Posted by SK at 1:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In an age where medical science has discovered an ability to tamper with the human life - to artificially create it, to prolong it, or to shorten it - the modern world is once again obliged to ask itself questions pertaining to life. With such newly discovered power which brings humanity towards an unprecedented potential as well as peril, we are once again confronted with questions such as these: What is existence? What is life? What is the meaning of life?

On 4 January at 4 pm, the International Medical University at Bukit Jalil gathered some 90 students, lecturers and guests before a panel of speakers representing various faith traditions to ponder over the meaning of life. I was asked to speak with the audience on the meaning of life from the Christian perspective. It was entirely intriguing to hear the other speakers presenting their perspectives on the meaning of life from the Hindu, Buddhist and Muslim perspectives. The way in which every speaker affirmed the inherent human search for meaning was heartwarming. At a level beyond our religious convictions, there was a sense of human connection and solidarity.

This inter-religious forum subsequently turned to questions of medical ethics pertaining to life issues. The panel of speakers was asked to address issues such as abortion, active and passive euthanasia, as well as DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) Orders. Once again, the solidarity demonstrated by the panel of speakers was amazing. There was such like-mindedness in the way the entire panel categorically affirmed the utter dignity and utter sanctity of the human life. The panel of speakers felt that the human life is to be preserved with a great sense of responsibility and at all cost insofar as medical science renders it possible. We all resonated with the notion that the termination of life, and even the termination of deliberate measures taken to preserve life, is morally wrong. There was also a consensus that one does not have a right to take away one’s own life or another’s life to alleviate temporal suffering, for beyond finding the meaning of suffering, part of the human quest is to also find meaning in suffering.

I think it is very crucial that the various faith traditions in a nation like Malaysia come together to seek points of common agreement whilst not having to sacrifice our own convictions and creeds. I believe it is no mere coincidence that when it comes to familiar human issues, most of these religions demonstrate very similar values and therefore responses; that life is a very precious gift.

Posted by SK at 12:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

It surely is promising to be an exhausting month to start the year with. But I'm quite sure that by the end of it all, I'm going to be whispering, "It was all worth it". My schedule for this month is as follows:

Writing a Research Paper
“Prospects for Ecumenism in the 21st Century”
World Council of Churches

04 (Friday)
Speaking on "The Meaning of Life"
Inter-Cultural / Inter-Religious Forum
International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur - Malaysia

06 (Sunday)
Preaching at Sunday Worship Service
Christian Life Gospel Centre, Petaling Jaya - Malaysia

12 (Saturday)
Academic Research & Personal Consultation
Singapore

18 (Friday)
Conversation Partner at "Conversation with F. LeRon Shults"
Jointly Organised by Friends in Conversation & RoH Malaysia
Bangsar Lutheran Church, Kuala Lumpur - Malaysia

Here are two particular events to look out for:

1. IMU INTERCULTURAL / INTERRELIGIOUS FORUM
The International Medical University has organised an Intercultural / Interreligious Forum on "The Meaning of Life". Each religious group will be represented by a speaker who will share on the meaning of life from his or her particular religious perspective.

I'm honoured to have been invited to represent the Christians in this Forum. But of course, I'm not sure all people who call themselves Christian would approach this issue from the same perspective. So it'll be my "Christian" perspective. But I'm sure it wouldn't be too far off from the official perspective of most ecclesiastical communities.

Date: 4 January 2008 (Friday)

Venue: International Medical University, Bukit Jalil

Hall: LT2

Time: 4pm - 6pm

I'm told that a large crowd is expected at this forum, as it's an issue close to many people's hearts. This event is open to the public, except that visitors are required to get a visitors' pass from the guard at the entrance.

2. CONVERSATION WITH F. LERON SHULTS
LeRon Shults is a professor of theology at Agder University in Kristiansand, Norway, who has authored numerous books.

Friends in Conversation (Emergent Malaysia) and Revolution of Hope (RoH Malaysia) are honoured to be having him here with us for a day to have conversations with us pertaining to issues of discipleship, church, and evangelism.

This promises to be one hell of an event! Ahem...

Date: 18 January 2008 (Friday)

Venue: Bangsar Lutheran Church, Kuala Lumpur

Tentative Schedule:
0930 - 1230 hours     Becoming Human: Changing Lives
1330 - 1600 hours     Becoming God's People: Changing Churches
2000 - 2130 hours     Becoming Friends: Changing Evangelism

LeRon will be flanked by a conversation partner in each of these three sessions, and I will be the conversation partner for the first of the three.

If you would like to have more details on this event, please send me an email.

To January!

Posted by SK at 5:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

The following report (on the Merdeka 2007: A Revolution of Hope event held on 25 November 2007) is adapted and edited from Alwyn's weblog. Nobody does reports on events like he does. Thanks, Al! **hat tip**

It was a tiring Sunday afternoon. But Jojo, Sherman, Tricia, Veronica and Sivin gave the 34 of us folks more than a few things to ponder on at the first RoH public gathering, Merdeka 2007: A Revolution of Hope.

One theme which resounded strongly throughout was the reign of God as a world/other-redeeming project cum phenomenon which the church has unwittingly turned "on its head" into a post-world/self-focused endeavour.

According to Sivin, the church is the sign and instrument of the kingdom of God, i.e. the societal/communal expression and implementation of the fact that God so loved the world that He gave Himself for it.

When the world is the mission, as a methodological starting point, therefore, the world’s unchallenged diversity of contexts and disciplines must find its way into our theologising; hence, RoH’s emphasis on drawing upon the social sciences as dialogue partners with theology (the spiritual science?) The people’s disciplines is a key ingredient in constructing a theology for the people, with the people, by the people.

Sherman also made it clear that he did not believe there was any right or wrong way to do [this kind of] theological reflection. What he probably meant was that it wouldn’t help to limit theological reflection to only one absolute right way, as he did point out a wrong way: a theology without imagination (a fascinating area to look further into, surely).

God made and loved the world. We are called to impart true humanity to this world, fallen and craving to be all that it could have been. This impartation is one done via listening, discerning, understanding, imagining, recognising and embracing all that God has already done in every culture and people-group.

For example, Sherman shared about his Muslim friend many years back who stopped his daily prayer to answer his mother’s call. When Sherman asked why he did that, the reply was that his faith taught that heaven was at the mother's feet (syurga di telapak kaki ibu), an eye-opening albeit not uncontroversial Hadith. The point is that God has not left Himself without witness (Acts 14:17), not least in traditional folk wisdom and religion, and the act of discernment must learn to reap such glorious - if quiet - nuggets of His truth.

To use an awkward but obvious analogy, God has lazed the targets - are we locking on? A people’s theology is a contextual theology done from the ground up, beginning with experience, using all available resources by and/or with those who’s sweat and tears have fallen on it.

Perhaps this is the intellectual component of a willingness to suffer for a particular community. And presumably only a suffering theology can be a prophetic one?

Where there are people, there is politics. Sunday’s session had a huge plus-point over against the recent one in October (note: not RoH), where one (and unfortunately only one) message was clear i.e. that Christians should get involved. Tricia supplied the how. Her helpful clarification of the issues in Malaysian socio-politics served to more clearly conceptualise the players, the problems and the possible steps we could take (including the nurture of an active civil society - surely we’ll be hearing more in days to come).

It’s worth repeating Tricia’s remarks that, in response to the political situation:

* only a tenth of Malaysians would opt to march and protest;
* another third would leave the country; and
* the remaining 60% would do nothing, content in the bosom of government.

These rough statistics belie the goal of keeping government in fear of the people instead of vice-versa. I wonder, though, about people who are far from feeling content at their life’s lot, but can neither raise their fist against the country nor flee it . They can only hope.

Which brings us to what must be a RoH distinctive (over against other theologically reflective movements in Malaysia): a heart for the marginalised and voiceless communities, the poorest of the poor. I reckon no ROH session would be (or should be) complete without some light shed on the status of these people.

A sample of their stories was brought out by Veronica, whose jouney from rags-to-riches to enriching-the-ragged, was the sober highlight of the afternoon: women in their 50s’ protecting grandchildren from their abusive parents; 14-year-olds heading their parentless families; boys seeking out abandoned objects for sale; women etching out a living in the midst of mother- and widow-hood. Veronica herself lived through a time and place of bread lines and poverty which included low-rent accomodation in a haunted house.

According to Jojo, these are telltale signs that Malaysians and the church have largely abandoned the social contract. By this he meant more or less two things, in the context of Malaysia:

1. We must ensure that all people-groups in the country are afforded equal access to the basic necessities of life and the means of improving life, i.e. education, technology, etc.

2. We must uphold the sacredness of the Federal Constitution.

And why must we? Because, to put a covenantal spin on the whole thing, this is God’s arrangement for our country.

A people’s theology is a covenantal theology, one which calls us to be faithful to the deal we have been graciously given or the story we’re part of. This (Gospel) story, when told and lived and shared, is the vehicle of God’s restoration of our personhood.

Embodying change and sharing God’s tender and aggressively compassionate life is a crucial step in changing mindsets - this is the trumpet call of RoH, which seeks to help people realise their true humanity. For isn’t the virtue which never dies also the same one which always guards the needs of others? (1 Cor. 13:7-8)

A people’s theology is also a protective theology of the watchful love of God.

Posted by SK at 9:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by SK at 4:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

7. An Afterword from My Participation in AMCU IV
Many Christians from my own tradition have an issue with ecumenism at both the levels of inter-faith dialogue and intra-faith dialogue. I am, however, unrepentantly and unapologetically ecumenical in my outlook. I thoroughly believe that it is possible for one to be ecumenical without having to compromise one’s position on the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Ecumenism is not about the disregard of our theological differences to a level of the lowest common denominator. For true unity to be achieved, it has to be attained within an environment where our differences are highlighted, honoured, and talked about.

Some people have an issue with how generous I’ve chosen to become in my embrace of the theological positions of other Christian traditions. I believe I have good reason for this. Firstly, I happen to believe (like a number of other evangelical thinkers) that my tradition has failed to examine itself critically and to reinvent itself. What was once a tradition arising from the Reformation now itself needs an internal reformation. And the last thing we need is another split from Mother Church. If anything, I believe that our own theological and spiritual deficit can find recovery only if we start paying some attention to the articulations of Mother Church before the Reformation occurred. Indeed, some say that this isn’t possible because there are corruptions in the pre-Reformation church (heck, anything pre-Reformation to them is heretic and corrupted); and this leads me to the second point: it’s appalling how we readily and conveniently compare other peoples’ worst with our best and thereafter engage in self-congratulatory affirmations, when all along our worst may have been worse than other peoples’ worst. And so, what I believe to be a healthy ecumenical spirit is to learn from the best of others and allow the worst of others to remind us of how grave our own worst is without first judging those others.

Ecumenism is very much an ecclesiological problem. And this, if I may say so, is the precise spot at which the Protestant Church finds its gravest weakness. Where in other traditions apart from the Protestant tradition do we find people saying “The church next door is more happening than ours, I think I’m going to go join them”, or “The worship and the sermons at the megachurch in town is more inspiring than ours, I think I’ll leave this church for that one”? It shows that we, the Protestant Christians, are rather unaware of what it means to be the church. It’s very telling of the state of our ecclesiology - if there is even one. And I think we would be deceiving ourselves to think that the solution to this can be found within our own tradition. If it’s worth finding a solution, one has to embrace an ecumenical outlook and be self-critical towards one’s own tradition.

Posted by SK at 1:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

6. The Joint Statement
The nett result of the four-day seminar was the issuance of a joint statement issued by the three participating bodies, which will be disseminated to the relevant parties.

The Fourth seminar of the Asian Movement for Christian Unity (AMCU IV) was held on 11 to 14 June 2007 at the Archdiocesan Pastoral Centre of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 24 participants, representing the Christian Conference of Asia (CCA), the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC), and the Evangelical Fellowship of Asia (EFA), took part. Earlier AMCU seminars (Hong Kong, 1995; Bali, 1997; Chiang Mai, 2001) were jointly sponsored and organized by CCA and FABC. The participation by representatives of EFA in AMCU IV was the result of discussions carried out at the Asian chapter of the Global Christian Forum in Bangkok on 21-23 September 2006.

The theme of AMCU IV was “Our Common Witness in Contemporary Asia” and focused on the importance of Christians of all Churches and Christian communities to be united in responding to the social, political, and religious realities of Asia today. The participants shared their personal faith journeys and then examined the possibilities of joint Christian witness of faith in the context of the social challenges of injustice and discrimination and in the milieu of Asia’s religious and cultural plurality.

The participants agreed that Christian commitment must lead the Christian Churches in Asia to take a prophetic stand against any form of discrimination, such as that of caste, class, race, and gender, as being incompatible with the teaching of the Gospel. God’s message to humankind, as enunciated by the prophets and expressed in God’s word in Jesus Christ, affirms the equal human dignity of all people and condemns as sinful those human attitudes and deeds that oppress and discriminate among persons.

The common witness that Christians are called to make against patterns of oppression includes self-examination and self-criticism to become more aware of the ways in which sinful structures have also become engrained in the life of Christian communities in Asia. To be credible, Christians must oppose injustice and exploitation, not only when the victims are themselves Christian, but also in those instances where those who suffer discrimination are the followers of other religions or of no religion, and in cases where the perpetrators of injustice are fellow Christians. Christian witness, based on the Gospel imperative of loving service to others, must focus on the needs of the most vulnerable such as victims of natural calamities, oppressive regimes, and all forms of degradation of human life and should confront problems like global warming and other environmental concerns.

Faced with the multiplicity of religions in contemporary Asia, the participants of AMCU IV sought to define some elements of common Christian witness. Faith in Jesus Christ must be proclaimed in full respect for the beliefs and practices of others. Witness to Christian faith should never be carried out by putting down or denigrating the faith of others. Genuine Christian witness understands faith in Christ to be liberation from patterns of human sinfulness and which arises from a free and joyful response to God’s grace.

In the light of the various challenges facing the churches, the participants call upon the component bodies (CCA, FABC, and EFA) to address together the following concerns. One challenge is that of forming Christian youth in a commitment to build Christian unity. A second challenge is that of making our parish communities and pastors to be focal points for deeper involvement in the search for full visible Christian unity.

The three bodies can concretely promote Christian unity by getting to know one another better through mutual discussions and invitations to assemblies and plenary sessions, by engaging in joint projects such as the Asia Conference of Theological Students (ACTS) and the Congress of Asian Theologians (CATS), and by undertaking joint actions such as summer camps for Christian unity for young people. Mutual cooperation and activities at national and local levels are also to be strongly encouraged.

The participants expect to hold the next seminar for the Asian Movement for Christian Unity (AMCU V) in the middle of 2009.

Christian Conference of Asia
Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences
Evangelical Fellowship of Asia

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
14 June 2007

Posted by SK at 3:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

5. The Paper I Presented (continued)

II. Suffering - the Most Distinct Challenge to Christianity in Asia
The church in Asia may interact with the challenge of suffering at three levels of engagements. The first level involves literary engagement through which the church writes about those various expressions of this reality, providing descriptions, analyses and theological responses towards them. The second level of engagement involves grassroots activism through which the church takes proactive measures to participate in the suffering of the people, and (where possible) attempting to contribute towards the alleviation of such suffering. The third level involves structural activism through which one seeks to effect systemic changes in socio-political structures.

Level One: Literary Engagement. Much writing has been done from within Asia in the last 50 years. A wealth of contextual writings has emerged from East Asia, South Asia, and South East Asia. But this endeavour still leaves much to be explored. For example, much of the contextual theological writings in Myanmar has been preoccupied with a particular social struggle, i.e. the role of women in society, and rightly so. But little has been written on the economic struggle of the people, i.e. poverty, which is by far the most rampant expression of the people’s suffering there.

Beyond that, many of these Asian writings also need to find a deeper sense of resonance from within the Great Tradition. Whilst it is right that most of these writings are spurred by their socio-political contexts, there is a wealth of articulations from the Great Tradition (referring to the synergistic contributions of Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and Protestantism) which contains wisdom for these socio-political realities. An example of this is the rhetorics of John Chrysostom, the fourth century Bishop of Constantinople, in regard to the alleviation of poverty.

Furthermore, at this point of time, most of the Asian writings find their circulations within academic theological circles and have yet to infiltrate the level of grassroots Christians. The possible problem may be that of the language employed in these writings, which does not reflect the linguistic expression of the populace. It is perhaps important that the thinkers within the Asian church express their observations and theological responses in the language of the people (popular language).

There is also a sense in which we need to re-examine much of the theology we have received from our colonial missionaries. Whilst we appreciate the beauty of the gospel we have received from them, Christianity has come to Asia together with a seemingly inseparable Western cultural and theological expression. There is something of Protestant evangelical eschatology, for example, which contributes to our Asian Christian indifference towards socio-political realities. The dualism in which our faith is entrenched has likely given rise to this phenomenon of indifference towards social affairs in the present scheme of things. This calls for a re-examination, and if necessary, a revision of our eschatology in a way that is truer to the tradition of the church catholic.

Level Two: Grassroots Activism. Grassroots activism is an arena of social action which has yet to find the wide support of the Asian church authorities. Many organisations participating in the suffering of the people in Asia are either non-religious NGOs or Western mission agencies. There is little, if any, orchestrated grassroots activism at the ecclesiastical levels.

Perhaps the Asian church’s most apparent concerted effort was rendered observable in her response towards the catastrophe of the Asian Tsunami which occurred on 26 December 2004, one of the deadliest disasters in modern history. The earthquake and resulting tsunami affected many countries in Southeast Asia and beyond, including Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, Thailand, the Maldives, Somalia, Myanmar, Malaysia, Seychelles and others, causing some 300,000 deaths. This event witnessed an orchestration of joint efforts and various local churches coming together to contribute to the restoration of demolished cities like Banda Aceh. Donations were sent through various organisations and voluntary relief workers from the local churches were also sent in batches.

However, the kind of help described above is sporadic in nature; hardly anyone from within the Asian church is now heard expressing concern for the forgotten effects of the tsunami. At the heart of the matter is a need for locally inspired and orchestrated efforts within the Asian church to participate in a redemptive work among the peoples of Asia in various concrete ways. These efforts should not merely be sporadic and ad hoc, but rather, sustained over a long-period of time. And more than that, sustained efforts should be orchestrated at an ecumenical level, for it is within such an ethos that power in unity can truly project the heart of the Christian gospel in concretely visible ways.

Level Three: Structural Activism. The Protestant tradition in Asia has perhaps not been entirely well-known for attempting to influence changes in political structures. Rather, much of such attempts has been attributed more to Roman Catholic endeavours, although this awareness is now becoming increasingly apparent in Protestant circles as well. Structural activism is commonly associated with the Liberation Theology movement, which refers to a family of theologies that treat the plight of the socially oppressed as a point of departure for their theology and praxis. Liberation theologies within Asia are sometimes held suspect by political entities because of the perceived employment of Marxist rhetorics in their constructions.

In highlighting some examples on how structural activism in the form of liberation theologies has affected the life of the Asian church, allow me to cite some examples from Singapore. In the 1970s, Christian students at the local universities in Singapore activated, among themselves, action for the cause of social justice despite their awareness of the impending dangers of doing so. They sought to support the cause of the working class in their struggle against poverty, injustice in income distribution, and political oppression. The state was being criticised as utilitarian and meritocratic such that materialism and selfishness had become ingrained in the psyche of the people, whilst the interests of the underprivileged continued to be ignored. English language classes were conducted for Chinese-educated industrial workers and used as a platform for arousing their awareness towards the need for social justice. By this point, suppression by the authorities had infiltrated the student movement efforts. Spies were sent into student groups, leaders were questioned by the internal security branch, and foreign workers who were deemed threats to social stability were deported. In 1976, a Parliamentary directive was issued for the student union of the University of Singapore to be directly accountable to the education minister.

On 21 May 1987, sixteen young professionals in Singapore were detained for allegedly having been involved in a Marxist conspiracy; a second arrest brought the figure to twenty two persons. The alleged leader was a prominent participant in several Catholic Church groups including the Justice and Peace Commission, Vincent Cheng. This event was deemed to be connected to the prior student movement in that the government claimed that Tan Wah Piow, the student leader from the 1970s and who was now based in London, was the mastermind of the conspiracy. The activists were said to have infiltrated the community with Marxist ideas through bible study classes, religious group meetings, and religious publications (much of which, in the opinion of the government, had little to do with religion). An aggregate of twenty two Singaporeans were eventually arrested consisting of human rights lawyers, church activists, and theatre producers. In August 1987, in allusion to this event during the National Day message, Lee Kuan Yew heightened the public’s awareness of the necessity of avoiding the intertwining of religion and politics. The role of religious communities in Singapore, he added, was confined to the practice of charity and community services. Religious clergy were warned to “take of [their] clerical robes before [they took] on anything economic or political”.

In December 1987, the Christian Conference of Asia (at that time based in Singapore) was expelled from Singapore upon having been charged with several accusations, one of which was the insertion of articles on liberation theology in their monthly publication. Later on, Lee Kuan Yew specifically emphasised that the ideas of liberation theology should not be allowed to translate into action in Singapore.

These examples are cited to highlight the reality of structural activism – it entails a high price, a cost to be borne by the Christian community within a nation. It is perhaps this reality that intimidates the Christian community, thereby causing the church in Asia to pander to a state of political passivism. At the most critical moments, official statements are issued by the church and circulated with little or no impact upon the structural realities of the societal government. This has been most apparent in Malaysia in the recent case of Azlina Jailani, a Muslim girl who became Christian at the age of 26 and subsequently changed her name to Lina Joy. In 1999, she managed to change her name in her identity card, but her religion remained stated as Islam. In a majority verdict delivered on 30 May 2007, the Federal Court rejected her appeal for the religious status to be changed. The various ecclesiastical authorities of the church in Malaysia have issued statements in response to this verdict which is deemed to have violated the right of religious freedom of the Malaysian people. But that is as far as the church can go, for to further engage in structural activism would entail a cost perhaps beyond that which we are ready to face.

III. Concluding Remarks - The Suffering Church
The church in Asia does not – and cannot – exist in an illusive Christendom which has never constituted a part of her historical reality, functioning as if she were the centre of reference for the regulation of the Asian society. She exists amidst a plethora of social realities, much of which brings deep suffering to the Asian people. And to these realities, she must respond.

This response needs to be well thought through, well executed, and expressed in a spirit of unity with the church catholic in Asia. This must be how we pray with the rest of the saints – in ages past, in the present, and in time to come – “Your Kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven”. Then truly will the gospel be a gospel for the Asian people and the Christ of the church be truly understood as the liberator of the suffering people of Asia.

Could it be that we in Asia are called to be the suffering church?

Posted by SK at 4:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

5. The Paper I Presented
My paper has been published on the Union of Catholic Asian News as follows:

ASIA UCAN Document - 'Living Our Faith in Asia's Social Context'
KUALA LUMPUR (UCAN) - Christians in Asia should not be surprised that part of their calling is to suffer, says Sherman YL Kuek, an adjunct lecturer in systematic and contextual theology at Seminari Theoloji Malaysia.

Kuek shared this insight in a paper he presented on behalf of the Christian Conference of Asia (CCA) during the fourth seminar of the Asian Movement for Christian Unity (AMCU IV), held June 12-14 in Kuala Lumpur.

Besides the CCA, the Evangelical Fellowship of Asia (EFA) and the Federation of Asian Bishops' Conference (FABC) also took part in AMCU IV.

Kuek's main interests are contextual theological methodologies and the recovery of the "Great Tradition" in the theological thought of the Christian community. He also promotes ecumenism in his travels to speak with Christians of various backgrounds and traditions. He says this helps him to reflect on faith, life, and culture in a profoundly theological and yet simple way.

Besides those involvements, he is currently writing a doctoral thesis on contextual theology with Trinity Theological College in Singapore, and he regularly adds new material to his own blog (www.ShermanKuek.net).

The full text of Kuek's paper at AMCU IV follows:

LIVING OUR FAITH IN ASIA’S SOCIAL CONTEXT
Sherman YL Kuek, OSL

[A brief paper presented on behalf of the Christian Conference of Asia at the fourth seminar of the Asian Movement for Christian Unity held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, from 11 to 14 June 2007]

I. Suffering - the Most Distinct Social Attribute of Asia
Asia is probably the most difficult area of the world to make generalisations about. It is fraught with a series of diverse realities which the Christian church has to constantly grapple with. 1) Asia experiences economic diversity. The polarity of this economic diversity is incredibly broad, ranging from the poverty of Bangladesh (one of the poorest nations in the world) to the wealth of Japan (one of the economically most affluent nations in the world). The majority of the economies are linked to those of the developed world, particularly the West, in a relationship of dependence. 2) Asia experiences political diversity, for within it we find socialist regimes, monarchies and liberal parliamentary democracies. One important trait of Asian politics (which frequently remains little understood by Western political entities) is that the masses of Asia are generally excluded from the decision-making process of society. 3) Asia experiences cultural and religious diversity. Religion is indelibly entrenched within the life and history of Asia. Asia constitutes the homeland of the great religions of the world - Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. Other religions such as Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism and various less prominent religions also find their birth in Asia.

In attempting a more detail delineation of these various diversities within the social context of Asia, one finds a most distinct attribute of Asia’s social context - suffering. Suffering is inescapably innate within each of the Asian social dimensions identified above. 1) Asia experiences economic suffering. More than 85 percent of Asians are said to be suffering from poverty and oppression of some kind. Within the economic arena, the gap between the rich and the poor is ever escalating rather than decreasing. 2) Asia experiences political suffering. Countries such as North Korea, South Korea, Laos, Vietnam, and Cambodia have all experienced suffering in the form of wars. Japan has constituted both a source of suffering (particular through the World War II) and a recipient of suffering (for example, through the loss of two major cities from being wiped out by atomic weapons during the World War II). 3) Asia experiences religious suffering. Countless Christians in Asia, for example, are suffering for their faith. In China, underground seminaries train their pastors methods of withstanding persecution in the event that they get arrested. In Muslim-dominated countries, evangelism and conversion are deemed punishable by execution. In such countries, non-Muslims (or dhimis, to apply the traditional designation) are accorded nothing more than a mere second-class status.

(To be continued...)

Posted by SK at 10:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

4. Some Personal Observations of People at AMCU IV
The people were interesting. They came from various nations, Asian and Western. India was rather over-represented, strangely. Thus, at times, what was supposed to be an Asian discussion became a sole discussion on the Indian context. Having said that, I have some concrete comments on my observations of these friends I met at AMCU IV, most of whom I’d met for the first time (and hopefully not the last).

a. On the “Thereness” of the People. One observation that struck me about many of the Roman Catholic archbishops, bishops and priests, as well as the Orthodox monk and priest who were present at this seminar, was how “unbusy” they were. They didn’t look like they were in a rush to move around or entertain phone calls on their mobile phones. They seemed truly present, unlike many other Protestant gatherings I’ve attended wherein I met ministers who were physically present but seemed very anxious to leave because of family- or ministry-related issues. This latter observation can sometimes be true of me too. But these ministers I met at the AMCU IV seminar and some other ecumenical meetings, they were there. And their physical, emotional, and mental presence was very telling.

They were so present and so accessible that I even had an opportunity to have an engaging conversation, personally, with the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur. Over lunch, he asked me, "What is the position of the Protestant Church in Malaysia on interfaith dialogue?" Answering honestly was at best a painful necessity. I simply had to say, "Honestly, I don't think we have a unified position on this (or on anything else, for that matter). Even if we did, it wouldn't be visible at the lower levels of our ecclesiastical hierarchies. And for some, interfaith engagements is about 'converting them all'!"

b. On Their Concern for Christian Unity. There was a stark absence of representation from Protestant denominational leadership. Daniel rants here about this rather embarassing situation wherein the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church sent their highest level ecclesiastical leaders, whereas small fries like us had to represent the Protestant Church where our denominational leaders were nowhere to be seen. The Roman Catholic and Orthodox concern for such matters as Christian unity (or disunity) has made a deep impression on me. And it somewhat alarms me that the same cannot be said about the stream of Christianity to which I belong.

It is strange how our Protestant denomination leaders don't seem to see anything promising in the spirit of ecumenism. Okay, they may be concerned about it - but I've not yet seen it thus far. Yet I deem it too crucial an issue to be dismissed, perhaps because of how it has impacted me so deeply. My ecumenical journey has very much affected the way I have come to view things and express my spirituality. Just one simple example of this is the whole arena of dialogue. Dialogue takes place at two levels: i) with people of other Christian traditions, and ii) with people of other faith traditions.

My dialogue with people of other Christian traditions has created an awareness within myself of the poverty of the spirituality I've lived with all these years. My eyes have been opened to many things I previously didn't even know I didn't know. It prompts me of the urgency of growing beyond myself towards a more holistic appreciation of the Christian faith - not just my own tradition, but the Great Tradition comprising of the synergistic contributions of all the traditions.

My dialogue with people of other faith traditions provokes an awareness within me of what Pope John Paul II called "the scandal of a divided Christianity". It prompts me of the urgency for a visible unity within the church of Jesus Christ. And it reminds me that I constitute a part of this sad disunity.

c. On the Representation of the Delegation. By and large, the representation at the seminar was still Western-dominated. Even if the delegation was Asian in ethnic representation, the theology and the worldview was very Western by virtue of the delegates' theological training in the Western context.

Also, there were only two representations from the Oriental Orthodox Church amidst over 25 voices; this was unfortunate. As a result of the under-representation of the Orthodox voice, the dominant assumption was still one of ethical and virtuous qualities rather than an ontological one (which is fundamentally the underlying concern of Orthodoxy). In other words, for the Western-minded Roman Catholics, Protestants and Evangelicals, the bigger issue pertained to doing, i.e. what we do and how we do it. The Orthodox people, on the contrary, see being as the more pertinent issue, i.e. who we are and whose we are.

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

3. Some Personal Reflections from Discussions at AMCU IV
Much was discussed during the AMCU IV seminar. Here are some personal reflections I emerged with throughout the discussions. I shared some of these thoughts with the participants during the discussions too.

a. On Life Stories. It was nice to hear the life stories of prominent ecclesiastical leaders - priests, bishops, archbishops, metropolitans - being told from their own verbal testimonies. Listening to how their life experiences had eventually led them to where they stand today in their faith journeys and ecclesiastical statures. Their life stories strip them of the coldness of their titles and the grandeur of their attires.

This reminds me that anything perceived from a distance - including other religious convictions - breeds and perpetuates suspicion and hostility. But when personalities are attached to these convictions, layers of bias are shed. In Martin Buber's language, the endeavour to know "the other" opens windows to a true(r) knowing of "the Other".

b. On Listening. Now more than ever, I'm convinced of the importance of listening. We are often quick to argue and present our case and points of argument, but much of what others have to say in a dialogue is deemed irrelevant, or at best, boring. Basically, only what we have to say is deemed necessary. When others share their stories, we walk away from potential boredom without realising what we are missing.

We lose out because we drown in our own spiritual poverty. We lose out because we remain dull and deaf to the world's cry for a visible embodiment of humility. We lose out because we remain blind to the need for more listeners in a world which has a story - many stories - to tell, in a world which is itself a story.

I'm not talking about agreeing. I'm talking about listening. When will we learn that there is a difference between agreeing and listening? How authentic and genuine (and legitimate) are our disagreements if these disagreements are based on our not having first listened? For many Christians, there is something about listening that intimidates them; that perhaps if they listened, they would be obliged to agree. But that isn't the point of listening.

c. On the Church's Indifference. When a church does not engage in the issues arising from her own socio-political contexts, the church becomes a stranger in her own country. It is not an issue of doctrines and orthodoxy of beliefs; it is an issue of contributing to the life of a suffering community. If she fails to walk this journey, she becomes a stranger to her own community.

Posted by SK at 9:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

2. Memorable Quotes from AMCU IV
The following are some very memorable things I heard being mentioned at the seminar which I never want to forget:

"Our categories are never enough for the work of the Spirit."

Professor Francis X. D'Sa, S.J.,
Germany/India

"My faith experience has been characterised by the question of how to be a friend to anybody... it is the atmosphere of trust and intimacy that brings out the best in others. For me, friendship is the bottomline... The human in each of us is very, very important."

Archbishop Fernando Capalla,
Archbishop of Davao, Philippines
The Roman Catholic Church

"People of other faiths are not objects of our care and concern. They are mutual subjects on a journey towards God."

Archbishop Murphy Pakiam,
Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
The Roman Catholic Church

"I think the right-wing Evangelicals have fallen prey to capitalism. Sometimes they behave as if capitalism is God itself... as if God was a capitalist. God is not a capitalist; he's not even a trade unionist!"

The Revd Richard Howell,
General Secretary of the Evangelical Fellowship of India and
Vice-Chairman of the World Evangelical Association

"Truth claims are a matter of belief. Outside the world of belief, they don't make sense."

Professor Francis X. D'Sa, S.J.,
Germany/India

Posted by SK at 10:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I have just returned from this three-day event held at the Archdiocesan Pastoral Centre in Kuala Lumpur. Over the next few days, I will be posting up a series of blog entries containing background information of the movement, my observations and reflections, reports of the proceedings of this event, official statements, and a paper which I presented there.

1. Background of the AMCU
The beginning of the Asian Movement for Christian Unity (AMCU) can be traced to 1993 when the two Christian bodies in Asia – the Christian Conference of Asia (CCA) and the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC) – decided to set up the Asian Ecumenical Committee (AEC) to carry out joint programs, foster ecumenical relations at the national and local levels, and conscientize Christians of all churches to the importance of making visible the unity in Christ that already exists. Both bodies approved the setting up of such a committee at their respective assemblies in 1995 (FABC Plenary Assembly in Manila and CCA General Assembly in Colombo). The AEC therefore became a structure for implementing proposals to share information, cooperate on social issues and provide ecumenical formation.

In 1994, AMCU was conceived by the two bodies with the goal of promoting Christian unity by bringing together leaders, theologians, and ecumenical officers of the churches to study problems connected with Christian unity and to find ways to promote unity, at local, national and continental levels among Christ’s disciples in Asia.

The first AMCU seminar was held in 1996 in Hong Kong on the theme, “Making Visible Our Unity in Christ.” This was aimed at studying the theology of ecumenism, sharing vision of Christian unity, and building on what unites while overcoming what divides – all from their respective perspectives. That consultation led to a common search for practical ways to work for Christian unity in Asia and to planning a wide range of programs aimed at fostering Christian unity.

As part of their reflections on ecumenism, they have identified some obstacles to Christian unity in Asia, i.e. a long history of mutual indifference, prejudice, hostility, inadequate understanding of ecumenism, failure of the ecumenical movement to reach the grassroots, lack of structures to carry out initiatives, and unresolved doctrinal, moral and disciplinary issues.

The second AMCU seminar was held in Bali, Indonesia in 1998 with focus on “Ecumenical Teams and Ecumenical Formation.” It was aimed at preparing ecumenical teams who would give ecumenical formation course at local and national levels.

The third AMCU seminar was held in Chiang Mai, Thailand in 2001 on the theme, “Giving Shape to a New Ecumenical Vision.” The theme echoed the desire of both bodies to enter into a process of prayer and discussion to explore the possibilities of new ecumenical structures and associations for promoting Christian unity.

The fourth AMCU seminar has just been concluded on 14 June 2007. The long gap between the third seminar and the fourth seminar is mainly due to the holding of the General and Plenary Assemblies of CCA and FABC, respectively, in 2005. Nevertheless, through these years, both CCA and FABC bodies have nurtured their relationship of cooperation by jointly holding some programs or through reciprocal invitations to their own programs.

Even as the two bodies, CCA and FABC, continue to work on their visible unity in Christ that they affirm, they have also been concerned about other Christian bodies with whom they do not have formal relations as yet. CCA and FABC have on their own made attempts to reach out to Evangelical and Pentecostal churches in Asia.

The Global Christian Forum (GCF) that was held in Hong Kong in May 2004 was one avenue in which representatives of member churches from CCA and FABC as well as Evangelical and Pentecostal churches met together. In that gathering, the three regional bodies (CCA, FABC and the Evangelical Fellowship of Asia or EFA) were given the responsibility of doing a follow-up in the region. Thus, the GCF in Asia was held in September 2006 in Bangkok, Thailand on the theme, “Affirming Our One Savior in Common Witness,” bringing together representatives from the three bodies.

One of the results of the GCF in Asia was for AMCU IV to be opened to EFA. Hence, this was an interesting development that the fourth seminar of the Asian Movement for Christian Unity had included Evangelical and Pentecostal churches under the Evangelical Fellowship of Asia.

The theme “Our Common Witness in Contemporary Asia” echoed the theme of the GCF in Asia (“Affirming Our One Savior in Common Witness”) while being conscious of our grounding in our regional context in Asia where we are called to witness to our one Saviour. Our context presents to us challenging realities in socio-economic, religious-spiritual and political-cultural dimensions. All these call for our response as Christians in Asia.

AMCU IV was well-represented. The meeting consisted of some 25 people. Representing the FABC were bishops, archbishops and Jesuit priests. Representing the CCA were their fulltime officials, an Oriental Orthodox monk and an Oriental Orthodox celibate priest, as well as academic theologians (this lucky guy managed to find his way in as well). Representing the EFA were just two of their officials, but it was a good start indeed.

Posted by SK at 11:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

An excerpt from the website of the Christian Conference of Asia (CCA):

Preparations are on for the joint consultation "Asian Movement for Christian Unity (AMCU)". The program is coordinated by Dr Hope Antone and will be held from June 11-14, 2007 at Archdiocesan Pastoral Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Around thirty participants representing Christian Conference of Asia (CCA), Federation of Asian Bishop's Conferences (FABC) and Evangelical Fellowship in Asia (EFA) will take part in the event.

Dr Hope reflects that the theme "Our Common Witness in Contemporary Asia" echoes the theme of the GCF in Asia ("Affirming Our One Savior in Common Witness") while being conscious of our grounding in our regional context in Asia where we are called to witness to our one Saviour. Our context presents to us challenging realities in socio-economic, religious-spiritual and political-cultural dimensions. All these call for our response as Christians in Asia. You may read more about this in the CCA website.

What is interesting about this forthcoming AMCU IV is the participation of friends from the Evangelical and Pentecostal churches under the EFA which reflects our hope for unity of the whole Christian family that we are all parts of the one body of Christ.

I'm slotted to represent the Christian Conference of Asia to share a brief paper on "Living Our Faith in Asia's Social Context". The very first problem in this consideration is the definition of Asia's social context itself, which is frightfully varied.

But this is, on all accounts, an effort worth making, for it concerns the unity of the church. A participation of such nature reflects one's desire to partake in the prayer of our Lord Jesus that those people who follow him "may be one".

Posted by SK at 1:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Sixth Asia Lausanne Conference on Evangelism 2006
"A New Heart for the Evangelization of Asia"

I'm back from the 5-day stint in Laguna, Philippines. It was splendid. I don't think I heard any cutting-edge papers being presented in this conference. It was merely a reiteration of the reality of Asia having the vast majority of unreached people groups, and the need for the reign of God to be proclaimed to these friends. And yet it was splendid.

It was splendid to see 150 key leaders of the Church in Asia (bishops, missiologists and Asian theologians, mission agency leaders, etc) representing 20 countries in this congregation. It was splendid to hear them sing and speak in different languages. It was a beautiful experience to watch the way in which deep generosity was expressed in the way we accepted the differences in one another's cultures and spiritual traditional expressions. This was most apparently exhibited when a pentecostal grassroots preacher was invited to speak before the audience which consisted of many theological academicians; the spirit of acceptance and forebearance was deeply moving. This was where the real beauty of the event lay; not so much in the tabling of academic missiological papers, but in the congregating of hearts and lives that find their existence and passion in the heartbeat of God.

The flight from Changi International Airport (Singapore) to Ninoy Aquino International Airport (Manila) took three hours. From the airport in Manila, a fleet of vans was present to transport us to the Caliraya Recreation Center in Lumban, Laguna, which took another three hours of travel. My bishop very kindly extended this invitation for me to participate in ALCOE VI with a flight ticket thrown in from his frequent flyer points. I was also sent to this event with my registration fee and lodging expenses fully paid by friends from my local faith community. I'm deeply grateful for such generosity.

This event, although being focused on evangelism, largely reflected the state of the evangelical tradition in Asia today (since it was a congregation of very prominent Asian church leaders). It has therefore provoked some very crucial reflections for me, which I will be blogging about in my new series called Evangelical Shifts. For obvious reasons, it wasn't appropriate to discuss some crises points of evangelicalism in a conference that was focused on evangelism. But this also means that further thought has to be put into these issues beyond ALCOE VI. There is much I will subsequently have to say in my new series of blog entries about the state of evangelicalism in Asia today. These thoughts were certainly provoked by my observations throughout ALCOE VI, but have no particular reference to and should not be taken to refer specifically to that event itself.

Photographs taken from this trip are posted here.

Posted by SK at 4:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)