What is your favourite scriptural passage that best represents your idea of spiritual formation?

My favourite passage is John 1:35-39. These two men were disciples of John the Baptist and were present with him one morning when Jesus passed by. John recognises him as the one sent by God to be the Saviour and says, "Look, the Lamb of God". John's insight led these disciples to leave him and follow this person so wholly acknowledged by their trusted master as more than just a prophet enlightened by God.

At that point, Jesus noticed these two at a distance, hesitating in wonder at the thought of approaching someone so significantly acknowledged by their master. The Lord turns and presents them with a leading question, which was also an implicit invitation for them to draw closer and engage with him directly. "What are you looking for?", he asks. His reassuring disposition helps them to express their interest in getting to know him. "Rabbi, where are you staying?", they inquired. "Come and see", Jesus said in return. They then accompanied the Lord to his dwelling and spent the rest of the day with him. That encounter changed their lives.

In this passage, John the Baptist is the spiritual formator who points the attention of his followers to Jesus and paves the way for them to follow the Christ. It is the role of the spiritual formator to create opportunities for people to follow Jesus and to “spend the day” with him, so that these successive encounters might change their lives.

The spiritual formator creates an environment that cultivates an awareness of the heart, so that when Christ “passes by”, he and his companions notice that passing by. Thereafter, he releases his companions to follow this Christ as the formator witnesses to his significance as the one worthy of being followed.

An even more sacramental approach to this would be for the spiritual formator to see himself as “being Christ” to those who sit at his feet. He is the mysterious representation of Christ to those who journey with him, dispensing the grace of Christ in real time to the lives of these spiritual companions.

Posted by SK at 12:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

What comes to your mind when you hear the term "spiritual formation"?

I prefer the term “formation” without an adjective attached to it. In such terms, adjectives usually present an implicit idea of disintegration and fragmentation. So people see these terms without realising that the logical conclusion to there being “spiritual formation” is that there is also “academic formation” which is all together separate from spiritual formation because it is quite an unspiritual form of formation!

When I hear the term “spiritual formation”, what comes to my mind (or rather, what is supposed to come to my mind) is a holistic process of life formation which an individual goes through within the context of a community. This process takes place within the context of a common life within a shared space.

It is immediately obvious that the term “spiritual formation”, for me, cannot be divorced from the communal and communitarian dimensions. For spiritual formation to take place, it has to take place within community. This conviction stems from a theological understanding of God’s nature.

Early Eastern thinkers of the church used to explain the nature of God in this manner: in all eternity, God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit – have existed in a state of perichoresis. Perichoresis has two indications, being i) the state of interpenetration in which the three person of the Trinitarian Godhead live, and ii) the dance of life that results in their intimacy of relationship. And God so desires that all human persons reflect that very perichoretic nature of his.

In accordance with this fundamental understanding of God’s nature, the whole goal of spiritual formation is the cultivation of the mind, heart, soul, and hands of a person such that he/she reflects the perichoretic nature of God within community.

Posted by SK at 1:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

A friend of mine, who also comes from the same local church as I do, is studying for a masters degree in Spiritual Formation in Talbot School of Theology.

She was recently working on a term paper and had asked me to answer some questions pertaining to spiritual formation. She has kindly agreed for me to post up my answers to her questions on this blog so that my perspectives on spiritual formation can also be shared with the readers here.

I'm not a guru in spiritual formation. And I naturally see spiritual formation from a very theological perspective, since my field of training is Theology rather than spiritual formation per se. So rightly or wrongly, I don't have a dichotomised paradigm of the two dimensions of the Christian life.

I'm taking a break from blogging this weekend (actually I seldom have time to blog on weekends anyway). But I'll be posting up the questions and answers successively as a series in the next two weeks - it's quite lengthy, really.

Hope you enjoy it.

Posted by SK at 12:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

MUTHU & THE INTERVIEWER
Interviewer: "What is your birth date?"
Muthu: "13th October."
Interviewer: "Which year?"
Muthu: "Every year."

MUTHU & HIS MANAGER
The Manager asked Muthu at an interview:
"Can you spell a word that has more than 100 letters in it?"
Muthu replied: "P-O-S-T-B-O-X."

MUTHU & LONDON TRIP
After returning from a foreign trip, Muthu asked his wife,
"Do I look like a foreigner?"
Wife: "No! Why?"
Muthu : "In London, a lady asked me, 'Are you a foreigner?'... that's why."

MUTHU & TOURIST
A tourist from the U.S.A. asked Muthu whether any great man was born in his village.
Muthu said, "No sir, only babies were born here."

MUTHU & HIS EXPERIMENT
Muthu was doing an experiment with a cockroach. First he cut off one leg and told it to "WALK! WALK!" The cockroach walked. Then he cut off it's second leg and told the same. The cockroach walked. Then he cut off the third leg and did the same. Finally, he cut off its fourth leg and ordered it walk! But the cockroach didn't walk. Suddenly, Muthu said loudly, "I found it. If we cut a cockroach's four legs, it becomes deaf."

MUTHU & DRIVER
When Muthu was travelling with his wife in a motorised tricycle, the driver adjusted the mirror. Muthu shouted, "You are trying to see my wife, eh? Sit in the back. I will drive."

MUTHU GOES TO HOTEL
Muthu went into a hotel. To wash his hands, he went to the washbasin. Then when he had finished, he started washing the basin. Seeing this, the manager asked what was he doing. Muthu pointed towards the signboard: "WASH BASIN".

MUTHU & INTERVIEWER - FINAL PART
Interviewer: "Just imagine you're in the 20th floor of a building and it's on fire. How will you escape?"
Muthu: "It's simple. I will just stop my imagination."

MUTHU AT A POLITICAL RALLY
At a political rally, Muthu was arrested. Why?
Because a lady journalist with a badge which read "PRESS" pinned on the right part of her blouse walked past him... and he did it!

Note from the Editor: The intention of this post is purely humour. The editor understands that some of the readers of this blog may come from cultures that are sensitive over potentially racial remarks, even if it is done in a spirit of humour. The editor would like to think that it is not so in Malaysia - most of us are able to laugh at the funny sides of our own races/cultures and those of other races/cultures. You won't get arrested for laughing.

Posted by SK at 4:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

In the past two months, I've spent no less than 70 hours on the road. It's been painful at times. It's not so much the speaking with people, meeting new faces, and being in different places that kill the energies of my soul; it's the traveling, the driving.

I sometimes wonder if I'm really busy because there's in fact much to be done, or if I'm just trying to appear busy because there's a hidden insecurity within me so I need to look like I have a real job. I hope it's not the latter.

Just a moment ago, a friend of mine commented about our mutual busyness: "...people listen, learn - you collapse, but it's fine because you've uplifted someone".

Thank you, Alwyn, for uplifting me.

Posted by SK at 3:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This series of a documentary broadcasted on the Canadian Broadcast Channel (CBC), exposing the ministry of Benny Hinn, is very sobering. It's amusing but not funny. In fact, it's very sad.

PART ONE (below)

PART TWO (below)

PART THREE (below)

PART FOUR (below)

Posted by SK at 11:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Recently, it seems that the physical punishment of school students by their teachers is forbidden. Increasingly, cases like this and this seem to be reported.

Sure, there is a level at which punishment takes on an excessive form and results in abuse, or at least potential abuse. But it does also seem that parents nowadays are protective of their children to an extent that can be quite baffling. They seem to get upset at the slightest stroke of the cane or some other form of physical punishment administered upon their children in school.

Some years ago, I used to hear of such sensitivities in a neighbouring country. But now, I’m hearing of this in my own country. And it somewhat puzzles me.

I’m not saying if this is right or wrong. But it is somewhat alien to me to see things like this bordering on the sensitivities of the people.

As a primary school child, I was caned quite a lot. For one thing, I was terribly naughty. For another thing, my parents gave the school the permission to cane me.

I remember how humiliating it felt to be caned. I was asked to put my two arms on the table so my butt would face upwards. And BAM, three strokes of the cane successively landed on my behind.

When I went home, mum looked at me and said, “You deserved it. Tomorrow, go and apologise to the teacher (who caned you) for being naughty, and thank him for teaching you to be good.” So today I get caned, and tomorrow I still have to go back to apologise for my misbehaviour and thank the teacher for caning me! And that’s exactly what I did.

No complaints. No police reports. No press statements.

So for parents today, I do quite wonder, what’s the deal? Like I said, no value judgement on my part. I'm just quite amused at the sensitivity I'm seeing.

Posted by SK at 12:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Tagged by Daniel. Eight random facts about me, me, me.

1. Sherman does not watch television.

2. Sherman’s mind does not rest.

3. Sherman is an insomniac. He sleeps for an average of 3 or 4 hours every night, and has been like that since his secondary school days. (For the reason, refer to point 2.)

4. Sherman hates clichés.

5. Sherman dislikes conformity for the sake of conformity.

6. Sherman dislikes travelling although travelling just about characterises most of his work.

7. Sherman feels very awkward being the centre of attention in any group although being in the spotlight just about characterises most of his work. Contrary to popular belief, he is rather shy and introverted.

8. Sherman has a very hidden sense of humour behind his utterly serious look. Only people who know him beyond a superficial relationship would get a taste of his humour.

Posted by SK at 1:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

A reflection on conversations with my spiritual guide on 21 July 2007

1. On Theology and Social Science
Theology needs to take the task of anthropological studies (and other social-scientific disciplines) more seriously than it has up until now. Whilst it is true that people have not entirely done justice to theological methodology, theologians and biblical scholars have often been guilty of the same wrongdoing.

For example, many theologians have assumed that they could write historical treatises without taking seriously the methodology that had been set out by the historians. Theologians should not try to assume the role of historians; instead, the former should ride on the work of the latter in order that their theological constructions be strengthened and well-aided by the latter.

Much of theology has failed to reflect the implicit theologies of the grassroots Christians. This is because the theologians have not taken seriously the work of religious anthropologists who seek to understand what people truly believe and what these theologies at work might look like. Yet, it is in taking seriously the findings and assessments of this anthropological exercise that our theological articulations would better reflect the theologies of the people at work.

Our understanding of theological methodology must be dynamic. We need to find an openness in our theological paradigm for methodologies rather than a singular methodology. To many theologians, constructing a contextual theology means using already established frameworks to critique observed societal realities. Whilst this may not in and of itself be wrong per se, it does not constitute a contribution to the theological exercise. Such a form of contextual theology is not truly contextual as it claims to be, for it ignores the local cultural wisdom and the propensity of any one culture for its own authentic theological methodology and construction.

2. On the Ministerial Vocation
In seeking direction for one’s ministerial vocation, one’s preoccupation should not be fixated upon the ecclesiastical hierarchy itself. If being a part of the ecclesiastical hierarchy is necessary for one’s ministerial effectiveness, one should be willing to embrace this “call”. But if not, one’s primary consideration should rest on how one may most effectively contribute to the betterment of the wider church in the longer run, even if this is bound to take place to the detriment of one’s own “career development”.

It is necessary that one remains focused in one’s undertakings. There are many things in the ministerial vocation that threaten to pull our attention in different directions. One must be sure of what one is called to fulfil in this ministerial journey. One’s energies must always be focused on undertakings that truly matter.

Posted by SK at 7:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Sure, we live in a world that needs grace, a world that needs to understand and experience forgiveness.

But sometimes we forgive ourselves too easily. We allow ourselves to lax into a state of indiscipline in our spirituality and an inconsideration for the wellbeing of our neighbour, simply because we don’t feel like we are in the right form on a particular day or during a particular season.

And then we very conveniently dispense forgiveness to ourselves, thinking that it is all right to be like that every now and then, and that God understands. We think that after all, we’ve already grown so much and done so much of this and that for God and for others, what’s wrong with failing sometimes.

The reality of falling once in a while is true and understandable. We are human after all. But the attitude with which we treat ourselves after having fallen is undesirable if we do not resolve to learn from each failure, to be better and to be more consistently loving.

Cheap grace is demeaning to the cause of the Kingdom. It’s not so much an issue of perfection as it is an issue of the habit of the heart.

Lord, have mercy on me. On us.

Posted by SK at 12:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by SK at 1:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Have you ever sat in a group before and shared on some matters you deemed crucial? And then strangely, you found that there was a clown in the group who trivialised just about everything you said, no matter how serious a tone you used in the transmission of your message?

The clown cracked jokes that you found unfunny and kept diverting the conversation towards other directions. At times, in the midst of your conversation with the group, the clown started initiating sub-conversations with other people in the group, as if the very thing you wanted to share about was of little or no consequence to himself and the people he was distracting.

And no matter how hard you tried to emphasise the seriousness of what you were saying, the clown kept on doing it anyway. Have you?

The soul of a clown that tends to trivialise just about everything he hears is precisely what the devil intends for all Christians to cultivate. Listen to anything mentioned about your faith and life, and make a joke out of it because you don’t see the implications of the words being spoken. Miss the point entirely and keep laughing away.

For the sake of those who take with utter seriousness the importance of the crucial matters, clowns must be expelled, lest they lead people to mock their own lives away. And there is nothing funny about that.

There is nothing wrong with humour or being funny, surely. But there is nothing funny about laughing one’s way out of life into death.

Every one of us needs to keep a check on ourselves when we find ourselves in the midst of such soul conversations taking place - we might just catch ourselves being the clown.

Posted by SK at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBacks (0)

Sometimes our confessions regarding our life commitments towards the Kingdom are over-stated. We pledge to empty ourselves of everything that hinders our participation in this dream… only to later realise that we have no capacity, or actual desire, to do so.

Not every heart is fertile ground for the seed of the Kingdom to grow, bloom and flourish. But of course, every person would love to think that his heart is fertile. Unfortunately, for many, it’s little more than an illusive state of self-understanding.

Many a human person has suffered too much of life’s damaging contaminative elements, too defected to possess the capacity to live up to their express commitments. Even those that haven’t don’t seem to have been spared the original state of fallenness spoken of by the Western Fathers.

Ultimately, it’s the man who beats himself on his chest upon looking at God, and who says, “Lord, forgive me, an unworthy man”, who catches a glimpse of the Kingdom. In his realisation of his unworthiness, he enters into the realm of divine favour. But unfortunately, depravity has a way of deception that drives many into the self-illusory notion that they are free from its clutches.

The hearts of these are infertile. The agricultural farmers call it “bad soil” that kills every seed which falls upon it. The information technologists call it the “corrupted and crashed” harddisk of the soul that cannot contain and preserve any form of precious data. In these hearts, only the mysterious work of the Spirit can accomplish a stunning miraculous transformation.

Until then, Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy.

Posted by SK at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

I did the unthinkable today. It’s literally been years since I stepped into a church with a prepared sermon in hand (together with really cool PowerPoint slides at that!), and then ended up preaching an entirely different sermon all together.

At the point of my arrival, the pastor was doing some teaching in the worship hall. So I thought before the service began, that it’d be good to quickly bring my thumbdrive to the audio visual guy so he could transfer my PowerPoint file over into the computer to be flashed later on during my sermon. Just then, I felt a firm tug in my heart that held back my intention. And the word salvation was literally haunting my mind.

By golly, was this what I thought it was? That the Holy Spirit was telling me that he wanted me to speak on salvation, and not on the topic I’d been asked to prepare? Hey, it’s been more than a decade since I was part of the Pentecostal tradition! Was there a part of me that was still “pentecostalised”?!

It did somewhat help that this church was a Pentecostal/Charismatic church. But still, I thought I’d not be so presumptuous as to think that the church would be okay with something like that. After all, who wants an invited speaker to come spew an incoherent sermon he didn’t have time to prepare, right? So just as I took over the microphone, I asked the pastor for permission to switch my sermon. He answered, “Coming from someone with your background, I’d say it must be the Holy Spirit. Shoot…”

So what ensued was an hour-long sermon on Salvation. I even managed to get my sermon organised into three points: i) You are saved, ii) You are being saved, and iii) You will be saved.

You know, I'm recently beginning to discover more and more about the Pentecostal/Charismatic tradition that is consistent with the Great Tradition of the church. It's just amazing. Sometimes, at the point of a new discovery (new to me, I mean), I have to pause for a moment to just hear my heart pounding.

This journey is amazing.

Posted by SK at 11:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

TMNet - register today! Good deals! Promotions! Attractive packages! Get effective access to the World Wide Web! You know you wanna!

I'm a happy customer.

More than a month ago, I discovered that TMNet had a seasonal offer to upgrade my broadband package from 512 kbps to 1.0 Mbps for only an extra ringgit per month (RM67-00) for the first three months, and then subsequently for RM77 per month. That was, in my assessment, a good deal. So I applied to have it upgraded. I was told that the upgrade would take five working days tops from the point of application.

Unfortunately, within the next one week, there was no change in my bandwidth. So I sent them an email, and they called me to find out what was wrong. I explained the situation to them, and they said they'd check things out. Later on they called me again, asking if there was any change in the bandwidth, as they'd made some adjustments - I said no. So they said they'd work on it again.

This happened at least five times. One of the times, they even told me they had changed some cable from their end. And yet, there was still no change in my bandwidth. This had been going on for the past one month.

Suddenly, late this morning, another call came from them: "Sir, we have adjusted your bandwidth. The technical department realised that they had not upgraded your bandwidth to 1.0 Mbps, that's why you kept getting a low bandwidth. Try it, it should be okay now."

I gawked at my phone receiver. I was a little too happy to yell, "Gimme back my one ringgit, you swindlers!" I could only manage a fumbling, "Oh, yes ar? Thanks ar..."

TMNet - register today!

Posted by SK at 1:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

This post is thick-skinnedly ciplaked (a colloquial Malay expression for "pirated") from Jonzz's entry:

If you are a Malaysian and have not been living under a nutshell for past week, you would have been aware of the tragic and cruel murder of a little girl by the name of Ooi Ying Ying, who perished at the very hands of the same people who were entrusted with her care and protection.

It's scary how low the depths to which our human nature can really sink to.

What were the motives behind the deed? I guess only God and the accused will ever know.

What we know is but the bits and pieces of information packaged for us by the media.

Which brings me to my second observation.

Nestled between the many headlines, was one that caught my attention:

Teacher: Ying Ying was the cutest in class

Pardon my self-righteous talk, but I observe a second but no less greater injustice looming behind this seemingly innocent headline.

Among my friends and peers, I have heard this statement being uttered and I'm pretty sure you might have as well, "How can they kill such a little girl? Look at her. She is so cute."

My concern is this: Why does cuteness even have to come into the picture at all?

But then again, if the victim had been someone ugly or less prominent, do you think they would have garnered as much attention?

I am sure there are many more murders that have taken place but look at the murder "personalities" that get prominence and front page photos in the newspapers.

Is this our value system these days? A handsome or pretty face is better or is worth more than a normal or plain looking face?

Well, I admit I am equally guilty of this.

Guess learning not to judge a book by its cover is easier said than done.

Jonzz is so right. Media people, with no particular reference to any one, sometimes have little sense of propriety in terms of the message they're transmitting. It often looks like it's all about what news sells. Even if the values portray rubbish.

Posted by SK at 6:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Listening is such a lost art, even in the Christian tradition. We have very devoutly spiritual Christians who happen to be brilliant theological minds, but who function like heresy hunters. At the slightest hint of some doctrines or belief that takes a marginal variance from their own, they don’t think twice about pointing it out. Not only do they point it out; they in fact point it out as if their view was superior and absolute in its validity.

Why can’t we meet someone who has a different theological position on some issues, and think to ourselves that perhaps this person has seen a perspective we’ve been missing? Or perhaps that this person actually does know more than us on something of that issue, and that we actually need to learn? What makes us often conclude so conveniently that our views are the absolute ones?

Are we afraid if we actually listened, that perhaps we might be obligated to yield our positions? Are we afraid to leave our views open to scrutiny for fear that our views might actually be proven wrong? Since when were we appointed to be guardians of doctrinal truths (well, truth in our view, at least) without the appointment of an ecumenical council?

I’m not saying that we shouldn’t share our views or state our position. I do that a lot; and I believe I’m doing just that right now. One stark example I can cite is a recent meeting I sat in last month consisting of various representatives from different Christian traditions, during which it was mentioned that “the Christian message is love”. I responded, hopefully gently, that in my tradition, the Christian message is not love. The Christian message is Jesus, who taught us to love. But Jesus and love cannot be mistaken to be the same entity. Our understanding of love is contingent upon who Jesus is, and our love cannot stand apart from him. God is love, but love is not God. The point is, part of the listening process also involves the sharing of our own positions and convictions, and that’s okay as long as it’s done with utmost respect.

I think we need to learn to listen to one another. I’ve grown up in a strictly Reformed tradition wherein black and white were thoroughly delineated (I’m not saying all Reformed people are like that – it’s just the background I grew up in). Over the years, I found myself opening up to a plethora of other voices, meeting people who might have had something to say from different perspectives, and discovering many areas of grey apart from the black and white through which I was taught to define my faith. As a result, my position on a number of issues has shifted; probably not changed all together, but nevertheless significantly shifted.

Of course, this puts me in great peril, because some people think I’m no longer “evangelical” (sigh, whatever that means anymore, really). Some say I’m liberal, and fortunately, yet others still say I’m evangelical (like on the occasion when I said that the Christian message is Jesus, someone stood up and commented that it seems I’m evangelical). And there have even been some who have called me a fundamentalist, actually! This just goes to show that different people develop different perceptions of one same object (in this case, me); and this further compounds the need to listen and to try to understand why and how these perceptions develop.

Yes, listening does that to a person. It ensures that our senses are not dulled to a world containing wisdom in various expressions. It ensures that we don’t become protectionistically elitist in our self-understanding. Many things in life are, after all, not as clearly cut and dry as we’d like them to be.

It’s very unlikely that I’m ever going to move away from my personal conviction that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, and that no one goes to the Father except through him. It’s very unlikely that I’m ever going to shift from my understanding that Jesus is uniquely very man and very God. I’m always willing to strongly defend these beliefs (although not at the risk of misrepresenting the very God whose truth I seek to defend, which unfortunately happens a lot among some people I know).

But should that stop me from listening to what anyone else has to say, or put me in a defensive mode about what I believe in, or insulate my faith from public examination, I think it shows an insecurity in my own positions. I know this makes some of my brethren worried about me. To these who are concerned, please keep praying for me.

Thank you for listening.

Posted by SK at 9:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

An Email I Received Recently
Hi (Sherman),

I have some questions for you which need your response. Recently, my pastor shared with me about his struggle over a church member who was marrying a Muslim. He and other church members were invited to the wedding. He saw this as apostasy. The fact that the Christian girl had agreed to enter into union with a Muslim, it was an expression of her having renounced her Christian faith. So he decided not to go to their wedding and advised his church members who were invited not to go too. By going to their wedding, it would mean that they would be celebrating their union. Instead, he shared that we should mourn and pray as we had lost a sheep to a wolf. And he was disappointed with a missionary couple, who were close friends to the bride and who decided to attend the wedding.

Questions:

1) If you were the pastor, would you make the same stand? Why? Please also state the scriptural principles on the reason of your stand.

Perhaps, the only scriptural principle I can draw on for my pastor's position is from the book of Nehemiah, where Nehemiah and Ezra forced the exillic Israelites to divorce their foreign wives as they regained their land. In other words, we need to show we have a different stand from other faiths.

2) What are the practical steps we can take in order to win her back to the Christian faith and yet be able to show a stand in our belief so as not to offend our Muslim friends as we live in this pluralistic society?

The only answer I can come up with is to not attend their wedding and say it nicely that I will mourn for her as she has renounced her faith. After that, I would try to make an effort to remain a friend and try to win her back (together with her husband).

My Reply to the Email
I'm deeply saddened by the position taken by your pastor to not attend the wedding of the couple. To forbid the marriage to take place in the church premises is one thing, but to not attend the wedding is entirely another thing all together. Even if this sister has decided to become a Muslim and to marry a Muslim, there is still a human-to-human level at which we all need to honour one another's choices and to show acceptance and respect for one another. I think the refusal to attend the marriage doesn't speak very well of Christian goodwill. Because implicitly, that refusal speaks of a derogatory view of all other faiths and people who embrace other faiths.

I hold that we cannot get a direct scriptural reference on this issue. In fact, there is no explicit passage in scripture that forbids marriage between a Christian and a person of another religious tradition. We can use the Old Testament passage about God not wanting the Israelites to marry people from the pagan nations; but to extrapolate that and to equate that with the contemporary situation without taking variant factors into account is to be rather naive in our understanding of scripture. As far as scripture is concerned, it is most directly clear in the New Testament that when a union like that takes place, the Christian should not dishonour his/her spouse.

I think one of the greatest fears your pastor might have about attending the wedding is that it might show approval for the sister's decision. But to not attend the wedding would show disrespect; that we can respect only "Christian" decisions and not "non-Christian" decisions. I think we need to be gracious enough to see that every human person is an equal subject on a journey towards God; some have gone further in their journey, some have not. Your pastor's participation in the wedding would certainly have helped them progress positively in their journey. Sometimes we handle people as if they are objects of our faith and not equal subjects in our life journey.

I think if there's anything that can win them to faith in Christ, it would be love, friendship, acceptance, and respect with no hidden agendas. It becomes totally obvious if we establish relations with them for the sake of "winning them to the faith". Ultimately, the best representation of Christ we can offer them is to relate with them, person to person, human to human, friend to friend. Only then can our love be authentic and dignifying to those we relate with.

Posted by SK at 12:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

You should come visit my lectures on Christian Theology in the seminary if you ever have the time to do so. Not because the lecturer is good. But because the students will give you one helluva time when it's their turn to do so.

Each student is given a practical issue to work on; it's related to the ministerial life. An example of the questions is, "A young couple from your church has just informed you that they have decided to leave your church and start attending the one down the street. When asked why, their answer is that the other church's activities seem to better cater for their needs and match their expectations. Respond."

Another one: "Why might the study of ecclesiology be important for your ministerial life? How may ecclesiology inform your decisions on certain issues? Give concrete examples."

And so each of these students tackles such a question through a presentation before his/her fellow students. Whilst having to apply their ecclesiological wisdom in as apt a way as possible, they're encouraged to present their case in the most creative ways possible. And many of them never fail to blow my mind - they have drawings, video recordings, interactive games, even fabricated "ancient scrolls"!

What strikes me is that the weightage given for these presentations is not high. Besides, they know that I'm very generous with my marks on such presentations anyway, whether or not they do that well. And yet, they still decide to give me and the rest of their fellow learners a blast of a time with fascinating, captivating, creative, amazing presentations anyway. Just so we all can enjoy the learning process.

It's amazing how people rise up to the occasion when you help them to see that they should strive to be their best all the time, not because of what they can get in return, but simply because they can. Really, I've never seen presentations like these before. In fact, I've never delivered presentations like these before! These presentations render all the other presentations I've ever delivered as a university student juvenile.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I'm learning.

Posted by SK at 12:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

A reflection on conversations with my spiritual guide on 30 June 2007

1. On the Rule of Life
A community of people sharing life together in commitment to the Kingdom should not be too impetuous in setting out its rule of life. The focus of the community should rest on its concrete sharing of life together on a daily basis.

From this daily sharing of life will eventually emerge a pattern, a settledness, a stability with which the community exists and regulates itself. The collation of words that we gradually find to describe this daily pattern of stability is that which we call the rule of life.

The rule of life cannot be externally imposed upon anyone who is not yet ready to accept it. Any new visitor spends a considerable season of time with the community as an observer and a learner. When the visitor finds himself attracted to the rule of life, it is for him to express a desire for a voluntary embrace of the community’s rule of life. Otherwise, the community continues to exist as a parable of the Kingdom for the visitor.

Upon the embrace of the community’s rule of life, the visitor becomes a brother. His life story becomes woven into the story of the community, integrating itself into the community’s being a parable.

2. On Speaking for the People of Asia
That which we know as Asian Theologies today has implicitly elitist undertones. They are written by people who have constructed theologies for the masses of Asia without first having consulted the masses. In thinking that they somehow know better, such theologies is written with the presupposition that they accurately reflect the struggle of the Asian peoples. No consent was sought from the masses to validate the written theology. In claiming their theologies to be liberating, they may have further marginalised those whom they sought to liberate.

A theology that is truly Asian would seek validation and legitimisation from the people it speaks about. Such a theology would take on a consultative tone and hopes to understand theologies that already form a part of the way the masses understand their world, and seeks to find the appropriate words to describe the experiences of the masses in as accurate a way as possible.

We need a new Asian theological method.

Posted by SK at 10:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The true test of giving is not in the giving itself. The true test lies in what you're giving for and what u expect in return. These motivations are very crucial; crucial to the integrity of giving itself.

Posted by SK at 6:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

3. Ensure that the life of your organic community is regulated. If you’ve been thinking that an organic community is about the cultivation of lovey-dovey mushed up and emotionally hyped sentimentalities, you couldn’t be more mistaken. An organic community isn’t about a group of people with similar interests and who speak a similar lingo cliquing together to live happily ever after. That’s called a club.

An organic community is a family of people who may be diverse in their cultures, worldviews and interests, but who have an express willingness to live in unwavering commitment in the ways of the Kingdom of God. They may have habits that get on one another’s nerves and cultural differences that confound one another, which makes it very difficult for them to live with one another, but they are nevertheless deeply committed to share life with one another to embody the reality of the Kingdom in the present.

This means that the people within this organic community are willing to embrace a set of values that are shared by all within the said community. These are also the very values that regulate the life they share together and how they relate with one another. Now, if all within the community are of almost a similar maturity (or lack thereof) in their faith journey, that’s a rather difficult feat to achieve. Thus, every community needs a person within it who is relatively advanced in his/her faith journey to steer and guide the community in terms of the community’s rule of life.

I suspect many people think that if they could find organic communities consisting of people who live in commitment to one another and to God, their spiritual vitality would be all fired up and they’d once again return to the “first love” experience. It’s a fallacy. An organic community that truly strives to live out the way of the Kingdom actually suffers. If you find that hard to believe, follow these suggestions I’ve given and go try them out and see for yourself if life in an organic community is all that pleasant as you’ve made it out to be. My experience tells me that proximity and intimacy in relationship spells trouble.

In the final analysis, you know what - it really is much easier to just be an institutional Christian. Inasmuch as you find it painful, it’s much less daunting a process than learning to live within an organic community which is committed to the way of Christ. The institutional way is the way that most Christians have chosen for themselves, because it is the way that enables them to live the religious life whilst still having every bit of freedom to live in almost exactly the way they most desire. If you think life in the institution is overly controlled and inhibited, try life in an organic community; you’ll most likely be horrified. It’s easier to survive the superficialities of the institutional church than the intimacy of the organic dimension of church.

We’re often complaining that life in the church institution is too superficial. But when confronted with the realities of the organic life of the church, can we actually take it? Is it something we actually want? If we've not been able to survive the demands of the institutional church on us, it's almost certain that we won't survive the demands of an organic community.

I could certainly share more on what an organic community within the institutional church looks like in concrete terms. But that's not really the point of this series. The purpose of this brief series has been merely to stir us to consider the realities of the church at the present moment, and to re-examine if our responses towards these realities have been legitimate from a theological perspective of the church.

One thing is for sure, whatever it is, and I've emphasised this multiple times in this writing - there is no such thing as a "churchless Christianity". It is theologically unjustifiable and untenable as a form of Christian spirituality, because it defies the most fundamental nature of God as a eternal and Trinitarian community. In other words, Christianity apart from the community that Jesus has instituted and which the Holy Spirit constitutes is no Christianity at all, maybe except to the one practising it and propagating hard to justify it.

I wish you all the best on your endeavour to survive church. A churchless Christianity? NO.

Posted by SK at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)