LKY Institute of Public Policy – November 6, 2009
Managing Religious Harmony in Singapore
Statue of Liberty – Staten Island
Give me your tired, your poor
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
The wretched refuse of your teeming shores
Send these. – Emma Lazarus
Merlion of Singapore – Mouth of Singapore River
Give me your geeks, your geniuses
Your PhD’s yearning for US research grants
The rich cream of your teeming shore
Oh pray do send these. Quick
Are you aware that you are the geeks and the geniuses and the rich cream from your countries. One of you may become the Prime Minister in the future.
It is recorded that the founding fathers, no mothers, of modern Singapore Toh Chin Chye, Goh Keng Swee and Ong Pang Boon who are from Malaysia. Rajaratnam was from Ceylon/Sri Lanka. Devan Nair was from Kerala, India. Only MM LKY was born in Singapore.
The Chief Minister from Penang, Malaysia observed recently that 40% of the specialist doctors working in government hospitals in Singapore are from Malaysia. To attract them back to Malaysia would de-stabilize the country. Malaysians like me are unwilling to renounce their citizenship while working and staying here as Permanent Residents.
Singapore’s early beginning was a tiny Malay fishing village. A small indigenous Orang Laut (People of the sea) also lived along the nearby coast, rivers and on smaller islands. Since the 5th century CE businessmen traveling between China and India have been using this island for trade. Later, Singapore became a trading outpost of the ancient Buddhist kingdom of Srivijaya, which had its centre in Palembang, Sumatra, and influenced the region from the 7th to the 10th centuries.
In the 13th century, Srivijaya was overshadowed by the rise of Islam, and Singapore came under the influence of the Muslim empire of Malacca. Malacca, situated on the western coast of present-day Peninsula Malaysia, rapidly developed into a thriving free port and commercial centre.
In 1819, the British East India Company, led by Sir Stamford Raffles, established a trading post on the island, which was used as a port along the spice route. In 1824, the island was bought by the British East India Company and became a British colony.
Singapore has always been a nation of immigrants and continue to do so in attracting foreign talents like some of you. The people who immigrated here brought along with their gods and goddesses and spirits in their boats and housed them in shrines, mosques, temples and churches. They were the business entrepreneurs who came to trade and ordinary labourers who came to work from the poor and crowded countries around us. This process continues till today but under tighter immigration controls. They erected their places of worship for the Muslims, Buddhist, Hindus and traditional Christian religions. The Christian religion came on the heels of the British colonial power and other European commercial interests. Later the Americans entered the scene and helped in the spread of Christianity.
Their religious footprints are left with these historic heritage church buildings like St. Andrew’s Cathedral of then called Church of England, the Armenian Orthodox Church, Wesley Methodist Church, English & Scottish Presbyterians on Prinsep Street. Initially Christian clergymen serve as Chaplains to the colonial officers and the Europeans who worked here Later they reached out to the local population. The promotion of English education furthered the growth of the Christian movement.
It must be noted that the Jewish presence was evident too and we have even a Jewish quarter along Mount Sophia Road where there remains some buildings marked by the Star of David.
In checking the current population statistics of 2009 we find:
Singapore is a multi-religious country in a population of 4.99 million, of whom 3.73 million are Singaporean citizens and permanent residents (termed "Singapore Residents"). There are 3.2 million citizens. Around 51% of resident Singaporeans (excluding significant numbers of visitors and migrant workers) practice Buddhism and Taoism. Muslims constitute 15%, of whom Malays account for the majority with a substantial number of Indian Muslims and Chinese Muslims. About 14%, mostly Chinese, Eurasians, and Indians, practice Christianity - a broad classification including Catholicism, Protestantism and other denominations. Smaller minorities practice Sikhism, Hinduism and others, according to the 2000 census.
About 15% of the population declared no religious affiliation. The secular core in our society does not come from this group alone but from people of different faith communities who refrained or restrained from expressing religious views overtly in the public sphere.
Singapore is extremely conscious that it is a small country with limited natural resources and depend much upon the human resource. The pre-occupation of our leaders is on economic development and we are prepared to trade off other social and cultural considerations. We are perceived to be Singapore incorporated and open for business. Therefore we have to grow our economy and control and manage other sectors of society.
Singapore jealously guards its secular nature and allows freedom of worship. They try to observe the separation between the sacred and the secular. It actively engages in promoting religious harmony in order to ensure social stability and economic growth.
It has been commented that Singapore has a highly unusual approach to issues of religious diversity and multiculturalism, adopting a policy of deliberately "managing religions" including Islam in an attempt to achieve orderly and harmonious relations between different racial and religious groups.
No one religion has attained a position of dominance in Singapore. In the struggle to be independent and to be free from the shackles of colonialism the faith communities in contrast with other colonial countries were not actively engaged in the movement for national independence. Christianity has a special relationship with the British colonial administration and for obvious reasons kept itself out of the struggle.
Since independence in 1965 there is generally no religious conflict among the major faith communities in Singapore. Now and then the issue of proselytisation surfaces in terms of aggressive approaches to secure converts from other religions. Religious activities are conducted in faith-based schools but the question is about participation by students who belong to other religions.. These are under control and the state is monitoring whether coercive and intrusive efforts are made to convert. Although the Religious Harmony Act is in place to remind us, no prosecution has really taken place specifically under the Act. Recently two persons were charged and convicted under the Sedition Act and Undesirable Publications Act for circulating fundamentalist Christian Chick Publications that cast a bad light on Islam. The case is under appeal.
Some religious materials and practices are banned in Singapore. The Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, are prohibited from distributing religious materials and are sometimes jailed for their conscientious refusals to serve in the Singaporean military.
Religion here is closely linked with ethnicity. Christianity and Islam cuts across ethnic lines. Singapore history is marred by two religious controversies. The Marie Hertogh case in 1950 over custody of a 13 year old Dutch girl who was adopted by a Malay family, and the overflow of the May 13 racial riots after a national election in Malaysia in 1969. The former was between Islam and Christians and the latter between Malays and primarily the Chinese.
Under the British colonial period there were attempts of integration and assimilation of the different races. We were encouraged to study the English language and imbibe Western culture. They had economic value and social mobility. But with globalisation we are moving in the direction of developing a pluralistic society.
May I cautiously move on to the past action of the government against the Christian groups who were involved in questions of social justice in the seventies and eighties. The events related to it are published in three recent publications. They are “Paths Not Taken: Political Pluralism in Postwar Singapore” edited by Michael D Barr &Carl A Trocki and published by National University of Singapore Press 2008; “That we may Dream Again” edited by Fong Hoe Fang and “Our Thoughts are Free” edited by Tan Jing Quee, Teo Soh Lung, & Koh Kay Yew published by Ethos Books 2009.
Lee Kuan Yew in a speech to an Asian Christian Conference in 1967 had recognized the role of religions in the struggle to move society “forward to progress and to a higher level of human life.” He even hoped that the Christian churches might contribute some real leadership to the role of nation building.
The Christian churches took him on his word. In 1969 a Christian ministry to urban industrial mission was developed. The Community Organization method of Saul Alinksy and others in Chicago was adopted. This is the same movement in which President Obama was related to in Chicago. The Jurong Industrial Mission and the Community Centre project in Toa Payoh was launched by the National Council of Churches. They sought to educate workers about their rights and residents about their responsibilities. It was an attempt to participate in nation building.
Soon the work met with government displeasure and the churches succumbed to the pressure and withdrew its endorsement and financial support. This brought an end to its closure in 1973.
In 1987 the government in Operation Spectrum detained 22 workers without trial who were accused to a Marxist conspiracy to “overthrow the government and establish a Communist state.” In fact there were mainly Christian students who were concerned with social justice issues and was rendering their services primarily to domestic maids and migrant workers. Some Catholic priests who were part of the Young Workers Movement were involved with the so-called conspiracy had to resign and left the country.
Nine who were released was courageous enough the recant the confessions that had been extracted from them and spoke about the ill-treatment they received under detention and were subsequently re-arrested. All after varying years of detention without trial were released.
I was personally around and engaged during this critical period. I was a Council member of the National Council of Churches in Singapore and became the General Secretary of the Christian Conference of Asia an ecumenical body forming a network of the NCC and churches in all the countries of Asia with the exception of the Middle Eastern countries but the inclusion of Australia and New Zealand. CCA had its office here and I was responsible in establishing it from 1973 and served for three full terms for a period of 12 years. But two years after I left and in connection with the events of Operation Spectrum the office was de-registered and the foreign staff members expelled from the country. I am a survivor.
When you visited the Harmony Center you were informed it was inaugurated in 2006. Let me first explain that after September 11, the Muslim community was seeking to project a better image of Islam to the society. They then initiated the establishment of such a center for the purpose of disseminating information about Islam and to foster interfaith dialogue. I have participated in their events frequently in my personal capacity. They sensed how crucial it is to promote religious harmony. Leaders of different faiths were at the official inauguration but there should have been more participation from the faith communities in subsequent events. No other faith community has established similar Harmony centers even to serve their own followers to know more about other religions or to have dialogue with people of other faiths. Most of the initiatives on interfaith dialogue come from the Muslim side. Islam is a minority religion and the fallout of 9/ll compelled the Muslim community to project a different image, one of peace and moderation rather than violence and extremism. The Muslim community is very interested in interfaith relations and dialogue and must be disappointed with the lukewarm response to do it on a more serious level from all the other faith communities.
Other faith communities do not feel threatened and do not feel that they are being discriminated. They are comfortable in their private religious zone. There is no siege mentality on the part of the religious communities. Generally there is goodwill among the religions. The faith communities live in splendid isolation, each able to maintain itself without the support of the other. But we cannot allow them to remain in their comfort zones be it in churches, mosques or temples tending only to its own business.
Faith communities tend to be conservative and hold on to traditional beliefs and practices. Unfortunately each community believes it has the monopoly of religious truths and values and the only way to salvation. Hence the need to dialogue on religious issues is not essential and there is no felt need to relate with other faith communities.
Some religious communities seek to inform one another about their faith and avoid issues that divide the communities. On the practical and social level there is much more interaction in the celebration of one another’s religious observances and festivities. They are still careful about the issue of conversion. A few conversions take place but kept under wraps. It seems that self-restriction is in place without too overt an evangelization or conversion programme.
With the increasing religiosity and the resurgence of traditional Asian religions there is the need for re-examination of our religious beliefs and values. With the open access to information more challenges are posed about the role of religion in society. In the period of secularization and the disenchantment with religious institutions serious questions are being asked. At the early stages there was the process of moving religion to the margins and become just a privatized faith with the hope that it will finally wither away. But there is as Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks has written persuasively a persistence of faith and religion is coming out enter the common space. The intra debate within each faith community itself has surfaced traditional and progressive divisions.
I personally welcomed this development and acknowledgment of diversity of religious beliefs. The call is to recognize differences and respect them. The process is to engage people who have different views in the expectation of finding common ground for the well-being of our community.
At one time the political leadership proclaimed that if one is to participate in the common space and deal with political issues it can be done only when he or she belongs to a registered political party. But lately with the AWARE saga the space has opened up for political views to be expressed other than from an exclusive political party base. If the profile of the religious population shows that only 15% declared no religious affiliation it is inevitable that the rest are members of their faith communities and are influenced by religious views on social and moral issues. Due to the multi-religious nature of the people it is important that we do not allow one religion to intrude, impose and dominate at the expense of the other religions. Each will have to come to share their views even though they may be different and reach agreement to function for the well-being of the society. That was the appeal of the Prime Minister in his National Day Rally speech. This is a significant step in the right direction. The fear is about religious fundamentalism, domination and extremism.
In the past there was comparative lack of opportunity for participation in the common space. There is no violent reaction from the faith communities on controversial social issues. Upon request from the State, they sent in their feedback on certain issues like abortion, stem-cell research, national service, birth control, organ donations and casino gambling. The conservative character of our faith communities at present are against the somewhat progressive secular policy. Most of the time their representations were entertained and shelved and the proposed policy prevails even if it is at odds with the faith communities.
A local theologian just last Saturday has called on Christians to be realistic about their role vis-a-vis society at large. It is beyond the ability of the Church to transform the world on a macro, societal level. This is something only God can achieve.
As for Christians, they are called merely to be witnesses of God’s justice and love in word and service, according to Dr Roland Chia, a professor of Christian doctrine at Trinity Theological College. Christians should realise that the social and political order is beyond their ability as humans to change and that “political and social engagement is not the quick way to usher in the Kingdom of God on earth”. In the end, the most important form of engagement Christians could engage in is by falling to their knees in prayer.
More than organising political and social movements in a vain attempt to transform the world, Christians should pray for God’s Kingdom to come on earth, the theologian said.
People of faith who are committed to diversity and who respect the differences should be encouraged to dialogue in seeking common values and working together to foster peace and harmony and ensure a bright future for all people throughout the world.
I have said enough without getting into more trouble and causing more conflict. I am sorry I have not painted a rosy picture but candidly portrayed a colorful scene of the inherent rainbow society in Singapore
Friday, November 20, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Lately, I have been challenged to reflect on sexual ethics. In terms of sex there is the tendency for us to “just do it” (it is just sex!) instead of first thinking over its consequences. It is to our advantage to be proactive and develop some guidelines concerning things sexual.
The breaking up of relationships resulted in emotional upheavals around us. The fallout of pain and agony should not surprise us. These happenings led me to informal discussions with people who are prepared to be engaged on the issue of sexual ethics and there are only a few. It is good and timely that these situations presented opportunities for us to reflect. The pressure of events has forced us to look more critically on sexual ethics in our community. It is all about sex in FCC in the direction of discovering meaning and purpose of sex in our lives. .
When I was requested to express my views on the article on “Sexual Ethics” I realise that I could not just simple state my views and rehearse them again. I need to probe also into recent publications on the subject to find my bearings and see whether I am on the right track in the current discourse on sexual ethics. I went to the library of Trinity Theological College and searched the catalogue under the search words “Christian sexual ethics.” I explored the following books which I found useful and I interacted with the writings in seeking clarity for my positions.
I want to share the titles of these books which I found stimulating:
1. Farley Margaret A, “Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics” (New York: Continum, 2006).
Ms Farley is Professor of Christian Ethics at Yale Divinity School since 1971. She is a feminist theologian and in her scholarly work she has researched the important writings on this subject with a vast bibliography.
2. Jordan, Mark D, “The Ethics of Sex” (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2002). Mr Jordan is avante-garde on Postmodern theology and writes from a non-heterosexual and marginal perspective. In the penultimate page of his book, he wrote: “Who could have imagined two decades ago (since 1970) that an introduction to the Christian ethics of sex could be written by an ‘unrepentant homosexual’”?
3. Cahill, Lisa Snowle, (Sex, Gender & Christian Ethics” (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1996). Ms Snowle is a Professor of Christian Ethics at Boston College. She wrote from the perspective of a Catholic feminist theologian.
4. Dominian, Jack & Montefiore, Hugh, “God Sex & Love” (London: SCM Press, 1989). Anglican Bishop Montefiore is a marital counselor and Senior Consultant at Central Middlesex Hospital. Roman Catholic Dr Dominian is a Senior Consultant Psychiatrist in the same hospital. Both speak as committed members of their churches and dare to differ from their official teaching.
5. Countryman, L. William, “Dirt Greed & Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and their implications for Today” (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988). Dr Countryman is Professor of New Testament at the Church Divinity School of the Pacific in Berkeley.
In reading through this random selection of books I found all the authors are gay-affirming and they seem to agree on some common principles of sexual ethics. Some will emphasize more on certain aspects like the Catholic bishop who shared also the concept of natural law. Others are more progressive. Farley was able to draw all the issues together and provides a basic framework for our reflection. A comprehensive view of sexuality was discussed in order to bring clarity to specific problems of sex.
They all seem to speak about one Christian sexual ethics along the lines that they understand, interpret and communicate. There is one sexual ethic applicable for the gays and the straights. They make reference to the LGBT community but they do not privilege them. One ethics fits them all – gay or straight. This is important and we no longer say that any group needs special consideration. The difference is in sexual partners – same-sex or opposite sex. The same ethic applies to both.
The peculiar situation of the LGBTG is that they have to accept their sexual orientation and then along with the straights deal with sexual ethics. Indulging in sex does not necessarily lead to affirmation of gay identity. It may create greater confusion both in acceptance of sexual orientation and in sexual ethics. Gays are not naturally more promiscuous than the straights. Gay and straight identities are not socially constructed but naturally endowed. This is what is meant when we claim we do not choose to become a homosexual. It is not a choice but a recognition and acceptance of what is given.
The question that we have to ask is the source and authority for our Christian ethic. Traditionally, we have been told to accept the authority of the Bible. For we all too familiar with the refrain “The Bible tells me so.” Then we are confronted with the teaching of the official Church that has declared what is right and what is wrong by the majority of its leaders. But when we examine more closely we have to raise the questions about the way the Bible was formed or the manner in which the pronouncements of the Church were formulated. . The literal acceptance of these important documents is not adequate. They are in reality not revealed but interpretations of the revelations by the different human authors inspired by God. Sola Scripture is not sufficient.
In my seminary training since 1952 I have been exposed to critical study of the sources of authority. A scholar of Wesleyan or Methdist theology, Albert Outler in 1964 coined the term Wesleyan Quadrilateral for the sources in our study of theology and search for truth. The four distinctive sources in arriving at theological conclusions are:
· Scripture - the Holy Bible (Old and New Testaments)
· Tradition - the two millennia history of the Christian Church
· Reason - rational thinking and sensible interpretation
· Experience - a Christian's personal and communal journey in Christ
This quadrilateral has been widely accepted by recognized scholars and has filtered down to popular usage. Farley readily admits that her version parallels the Wesleyan Quadrilateral which she regards as fairly “standard” for most scholars for the study of Christian sexual ethics. She uses the terms Scripture, tradition, secular disciplines and contemporary experience.
These four sources are distinct but inter-related. We can no longer believe that the words of the Bible were dictated by God and the metaphorical story of the Ten Commandments were carved in stone tablets and brought down from Mount Sinai by Moses who met Yahweh at the top. People of faith have received what they in faith believed as God’s revelation of truth. They must have undergone the process of reasoning to come to their conclusions. The teaching of the Church was formulated by scholars and leaders through their critical study and reflection not only of the Bible passages. What they believe to be true has to be experienced in the life of the faithful individually and corporately in community. No one source can stand alone. It must interact with one another in trying to reach truth and understanding.
When we interpret the Bible and Tradition we must recognize that it is historically based and culturally bound. They cannot be absolute and universal truth for all people and all time. We have the obligation and responsibility to investigate how they can become relevant to our contemporary situations. We have already rejected the purity laws, slavery, racial discrimination, patriarchy and it is just a matter time before the teaching that homosexuality is a sin and abomination is cast into the shredder.
With sexual ethics in mind we must note that the Bible is primarily concerned with sex solely for procreation and the patriarchal model of sexual relationships. Women were generally under the control by men and regarded to be a piece of property to be used and transacted. The Jewish tribes were concerned with the perpetuation of their people as Chosen people and the continued dominance of the male members in society. Monogamous relationship for life was valued and promoted. Adultery was punishable by death of both partners.
The Jewish faith was concerned with the issue of holiness and purity and regard the material including the body as of less worth than the spiritual. There are those who even say that sexuality violates purity laws and there is much argument about what is clean and what is unclean. It also leads to feel that erotic pleasure is disgusting and that sex is dirty.
Sex is due to the fall.. Too easily is the acceptance even within the gay community that sex is original sin and fallen nature. It is then associated not only to the weakness of the temptress Eve but with the demonic and the idolatrous.
The New Testament is clear that there is the overarching command to love God and neighbour which includes the sexual lives of the people. Seeking justice and loving mercy is more important that pursuing sex. It was concerned with the reign of God in all human activity.
The community of faith in their critical reflection and interpretation of the words and events written down in the pages of the holy text which originally circulated as oral tradition form the official teaching of the Church.
As the Bible was influenced by the pagan religions around them, the teaching of the Church was impacted by Graeco-Roman culture and the other religious and cultural conditions prevailing then. Tradition is continuing and is not frozen to the past. Through our experiences and new thinking we correct old traditions, updating them and forming new ones. This process is a continuous one. New occasions teach new duties.
The Graeco-Roman culture accepted sex as a natural part of life. It was against incest, bigamy and adultery because they covet another person’s property. Both the Greeks and the Romans know about same-sex relations for they assumed that the male sex is bi-sexual. Concubinage, male and female prostitution, sexual use of slaves were accepted. Both men and women sought sex with partners other than their spouses. Only the brides were expected to be virgins. Male homosexuality was accepted but male passivity is questioned. Lesbian relationships did not receive positive support and seen as adultery because a woman is a property of her husband.
The Christian tradition inevitably changed in succeeding generations. The ancient philosophers were against bodily passion. But the use of reason in dealing with questions of morality was encouraged. Sex was good but gone bad due to the Fall. Virginity became a virtue and extolled.
The Early Church Fathers viewed sexual passion as an evil passion that must be brought under control. Even sexual intercourse outside marriage and without the purpose of procreation was regarded as sinful. Marriage is seen as a remedy for lust. Canon law was instituted on the principle that “all sexual activity is evil unless it is between husband and wife and for the sake of procreation. Generally then they took a negative and pessimistic view of sex.
In the Middle Ages the tradition of spiritual love and sexual pleasure came together and celibacy was challenged. Later Luther advanced the idea that marriage is not a hospital for incurables but a school for character and the importance of family life. Luther along with Calvin opposed divorce, premarital and extramarital sex and homosexual relations.
Sexual ethics must necessarily be affected by new information and new technologies. The secular disciplines of philosophy, psychology, sociology, science and arts are what we can regard as the rational source. We use reason and we experiment to gain knowledge.
Karen Armstrong recently commented: “Homo sapiens is also Homo religiosus. As soon as we became recognizably human, men and women started to create religions. We are meaning-seeking creatures. While dogs, as far as we know, do not worry about the canine condition or agonize about their mortality, humans fall very easily into despair if we don’t find some significance in our lives.”
Is it reasonable for us to believe that when human beings came out of the waters on the shores of life they were gifted with reason to comprehend and cope with their surroundings. In this condition filled with awe and wonder they constructed their religious systems. They looked at one another and found the differentiation of male and female gender. In the new and strange environment they sought companionship and driven my inner urges they found intimacy with their partners. Through the process of observation they discovered though in a primitive sense how new life emerged.
The powerful with sheer strength and plain possessions began to dominate the weaker ones to satisfy their natural desires including sexual urges. In organizing the tribes they discovered the value of family and community in child-rearing and protecting the group.
God has also gifted humankind with a moral sense of what is good and right and the freedom to choose. We find the authority embedded in religion as well. We entered into a whole range of experiences and reflected upon them. This process is continuing.
When we look at experience as a source of authority we recognize that the Bible is a record of the experience of the people of faith and the teaching of the Church is a record of the experience of the community of faith who at a specific time of history come to agreement, in this case, on sexual issues. All claim divine revelations but even then the revelations have to be processed by the use of reason and experience.
Farley offers further the concept of “just love.” She warns us about casually saying that love is the sufficient answer to all our sexual issues. We must be able to see the right kind of the expression of love. It must be true, good and just love. She places the emphasis on the principle of justice in our loving relationships. Her definition of love that is true and just, right and good as “true response to the reality of the beloved, a genuine union between the one who loves and the one loved, and an accurate and adequate affective affirmation of the beloved.”
She then listed specific norms for a “just sex.” Our sexual relationships need to serve the cause of justice. These are the principles or guidelines: 1. Do no unjust harm. 2. Free consent of partners. 3. Mutuality. 4. Equality. 5. Commitment. 6. Fruitfulness. 7. Social justice. All these come to play when we reasoned out our own version of sexual ethics to guide our actions.
With this interpretation of authority and framework for sexual ethics we now examine some of the problematic areas. .
What is sex? Much has been said that the sexual act between male and female is for the purpose of procreation. The created human body - male and female - come together to give birth to new life. This is the natural form of ensuring life to continue on earth knowing that death is inevitable to all. This is the case with animal life. We detect the strong drive for sex which is innate that leads to intense desire and performance of the sexual act for the purpose of creating new life.
Beyond reproduction, sex also provides intimacy and pleasure. According to Cahil, “Sexual pleasure as a bodily reality involves sexual drives and attractions, and their resolution through orgasm or to less genitally focused experiences of sexual satisfaction.” St Paul acknowledges the satisfaction of desire for intimacy as a valid reason for marriage. Sex in our time in contrast with the past is focused more directly on intimacy and pleasure than in reproduction. This is a positive value of sex being an integral part of the human person with freedom and responsibility to relate and enter into relationships with others. Sex is to be regarded as a good gift from God in creating us as sexual beings.
What do we have to say about open relationships? While it is true that we cannot be easily satisfied with a monogamous relationship and even managing one, how are we to cope with multiple relationships and managing more than one. The eruptions caused by breaking relationships of a couple without open relationships will just increase exponentially for those who work on open relationships. Strong emotions swirl around in relationships and they need to be controlled and regulated.
There are levels of relationships for intimacy and pleasure. It is different between friends and partners in committed and consensual relationships. What form of sexual acts come into play between friends and between partners?
Much has been said about marriage and family values. If open relationships is acceptable what does it mean for the sanctity of marriage of gays and straights, the stability of family life and the sustaining of community.
Is sex is just not a recreational activity that we indulge in as couples or in groups as casual sex? Sexuality is not just physical activity. Sexuality has physical, emotional, spiritual, personal and social dimensions. It is not a private activity in the secrecy of our bedrooms. It has social implications as to how we view sex and the kind of human community we form when sex is only physical and recreational. We can see the chaos in the more open and competitive community in the animal kingdom where physical prowess rules. We see it when the powerful and the rich are able to control and buy sex. Sex cannot be just individualistic and bodily. Sex which is good has turned bad. Good sex has to take into account the dimensions of the body, individual and the social. Sex seeks to gratify the person and interpersonal fulfillment. That will happen when sexual norms that we listed earlier are being applied
The key to an individual, gay or straight, is not sex but true love. We do not engage in sex and destroy life of the individual and community. Sexual love must also serve the cause of justice. It is not just sex or simply sex. It is sex that is just. Have good and just sex and enjoy it.
The breaking up of relationships resulted in emotional upheavals around us. The fallout of pain and agony should not surprise us. These happenings led me to informal discussions with people who are prepared to be engaged on the issue of sexual ethics and there are only a few. It is good and timely that these situations presented opportunities for us to reflect. The pressure of events has forced us to look more critically on sexual ethics in our community. It is all about sex in FCC in the direction of discovering meaning and purpose of sex in our lives. .
When I was requested to express my views on the article on “Sexual Ethics” I realise that I could not just simple state my views and rehearse them again. I need to probe also into recent publications on the subject to find my bearings and see whether I am on the right track in the current discourse on sexual ethics. I went to the library of Trinity Theological College and searched the catalogue under the search words “Christian sexual ethics.” I explored the following books which I found useful and I interacted with the writings in seeking clarity for my positions.
I want to share the titles of these books which I found stimulating:
1. Farley Margaret A, “Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics” (New York: Continum, 2006).
Ms Farley is Professor of Christian Ethics at Yale Divinity School since 1971. She is a feminist theologian and in her scholarly work she has researched the important writings on this subject with a vast bibliography.
2. Jordan, Mark D, “The Ethics of Sex” (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2002). Mr Jordan is avante-garde on Postmodern theology and writes from a non-heterosexual and marginal perspective. In the penultimate page of his book, he wrote: “Who could have imagined two decades ago (since 1970) that an introduction to the Christian ethics of sex could be written by an ‘unrepentant homosexual’”?
3. Cahill, Lisa Snowle, (Sex, Gender & Christian Ethics” (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1996). Ms Snowle is a Professor of Christian Ethics at Boston College. She wrote from the perspective of a Catholic feminist theologian.
4. Dominian, Jack & Montefiore, Hugh, “God Sex & Love” (London: SCM Press, 1989). Anglican Bishop Montefiore is a marital counselor and Senior Consultant at Central Middlesex Hospital. Roman Catholic Dr Dominian is a Senior Consultant Psychiatrist in the same hospital. Both speak as committed members of their churches and dare to differ from their official teaching.
5. Countryman, L. William, “Dirt Greed & Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and their implications for Today” (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988). Dr Countryman is Professor of New Testament at the Church Divinity School of the Pacific in Berkeley.
In reading through this random selection of books I found all the authors are gay-affirming and they seem to agree on some common principles of sexual ethics. Some will emphasize more on certain aspects like the Catholic bishop who shared also the concept of natural law. Others are more progressive. Farley was able to draw all the issues together and provides a basic framework for our reflection. A comprehensive view of sexuality was discussed in order to bring clarity to specific problems of sex.
They all seem to speak about one Christian sexual ethics along the lines that they understand, interpret and communicate. There is one sexual ethic applicable for the gays and the straights. They make reference to the LGBT community but they do not privilege them. One ethics fits them all – gay or straight. This is important and we no longer say that any group needs special consideration. The difference is in sexual partners – same-sex or opposite sex. The same ethic applies to both.
The peculiar situation of the LGBTG is that they have to accept their sexual orientation and then along with the straights deal with sexual ethics. Indulging in sex does not necessarily lead to affirmation of gay identity. It may create greater confusion both in acceptance of sexual orientation and in sexual ethics. Gays are not naturally more promiscuous than the straights. Gay and straight identities are not socially constructed but naturally endowed. This is what is meant when we claim we do not choose to become a homosexual. It is not a choice but a recognition and acceptance of what is given.
The question that we have to ask is the source and authority for our Christian ethic. Traditionally, we have been told to accept the authority of the Bible. For we all too familiar with the refrain “The Bible tells me so.” Then we are confronted with the teaching of the official Church that has declared what is right and what is wrong by the majority of its leaders. But when we examine more closely we have to raise the questions about the way the Bible was formed or the manner in which the pronouncements of the Church were formulated. . The literal acceptance of these important documents is not adequate. They are in reality not revealed but interpretations of the revelations by the different human authors inspired by God. Sola Scripture is not sufficient.
In my seminary training since 1952 I have been exposed to critical study of the sources of authority. A scholar of Wesleyan or Methdist theology, Albert Outler in 1964 coined the term Wesleyan Quadrilateral for the sources in our study of theology and search for truth. The four distinctive sources in arriving at theological conclusions are:
· Scripture - the Holy Bible (Old and New Testaments)
· Tradition - the two millennia history of the Christian Church
· Reason - rational thinking and sensible interpretation
· Experience - a Christian's personal and communal journey in Christ
This quadrilateral has been widely accepted by recognized scholars and has filtered down to popular usage. Farley readily admits that her version parallels the Wesleyan Quadrilateral which she regards as fairly “standard” for most scholars for the study of Christian sexual ethics. She uses the terms Scripture, tradition, secular disciplines and contemporary experience.
These four sources are distinct but inter-related. We can no longer believe that the words of the Bible were dictated by God and the metaphorical story of the Ten Commandments were carved in stone tablets and brought down from Mount Sinai by Moses who met Yahweh at the top. People of faith have received what they in faith believed as God’s revelation of truth. They must have undergone the process of reasoning to come to their conclusions. The teaching of the Church was formulated by scholars and leaders through their critical study and reflection not only of the Bible passages. What they believe to be true has to be experienced in the life of the faithful individually and corporately in community. No one source can stand alone. It must interact with one another in trying to reach truth and understanding.
When we interpret the Bible and Tradition we must recognize that it is historically based and culturally bound. They cannot be absolute and universal truth for all people and all time. We have the obligation and responsibility to investigate how they can become relevant to our contemporary situations. We have already rejected the purity laws, slavery, racial discrimination, patriarchy and it is just a matter time before the teaching that homosexuality is a sin and abomination is cast into the shredder.
With sexual ethics in mind we must note that the Bible is primarily concerned with sex solely for procreation and the patriarchal model of sexual relationships. Women were generally under the control by men and regarded to be a piece of property to be used and transacted. The Jewish tribes were concerned with the perpetuation of their people as Chosen people and the continued dominance of the male members in society. Monogamous relationship for life was valued and promoted. Adultery was punishable by death of both partners.
The Jewish faith was concerned with the issue of holiness and purity and regard the material including the body as of less worth than the spiritual. There are those who even say that sexuality violates purity laws and there is much argument about what is clean and what is unclean. It also leads to feel that erotic pleasure is disgusting and that sex is dirty.
Sex is due to the fall.. Too easily is the acceptance even within the gay community that sex is original sin and fallen nature. It is then associated not only to the weakness of the temptress Eve but with the demonic and the idolatrous.
The New Testament is clear that there is the overarching command to love God and neighbour which includes the sexual lives of the people. Seeking justice and loving mercy is more important that pursuing sex. It was concerned with the reign of God in all human activity.
The community of faith in their critical reflection and interpretation of the words and events written down in the pages of the holy text which originally circulated as oral tradition form the official teaching of the Church.
As the Bible was influenced by the pagan religions around them, the teaching of the Church was impacted by Graeco-Roman culture and the other religious and cultural conditions prevailing then. Tradition is continuing and is not frozen to the past. Through our experiences and new thinking we correct old traditions, updating them and forming new ones. This process is a continuous one. New occasions teach new duties.
The Graeco-Roman culture accepted sex as a natural part of life. It was against incest, bigamy and adultery because they covet another person’s property. Both the Greeks and the Romans know about same-sex relations for they assumed that the male sex is bi-sexual. Concubinage, male and female prostitution, sexual use of slaves were accepted. Both men and women sought sex with partners other than their spouses. Only the brides were expected to be virgins. Male homosexuality was accepted but male passivity is questioned. Lesbian relationships did not receive positive support and seen as adultery because a woman is a property of her husband.
The Christian tradition inevitably changed in succeeding generations. The ancient philosophers were against bodily passion. But the use of reason in dealing with questions of morality was encouraged. Sex was good but gone bad due to the Fall. Virginity became a virtue and extolled.
The Early Church Fathers viewed sexual passion as an evil passion that must be brought under control. Even sexual intercourse outside marriage and without the purpose of procreation was regarded as sinful. Marriage is seen as a remedy for lust. Canon law was instituted on the principle that “all sexual activity is evil unless it is between husband and wife and for the sake of procreation. Generally then they took a negative and pessimistic view of sex.
In the Middle Ages the tradition of spiritual love and sexual pleasure came together and celibacy was challenged. Later Luther advanced the idea that marriage is not a hospital for incurables but a school for character and the importance of family life. Luther along with Calvin opposed divorce, premarital and extramarital sex and homosexual relations.
Sexual ethics must necessarily be affected by new information and new technologies. The secular disciplines of philosophy, psychology, sociology, science and arts are what we can regard as the rational source. We use reason and we experiment to gain knowledge.
Karen Armstrong recently commented: “Homo sapiens is also Homo religiosus. As soon as we became recognizably human, men and women started to create religions. We are meaning-seeking creatures. While dogs, as far as we know, do not worry about the canine condition or agonize about their mortality, humans fall very easily into despair if we don’t find some significance in our lives.”
Is it reasonable for us to believe that when human beings came out of the waters on the shores of life they were gifted with reason to comprehend and cope with their surroundings. In this condition filled with awe and wonder they constructed their religious systems. They looked at one another and found the differentiation of male and female gender. In the new and strange environment they sought companionship and driven my inner urges they found intimacy with their partners. Through the process of observation they discovered though in a primitive sense how new life emerged.
The powerful with sheer strength and plain possessions began to dominate the weaker ones to satisfy their natural desires including sexual urges. In organizing the tribes they discovered the value of family and community in child-rearing and protecting the group.
God has also gifted humankind with a moral sense of what is good and right and the freedom to choose. We find the authority embedded in religion as well. We entered into a whole range of experiences and reflected upon them. This process is continuing.
When we look at experience as a source of authority we recognize that the Bible is a record of the experience of the people of faith and the teaching of the Church is a record of the experience of the community of faith who at a specific time of history come to agreement, in this case, on sexual issues. All claim divine revelations but even then the revelations have to be processed by the use of reason and experience.
Farley offers further the concept of “just love.” She warns us about casually saying that love is the sufficient answer to all our sexual issues. We must be able to see the right kind of the expression of love. It must be true, good and just love. She places the emphasis on the principle of justice in our loving relationships. Her definition of love that is true and just, right and good as “true response to the reality of the beloved, a genuine union between the one who loves and the one loved, and an accurate and adequate affective affirmation of the beloved.”
She then listed specific norms for a “just sex.” Our sexual relationships need to serve the cause of justice. These are the principles or guidelines: 1. Do no unjust harm. 2. Free consent of partners. 3. Mutuality. 4. Equality. 5. Commitment. 6. Fruitfulness. 7. Social justice. All these come to play when we reasoned out our own version of sexual ethics to guide our actions.
With this interpretation of authority and framework for sexual ethics we now examine some of the problematic areas. .
What is sex? Much has been said that the sexual act between male and female is for the purpose of procreation. The created human body - male and female - come together to give birth to new life. This is the natural form of ensuring life to continue on earth knowing that death is inevitable to all. This is the case with animal life. We detect the strong drive for sex which is innate that leads to intense desire and performance of the sexual act for the purpose of creating new life.
Beyond reproduction, sex also provides intimacy and pleasure. According to Cahil, “Sexual pleasure as a bodily reality involves sexual drives and attractions, and their resolution through orgasm or to less genitally focused experiences of sexual satisfaction.” St Paul acknowledges the satisfaction of desire for intimacy as a valid reason for marriage. Sex in our time in contrast with the past is focused more directly on intimacy and pleasure than in reproduction. This is a positive value of sex being an integral part of the human person with freedom and responsibility to relate and enter into relationships with others. Sex is to be regarded as a good gift from God in creating us as sexual beings.
What do we have to say about open relationships? While it is true that we cannot be easily satisfied with a monogamous relationship and even managing one, how are we to cope with multiple relationships and managing more than one. The eruptions caused by breaking relationships of a couple without open relationships will just increase exponentially for those who work on open relationships. Strong emotions swirl around in relationships and they need to be controlled and regulated.
There are levels of relationships for intimacy and pleasure. It is different between friends and partners in committed and consensual relationships. What form of sexual acts come into play between friends and between partners?
Much has been said about marriage and family values. If open relationships is acceptable what does it mean for the sanctity of marriage of gays and straights, the stability of family life and the sustaining of community.
Is sex is just not a recreational activity that we indulge in as couples or in groups as casual sex? Sexuality is not just physical activity. Sexuality has physical, emotional, spiritual, personal and social dimensions. It is not a private activity in the secrecy of our bedrooms. It has social implications as to how we view sex and the kind of human community we form when sex is only physical and recreational. We can see the chaos in the more open and competitive community in the animal kingdom where physical prowess rules. We see it when the powerful and the rich are able to control and buy sex. Sex cannot be just individualistic and bodily. Sex which is good has turned bad. Good sex has to take into account the dimensions of the body, individual and the social. Sex seeks to gratify the person and interpersonal fulfillment. That will happen when sexual norms that we listed earlier are being applied
The key to an individual, gay or straight, is not sex but true love. We do not engage in sex and destroy life of the individual and community. Sexual love must also serve the cause of justice. It is not just sex or simply sex. It is sex that is just. Have good and just sex and enjoy it.
Venerable Gunaratana and I left for Sri Lanka Sunday November 7th with over 50 pieces of accompanied baggage. All were transported by courtesy of Sri Lankan Airlines. The Airport Manager in Colombo met us and speedily urshered us through Immigration and Customs. Early Monday morning we took the five-hour ride to Kandy and directly to the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple. When the Buddha died, his body was cremated in a sandalwood pyre in India and his left canine tooth was retrieved from the funeral pyre. It was later taken to Kandy 371 C.E. where it is at present, in the Temple of the Tooth. It is viewed as a symbolic presence of Buddha and it is on this basis that offerings, rituals, and ceremonies are being conducted.. The Director of International Buddhist Affairs, Gamini Bandara, received us and in the evening we were given the rare privilege to ascend to the inner sanctum where the tooth is enshrined.
My last visit to Kandy was to attend my first international ecumenical conference in the early sixties upon the invitation of D.T. Niles. We met at the idyllic colonial hotel, Queen’s Hotel, built in 1895 alongside Kandy Lake and was the former Governor’s Mansion. It has since been rebuilt on this heritage site and is the “Raffles” in Kandy. .
The Chief Minister of the Central Province. Sarath Ekanayake, invited us to lunch at his Residence before the Special Public Event at the Buddhist Cultural Center honouring MP Basil Rajapaksa, the brother of President Rajapaksa. He is in charge of development in the Northern and Eastern Provinces in his office as Senior Advisor to the President. We met him and he told us that he has favourably considered our request for the establishment of an Interfaith Centre for Education and Peace in Vavuniya and has already informed the Government Agent there. The religious ceremony was in honour of the elevation to top leadership of a senior monk in a four-hour long ceremony. Maha Kuruna Society in Singapore donated 500 robes which we brought over and offered to the hundreds of monks gathered at the celebration.
After the Kandy event we proceeded to Anuandhrapura after another five-hour journey and reached the Army Headquarters near midnight where Major General Kamal Gunaratne had arranged for us to stay at their Guest House. Early at six we were saying our prayers at the foot of the Bodhi Tree which is reputed to be a sapling from the tree where Buddha had his enlightenment. It was brought over to Ceylon and planted in 288 B.C.E.
We visited the camp for the LTTE teenage soldiers in a re-education camp in Manik Farm. We had supplied them with chairs for the hall and erected sanitary facilities for them since our visit last September. Almost half the number have been released and there are only about 200 students. It is an encouraging sign.
We had an appointment with the Government Agent, Mrs P.S.M. Charles a Catholic, in Vavuniya and she has assured us of her support in acquiring a piece of government land for the building of our proposed Interfaith Centre for Education and Peace.
We then met individually with The Chief Buddhist Monk of Vavuniya, the Priest of the largest Hindu Temple, and priests leading the Catholic, Anglican and Methodist churches in the city. The Imam of the Mosque was not in his office when we visited the main mosque. In our conversations with these interfaith leaders who had been meeting for religious dialogue regularly we sensed their excitement of having such an innovative centre which could be used to further the cause for peace and reconciliation. Vavuniya is a unique town in the country where the numbers of devotees are almost equally balanced and there has been religious harmony.
We are of the view that this Centre for Education and Peace should be locally managed by this interfaith group of leaders. This is an opportunity for them to work together to render community services initially through education of English and Computer skills. We are targeting the O and A level students especially those who have been released from the IDP camps. We will offer computer training to them and upgrading others in the community in the use of new computer programmes.
The Centre will further the development of interfaith relations through the existing dialogue sessions of the leaders. It will be the base for educating the public about the different faiths and promoting other activities leading to religious harmony, reconciliation and peace.
Hopefully we want to be operational early in 2010 and we solicit your prayers and support.
The Church (not the Bible) discriminates against gays, says pastor
Friday, 13 November 2009, 11:51 pm | 3,200 views
Note:
Hi everyone. Please note that we have a “Random Posts” section. It highlights earlier articles which were published on TOC and which you may have missed. “Random Posts” is located at the bottom, after our Facebook Fans box. We hope you’ll find it useful.
Kelvin Teo
In this article the writer speaks to Reverend Doctor Yap Kim Hao, pastoral advisor to the Free Community Church (FCC), on his views about homosexuality and Christianity.
The AWARE saga earlier this year saw the Christian community torn apart by differing interpretations of homosexuality. While the most vocal of advocates were adamant that homosexuality in itself is a sin against the Christian faith, other moderates and liberals plead for a more inclusive understanding of Christianity.
Reverend Doctor Yap Kim Hao represents the liberal point of view. He earned his Master of Divinity and Doctor of theology degrees from the Boston University School of Theology. Rev Dr Yap was consecrated the 1st Asian Bishop of the Methodist Church in Singapore and Malaysia in 1968 and was made the Visiting Professor of World Christianity at Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University.
The FCC is not recognized by the National Council of Churches in Singapore because of its controversial stance towards homosexuality. It does not ostracise against gays, and is probably the only church in Singapore that does not treat homosexuality as a sin. Furthermore, the reputation of the FCC as a gay group has rendered the church unable to register as a legitimate organization. To circumvent regulations, the church has registered itself as a company, and worship sessions are considered private gatherings [1].
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
When I heard that a Sinhalese Buddhist monk, Venerable Dr K Gunaratana who is the Religious Advisor of Mahakaruna Buddhist Society in Singapore had delivered a container load of relief supplies to the “Internally Displaced Persons” (IDP) in the Jaffna area, I decided to support him through the Chen Su Lan Trust in which I serve as the Chairman.
At the conclusion of the Civil war between the Sri Lankan Army (SLA) and the Liberation Tigers Tamil Eelam (LTTE) which raged for almost 30 years, around 250,000 children, women, cadres and Tamil soldiers were in the war zone at the end. They had fled before the advancing SLA forces from their villages. When the remaining LTTE fighters laid down their arms, some merged with the civilians. They were all – civilians and combatants - rounded up and placed in IDP camps to be screened. LTTE fighters and their supporters are being identified and put into rehabilitation camps. Others wait for re-settlement.
The war zones where their former villagers were located have been heavily laid with landmines and the process of de-mining the area is in process. Children and adults will then be repatriated back to their old homes and given support to start their lives again.
Meanwhile they are kept in IDP camps scattered in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.
For security reasons there are unable to go in and out of the camps when the screening is in progress. Access to the camps is restricted.
The Sri Lanka government with the help of United Nations, foreign governments, International Aid agencies and non-government organizations (NGO) are providing housing, clothing, water, food, medical services to those in camp. I identified the International Committee of the Red Cross, Oxfam, Medecins sans Frontieres, World Food Programme, UNICEF. I was pleasantly surprised to read from a United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Report that the United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCOR) has donated close to US$4 million.
Faced with the mounting daily needs of the people in the IDP camps the government is also confronted by the United Nations to speed up the process of re-settlement. On the day of our visit to Manik Farm on September 17, the UN Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Lynn Pascoe, was there in the morning and met with the military leadership.
Ven Gunaratana, Khema (representing Mahakaruna) and I landed in the Colombo airport after a three and half hour flight and we continued on by a four-wheeled drive Pajero for a five hour drive in the night to the north. The drive was along the main road north which is only two lane and undivided. It reminded me of the forties in Malaysia driving through dark roads passing equally dimly-lit villages and towns until we reached Anuandhrapura which is the ancient capital around midnight. It was busy with traffic of bicycles, motor cycles, three-wheelers, cars, vans, and trucks.
Early next morning we set off to Vavuniya which is the large town serving the area where Manik Farm, the largest camp, was located. We first visited the office which is responsible for the processing of the camp inmates for repatriation. Colonel Wadugodapitiyn briefed us. There have released around 15,000 people mainly to the Jaffna area and will try to speed up the work of reuniting families and settling in their former villages.
We then visited the office of the office of the Rehabilitation programme. Major General Daya Ratnayake reported about the work with the LTTE combatants who have been identified and placed in separate camps to undergo re-education. We went to a camp where there were teenagers recruited in the fighting forces. In this camp there were 458 teenagers between the ages of 13-18 out of which 370 are Hindus and 86 Christians. They gathered in the hall of the former Teachers Training Center to receive gifts from us. We talk to some of them and they seem to have adjusted to their situation. They have a full programme daily and a few may want to take the O Level examinations at the end of the year.
Major General Kamal Gunaratne who is the Commander in Vavuniya had earlier in the morning entertained the UN Under Secretary came to receive us in the office of a Sinhalese monk who has taken into his temple 120 orphans and also involved in feeding some of the people in the camp daily.
Ganeral Kamal joined us for a meal hosted by the revered monk and then invited us for tea in his home. He directed the war operation and told us that it was a massive effort. Around 26,000 were killed on each side and thousands were wounded. He is now in charge of the entire programme of the IDP camps. We went with him in his car back to his home in Vavuniya and we had a good discussion along the way. We spent the night in the Guest House of the Military Headquarters there.
The Generals had visited Singapore before on official missions and Ven Gunaratana had established good relationships with them. In Sinhalese culture there is a great respect for the monks. The symbol for me is to see even the Generals greeting the monks in the customary manner of kneeling before him and bowing with clasped hands each time they meet and leave.
While there is a continuing need for relief supplies we will respond to their requests for specific ones. The Rehabilitation camp we visited need more installation of sanitary facilities, chairs for the hall (They were all seated on the floor when we were there). They now saw the need for equipping a computer room for instructional purposes. That is why I sent out the appeal for computers in working condition to be shipped over to the camp. Thank you for your quick response.
In our discussion with General Kamal we were concerned with reconciliation between the Sinhalese and Tamils. We are seeking his help to secure a piece of land in the town of Vavuniya or an old building for us to use as an educational center. It will serve as an interfaith and intercultural center for peace and unity and providing services for English instruction, IT training and other skills to the community. It will be a place of intersecting and interaction between the different religious groups in the community to be led by the leadership of the respective faith communities there. He has promised his support and awaits our official proposal.
When we went back to Colombo I had made an earlier appointment with an old friend who was a staff member of the Christian Conference of Asia and currently Chairman of the National Council of Churches in Sri Lanka, Bishop Daniel Thiagarajah who is based in Jaffna. Unfortunately he was unable to get a flight out on that day. We visited the office and briefed the General Secretary Jayasiri Peiris about our visit. He recalled that he first met in Hong Kong when I conducted an ecumenical training session years ago.
When we left Dr Peiris presented us with a replica of a “Persian” cross which was excavated in Anuandhrapura. It was dated an 6th century A.D. relic.It was taken over to Ceylon by Persian traders. For centuries this nascent Christian group existed with the Buddhists in this ancient capital of Ceylon and now a World Heritage Site.
When we visited Anuandhrapura at 6:00 a.m. on the morning we returned to Colombo, we met gain General Kamal at the largest Buddhist Pagoda. He was there for his morning prayer. We were together under the historic Bodhi Tree which came from a saplimg of the original tree where Gautama Buddha had his enlightenment. This was reputed to have been planted in year 288 B.C. It was an inspiring moment – an epiphany for me to be praying with my Buddhist friends under the tree of enlightenment.
The war has ended in Sri Lanka. Rehabilitation has begun. Reconciliation has to occur for continued peace and harmony in the land.
We pray for the rulers and the people that they may engage vigorously in the pursuit of peace with justice.
Friday, December 5, 2008
THE STRAITS TIMES FORUM Wednesday December 3, 2008 THE illuminating articles in last Saturday's Review section on HIV/Aids and 'Time to treat HIV like other diseases' on Monday have cast light on this issue and made us aware of our responsibilities.
HIV/Aids has reached pandemic proportions and infects and affects people throughout the world. The articles have highlighted the plight of victims and the alarming rise of infections here. This sexually transmitted disease crosses the lines of straight and gay, young and old, men and women and, most pathetically, innocent children.
The articles have painted a hopeful and positive scenario of education, including safe sex, early HIV testing without stigmatisation, availability and affordability of retro-viral drugs. They have indicated the dramatic drop of infections in countries that have these services in place. Any denial of any of these services will increase the spread of infection and impede treatment of HIV/Aids.
It is widely acknowledged that the message of abstinence and being faithful alone will not lower the rate of incidence of the transmission of HIV/Aids. The realistic strategy is also to promote wider use of condoms. This approach has lowered dramatically the infection rate of HIV/Aids in countries like Thailand and Cambodia.
We applaud the work of our Health Promotion Board and Action For Aids which are out in the frontlines. The services to those who are infected, especially by City Harvest, Kampong Kapor Methodist Church and Care (Catholic), are commendable. We encourage wider participation by non-government service agencies and financial support of corporate bodies so that, together, we can prevent the spread of HIV/Aids in Singapore.
We know the way to deal with HIV/Aids and bring down the infection rate, but obstacles have risen along the way.
We have to remove stigmatisation, avoid discrimination, promote education, instil public awareness and introduce affordable drugs. Unless we tackle these issues, the result will be that more and more people are left to suffer pain and misery and die a slow and lonely death.
It has become a global problem and we have to address this problem locally and act more vigorously in expanding our existing programmes of education, prevention and treatment of this disease.
HIV/Aids has reached pandemic proportions and infects and affects people throughout the world. The articles have highlighted the plight of victims and the alarming rise of infections here. This sexually transmitted disease crosses the lines of straight and gay, young and old, men and women and, most pathetically, innocent children.
The articles have painted a hopeful and positive scenario of education, including safe sex, early HIV testing without stigmatisation, availability and affordability of retro-viral drugs. They have indicated the dramatic drop of infections in countries that have these services in place. Any denial of any of these services will increase the spread of infection and impede treatment of HIV/Aids.
It is widely acknowledged that the message of abstinence and being faithful alone will not lower the rate of incidence of the transmission of HIV/Aids. The realistic strategy is also to promote wider use of condoms. This approach has lowered dramatically the infection rate of HIV/Aids in countries like Thailand and Cambodia.
We applaud the work of our Health Promotion Board and Action For Aids which are out in the frontlines. The services to those who are infected, especially by City Harvest, Kampong Kapor Methodist Church and Care (Catholic), are commendable. We encourage wider participation by non-government service agencies and financial support of corporate bodies so that, together, we can prevent the spread of HIV/Aids in Singapore.
We know the way to deal with HIV/Aids and bring down the infection rate, but obstacles have risen along the way.
We have to remove stigmatisation, avoid discrimination, promote education, instil public awareness and introduce affordable drugs. Unless we tackle these issues, the result will be that more and more people are left to suffer pain and misery and die a slow and lonely death.
It has become a global problem and we have to address this problem locally and act more vigorously in expanding our existing programmes of education, prevention and treatment of this disease.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Reflections on Obama's Election
Dear Friends Far & Near
I received the following message on Election evening:
"Dear Kim: We are absolutely thrilled along with all other Democratic Americans that Barack Obama has become our President. It seems impossible that it could happen and like others we were holding our breath. For once America did something right and maybe we can redeem our country in the world. Jill, my daughter, and her husband and children were working in the Obama Headquarters in Cleveland, Ohio. Leslie, her youngest daughter who is in college in Bowlling Green, Ohio worked in her college Headquarters and came home last night to be with the family. They all were crying, hollering etc like everyone else when Ohio went for Obama. We cut our trip to AZ short so we could be here in Lansing to be a part of the excitement."
Shan Wilder (her son is the Senior Director of the out-going National Security Council) wrote to me the above while I was still relishing CNN News Live Report yesterday morning and watched the CNN Projections during the vote counting, McCain's gracious concession speech, Obama's brilliant acceptance mountain-top acceptance address and the world-wide celebrations beginning in Grant Park, Chicago. What a momentous, inspirational, earth-shattering and highly charged emotional experience even for me in my home in Singapore.
The image that moved me was to see the face of Jesse Jackson beaming with pride and then his face streaming with tears. He shows the scars of the Civil Rights Movement, remembers his failed attempts to run for the Presidency, seeing the fulfillment of the Martin Luther King's dream, and witnessing his black brother attaining the pinnacle of political leadership of a great nation now energized with hope, possibilities and promise. I resonate and shed silent tears with him and others especially the blacks for I experienced the sorrows of the racial struggle when I began my college education in Kansas in 1947 and was in touch with the American scene since then.
With all the problems that we face even now with the financial crisis, global conflicts and the hitches in the LGBT movement, Obama embodies hope. In his acceptance speech when he included the word "gay" into the inclusive community of Americans he has embraced the gays and conjured up promise for the future. His life was rooted by his Kenyan father, began in womb of his white mother in the Kansan heartland, touched base amongthe Indonesians, immersed in the academic center of Harvard and engaged in communty organisation inspired by Saul Alinsky in Chicago. He has nurtured a global outlook, inherited an intellectual tradition and involvement in the grassroots. He now will give youthful, fresh and exciting global leadership to a tired and weary world.
Truly this is a defining moment for all us and it holds much promise and hope. If that grand old black poor woman who in the not too distant past could not vote, sat in the back of the bus, entered only segregated toilets and restaurants, lived in the slums could survive to see the day when a young black man is voted in as the President of the most powerful nation of the world, there is hope. All things are possible. Opportunities abound around us. We can, yes we can make a difference. Our faith in humanity is being restored, our trust in the future is being re-vitalized.
It is a dawn of a new day, the emerging of a bright future. The past is behind us and we have overcome, change has come, dreams are realised. Filled with faith and inspired we are called to participate to shape the tommorrows of God's people on this earth. We can all join to thank God for what God has accomplished. Our God has waited long for God's people to rise and march together to enter the promised land of God's rule on this earth.
Shalom, my friends, SHALOM
Kim Hao
Rev Dr Yap Kim Hao 10E, Braddell Hill, Apt. #16-17Singapore 579724Tel: +65-62504561
Email: kimhao.yap@gmail.com
I received the following message on Election evening:
"Dear Kim: We are absolutely thrilled along with all other Democratic Americans that Barack Obama has become our President. It seems impossible that it could happen and like others we were holding our breath. For once America did something right and maybe we can redeem our country in the world. Jill, my daughter, and her husband and children were working in the Obama Headquarters in Cleveland, Ohio. Leslie, her youngest daughter who is in college in Bowlling Green, Ohio worked in her college Headquarters and came home last night to be with the family. They all were crying, hollering etc like everyone else when Ohio went for Obama. We cut our trip to AZ short so we could be here in Lansing to be a part of the excitement."
Shan Wilder (her son is the Senior Director of the out-going National Security Council) wrote to me the above while I was still relishing CNN News Live Report yesterday morning and watched the CNN Projections during the vote counting, McCain's gracious concession speech, Obama's brilliant acceptance mountain-top acceptance address and the world-wide celebrations beginning in Grant Park, Chicago. What a momentous, inspirational, earth-shattering and highly charged emotional experience even for me in my home in Singapore.
The image that moved me was to see the face of Jesse Jackson beaming with pride and then his face streaming with tears. He shows the scars of the Civil Rights Movement, remembers his failed attempts to run for the Presidency, seeing the fulfillment of the Martin Luther King's dream, and witnessing his black brother attaining the pinnacle of political leadership of a great nation now energized with hope, possibilities and promise. I resonate and shed silent tears with him and others especially the blacks for I experienced the sorrows of the racial struggle when I began my college education in Kansas in 1947 and was in touch with the American scene since then.
With all the problems that we face even now with the financial crisis, global conflicts and the hitches in the LGBT movement, Obama embodies hope. In his acceptance speech when he included the word "gay" into the inclusive community of Americans he has embraced the gays and conjured up promise for the future. His life was rooted by his Kenyan father, began in womb of his white mother in the Kansan heartland, touched base amongthe Indonesians, immersed in the academic center of Harvard and engaged in communty organisation inspired by Saul Alinsky in Chicago. He has nurtured a global outlook, inherited an intellectual tradition and involvement in the grassroots. He now will give youthful, fresh and exciting global leadership to a tired and weary world.
Truly this is a defining moment for all us and it holds much promise and hope. If that grand old black poor woman who in the not too distant past could not vote, sat in the back of the bus, entered only segregated toilets and restaurants, lived in the slums could survive to see the day when a young black man is voted in as the President of the most powerful nation of the world, there is hope. All things are possible. Opportunities abound around us. We can, yes we can make a difference. Our faith in humanity is being restored, our trust in the future is being re-vitalized.
It is a dawn of a new day, the emerging of a bright future. The past is behind us and we have overcome, change has come, dreams are realised. Filled with faith and inspired we are called to participate to shape the tommorrows of God's people on this earth. We can all join to thank God for what God has accomplished. Our God has waited long for God's people to rise and march together to enter the promised land of God's rule on this earth.
Shalom, my friends, SHALOM
Kim Hao
Rev Dr Yap Kim Hao 10E, Braddell Hill, Apt. #16-17Singapore 579724Tel: +65-62504561
Email: kimhao.yap@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
