulong sa simbahan na makisali sa lipunan.

Naisip ko na ito ay maaaring isang magandang lugar upang ipaliwanag nang kaunti kung bakit nararamdaman ko na ang mga simbahan ay dapat na kasangkot sa mga ministeryo ng hustisya, kabilang ang kung ano ang sinasabi ng bibliya tungkol sa kanila, kung paano sila mabibigyang-diin ng simbahan, at kung paano sila tunay na nagpapakita kung sino ang Diyos. Sasamahan mo ba ako sa aking pagpapaliwanag?

Pagbibigay ng kahulugan sa Katarungang Panlipunan.

Una, magsimula tayo sa pagtukoy sa ating mga termino para lahat tayo ay nasa iisang pahina at matiyak na pare-parehong isyu ang pinag-uusapan natin. Ayon sa Oxford English Dictionary, ang ibig sabihin ng “sosyal” ay “may kaugnayan sa lipunan o sa organisasyon nito” at “hustisya” ay nangangahulugang “makatarungang pag-uugali o pagtrato.” Kapag pinagsama natin ang dalawang salita, nakakakuha tayo ng “katarungan sa mga tuntunin ng pamamahagi ng kayamanan, pagkakataon, at mga pribilehiyo sa loob ng isang lipunan.” Iyan ay tila medyo prangka bukod pa sa tila isang magandang ideya, hindi ba? Mukhang tinutugunan din nito ang isang serye ng mga isyu na binanggit din sa bibliya.

Ang hustisya sa Bibliya.

Mababasa natin sa Bibliya ang tungkol sa hustisya bilang pagtulong sa mga balo, mahihirap, at dayuhan.

Narito ang ilang ideya at talata (mula sa 443 na talata sa Bibliya na nagbabanggit ng hustisya) na maaari nating makipag-ugnayan pagdating sa hustisya:

Nais ng Diyos na alagaan natin ang mga biktima, mapang-api, pagsasamantala, mga ulila, mga balo, at mga inosente na pinatay: Malinaw na sinasabi sa Jeremias 22:3, “Ito ang sabi ng Panginoon: Mangangasiwa ng katarungan at katuwiran. Iligtas ang biktima ng pagnanakaw mula sa kamay ng kanyang nang-aapi. Huwag pagsamantalahan o lupitin ang dayuhan, ulila, o balo. Huwag magbuhos ng inosenteng dugo sa lugar na ito.”

Nais ng Diyos na magbayad tayo ng makatarungang kabayaran: Jeremias 22:13 “Nakakaawa ka Jehoyakim, nagtayo ka ng iyong palasyo sa pamamagitan ng masamang paraan. Pinagtrabaho mo ang iyong kapwa nang walang sweldo.”

Ang Diyos ay interesado sa mahihirap, at sa pagiging patas sa ekonomiya: Ezekiel 18:17 “hindi siya gumagawa ng masama at hindi nagpapatubo sa may utang sa kanya, tinutupad niya ang mga utos koʼt mga tuntunin, ang taong itoʼy hindi mamamatay dahil sa kasalanan ng kanyang ama. Patuloy siyang mabubuhay.”

Nais ng Diyos na unahin natin ang hustisya sa buong buhay natin: Amos 5:24 “Sa halip, nais kong makita na pinaiiral ninyo ang katarungan at ang katuwiran na parang ilog na patuloy na umaagos.”

Ipinakita sa atin ng Diyos kung paano isama ang pantay na paghahati ng ari-arian sa ating mga sistema. Ang Lupang Pangako ay hinati sa mga yunit ng lupain ng tribo na nilayon upang manatili sa bawat pamilya magpakailanman.

Ipinakita sa atin ng Diyos ang isang paraan upang maisama ang pagpapatawad sa utang sa ating mga sistema. Mayroon ding kakaibang sistemang ito na tinatawag na Taon ng Jubileo. Tiniyak ng taon ng Jubileo na ang mga panggigipit sa ekonomiya na naging dahilan upang ibenta ng mga tao ang kanilang mga ari-arian o maging ang kanilang mga sarili ay makakakuha ng ginhawa kada 50 taon. Ang kagiliw-giliw na tandaan ay na, habang ang bibliya ay nagtatala ng promulgasyon ng batas na ito, hindi namin nabasa kung paano ito aktwal na ipinatupad.

Binanggit ni Jesus ang kanyang pangunahing layunin bilang nakatuon sa mga dukha, bilanggo, bulag, at makasalanan. Ito ay pinakamalinaw na sinabi sa kanyang unang sermon sa Lucas 4, kung saan sinipi niya si Isaiah. Nakikita rin natin ito sa kanyang patuloy na pagbibigay-diin sa mga bagay tulad ng pagpapagaling sa maysakit, pagbangon ng patay, pagpapakain sa mga nagugutom, at pagdidisipulo sa mga maniningil ng buwis, mga kalapating mababa ang lipad, at mga makasalanan.

Hindi ko alam tungkol sa iyo ngunit para sa akin ang bibliya ay interesado sa “katarungan sa mga tuntunin ng pamamahagi ng kayamanan, pagkakataon, at mga pribilehiyo sa loob ng isang lipunan.”

Ang Pag-aalis ng Kahirapan bilang Social Agenda ng Simbahan.

Binanggit din ng Bibliya ang kakaibang sitwasyon ng mga mahihirap na laging kasama natin ngunit wala nang dukha sa atin. Sinasabi ng Deuteronomio 15:4, “Kailangang walang maging mahirap sa inyo sa lupaing ibinibigay sa inyo ng Panginoon na inyong Dios na inyong aangkinin, dahil tiyak na pagpapalain niya kayo,” Pagkaraan ng ilang mga talata, mababasa natin sa v11: “Hindi maiiwasan na may mahihirap sa inyong bayan, kaya inuutusan ko kayong maging lubos na mapagbigay sa kanila.”

Kaya, sa isang banda ay palaging may dukha sa lupain ngunit sa kabilang banda ay hindi dapat walang mahirap sa lupain. Ang parehong mga talata ay hinihikayat ang iba na tumulong sa pag-alis ng kahirapan sa pamamagitan ng pagkabukas-palad at maging ng Jubileo. Ito ay, ayon kay Dr. Jun Vencer, ang evangelical agenda.

Ang mas kumplikado sa atin ngayon ay ang kahirapan ay hindi lamang pang-ekonomiya. Sa katunayan, sa ulat ng Asian Development Bank tungkol sa kahirapan, natuklasan namin na ang kahirapan ay may labing-apat na pangunahing tagapagpahiwatig, isa o dalawa lamang sa mga ito ay pang-ekonomiya. Nagbibigay iyon ng sapat na pagkakataon para sa simbahan na makisali sa mundo sa ilang antas, kabilang ang pangunahing kaligtasan, seguridad, at pagpapagana.

Simbahan bilang sentro ng Diakonia.

Higit pa rito, ang pangunahing pagkakakilanlan ng simbahan ay nasa tungkulin nitong diakonia, na paglilingkod sa Diyos at kapwa. Kasama sa serbisyong ito ang mga bagay na may label dito bilang “katarungang panlipunan” ngunit siyempre higit pa doon.

Iyon ang dahilan kung bakit ang simbahan sa buong panahon ay nababahala sa mga bagay na inaalala ng Diyos – mga ulila at mga balo, pagpapakain sa mga mahihirap, pagpuna sa mga kasalanan at kasamaan ng lipunan — at kung bakit ito ay tumutulong sa panahon ng natural na kasamaan tulad ng mga bagyo at lindol, gayundin ang pagtulong sa mga tao harapin ang kanilang sariling mga personal na bersyon ng kasamaan.

Hindi ako sigurado kung ano ang nangyari sa kasaysayan ng simbahan o sa pag-unlad ng teolohiya na nag-akay sa simbahan palayo sa mga katotohanang ito.

Lahat ng Katotohanan ay Katotohanan ng Diyos.

Ang isa sa mga isyung nakita kong itinaas ng iba ay ang katarungang panlipunan ay maaaring nasa tamang lugar ang kanyang puso ngunit dahil si Jesus ay hindi bahagi ng equation ito ay hindi biblikal. Ito ay isang magandang panahon upang pag-usapan ang tungkol sa isang ideya na una kong narinig sa Canadian Baptist Seminary (napakaraming taon na ang nakalipas). Medyo matagal bago ko na-appreciate ang sinasabi nito. Ang ideya ay na “lahat ng katotohanan ay katotohanan ng Diyos.” Ito ay hango sa dalawang katotohanan sa Bibliya: Si Jesus ay sinasabing ang … “katotohanan” at si Satanas ay sinasabing “Ang ama ng kasinungalingan.” Ibig sabihin, kung ang isang bagay ay totoo, ito ay mula sa Diyos, anuman ang pinagmulan. Ang ibig kong sabihin dito ay kahit na hindi ito tahasang mula sa Bibliya maaari pa rin itong maging totoo. Nangangahulugan din ito na kung ito ay mali, kung gayon ito ay mula sa diyablo.

E ano ngayon?

Ang ibig sabihin ng lahat ng ito ay kailangan nating gumugol ng oras sa pagtutok sa mga tamang bagay. Pinaghihinalaan ko na maraming mga Kristiyano na tutol sa hustisyang panlipunan ay gayon dahil ang mga nagsasagawa ng katarungang panlipunan ay gumagawa ng isang mas mahusay na trabaho ng pagiging simbahan kaysa sa simbahan! Kami bilang simbahan ay nakatutok nang napakatagal sa buhay sa kabilang buhay na kung minsan ay hindi namin pinapansin ang buhay dito at ngayon. Nakikita natin ito sa ating paraan ng pag-eebanghelyo — “Kung mamamatay ka ngayon alam mo ba kung saan ka pupunta?” Binabalewala nito ang ideyang “Kung ipagpapatuloy mo ang iyong buhay ngayon alam mo ba kung paano mo ipapakita ang pag-ibig ng Diyos sa mundo?”

Mga tainga ng Diyos.

Nais kong tapusin ang lahat sa pamamagitan ng pag-iisip kung paano, sa Exodo 3, mababasa natin ang tungkol sa pagdinig ng Diyos sa mga daing ng Israel para sa katarungan at pagsisimula ng mga aksyon na kalaunan ay humantong sa kanilang pagtakas mula sa Ehipto. Kaya naman ang pamagat ng post na ito ay natutong makinig sa pandinig ng Diyos.

Napagtanto ko na hindi lahat ay maaaring sumang-ayon sa aking pananaw sa katarungang panlipunan at sa simbahan. Kung mayroon kang ibang pananaw, gusto kong basahin ang tungkol dito sa mga komento sa ibaba. Gusto kong marinig lalo na ang iyong opinyon sa kung ano ang sinasabi ng Bibliya tungkol dito.

Kung may nakita kang kapaki-pakinabang sa alinman sa mga ito, mangyaring huwag kalimutang i-follow at i-like ang blog na ito.

Tandaan na ang pagbabahagi ay ginagawa ng mga kaibigan!

Larawan ni Nawartha Nirmal sa Unsplash.

How I learned that paying attention to social justice is discovering how to listen with God’s ears.

Posted on by

Basahin sa wikang Tagalog.

Something puzzling has been popping up in my social media feeds in the past little while. There have been debates about the role that justice, or more particularly social justice plays in the life of the church. It’s puzzling to me because for the past number of years social justice and related issues have been central to my life and ministry. But I guess it hasn’t always been that way for me. I remember many years ago when I first heard the phrase social gospel wondering what it meant and why it was considered important to some and unimportant to others. This initial curiosity led me down a path towards developing practical theologies that help the church engage society.

I thought this might be a good venue to explain a little bit why I feel that churches should be involved in justice ministries, including what the bible has to say about them, how the church can emphasize them, and how they truly reflect who God is. Will you join me in my explanation?

Defining Social Justice.

First, let’s begin with defining our terms so that we can all be on the same page and ensure that we are talking about the same issues. I guess we can just take each word in order and then look at how they are used together. According to Oxford, “social” means “relating to society or its organization” and “justice” means “just behaviour or treatment.” When we put the two words together we get “justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.” That seems pretty straightforward in addition to seeming like a pretty good idea, doesn’t it? It also seems to be addressing a series of issues also addressed in the bible.

Justice in the Bible.

In the Bible we read about justice as helping widows, the poor, and the foreigner.

Here are a couple of ideas and verses (out of the 443 verses that mention justice) that we can interact with when it comes to justice:

God wants us to care for victims, oppressors, exploitation, orphans, widows, and innocents who have been killed: Jeremiah 22:3 clearly states, “This is what the LORD says: Administer justice and righteousness. Rescue the victim of robbery from the hand of his oppressor. Don’t exploit or brutalize the foreigner, the fatherless, or the widow. Don’t shed innocent blood in this place.”

God wants us to pay fair wages: Jeremiah 22:13 “Woe for the one who builds his palace through unrighteousness, his upper rooms through injustice, who makes his fellow man serve without pay and will not give him his wages,”

God is interested in the poor, and in economic fairness: Ezekiel 18:17 “He keeps his hand from harming the poor, not taking interest or profit on a loan. He practices My ordinances (ie. justice) and follows My statutes.”

God wants us to prioritise justice with our entire lives: Amos 5:24 “But let justice flow like water, and righteousness, like an unfailing stream.”

God shows us how to incorporate the equitable division of property into our systems. The Promised Land was divided up into tribal land units that were intended to stay with each family in perpetuity.

God shows us one way to incorporate debt forgiveness into our systems. We also have this rather strange system called the year of Jubilee. The year of Jubilee ensured that economic pressures that caused people to sell their properties or even themselves would get relief every 50 years. What’s interesting to note is that, while the bible records the promulgation of this law, we never read about how this was actually implemented.

Jesus talked about his main purpose as targeted towards the poor, the prisoners, the blind, and sinners. This is most clearly stated in his first sermon in Luke 4, where he quotes Isaiah. We also see this in his seemingly continual emphasis on things like healing the sick, raising the dead, feeding the hungry, and discipling to tax collectors, prostitutes, and sinners.

I don’t know about you but it sure seems like the bible is interested in “justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.”

Eliminating Poverty as the Social Agenda of the Church.

The bible also mentions the curious situation of the poor always being with us and there being no more poor with us. Deuteronomy 15:4 says, “In any case, there shouldn’t be any poor people among you, because the Lord your God will certainly bless you in the land he is giving you as your own possession.” Just a few verses later we read in v11: “There will always be poor people in the land. That’s why I command you to be generous to other Israelites who are poor and needy.”

So, on the one hand there will always be poor in the land but on the other hand there shouldn’t have to be poor in the land. Both verses encourage others to help eliminate poverty through generosity and even Jubilee. This is, according to Dr. Jun Vencer, the evangelical agenda.

What makes the issue more complex for us today is that poverty is not merely economic. In fact, in the Asian Development Bank’s report on poverty, we discover that poverty has fourteen core indicators, only one or two of which are economic in nature. That gives ample opportunity for the church to engage the world on several levels, including basic survival, security, and enabling.

Church as center for Diakonia.

Going beyond this, the basic identity of the church is in its function of diakonia, which is serving God and kapwa (“myself in the Other”). This service includes the stuff labelled here as “social justice” but of course goes beyond that.

That is why the church throughout the ages has been concerned with the things God is concerned with — orphans and widows, feeding the poor, critiquing society’s sins and evils, and why it helps during natural evils like typhoons and earthquakes, as well as helping people deal with their own personal versions of evil.

I am not sure what happened in the history of the church or in the development of theology that has led the church away from these realities.

All Truth is God’s Truth.

One of the issues I have seen raised is that social justice may have its heart in the right place but since Jesus isn’t a part of the equation then it’s not biblical. This is a good time to talk about an idea that I first heard about at Canadian Baptist Seminary (so many years ago). I should also point out that it took me quite a while to appreciate what it was saying. The idea is that “all truth is God’s truth.” This is derived from two biblical truths: Jesus is said to be the … “truth” and Satan is said to be “The father of lies.” That means if something is true then it is from God, regardless of the source. What I mean by this is that even if it’s not explicitly from the Bible it can still be true. It also means that if it is false, then it is from the devil.

So what?

What all this means is that we need to spend time focussing on the right stuff. I suspect that many Christians who are opposed to social justice are so because those practicing social justice are doing a better job of being the church than the church is! We as the church have focussed for so long on the life hereafter that we have sometimes ignored the life here and now. We can see this in our method of evangelism — “If you were to die today do you know where you will go?” It ignores the idea of “If you were to keep living your life today do you know how you would reflect God’s love in the world?”

God’s Ears.

I would like to wrap this all up by reflecting on how, in Exodus 3, we read about God hearing Israel’s cries for justice and beginning actions that eventually led to their escape from Egypt. That’s why this post is entitled learning to listen with God’s ears.

I realise that not all may agree with my take on social justice and the church. If you have a different perspective I would love to read about it in the comments below. I would especially love to hear your take on what the Bible says about it.

If you have found any of this useful, please don’t forget to follow and like this blog.

Remember sharing is what friends do!

Image by imdadul hussain on Unsplash.

We sometimes like to use Scary Words but often don’t really know if they’re scary or not, but we use them anyways so we don’t have to engage new ideas question our own favourite beliefs.

Posted on by

There are lots of scary words being thrown around these days, words that are used not necessarily with their original meanings attached but used merely as labels to scare us. We label what we don’t like. That means we no longer need to engage or seek understanding. Without the label we need to accept that our vision of the world may not be as neat as we might like. What we have done, instead, is to turn the dialogue into a monologue that keeps us firmly in the driver’s seat. What’s more, these words are used together with other words — words that we think we agree with — so that we automatically agree with the statement and claim that the scary word is in fact scary.

Liberal.

A couple of years ago I was called a “liberal Canadian pastor” by an USA-ian former classmate and FB friend. I had to laugh because the term liberal is so diverse in its meanings that the statement made no sense. Is he saying, Liberal, in the sense of being a part of the political party in Canada or liberalism in the Canadian sense? Is he saying theological liberal in the sense of having the same theology as Protestant mainline churches? Is he saying liberal in the sense of liberal democracy that he himself is also a part of? Is he saying liberal as in liberal arts, a field of study in many universities including those universities that label themselves “Christian.” Is he saying liberal as opposed to conservative? Or is he defining liberal in some USA-ian way that I don’t understand? I honestly suspect that he really didn’t know what his label meant other than “a Canadian pastor who believes something different than me and who I suspect is wrong.” Now I may be reading too much into it is but subsequent interactions with him seem to support my view. Certainly there are some aspects of the term that deserve caution but other aspects merely identify who we are as a society today.

CRT.

Another scary word is actually an acronym: CRT. CRT, for those who don’t know, stands for Critical Race Theory, a theoretical framework that originated as a critique of USA laws that seem to favour one race over others. It has become a touchstone for more recent debates about race and culture in the USA particularly. Do you know what the big issue really is? It’s that there are racial discriminations underlying USA society and these are embedded in the very definition of what it means to be a USA-ian. It’s entirely a framework that is based in the USA. But lest we Canadians think these same things aren’t true for us we have another think coming. Racial discrimination is live and well in Canada, too. And it needs to be addressed. In some ways, this scary word has the least number of potential real issues associated with it.

Progressive.

Here’s the kicker. For many years the political party that was slightly right of centre was called “Progressive Conservative.” Isn’t that funny? How can something be both of those things? I guess I should also point out that, at least in years past, the political spectrum in Canada was primarily centrist — the massive swings we see in today’s political landscape haven’t really existed in the mainstream in Canada. Now the term progressive has been applied to Christianity. This term does have a specific meaning, and certain aspects have real issues of its own, but it is often used as another of those terms to indicate someone whose theology I disagree with. I suspect that most people have issue with it’s connection to post-modernism. (However, I would like to point out that if you are 60 years old or younger, your own personal system of thought is post-modern. Sorry.) What is even stranger, even biblical requirements of the gospel such as social peace and public justice get lumped into the term even though these issues are core to what the gospel is. What I suspect has happened is that people have blended their political ideas in with the gospel to create some kind of Frankenstein religion. 

What’s the Takeaway?

So, what’s the takeaway from all these scary words? Know what words mean before I use them. Many philosophies and ideologies are difficult to define definitively — there is always nuance needed. That’s why labels don’t work because there is no nuance allowed. When I see someone who I think believes something different, it’s perhaps best to engage in dialogue rather than merely labelling and ignoring them. Who knows, I may discover that I am the one who needs adjustment. Make the world a better place for everyone.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not advocating becoming progressive or liberal or some other such label. What I am advocating for is using labels less. For me the bottom line especially when it comes to Jesus followers is depends on how we answer the question, “Who is LORD?” If someone says, “Jesus is LORD,” then guess what? They are automatically a part of our faith community. “But what if they don’t believe the right stuff?” you may ask. My reply is that we didn’t understand the ins and outs of the scary words above but we don’t use that limitation to disqualify ourselves from Jesus family. Why then do we want to disqualify others?

What should we focus on instead?

I genuinely believe that our main task here on earth is to follow the example of God Almighty who “did not send his son into the world to condemn the world but to save the world through him.” And I guess love is the most basic theological truth we need, isn’t it? Jesus even tells us. Twice. Matthew 22:37-39. That means doctrinal issues necessarily come second, doesn’t it? I mean, if Jesus wanted us to believe a specific statement of faith wouldn’t he have listed that instead?

I assume some of you disagree with my take on these things. If so, why not engage in some dialogue in the comment section below? Please tell me where my understanding is lacking. Let me understand your perspective. Let’s talk.

Remember sharing is what friends do.

Don’t forget to Like and/or Subscribe.

Image Angel Luciano by on Unsplash.

Alabaster, going all in, and moving from darkness to light.

Posted on by

I overheard the young virtual tour guide as she interacted with a school class in some other part of Canada. She held a phone on a gimbal and narrated as she walked through the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. I was particularly interested when she started talking about these wonderful ramps that lead from one floor to the next. The ramps are covered by this translucent yellow stone that the guide said was alabaster.

The design is intentional, leading the eye as one looks up. As you can see in the above picture, the eye moves from darkness to light and is a metaphor for the entire purpose of the museum — to move people from darkness to light in the realm of human rights. As the website says, “Alabaster ramps carry visitors between galleries. Glowing with LED lights, they criss-cross upwards for 800 metres between chalkboard black concrete walls – a literal path of light through the darkness.”

The alabaster was significant for me because it reminds me of the woman with the alabaster jar in the Bible. You may recall the story that is recounted in all four gospels. Here is how Matthew tells it:

“Jesus was in Bethany in the home of Simon, a man who had suffered from a skin disease. While Jesus was sitting there, a woman went to him with a bottle of very expensive perfume and poured it on his head. The disciples were irritated when they saw this. They asked, “Why did she waste it like this? It could have been sold for a high price, and the money could have been given to the poor.” Since Jesus knew what was going on, he said to them, “Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing for me. You will always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me with you. She poured this perfume on my body before it is placed in a tomb. I can guarantee this truth: Wherever this Good News is spoken in the world, what she has done will also be told in memory of her.”

The thing about alabaster jars was that you had to go all in to open them. There was no cap — you had to break the neck of the jar in order to get the perfume out. That means that it was saved for a very special occasion. The theme of all in is important.

This story is in the context of the Passover feast celebrated by Jesus and His disciples (also known as the Last Supper — also in Mt 26). Passover celebrates God’s salvation of His people from oppression and its associated punishment of the enemy. It’s when both parties went all in so that they can assure the salvation of God’s people.

The same could be said for the fight for human rights — we need to go all in. If we only wanted to go half way it would be called “human right.” But all humans have rights. Saving the world means looking at everyone’s rights, not just those of a few.

Jesus alabaster jar experience, meaning his decision to be the saviour of the world, was also all in. Jesus couldn’t go half way in His plan to save the world.

There is the other side of the story that makes alabaster all that more symbolic for a human right museum. The story also talks of those opposed to the woman’s actions — namely Simon, the host, and Judas.

Simon’s criticism merely sees the woman’s actions based on their monetary value and tries to redirect the investment somewhere else — not realising that the woman and Jesus are planning something priceless — the salvation of the world!

Judas decides to betray Jesus to the authorities for 30 pieces of silver. I guess Judas’ decision was to go all in in the wrong direction.

What is your alabaster jar experience? What are you willing to go all in on?

Your voice is important to me. That’s why I look forward to your feedback.

Sharing is what friends do.

Please consider clicking “Follow” so you can be assured of getting the most timely updates.

Image taken at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights is mine.

Scripture is taken from GOD’S WORD®.
© 1995, 2003, 2013, 2014, 2019, 2020 by God’s Word to the Nations Mission Society. 
Used by permission.

Speaking into truth & reconciliation, how would you apply Jesus’ words, “If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off”??

Posted on by

Last week I posted some thoughts on truth and reconciliation on Canada’s National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. My thoughts centered around Mark‬ ‭9:42-50‬ ‭GW‬‬, and how these verses about protecting children’s faith is in the context of the verses that talk about dealing with sin our lives. If your hand cause you to sin cut it off. If your foot causes you to sin cut it off. If your eye causes you to sin pluck it out. I realize that the sins of the hand, the foot, and the eye are central to the legacy of the abuse suffered through Indian Residential Schools.

Krystal Wawrzyniak, one of my colleagues at BGC Canada and currently seconded to Indian Life Ministries, asked, “I’m curious about your thoughts surrounding the application of ‘if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off,’ or the foot or eye. Speaking into truth and reconciliation, how would you apply this??” I did respond to Krystal on Facebook but thought it might be a good idea to flesh out some of my ideas in another blog post.

First off I need to say that the best approach is to listen because it’s only through listening to Others’ stories that we can both understand them and see the things that need to be changed in ourselves.

It’s also important to examine ourselves to see if we can find areas that need change. This happens through reflection and through listening. I think that because few of us were directly involved in the Indian Residential School system (the last school closed in 1996) we can’t simply call for repentance on a personal level. The areas where change needs to happen (ie. the parts that need to get cut off) are the systems and structures that still exist in our society — including our churches and theology — that are a part of the framework that led to Indian Residential Schools. These need to be excised from our identity as both Christians and Canadians.

On the national level this might include how the doctrine of discovery and the Treaty of Tordesillas — which blended religious and commercial interests — continues to impact Canadian institutions such as the Indian act, unclean water on First Nations, and unequal access to health care. Other issues include how the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and the Overrepresentation of Indigenous People in the Canadian Criminal Justice System reveal problems with the justice system.

On the theological level we need to revisit our understanding of God’s prevenient grace, get rid of our theological superiority that prioritises theologies from the Global North over and above those of the Global South, and read the Bible through the eyes of the Other. Jose de Mesa’s hermeneutics of appreciation is a good starting point for this and will teach us how to listen.

Ka Jose de Mesa (1946-2021) was a Filipino lay theologian who worked for many years on issues surrounding contextualisation and theology. In his Mga aral sa daan: Dulog at paraang kultural sa Kristolohiya he develops a hermeneutics of appreciation as a way to correct errors he saw in how the church crossed cultures.

The “Hermeneutics of appreciation” is presented as a series of attitudes that serve as guides for those engaging in cross-cultural interactions. How can we apply them to the Indian Residential School issue?

Attitude #1: Presume the cultural element or aspect under consideration to be positive (at least in intent) until proven otherwise. Indian Residential Schools were designed to do the exact opposite of this — to remove all traces of “Indian” from the children who were forced to attend. There is certainly nothing positive about this. A better approach would be to recognise that the Kingdom of God consists of people from “every nation, tribe, people, and language” and that includes First Nations and Metis peoples.

Attitude #2: Be aware of your own cultural presuppositions and adopt the insider’s point of view. When we look back at some of the statements made by the proponents of the Indian Residential School system we can’t help but wonder what they were thinking? To people living and thriving in the postmodern world of 2021’s Canada, the ideas of our forefathers are more than odd — they are offensive. But did they know that? Did they realise the meaning of statements like “Kill the Indian, save the man” and that ideas of assimilation were actually cultural genocide? It’s hard to believe that they didn’t realise these things. Knowledge of de Mesa’s Attitude #2 would have gone a long ways towards developing a true understanding between the various cultures.

Attitude #3: Go beyond the cultural stereotypes. It is obvious that the use of terms such as “Indian problem” and “dirty Indian” that stereotypes were the only standard of practice in these schools. As Duncan Campbell Scott said when developing his policies, “I want to get rid of the Indian problem. I do not think as a matter of fact, that the country ought to continuously protect a class of people who are able to stand alone. . . . Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill.”

Attitude #4: Use the vernacular as a key to understanding the culture in its own terms. Indian Residential Schools made a concerted effort to eliminate the various languages of the First Nations. A deeper understanding of language always leads to a deeper understanding of culture.

Unfortunately, nothing about the experience that First Nations and Metis peoples have had with either the government or the church in Canada seems to reflect these attitudes. Let’s hope that we can work towards changing some of these attitudes as we work towards truth, healing, and reconciliation.

Help is available. Call the 24-hour national Indian Residential Schools Crisis Line: 1-866-925-4419. 

Feedback is always welcome. 

Sharing is what friends do.

Image by Liviu Florescu on Unsplash.

Scripture is taken from GOD’S WORD®.
© 1995, 2003, 2013, 2014, 2019, 2020 by God’s Word to the Nations Mission Society. 
Used by permission.

Is it possible that my understanding of the Bible is wrong and if so how am I supposed to find out?

Posted on by

“When I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came to these people. This was the same thing that happened to us in the beginning. I remembered that the Lord had said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized by the Holy Spirit.’ When they believed, God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. So who was I to interfere with God?” When the others heard this, they had no further objections. They praised God by saying, “Then God has also led people who are not Jewish to turn to him so that they can change the way they think and act and have eternal life.”‭‭ Acts‬ ‭11:15-18‬ ‭GW‬‬

In Acts 10–11 some incredibly significant changes happen in the early church. Here we read that the good news of Jesus Christ is expanded to include proselytes to Judaism and non-Jewish peoples. 

In Acts 11 some people complain about Peter’s encounter with Cornelius saying, “You went to visit men who were uncircumcised, and you even ate with them.” Peter then goes into a lengthy explanation of what had happened,  repeating every detail of the events of Acts 10. He says, “When I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came to these people. This was the same thing that happened to us in the beginning. I remembered that the Lord had said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized by the Holy Spirit.’ When they believed, God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. So who was I to interfere with God?”

Once the complainers heard this “they had no further objections. They praised God by saying, ‘Then God has also led people who are not Jewish to turn to him so that they can change the way they think and act and have eternal life.'” 

The argument seems to be based on shared experiences. Jesus promised that they would be baptised with the Holy Spirit and so if anyone else shares in that baptism then that is a good thing. 

It got me thinking about issues that we face today. Issues where we know that we are right, not simply because of our opinions but because the Bible tells us that we are right. Is it like that for us today, too? Is this a model of how to make determinations in these issues? Are there things we are absolutely convinced about that the HS may have a different opinion on? How would the HS make that known to us?

In Acts 10-11 we see two ways that these kinds of changes happen: 

1. Sometimes God intervenes directly and tells people where they need to change. God directly tells both Cornelius and Peter that change is coming.

2. Sometimes people act on their own and God blesses their actions. One could argue that the people from Cyrene who first shared the good news with the Greeks of Antioch were simply following Peter’s example. But we also read that there was another discussion held in Jerusalem about the issue that resulted in the statement of Acts 15 regarding how non-Jewish followers of Christ needed to act. 

Andrew Walls, in The Gospel as the Prisoner and Liberator of Culture, says of theology, “It is therefore important, when thinking of African theology, to remember that it will act on an African agenda. It is useless for us to determine what we think an African theology ought to be doing: it will concern itself with questions that worry Africans, and will leave blandly alone all sorts of questions which we think absolutely vital. We all do the same. How many Christians belonging to churches which accept the Chalcedonian Definition of the Faith could explain with any conviction to an intelligent non-Christian why it is important not to be a Nestorian or a Monophysite? Yet once men not only excommunicated each other, they shed their own and others’ blood to get the right answer on that question. The things which we think are vital points of principle will seem as far away and negligible to African theologians as those theological prize fights among the Egyptian monks now seem to us. Conversely the things that concern African theologians may seem to us at best peripheral.”

What Walls is saying is that theology is developed around questions that are important for people in societies and because there are a variety of societies in the world, sometimes the issues in one society are unintelligible to the people of another society. 

For example, clearly the NT people saw no problem with the prominent role that women played in the spread of the good news of Jesus Christ. From the women who supported Jesus and the 12 financially, to the women who first announced the resurrection, to Saphira who, with her husband Ananias, taught Apollos the ways of the gospel, to Junias who was numbered among the apostles, there were many women who were involved in ministry at the highest levels! If this is indeed the case, why do many have such big issues with it today? 

Justice is also a key biblical issue. When Ezekiel says, ”Put a mark on the foreheads of those who sigh and groan about all the disgusting things that are being done in the city” (9:4) he is telling us that it’s a sign of connection to God to complain about injustice. If justice is so important to God, why is social criticism that is a part of movements such as Critical Race Theory, Black Lives Matter, and #metoo often rejected by the church?

When writing this post I had a lot of issues in my mind that I think others get wrong. But the real question I need to ask myself is where am I getting it wrong? Where do I need to hear the voice of God and change my deeply held convictions and move into conformity with his will? 

Feedback is always welcome. 

Sharing is what friends do.

Image by Robert Ruggiero on Unsplash.