From: KRMMB@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 02:23:39 -0400 (EDT) To: CAC@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: New Topic: Asian-American Evangelism that Works??? Hello Everybodee! Trust that the Lord is blessing the socks off of all my "newfound" brothers & sisters and christian friends in CAC land.I truly appreciate all of your contributions even tho I might not have always agreed with some of you. It did helped me to understand and to learn so I am that much more enriched because of y'all. Dj gave me once in a lifetime deal. It was "an offer I couldn't refuse". Here's the deal - If I could signed up 10% more CACers to the mailing list, then, I could sign on for free and receive unlimited access to all these godly guys and gals. Isn't that right, DJ? Boy, did I pull a fast one on him...I only signed up four guys and still got access to y'all (my best Texas drawl) Hey, just a brief bio statement about myself since this may be my "first and ONLY" posting.Where do all you brothers and sisters find the time to write (y'all must have some cushy job somewhere, uh, d'ya have any openings where you work. (*-*) My name is Ken L. Tom. (Psss...please do not reverse my last name with my first). As you can well imagine, I had a rough childhood as Tom Ken. Am a "bona fide" ABC who sings along to Bruce Springsteen's anthem "Born in the USA". Am just an average East Coast "t-shirt & jeans" kinda of guy who serves the Lord in our Metro-NYC/NJ tri-state region.Have pastored four churches both in Texas and in New York. Finished a graduate program at Alliance School of Theology & Missions (now, ATS ''76) and graduated from Dallas (Th.M/MA '87). Presently, I am the founder, director & (sigh) the "one" and the ONLY staff of a small resource agency known as VisionQuest which "stands in the gap" as a pastor to our pastorless churches. Basically, as a church aerobics instructor, I seek to spiritually re-conidtion both churches(w/o a pastor) and ministers (w/o a church) while they're in transition. VisionQuest mission seeks to advance the English Ministry developments within our Chinese/Asian Churches into the 21st century. (Actually, sucess is being able just to maintain and sustain any local church English Mnistry (EM) in this 20th century). As a catalytical missionary, VQ jumps starts the start-up of new EM church-plants, refocuses towards renewal mature EM congregations and creates church growth environments for new EM groups. In my "visions of grandeur", I use to think it was "my great preaching" that " knocked opened" close to 50 pulpit doors for a VisionQuest ministry. Alas, I have come to humbly realize its wasn't my great preaching (sic) but, rather, it was the great (and desperate) need that churches "called me"...and usually, late at night at that when they needed someone? anyone?. Help... So, as Hendricks wisely taught us DTS guys, we've got to stop believing those press reports we keep on creating and reading about ourselves. Now, I've developed this Eleanor Rigby/ Father McKensie syndrome of "writing sermons that no will hear". Just look upon the glazed eyes of some of the young people who look like they are s in cyberspace while they might think I am still "lost in space" (*-*)! Sometimes, I lament to God ala Nancy Kerrigan "why me?" - why wasn't I born a Ken Fong (instead of) a Ken Tom.By the way, Ken. I met you in LA when I was in late Sept amongst a swarm of folks.You're our closest icon to a "rock" star. Evergreen worship was a joyful and you were awesome. Sign me up for a year supply of tapes. (Hope you don't have any copyrights from us copycats) (*-*) As we chatted, VQ will try to set-up something here on the East Coast. As Tommy Smothers might have said about his brother, Dickie "God always liked you better" Did the "angelic" nurses switch us at birth? Nevertheless, I had always dreamed, probably, it more "wishin, hopin & praying" that one of our ABC senior FACE leaders would have responded to the East Coast "Macedonian call" but, no one came to help... so, when the Lord looked around and saw no one else, He scraped the bottom of the barrel and said "Tom - You're it!" (gulp) and with a, Bill Cosby's impish grin as Noah..."I said..."right????" Now, I always wanted to be one of West Coast kinda guys, especially, since my teen-age sons were always humming (out of tune, of course) the Beach Boys " I wish they could all be California girls" :-). Now, that's pressure...Nevertheless, we remain faithful to bloom where the Lord has planted us for now. If any of you brothers...and sisters would like to talk with me about your current or church situation or learn more about VisionQuest. You should be encouraged to either email me or await a future posting about VisionQuest. I am likened to Barnabas - a minister of encouragement who would be more than happy to hear you out. Sorry, had so much fun that I almost forgot my purpose for writing y'all...I've been invited to share in a seminar on Asian American Evangelism for Sat. Oct 25th. Part of my challenge is to encourage our of our tri-state Chinese/Asian churches on the East Coast to mobilized for ministry in evangelism. Where I hope the CAC family of readers might be able to help me is to share briefly. first hand either, your story of Evangelism that Works (Barna's title) or didn't work and/or your church "sucess/failure" results story in Evangelism. Pls share any personal/church story, AA conversion, evangelistic strategic approach or any insight that you think might be helpful that will inspire others to do the Lord's work in evangelism that works. Your contributions are most appreciated and will make invaluable to the seminar. I will in turn will share your stories and my pastoral aspirations to see evangelism happen within Chinese/Asian our churches. Greetings and Thanksgiving to y'all. Joyfully in Christ, Ken L. Tom VisionQuest 226 Milltown Road East Brunswick, NJ 08816 732 613 0637 (VQ fone/fax) 732 238 4409 (family fone/ans mach) Email address - KRMMB@aol.com -- End -- From: JWongCDI@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:02:35 -0400 (EDT) To: RevCow@aol.com, cac@emwave.net cc: JWongCDI@aol.com Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Reality vs. Virtuality Well, a deeper apology is needed; I have switched to AOL 2.7, since coming to Chicago and did not realize that my response to Ted Kau did not get sent out properly. But today's email from Bill L. to Bro. G caused me to realize that I never received a copy of my email either. (I hope my personal email to Bill got through.) Please allow me to reconstruct what I tried to write, since I no longer have a copy of it. I wish to apologize for the anguish my comments caused. My writing was probably too obtuse. I was, however, encouraged by Ken Fong's analysis, which was correct, of what I was saying. I was prophetic over the potential reaction to my comments, which confirms my foolishness in offering it. :-{ First of all, I do not know Michelle, with no reasons whatever to attack her, but am very sorry for offending her FATHER with my comments. It is not my practice to comment on a person's integrity, even when I know that person. My comment was directed at the practice of praising a person's sincerity, perhaps at the cost of reality. But with this missed focus, what I had hoped to provoke will probably be dissolved. Here is an excerpt of what I wrote to Bill Leong,.. "Thank you for responding to my inquiry, which was from a pastoral concern that our faith be based on what is real. I do not attack nor do inquisitions on young Christians, but do challenge their thinking, believing that they are ready to learn and eager to know what is true in Christ. I knew when I wrote that the brevity is capable of brewing misunderstanding, knowing the natural patterns... Cynicism is not what I was writing from, but I acknowledge, can be interpreted as such. Neither was I writing to the one who gave testimony. Instead, I was writing to those charged with guiding Christians, asking for a deeper evaluation of how well we are doing. I remember, as a young Christian, many times when I shared my testimony or observations, I was hoping that a more mature believer would help me evaluate the accuracy or validity of what I said. "Should I say it again? Should I teach others that it's reliable?" I did not believe that I had it all right. But, you know what? I rarely got any input. I didn't know whether to interprete the silence as "You're right on!" or "Oh no, did he say that?" I'm concerned that there are Christians who spoke as I did, but no one chose to interact with, to guide them. Instead, they are simply "branded" (maybe ostracized by the "orthodox") or "praised." I suspect that the young believer would appreciate a caring person who would provide wise evaluation of what was shared, to refine, to make more accurate. I believe Apollos appreciated those who helped him. I guess for most believers, being an "eye" witness is all they need to do. However, I'm concern about raising leaders who will feed and disciple. In the vocabulary of your "paycheck," I receive considerable satisfaction also, from those who have been guided toward a renewed mind, who have the confidence to guide other believers toward a greater faith. I hope this enlarged sharing of my perspective is useful. Again, thanks, Bill for the inter-action." In Christ, Joe -- End -- From: RevCow@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 05:14:19 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: The accuracy of reported experience... 3 C notes: 1. CREDIT >...encouraged by Ken Fong's analysis, which was correct... If interested in accuracy, Tim had the original analysis, Ken subsequently agrees (Tseng 10/11, 1:09AM EDT; Fong 10/11, 12:46PM EDT). 2. CRUX >Bill (10/6): WOMEN IN MINISTRY. My daughter loves the Lord... >Joe (10/13): ...oops, I didn't know you were writing about your > daughter... Joe, if you'd known it was from Mich's father, I'm sure you'd have written differently. Within this context, I'd be surprised if a father did NOT take the following personally: >Joe (10/7): Is the description given by those closest to the > experience really real?...As long as the person is happy > with their own description... Bill, when Joe said "fools rush in [where angels fear to tread]", I believe he was referring to himself. He immediately states that "I'm not sure I'm ready for the results from this 10 cents input," which seems to support this view. 3. e-mail CREDO read carefully give more grace write even more clearly The accuracy of our reported experiences must be preceded by the accuracy of our understanding of the experience itself. I've been enjoying CAC postings of late, and hope they continue to remove bottlenecks to our unity and His revival. Now back to our regularly scheduled program... Shalom, Ted Rev. Ted Kau Harvest San Gabriel Valley A pastor needs three bones to remain upright: a backbone, a wishbone, and a funny bone. --Anon -- End -- From: RevCow@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:16:38 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: the WORK and WORD of God Challenging, re Ken's "God's Work sometimes interpreting God's Word" (10/16) and Bill's "how we relate to God" (10/14, #1). I'm intrigued, Ken, that you point out: >...it was easy for me to point to Scripture and say >that that gift no longer exists... ************ CASE Intrigued, because I didn't believe in tongues until I studied Scripture (WORD). This, with an understanding of the relatively recent development of dispensationalism, the substantiation of tongues used throughout church history, and the lives of those who practiced tongues (WORK), led me to accept the biblical exercise of tongues. I accepted tongues because of God's Word interpreting God's Work. Despite my original bias against it, the only way I could reason tongues had ceased was to 1) employ an eclectic approach to Scripture, 2) redefine biblical terms, 3) disassociate text from its context, or 4) all of the above. I know that intelligent, scholarly, genuine believers stand on both sides of this issue. With my limited resources, however, I couldn't rule out God's use of spiritual gifts of tongues today. This issue can be quite emotional, but Ken, you opened up this can of tongues. :P :b ************ MY INTENT My intent is not to highlight tongues, but to better understand the underlying process of how we are to relate to and reconcile the tensions encountered between predisposition, experience, and Truth, or to borrow Bill's phrase, "how we relate to God." ************ THE ISSUES This leads me to my Real Questions: 1. How does a believer determine when God's Work interprets God's Word? 2. Are pastors to preach/teach this? 3. How can we safeguard ourselves from subjectively re-interpreting God's Word? 4. For Chinese/Asian American churches, which seems to you to be the greater abuse: experiential-ism or intellectualism? 5. What organizations have been successful in discipling believers to be mature both in their personal relationship with God AND in their study of His Word? I'd really like to know about this one, because I'd like to learn. Remember mentorship (9/29)? If you're too modest, please e-mail me personally. Thanks in advance for your input. Btw, for more background, I had been on staff at EFCLA's English congregation (1 of the 3 congregations under EFCLA's roof) from 1988 to 1997. 25/160 EFCLAers branched out with EFCLA's blessings on Easter of 1997. I'd appreciate any prayers you'd lift up on our behalf. Thank you. For His Kingdom, Ted Rev. Ted Kau Harvest San Gabriel Valley "The Bible was not given to increase our knowledge but to change our lives."--D.L. Moody "Most people are bothered by those Scripture passages which they cannot understand. But for me, the passages in Scripture which trouble me most are those which I do understand."--Mark Twain "He who teaches the Bible is never a scholar; he is always a student."--Vern McLellan "Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only Law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited...What a paradise would this region be!"--John Adams, 1756, America's Second President -- End -- From: AsianPK@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:25:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CAC_Mail: Fwd: KimSt@aol.com: Fwd: fwd: International Day of Prayer for the Suffering ... Please read and participate as you feel lead. --------------------- Forwarded message: From: petelindborromeo@juno.com (PETER P BORROME) To: ianweb@sonic.net, chung7@aol.com, pholey@MSN.com, AsianPK@aol.com, Date: 97-10-16 14:32:11 EDT --------- Begin forwarded message ---------- From: KimSt@aol.com To: beng.him.teh@nsc.com, DENALI@leland.stanford.edu, Subject: Fwd: fwd: International Day of Prayer for the Suffering Churches Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 14:05:30 -0400 (EDT) --------------------- Forwarded message: From: kimst@ul.com (Steven Kim) To: support@rational.com, lloydc@compuserve.com, HERMESA@aol.com, Date: 97-10-16 12:55:34 EDT ------------- Original Text From: Bryan Young@316K@Eng_Srvc, on 10/16/97 9:21 AM: To: imail[youngb@ul.com] Hi yall, My great friend, Godly man, sent this message to me. I encourage you to read the following message. Bryan ************************************************** To all my friends, I'm deeply distressed by the following news but I hope that we will all pray together. Eddie (pls forward this message) ************************************************************************** Dear fellow brothers & sisters: More Christians have been martyred in the 20th century than in the previous 19 centuries combined.(1) Pastors are being arrested and sometimes shot in China and Cuba. Believers are forbidden to buy goods or own property in Somalia. Christians who testify to their faith in Iran or Saudi Arabia may be put to death for blasphemy. Mobs have wiped out whole villages of Christians in Pakistan.(2) And it goes on. For all this, the western Church is mostly silent. "I am in prison," says the Lord, "and you are not visiting me."(3) It is time to shatter the silence. Sunday, November 16, 1997, has been declared an International Day of Prayer for the Suffering Church. Until then, we need to educate our churches and our friends concerning the extent of persecution which Christ is suffering throughout the world. Later in this message, I suggest 3 specific steps we can all take, and I will let you know where to get information. (NOTE: NONE of the suggestions include "send your donation...") The International Day of Prayer (IDOP) was initiated by the World Evangelical Fellowship (WEF), but it has earned the endorsement of Christian leaders of all types and denominations (I've attached a list to this message). This is as it should be; this call is for everyone. When a mob, fundamentalist Islamic policeman, or communist government investigator comes looking for Christians, they DO NOT ask any of the following questions: - Do you believe the Bible to be inerrant, infallible, and uniquely inspired? - In whose name do you baptize? - Do you acknowledge the Priesthood of all believers? - Do you believe in a pre- or post-tribulation rapture? - Do you believe in the Holy Trinity? No, they ask one thing, and one thing only: will you bow down to another god, or will you remain faithful to Jesus? If the answer is "Jesus," you are under arrest. It's that simple. I AM ASKING EVERYONE WHO RECEIVES THIS MESSAGE TO DO 3 THINGS: 1) Please, please forward this message to every Christian in your personal electronic mailing list. If we are all diligent to do this,in a few weeks this message could reach every Christian in the world who owns a modem. (No, this is not the only way we're spreading the word, but it could turn out to be one of the more efficient ones.) 2) Please pray for your brothers and sisters under persecution around the world on November 16. Pray every day, for that matter, but especially pray that day. Fast if you can. 3) Inform your pastor, your church's prayer ministry, and your friends (especially those who don't have email) about the International Day of Prayer on November 16, and about the persecution Christ is suffering. Information concerning the suffering of Christians worldwide may be obtained, in the US and Canada, from the US headquarters of IDOP. The address is: International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church P.O. Box WEF, Wheaton, IL 60189-8003 INFO: 800-LETS-PRAY (1-800-538-7772) OFFICES: 630-668-1754 FAX: 630-668-0498 EMAIL: IDOP@xc.org WEB SITE: http://www.persecutedchurch.org National Coordinator: Steve Haas Director of Communications: Dr. Ed Bez IDOP has a packet of information designed for informing your church group and joining the day of prayer. The packet contains a Prayer Journal containing several articles concerning the persecuted church, a 21-minute video tape for your church or home group, several letters, and a Prayer Commitment Sheet to send to IDOP to register your support(this is optional. Please pray, with or without notifying anyone.) They ask for $15 to cover the cost of printing and shipping. If you really can't afford $15, ask for the packet anyway. Whatever you do, please don't allow this message to stop traveling. Keep the word moving. Real people are dying real deaths out there where we can't see them, and they need our help. Do it now rather than later. International Day of Prayer Board of Advisors: Dr. Joseph Aldrich, President Multnomah Bible College Dr. Donald Argue, President National Association of Evangelicals Hon. William Armstrong, Senator U.S. Senate, retired Dr. Scott G. Bauer, Co-Pastor The Church on the Way William Bennett, President Empower America Charles E. Blake, Bishop West Angeles Church of God in Christ Dr. William Bright, President Campus Crusade for Christ International Dr. Paul Bubna, President Christian and Missionary Alliance William F. Buckley, Jr., Editor at Large National Review John Burke, Management Team Willow Creek Community Church Anne Buwalda, Director Jubilee Foundation Dr. Anthony Campolo, Professor Eastern College Rev. Dwight Chapman, President General Association of General Baptists Charles Colson, President Prison Fellowship International (Chairman, IDOP Advisory Board) Johan Companjen, Intl. Director Open Doors Rev. Stan DeBoe, Priest Trinitarian Order David Engelhard, Gen. Secretary Christian Reformed Church - N. America Keith A. Fournier, President Catholic Alliance Dwight Gibson, N.A. Director World Evangelical Fellowship John Gimenez, Bishop Rock Church Dr. Os Guinness, Sr. Fellow Trinity Forum William J. Hamel, President Evangelical Free Church of America Hon. Mark O. Hatfield, Senator U.S. Senate Gary A. Haugen, President International Justice Mission Kent R. Hill, President Eastern Nazarene College Dr. John R. Holland, President Intl. Church of the Foursquare Gospel Michael Horowitz, Sr. Fellow Hudson Institute Jim Jacobson, Director Christian Solidarity International Dr. D. James Kennedy, President Coral Ridge Ministries Diane Knippers, President Institute on Religion & Democracy Dr. Richard Land, Exec. Director Christian Life Commission, SBC Paul E. Larsen, President The Evangelical Covenant Church Dr. Duane Litfin, President Wheaton College "For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain." -Philippians 1:21 --------- End forwarded message ---------- -- End -- From: Rlfong@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:53:10 -0400 (EDT) To: RevCow@aol.com, cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the WORK and WORD of God Ted good quotes! I think it would be broadbrushing to paint all CACers in the same category of either intellectualism or experientialism. I believe that our younger / youth up to the 20 somethingers are into the experientialism arena because of the mass culture in the USA; on the other hand, those who get higher education or are immigrants agers 12 and up are probably more intellectual oriented; hence, as a sterotype, I would guess most MITers are intellectual; more younger people immigranting from the PRC are experiential than intellectual ( older immigrants more intellectual ); most ABCs today's age 30 and younger experiential. does this jive with anyone else's opinion? Ronnie Fong Fremont, CA ( somewhere in nor.Calif. on the Hayward EQ fault being home sick ) In a message dated 97-10-16 08:33:29 EDT, Ted Kau writes: << ************ THE ISSUES This leads me to my Real Questions: 4. For Chinese/Asian American churches, which seems to you to be the greater abuse: experiential-ism or intellectualism? Rev. Ted Kau Harvest San Gabriel Valley "The Bible was not given to increase our knowledge but to change our lives."--D.L. Moody "Most people are bothered by those Scripture passages which they cannot understand. But for me, the passages in Scripture which trouble me most are those which I do understand."--Mark Twain "He who teaches the Bible is never a scholar; he is always a student."--Vern McLellan "Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only Law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited...What a paradise would this region be!"--John Adams, 1756, America's Second President >> -- End -- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 23:47:42 -0700 From: OHBRUDDER To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Personal Experiences as a Scholar Sze-kar Wan wrote: > > Dear Bill, I know you didn't mean it this way, but your remark cuts like > a hot jab to my soul. > Dear Sze-kar, I was deeply touched by your reaction and response to my remarks about relating to God. I obviously opened up some very old wounds and touch some deep, raw nerves. I hope you truly believe that I did not mean to offend nor hurt you. Like yourself, some of my most painful offenses received in the past was wrought by other Christians . . .the body of Christ shooting itself in the foot! And as you may recall, I prefaced my remarks by saying I was not trying to judge which was the right or wrong way of relating to God but to point out that there was a difference. And obviously I left little doubt as to which I favored. There is much I want to say about your position on scholarship but sometimes wisdom is in the silence. At the moment, I don't think there is much I could say that would not offend you just because I do think differently. I'd rather be thought wrong than to hurt or offend you any further. So I hope you could accept my apology, and may the peace of God reign between us. bill leong -- End -- Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 14:26:14 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship Dear CACers: My last post was one of those you hit the "send" command and immediately wondered if you had exposed too much of yourself. Well, so be it. Thank you, Ray, Bill, and Gary for your words of understanding. Thank you Bill for not taking it too personally. Yes, there are old wounds and decade-long hurts, but my post was not intended as self-therapy so much in vogue these days. Rather, I was hoping to bring to the fore the anti-intellectual tendency I see in the Chinese church today (can't say for sure about other ethnic groups), using myself--wisely or unwisely--as illustration. I don't know where this anti-intellectual bias came from. Maybe it's from the indigenous Chinese churches of the 20s and 30s, our spiritual predecessors. Maybe it's the anti-intellectualism so prevalent in North American culture. Truth is, I hold scholar no higher or lower than pastor. Both ought to be held to a standard of accountability based on his or her faithfulness to the gospel. Both contribute to the Kingdom in substantial and nonreducible ways. When I hear public statements like "The Chinese church does not need PhDs" or "Scholarship only gets in the way of saving souls" (not uttered on CAC but frequently heard in Chinese churches), I bristle with disappointment. What in fact is so wrong with serving God with the best of one's intellectual abilities? What is so destructive with loving God with all our mind? We encourage our children to be doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists, and occasionally pastors; when will we start encouraging our children to be scholars and theologians? No wonder Chinese-Americans are so underrepresented in our theological schools. If Chinese American Christianity is to chart a future course that can ensure its sruvival and bring glory to God, we've got to think in terms not only of church growth, evangelism, discipleship, etc. (all of which are important), but also of seminars, serious and rigorous studies, theological education. Talk is NOT cheap, true understanding is NOT easy. Let's not cripple ourselves. Being daily transformed, Sze-kar -- End -- From: Rlfong@aol.com Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 16:00:43 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: MEDIA / GAYS ISSUE * Fwd: Vote CACers media poll on the gays kissing on TV on ELLEN. Take a position and vote as the CAC vote portion of the populace. Ronnie Fong Fremont, CA ( SF Bay Area ) --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Vote Date: 97-10-17 09:47:32 EDT From: Mypyface To: djchuang@ix.netcom.com,Rlfong Hi, Everyone: Sorry, I had an error in the abcnews address. It should be as follows: Cast your vote at http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/ellen109. I got the following message Oct. 15, and the vote was 65% for and 35% against. I thought I should act on it so I got on just now Oct 17 6AM, and the scale is tipping the right way. 60.8 for and 39.1 against. In Him, Peter Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:15:36 -0700 > Subject: FYI-Lesbian Kiss Poll > > This is a forwarded message!> > > > >Subject: Lesbian Kiss Poll > > > >Brothers and Sisters, > > > >I encourage you to go to > >http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/ellen109 > >today and place your vote. > > > >ABC is taking a poll to determine if you would > >allow your children to watch lesbians kiss on TV. > >(this is in reference to the Ellen show where that occurred). > > > >Currently the stats show 65% for and only 35% against. > >I beleive the stats show a high gay response as info about > >this poll originally came from a pro-homosexual page. > > > >I really can't believe any parent in their right mind would > >allow their children to watch something like that. > >I don't know any parents (believing or not) who would allow it. > >Ellen and her mother actually had the arrogance to complain > >about the warning message for parents ABC ran before that episode. > >That is a clear indication that the gays will not stop until they > >force everybody to accept their lifestyle. > > > >This is urgent as we don't know how long ABC will run the poll. > > > >------------- End Forwarded Message ------------- -- End -- From: "DJ Chuang" Organization: Ambassador Bible Church To: cac@emwave.net Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 00:04:00 -0500 Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the WORK and WORD of God On 16 Oct 97 at 8:16, RevCow@aol.com wrote: > 4. For Chinese/Asian American churches, which seems to you to be > the greater abuse: experiential-ism or intellectualism? Ted, this is an interesting question, but a good one.. I'm not sure it can be compared on which is the greater abuse, and from my instinct and experience(!), I believe both are abused depending on the context/ situation.. that's not to say that there is abuse everywhere, but there are both extremes and tendencies by individuals. Some people value experiences much more than anything else (and I think this may be a Asian cultural value), where life experience (thus respect for older people, I believe is tied in to this) is more valuable than expertise (from an educated "expert"). What may happen in an extreme situation with this person is that an idea that is outside of this person's experience is rejected; also, this person will use his/her experience to interpret the Bible, using the line of reasoning "it's obvious that this is a good thing that God is blessing, so it must be of God, and the Scripture must mean thus and so." Some people value intellectualism more, though this may or may not be theological intellectualism, and experiences are put through an extreme scrutiny, and ideas may be rejected because their former intellectual training and reasoning disallows other concepts, and disallows valid experiences. Where Asian culture fits here may be unique, for as a people, education is highly treasured, but in the realm of the spiritual and mystical, educated logic is sometimes set aside, it seems, for something that relates to the supernatural. Thus in some circles, spiritual mystical practices are prized over planning or strategizing. A line of reasoning common on this extreme might be proof-texting, or intellectual pride. What conclusion do I draw? I believe education and experience are not antithetical nor absolute contrary, I believe they go hand-in-hand. How they go together as to avoid extremes is much more challenging to define... as we see our new discussion under way, we can see just how challenging of a task this is. DJ --- * * new email -- End -- To: Cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: I Tim. 3"Ray Downen" From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong) Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:32:05 EDT Hi Ray: Good to hear from you. I appreciated your affirmation and wish to seek to pursue a greater unity between us in God's Word. This is posted on CAC as an invitation to reach unity with others. Ray you wrote: Prophets (directly receiving and transmitting to God's people words from God) were temporary workers in the early church. It appears that their work was done after the N.T. scriptures were available to the church. I'm out of sequence here because I responded to this at the end of this letter. You also wrote: And here there's a problem. Leadership in the Lord's church is made the work of a "committee" of elders rather than in any one man of any age. We choose to veer from the Bible plan. We have set up a clergy system which makes the clergyman the leader of the congregation. That's not what the Bible teaches. There we see evangelists (where age is no barrier to service) teaching the Word and seeking to win the lost. We see those who were won gathering in congregations, which are then led by the "committee" of elders selected from among themselves (not hired from outside the group). Do you see in the Bible a different pattern for church government than I've here outlined? Have we the right to set up alternate church governments and still claim to be following the Bible as our guide? I think not. I believe that the leadership of the church is best served thru a plurality of elders. I do not know of a passage of Scripture that says it MUST be plural; (This is confessing ignorance and not a challenge to produce it.). That the word "elder" was plural does not mean it MUST be plural but is sufficient to understand that in general the churches were ruled by elders. This would be the goal. When Paul started a new church I would understand that he was the only elder until others were qualified to be elders. When Paul left Titus behind to pastor the church, my impression is that Titus was the only elder for a time until he obeyed Paul in appointing elders. My own experience in starting a new church was that for some time we only had one person who was qualified to be an elder. I did not know how to have a plurality of elders. This is the goal of the Biblical church, but the goal does not prohibit the process, since the process is not veering from the goal. My comment of a "single" man is not in reference to one man but to an unmarried man; which leads us to: I earlier said, "The "husband of one wife" is not that he should be a husband, (cf. Paul's exhortation to celibacy) but that if he is a husband, he has only one wife. So also, if he happens to be a father, he must be "keeping his children under control with all dignity". But the qualification is not that he must be a father." You responded: You surely have a right to your opinion. But the qualification is that an elder MUST be, not only of mature age, but also that he be the husband of one WIFE. This disqualifies any unmarried man, even if otherwise fully qualified, from serving in the "office" of elder if that office is being conducted according to scriptural requirements. A problem some have is that they want to impose on what is taught a different form of church government and still be doing things God's way. We shouldn't look to the Bible for proof that our unscriptural church government is acceptable to God. Your focus for this qualification is on the word HUSBAND. My focus for this qualification is on the word ONE WIFE. My understanding would be expressed this way, "as a husband he must have ONE wife." The concern that he be "above reproach" is that he doesn't have more than one wife, not whether he is married or not. The other qualification I referred to is similar; "as a father, he must keep his children under control with all dignity." The concern that he be "above reproach" is in keeping his children under control with all dignity, not whether he is a father or not. Would you say any man who is not a father is not qualified to be an elder? How is a single man or a childless man not "above reproach," in what sense? In this passage I see the issue of qualifications is that he is "above reproach." Again you wrote: Ben" I'm not clear as to the intent of the question here (Would you say that this is really a verse of excluding rather than including them into our salvation?). [[This has to do with Gal. 3:28]]. Sorry for the confusion caused by a closing spontaneous question that is to pursue "irony" (?). ( "Them" is the differences, Jews and Gentiles, male and female). Another following question would have helped. " Isn't it strange to interpret this verse as to mean inclusive?" Just a quick comment on prophets. It is late and the letter is too long. More on this another time. Definition of "priest" is a spokesman for man to God. Definition of "prophet" is a spokesman for God to man. The definition does not required him (prophet) to have special or new revelation from God nor new predictions about future events. Question: Where in the Bible do you defend your statement that prophets were temporary and that they ended after the NT was completed? If it is from I Cor. 13:8-10, what is the "perfect"? and how did you arrive at that? I would like to suggest that the "perfect" is the Church, the Body (soma: neuter) of Christ. The context of this passage is dealing with spiritual gifts for the edifying of the Church. Ben -- End -- To: Cac@emwave.net, CdBacDenC0@aol.com, pastorc@ecentral.com, Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 14:01:56 -0600 Subject: CAC_Mail: Poem From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson) To whom true love rings true Cool carbon stones afire Brilliant studded golden band Only thee, my one desire be my glory hand in hand Grand design, taking time I, the maker of the mines Coal, coal, black and light Diamonds flaming, blue and bright Visions of Me on the verge Inklings an iota risen like a tree of life in Deadwood, South Dakota Soon the early will be chosen Morning be at night Santa Anas freeze the frozen Icebergs will ignite Darkness light upon the sun Sickles slay the hammers Freedom free without a gun Learn-ed learn some manners Tumble stars from lofty heights Light devour darkness Wickedness no more be right Left be few, the righteous Poets grope for wedding words, politicians answers Oceans offer up in thirds death to necromancers Thy design, Lord, taking time Mine Thee, maker of the mines Coal, coal, black and light Diamonds flaming blue and bright Pressure-treated stones inspire Brilliant like Thee Son of Man Love me all-consuming fire Grace me with Thy wedding band Love, Thee all-consuming fire, take me to Thy Holy land Love me, Spirit, my desire Touch me with Thy hammered hand c. 1995-1997 go -- End -- From: "DJ Chuang" Organization: Ambassador Bible Church To: wans@monet.bc.edu Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:52:59 -0500 Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship CC: cac@emwave.net On 17 Oct 97 at 14:26, Sze-kar Wan wrote: > I don't know where this anti-intellectual bias came from. Sze-Kar, I'm sure if we dig around a little bit, we might find out where it came from *grin* (perhaps from the theology of Kant and the enlightenment, perhaps from other prominent or not-so-prominent pastor/teachers, or as Asians prefer, "preachers", who passed along some teachings, where the intellect is strongly separated from spirituality) Suppose we look at Jesus' summary of the faith, say from Mark 12:30-31, which is: "love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." and the second (perhaps demonstrative) "love your neighbor as yourself." For some streams of spirituality, heart and soul become a greater priority than mind and strength (and even to the neglect of the latter), so that spirituality seems to be only discerned and defined by mysticism, attitude, emotions, and experience, and spirituality seems to have nothing to do with planning, or strategizing, or management/organization, or quality scholarship. What can one say to a spirituality like that? Is not what Jesus saying totally comprehensive and integrated (not a list of priorities, not a dichotomy to neglect), that everything that we have, all the capacities and abilities and faculties are to be used unto Him, for His purpose, and for His kingdom? DJ --- * * new email -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 00:55:56 -0400 (EDT) To: ben_mel@juno.com, Cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: I Tim. 3"Ray Downen" Ray has been in dialogue with me about the "woman's issue" as well. It is clear that we disagree with each other's interpretation of Scripture - but I'm glad that the conversation is continuing - with one qualification: perhaps we men should stop talking about what Scripture says about women and start listening to what women hear Scripture saying to them. This discourse is entirely too male dominated for me! Finally, I want to recommend Craig S. Keener's _Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul_ (Hendrickson, 1992) as an example of the abolitionist hermeneutical principle in Scripture. Keener discusses all the "problem" passages and, IMHO, is on target. I certainly would not want to part of a hermeneutical tradition that supported slavery! On another note, Craig is an example of a devout and dedicated evangelical who has been mistreated by his fellow evangelicals because of his views on women in ministry and racial justice. When I "fight" for the marginalized and oppressed, I think of white men like Craig who are persecuted for speaking out. In Christ, Tim ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:04:18 -0400 (EDT) To: corn1414@mailhost.net, pangks@pl.jaring.my cc: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Catholics on Mary - Antioch Letter 4.41 Dear Rev. Eng: At times I have appreciated your "letters" and commentaries. Some of it is very helpful and some of it is not. Furthermore, I don't always agree with everything you say - but, that's okay, since we obviously believe in the same Christ and Lord and Savior). But, I'm not sure how I got on your distribution list. Nor did I give permission to be placed on your distribution list. So, please tell me more about yourself and your intentions for distributing your newsletter - and ask for my permission and that of others first before you send it to me or others. This message applies to others on the CAC list as well. Before putting all of us on a distribution list, give each of us a choice in the matter. Announce your list, give background info, and invite us to subscribe individually. We've learned from our past mistakes of overloading information to participants. We've become a pretty good discussion list. Let's continue in that spirit. Thanks. Tim Tseng ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:06:17 -0400 (EDT) To: gdot@juno.com, Cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action Brother G: My take on Fuller's courage is not so much linked to their stand on infallibility/inerrancy (I agree with you there). Though Fuller's decision to move away from "inerrancy" may have saved it from the harsher Christian constituents who wield "inerrancy" as a political butcher knife and given it space to address other controversial issues with commendable grace and tact (e.g., the charismatic claims, women in ministry, many social justice issues, engaging in high powered academics, etc.). I have found that often "inerrantists" tend to be gate-keepers while "infallibists" tend to be seeker sensitive. Both have strengths and weaknesses, but the latter is better equipped to handle the current shift into a global post-modern culture and post-industrial economy. Thus, in this sense, I consider Fuller more courageous because it is much more willing to "engage" (Star Trekkies, forgive me) culture and contemporary life than those more cautious about being "polluted" by it. I share your concern about Christ's bride co-habitating with American corporations. But overcoming idolatry (or using your metaphor, adultery) is not as easy to do as one might imagine. Even if theological institutions were able to divest themselves of any corporate sponsorship, their administrators, faculty, and students still have to wrestle with divesting themselves of the worst of American culture. I submit that all of us have to negotiate through a world filled with evil forces (principalities and powers) in hopes that we can be "signs" of God's inbreaking Kingdom. The strategy of separatism and isolation will fail in the long run because the problem is not only in the "world" out there, but also the "worldliness" within us. Having said that, this means that the Christian must always be alert and humble. We must continually confess our weakness and dependence on the Holy Spirit of God to discern and act wisely in the world. (Indeed, in the CAC discussions, it seems that what we are groping for - especially in light of the disagreements on a number of issues - is the gift of discernment. What belongs to Christ? What does not?). So, if Fuller accepts Weyerhauser money (shades of DNC acceptance of money from Asians?), it needs to be alert and ready to return it if news, say, of labor exploitation or anti-Chinese discrimination is confirmed. But, this is not very likely. So it is up to discerning and humble brothers like you to call Fuller (and any Christian group) to accountability in that event. Perfect ethical and courageous leadership is unattainable. But it can be approximated so long as no one abdicates their responsibility to call others to accountability (in a civil manner). Ack, I spachen too muchen. Cheers to Robin! In Christ, Tim In a message dated 10/16/97 12:03:01 AM, gdot@juno.com wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:08:04 -0400 (EDT) To: wans@monet.bc.edu, cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship Sze-Kar: I echo your sentiments and concern about anti-intellectualism in Chinese Christianity and North American culture (the eminent historian, Richard Hofstader wrote an entire book about American anti-intellectualism). It seems to me that many of us Chinese Christians will remain hostile towards _certain_ intellectuals (not hard science Ph.Ds, medical doctors, or engineers) so long as we cherish our marginal status in society and the Church (universal). Academicians in the humanities, social sciences, or theological disciplines have engendered an elitist attitude in the past, so it is understandable why marginalized peoples feel suspicious of them. What most people don't understand is that the academy has changed in the past thirty years - becoming more inclusive of people of color, of women, and of so-called "low brow" culture. The democratization and popularization of the humanities and theological disciplines has meant that this elitism no longer carries much weight as many younger scholars have entered their respective fields hoping to find a voice for the marginalized. Ironically, this effort to include the voices of all people in America has produced a backlash that would like to keep America as monochromatic and monolingual as possible. Thus, neo-conservative think-tanks like the American Enterprise Corp. have maligned these developments as "political correctness" or "raging relativism." And many conservative Christians have jumped on the band wagon. And based on my reading of many of the messages on the CAC list, many Chinese Christians have also adopted the agenda of the "backlashing" conservatives. I believe that much of the spewing of right-wing talk on this list (which I welcome, don't get me wrong) comes from "uncritical" acceptance of ideologically conservative Christians (who are primarily white and male - at least that agenda seems to serve white male elite interests better than anyone elses). I've yet to hear a substantive argument on this list justifying the identification of core Christian values with "conservative ideology." Another irony: ideologically conservative American Protestants are now trying to force "political correctness" out of their seminaries - which translates into fewer opportunities for women and people of color (like most of us on this list) to find seminary teaching positions. And they are succeeding. The irony is this: many younger minority Christians [late baby boomers or baby busters, not necessarily generation X - ugh, I hate these labels!] have joined in the call to eliminate "liberal political correctness." Consequence # 1 Less of their own people will be represented in these seminaries. Correction: less of the kind of people who really represent the interests of minority communities will be represented. Consequence # 2: don't count on seminaries which have successfully stamped out "political correctness" to provide for the special concerns and needs of minority Christians. All these ironies! It all stems from this problem you highlighted, Sze Kar. We so-called "theological intellectuals" are trench fighters in an arena who - given proper direction, support and encouragement - will reshape the configuration of American Protestantism and academia (to a lesser degree) in the next century. So long as we are seen as ivory tower professors disconnected from the life of the local church, the enemy will have already won. Chinese American Christians will remain divided and marginal. It seems blatantly unfair for our brothers and sisters in the local churches to privilege their own experiences while kicking a leg out from underneath us. We are also servants of Christ's church among Chinese Americans. You know as well as I do how tricky it is to juggle the many institutional and academic agendas which are thrust into our hands while we try to provide voice to Chinese American Christians. Illustration: I've been shopping around for publishers for my book on the history of Chinese Christianity in North America. While many publishers have expressed interest, many others ask me whether such a book is "marketable." "Too specialized a topic," I sometimes hear. Lesson learned: mainstream academics, publishers, religious institutions really care very little about Chinese American Christians - even though I've devoted so much of my energy trying to get research grants, trying to justify teaching an Asian American Christianity course which no one is interested in taking, trying to argue that we're not simply going to assimilate into the American mainstream (if we do, there would be no reason to study Chinese Americans as a distinct religious tradition, would there?), etc., etc. - all to give voice to Chinese American Christians in the academy, seminaries, Asian American studies, etc. With voice comes space and resources to strengthen a marginalized Christian community that few in America really care about. But, it seems that our greatest impediment is ourselves. Unlike our Korean brothers and sisters, we choose to remain isolated from those "liberal" denominations and seminaries and associate with evangelicals who are usually less than enlightened about or interested in Chinese Americans (though they seem to love us when we are in China or the Chinese diaspora). Koreans, on the other hand, have pounded the doors and invited themselves in (witness the Korean dominated Asian American ministry programs in several mainline seminaries including Princeton, Garrett-Evangelical, Claremont, Drew). After all, they, too, are brothers and sisters in Christ and therefore deserve a seat at the welcome table. Conservative or liberal, Koreans have done well to get a foot in the door and I applaud them. But we have lashed at each other (OBC v. ABC, "liberal" v. "conservative," ordinary people v. "intellectuals"), bashed our own culture while uncritically adopting the white evangelical subculture and their "issues," and argued about issues irrelevant to our community (why no discussion about the impact of welfare reform on Chinese immigrants? why no discussion about the rise in anti-Asian violence?). When will God raise up leaders among us who are looking out for our people's _real_ interests? If this discussion list does anything to address that last question, I will meet my Creator a happy man. When you and I gathered a group of "academic types" to start this list, we had hoped to bring together the wonderful diversity of Chinese and Asian American Christians into dialogue with one another ('tis true that theological liberals and conservatives rarely speak to each other - preferring to create and destroy "straw persons" [I believe in inclusive language use]). We [Chinese seminary professors] also wanted to share our views and hear others in hopes of strengthening the Chinese church in North America. I still believe that participants on this list are doing just that. Anti-intellectualism is both understandable and legitimate (to a degree), but I hope that we won't allow it to "censor" certain messages posted on this list. The time is ripe now for Chinese and other Asian America n Christians to partner with leaders who are in the trenches of mainstream Christianity (e.g., denominational leaders, seminary professors and administrators, etc.) to develop Christ-like leaders for our churches, the Asian American community, and the wider community. In Christ, Tim In a message dated 10/17/97 1:42:14 PM, wans@monet.bc.edu wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: JWongCDI@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 11:28:49 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: CAC mail: more, Women & Ministry Greetings on a beautiful Monday morning in Chicago. Fall is crisply in the air, hinting of a winter (which I hear can be pretty challenging for a Californian). But, for now, I love it. I apologize for being slow in entering the discussion on women and ministry. It is often a frustrating topic because we are concerned about authority and power, about "ruling over" and submitting. In trying to discern God's design and purpose in this matter (as we are all seeking to do) I've decided on an approach that seems to work for me. My primary question is over Responsibility. Who is responsible? or What are the responsibilities given to this person? The point of discovering responsibility is that we are then able to (assign) recognize who has authority or power. I believe God has not handed out authority willy-nilly, but purposefully, according to His design in creation. Many of our problems in relationships come about when an individual assumes/usurps a responsibility that does not belong to him/her. In trying to carry out the responsibility, he/she discovers that there is no accompanying authority, and wonders why nobody is willing to listen to him/her. (eg: an older child acting like a parent over younger siblings) There is also the practice of assigning a responsibility to an individual, without providing authority. This also is a way to create chaos. I find that Scripture passages like Hebrews 13:17, are easily understood when we approach it from a Responsibility perspective. "Obey your leaders, and submit {to them}; for they keep watch over your souls, as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you." Hopefully, this approach will help in our thinking. Joe Wong Church Dynamics International -- End -- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:25:31 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: Cornelius CC: ctesl-l@iclnet.org, CAC Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Verse of the Week - 52 Dear CACers: Does anyone know who "Cornelius" is and how CAC-members got on his distribution list? He doesn't seem to respond to our best effort to get in touch with him. Tim is right about cluttering our CAC discussion which has been constructive and informative. Ours a private discussion on issues specifically related to Chinese/Asian-American Christian life. It's not appropriate to use the CAC-forum as another distribution point if the post is not directly relevant to our group. Respectfully, Sze-kar -- End -- From: Fenggang Yang Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Re: Verse of the Week - 52 To: wans@monet.bc.edu, Cornelius Cc: ctesl-l@iclnet.org, CAC I strongly agree with Sze-kar!!! Get my name off your list, Cornelius. Who are you? fyang@uh.edu -----Original Message----- From: Sze-kar Wan To: Cornelius Cc: ctesl-l@iclnet.org ; CAC Date: Monday, October 20, 1997 4:57 PM Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Verse of the Week - 52 >Does anyone know who "Cornelius" is and how CAC-members got on his >distribution list? He doesn't seem to respond to our best effort to get >in touch with him. > >Tim is right about cluttering our CAC discussion which has been >constructive and informative. Ours a private discussion on issues >specifically related to Chinese/Asian-American Christian life. It's not >appropriate to use the CAC-forum as another distribution point if the >post is not directly relevant to our group. -- End -- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 22:59:32 +0000 From: Grace May To: Benjamin C Wong CC: Cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: CAC: W/M Ministry Ben, I want to encourage you and others interested in a more detailed understanding of my position to read an article I co-authored w/ Hyunhye Joe (a colleague of mine from Gordon-Conwell) in response to J.I. Packer's argument for not ordaining women as elders. Feel free to skim. But I would hope that you would find a more thoroughly reasoned and more carefully articulated response there than I can give here. Let me know if, after reading my article, you still have questions. See http://www.goldengate.net/mall/cbe/may.htm. To respond to your e-mail addressed to me dated 10/13/97: 1. How would you understand the meaning of kephale (Eng. "head")? Hyunhye and I offer a definition of kephale in our article. In light of Peter Woo's 10/15/97 posting, do you believe that Paul had in mind all women and men or only wives and husbands (or both) in Eph 5 and I Cor 11? I find I Cor. 11:11-12 one of the most compelling passages for advocating the interdependency of women and men in Christ ("all things come from God") over and above any biological ("man comes through woman") or chronological ("woman comes from man") orderings. 2. I'm delighted to hear that you understand the standard of "one wife" as expansively as you do. Like you, I firmly believe that the list of qualities in I Tim. 3 are guidelines for maintaining godly leaders. But many people cite the reference to "one wife" as an absolute bar against having women as overseers, because, the argument goes, since a leader must have a wife this automatically eliminates women from consideration. In my opinion, that argument is as logical and helpful as saying that the text is insisting that only single men can be overseers. 3. Right -- we mustn't prioritize experience over Scripture, but we must remember that all of our interpretations of Scripture are just that: "interpretations" and that our understanding by necessity is mediated through our human experience. So I'm glad when people own the experiences that have informed their respective views. The information helps me to understand where people are coming from and weigh the factors that might have influenced them. E.g. I think Ken Fong provided us w/ some useful history from his Fuller days. I’m humbled by the caliber of female students he found at seminary. 5. Gal 3:28 is about our identities in Christ. Many people argue, however, that this passage on equality should be applied exclusively to our position in salvation. But didn’t God initiate us into the divine reign for a purpose? Are we not to live out and embody the ethics of God’s kingdom -- values which are so alien to the world -- and make them a viable, living reality here on earth? Praying as Christ taught us "Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven," Blessings, Grace -- End -- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 08:59:07 -0500 To: CAC@emwave.net From: Samuel Ling Subject: CAC_Mail: patience and courtesy Dear good friends at CAC: May I encourage the moderator of our group to contact Cornelius, to kindly suggest that he needs to respond to people like Sze Kar and Fenggang about their request that they be removed from his list? May I also encourage all of us to be a bit more patient with one another? I am not sure that ALL of Cornelius' messages are irrelevant to our discussion. Perhaps it is the sheer volume of material he is producing, which is our concern? (In which case, I have been guilty for months, though am submitting much less these days!) Let's respond to the issue of Cornelius' VOLUME rather than the CONTENT or VIEWPOINT (which I don't think Sze Kar and Fenggang is doing ... I just want to raise a little word of caution here). In Christ, Sam Ling (Greetings, Sze Kar and Fenggang!) -- End -- To: Cac@emwave.net Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 20:28:55 -0600 Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson) On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:06:17 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes: >Brother G: > I submit that all of us have to negotiate through a world filled with evil > forces (principalities and powers) in hopes that we can be "signs" > of God's inbreaking Kingdom. The strategy of separatism and isolation > will fail in the long run because the problem is not only in the "world" > out there, but also the "worldliness" within us. Dear Tim, CAC: No rebuttal to your wisdom, Tim, but an opportunity to apply it follows. I know this issue may appear to be off the track, but I'll take a chance that it isn't, that it could help to achieve even more clarity for your point. Feel free to expand/refine the issue in terms of Chinese culture/customs, about which I know too little: There was an article in the news the other day, maybe you/some other people saw it, about the 'medical care' system in Africa. Allegedly, about 85% of ~1 billion African population go to witch doctors and medicine men for traditional cures-- a thriving business, too. The World Health Organization endorsed this form of 'medicine'--rendered it 'valid'. It involves pagan ritual, incantations, massage, casting out 'spirits', etc. in curing disease. What would be wise Biblical counsel for our African brethren, sisters who must 'negotiate' through that part of the world today? Should they renounce the witch doctors or not? Also, is there a real difference (in this context) betw relying on witch doctors etc. and relying on (medical) technology, as many Americans do, over against faith in God, i.e. living ' in hopes that we can be "signs" of God's inbreaking Kingdom'? Gary P.S. Robin sends her greetings to you and all the saints :) -- End -- From: Rlfong@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 03:11:31 -0400 (EDT) To: Cac@emwave.net cc: TSTseng@aol.com, gdot@juno.com Subject: CAC_Mail: INQUIRY - Customs Has anyone posted Christian interpretations of Chinese customs, as imported and practiced here in America. It'd be my guess that there be some differences between practices here and in Asia; as well as regional differences between say San Francisco and Texas. Customs I'm curious about are weddings, funerals, baby births, i.e. wearing a cheong sam or an embroadered jacket; big banquet party i.e. doing three bows to the decreased; or paper money; or candy and money gifts i.e. doing a red egg and ginger party; drinking chicken wine soup In the SF Bay Area, the Christian theme seems to be go with the materialistic culture which in many ways is an affluent expectation of spending lots of money to impress others. How much do we follow to "honor" our parents expectations v. doing proper Christian stewardship? be interested to hear thoughts. Ronnie Fong Fremont, CA ( attending another red egg & ginger party on Saturday ) -- End -- From: "DJ Chuang" Organization: Ambassador Bible Church To: cac@emwave.net Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 10:00:03 -0500 Subject: CAC_Mail: Women & Ministry ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: JWongCDI@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:10:08 -0400 (EDT) cc: corn1414@mailhost.net Subject: CAC_Women & Ministry Warm greetings; First, I too wish "Cornelius" to remove me from his list. Thanks Sze-kar for saying it for us. Now - I continue to do some thinking and would like to add to my earlier memo on Women & Ministry. (it may even seem clever) the key words for this issue may be: Real - Role - Relationships - Responsibility - Right . the first concern for us ought to be "What is Real?" Is our understanding of Men and Women Roles accurate to Reality? that is True? Of course our understanding of what is true or real, must conform to God's design and purpose in creation. And conforming to God's (not Man's) design and purpose is what I understand as Right. (our understanding is most reliable when it is discerned from His Word.) So, in God's creation, what are the Roles and Relationships which He assigned to His creatures, humans, in particular? This understanding must not simply be based upon ability. One young man told me he wanted his wife to pursue a career because she was good at it. I thought, however, that Sin is also something we are ABLE to do. The basis for his (and her) decision must involve her roles and relationships. Finally, it seems to me that the assigning of role and relationships are tied to the responsbilities God gives. Has God given responsibilities to the male different from the female? Has God empowered each gender with physical and psychological characteristics to fulfill their different responsibilities? I believe the answers are "Yes." But these characteristics does not automatically make us good at carrying out our responsibilities. Neither does it mean that each is not capable of doing more. Instead the capability is what allows us to sin, that is to act in a manner that is inconsistent to God's design and purpose. A word about roles. It seems that we humans are usually seeking roles of power and control. This will lead us to miss entirely the true roles God has designed for us - and Himself. I find that the role God has assigned to Himself is to be a Servant. Let me share the words of a godly woman; " I am sure that we are made women so that we can model for our men the true servant spirit." Anyway, in my own searching, these are guiding concepts which I find valid and employ. Respectfully, Joe Wong (at Chicago Chinese Baptist Church) Church Dynamics International -- End -- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 17:22:45 +0000 From: Grace May To: KRMMB@aol.com CC: CAC@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: New Topic: Asian-American Evangelism that Works??? Ken, Good question. I don't know how everyone stays on top of your CAC mail, let alone everything else people must receive. I'm thinking of getting a faster modem. Any other suggestions? Grace -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Asian-American Church Planters From: jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:15:12 EDT Hi DJ, Thanks for your message. Yes, you did send it earlier. However, I accidentally deleted it upon reading it for the first time and forgot who actually sent it. I apologize for my mistake and I do appreciate your persistence. Yes, I did speak at the B-ball tournament at CCUC. Thanks for your comments. Being vulnerable has been a character trait I've been working on for years and it hasn't been easy. I still struggle with that issue since I have so much "performance/acceptance" baggage in my past. But by God's grace He is slowly flushing it out. Great to hear about your new church plant situation. Tell me more about it. What is the make up of the core team? What vision does the core team have? What denomination or church is it affiliated with? How large is the church plant? How long has it been since the launch date? What strategy and model will you be implementing and why? Who is your primary target group? Is it realistic to go multi-ethnic if most members of the core team are Asian Americans? My wife and I just got back from the "Church Planters Assessment Seminar." It was a grueling weekend but a good one. I learned a lot about myself; what were my strengths and weaknesses. We are in prayer waiting for God's leading. Love to hear from you... In Christ, Jon -- End -- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 01:34:34 +0000 From: Grace May To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: CAC mail vol Tim, I had to chuckle. You gave a detailed and thoughtful response even to a query such as mine. Thank you. I'll try and incorporate suggestion #1 to avoide duplicate mailings and am open to suggestion #2. The latter could help me to be a better steward w/ my time. Grace -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:29:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CAC_Mail: CFP: Conf. on Social Gospel at Colgate-Rochester To: Greetings. I'd like to announce the following call for papers for an upcoming conference on the Social Gospel. Please send inquiries to Dr. Christopher Evans at revsroce@frontier.net. Thank you. - Timothy Tseng Call for Papers Conference on the Social Gospel at Colgate Rochester Divinity School April 24-25, 1998 Sponsored by Colgate Rochester Divinity School and the Edwin Mellen Press On April 24-25, 1998, an inaugural conference on the social gospel will be held at Colgate Rochester Divinity School. This two-day event, co-sponsored by the Divinity School and Edwin Mellen Press, will feature papers and panel presentations designed to promote a scholarly understanding of the social gospel tradition. The conference speaker will be Dr. Max L. Stackhouse, Professor of Ethics at Princeton Theological Seminary. Paper and panels will be considered on all facets of the social gospel tradition. Given Colgate Rochester's historical and theological connection to the thought of Walter Rauschenbusch, papers dealing with Rauschenbusch's legacy are encouraged. Proposals from graduate students will also be considered. Selected papers from this conference will be published in a special volume in the Edwin Mellen Press Series, _Texts and Studies in the Social Gospel_. Proposals, including a 250-word abstract and one-page vitae, should be submitted by January 15, 1998 to Dr. Christopher Evans Assistant Professor of American Church History Colgate Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, New York 14620 (716) 271-1320 FAX (716) 271-8013 Email: revsroce@frontier.net ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:40:41 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: New Topic: Asian-American Evangelism that Works??? Dear Grace (and CACers): I hope that my initial statement of concern about being placed on other distribution lists won't open up another period of "slashing and burning" on this list - so please be patient with me and one another. The only concern I was addressing was the way my email address was apparently placed on someone else's distribution without my knowledge or permission. Now, with regards to the volume on the CAC list - two suggestions: 1. send you messages only to the cac list w/o "cc"ing other persons on the list. sometimes duplicate messages are sent. 2. we may want to consider a CAC Digest option, i.e., instead of receiving all the messages separately, they can be automatically condensed into one longer digest of messages. this usually means that a participant won't be in on discussions instanteneously, but most of us don't respond immediately anyway (nor is it always wise to do so!). Most of all, let's exercise care about what types of messages we post. Some messages that I've posted in the past really were not relevant to the entire group, so I've consciously tried to reduce the volume I've been sending. All the best and God's "Grace" to you, always! :-) Tim In a message dated 10/22/97 4:20:02 PM, you wrote: <> -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:51:27 -0400 (EDT) To: Cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch Doctors (Healers) Hey, hey, Gary: Thanks for opening up a new thread! This issue that you've raised will probably be better answered by a missiologist (like Grace May), but my take on it is that African Christians will either: (1) renounce all forms of traditional cures that appear contrary to Christianity, (2) negotiate a somewhat syncretistic/synthetic arrangement where Christian [modern?] and traditional practices are both employed, or (3) fully incorporate these traditional practices into their Christianity (i.e., Christianize them). In reality, I think all three dynamics occur more or less simultaneously (consciously or not). Most African Christians would probably make clear distinctions between their faith and traditional "superstitions" but choose to retain some of their traditional mores. I think of all the Chinese herbal medicines that I've taken (and shared some with you, I recall), yet, I don't see myself compromising my faith. Indeed, if everything in our Chinese culture was renounced, what would replace it? IMHO, there's no such thing as a "cultureless Christianity" or a Christian culture untouched by human experiences. Therefore, we need more than trying to find the "purest" expression of Christian faith is the gift of discernment. - Tim In a message dated 10/22/97 2:13:10 PM, gdot@juno.com wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:03:29 -0400 (EDT) To: Cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch Doctors (Healers)2 Apologies for not giving credit to Ronnie's posting about Christian responses to Chinese customs - which raised a similar question that Gary raised. I'd like to hear what others think about how we relate to or interpret Chinese customs. Nicole Constable wrote a book studying Hakka Christians in Hong Kong and she concluded that these Chinese Christians maintained a dual-system approach to their worldview and religion. By "secularizing" Chinese customs (i.e., saying that Chinese New Year is not really a religious holiday), Christians allowed themselves to participate in Chinese festivities. This permitted them to retain their Christian convictions without being totally alienated from Chinese society. Now, I wonder what happens in North America? Any thoughts! - Tim ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:29:04 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Help needed in NYC's Chinatown FYI, Tim Tseng ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:20:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Joshua Henry Atkins To: hksss@columbia.edu Subject: Medicine - Chinese Dear friends, I am writing regarding an opportunity for anyone interested in medicine/paramedicine and who speaks a substantial amount of either Cantonese or Mandarin. The Urban Institute of Family Health is looking for students with medical interest to assist in their Clinic on the Lower East Side on Tuesday mornings from 8:30 am to 12:00 pm. The clinic is mainly for lower income or homeless persons and they have recently seen a very large increase in elderly Chinese patients. They only have 1 doctor who speaks Chinese and she is only available 1 day per month. Students interested would help with translation of basic information, participate in seeing patients, and have the opportunity to get involved in other areas of the clinic operation. If interested please call Elisa Wallman at the Urban Institute for Family Health at (212) 633-0800 (extension 263). Please pass this note along to anyone who you think might be interested. Thanks, Josh -- End -- From: "Peter Szto" To: Cac@emwave.net Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 12:33:08 EST5EDT Subject: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs While studying for my doctorate I took a course in folklore. The focus of my research was "Asian America weddings" and the rituals that are used in a cross-cultural context. My experience as a wedding photographer provided a rich data source to visually analyze how various rites and rituals are carried over from Chinese societies into the American context. Asian American weddings are unique in how they combine Western rituals and symbols with Chinese ones. The paper I wrote used semiotic analysis to decode the meaning of such things as the significance of white and red dresses for the bride, a church ceremony versus an outdoor one, and the array of rituals such as the social function of kissing. I'm glad that Ronnie is also analyzing this dimension of life. My short conclusion is that cultural awareness is important to understand the meaning of all rituals, whether Esat or West, particularly as a Christian. I don't see the value of a so-called "Christian wedding" if the couple themselves are not epistemologically self-conscious of the rites they employ to celebrate marital union. Peter Szto -- End -- From: gdot@juno.com To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch Doctors (Healers) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 13:48:22 EDT On Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:51:27 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes: >I think of all the Chinese herbal medicines that I've taken (and shared some with >you, I recall) The warts disappeared after that. I'd ask, 'What do you recommend for grey hair?' except for the fear of going bald :) Bro. G -- End -- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 12:19:14 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: patience and courtesy Samuel Ling wrote: > > May I encourage the moderator of our group to > contact Cornelius, to kindly suggest that he needs > to respond to people like Sze Kar and Fenggang > about their request that they be removed from his > list? > > May I also encourage all of us to be a bit more patient > with one another? I am not sure that ALL of Cornelius' > messages are irrelevant to our discussion. Perhaps > it is the sheer volume of material he is producing, > which is our concern? (In which case, I have been > guilty for months, though am submitting much less > these days!) Let's respond to the issue of Cornelius' > VOLUME rather than the CONTENT or VIEWPOINT > (which I don't think Sze Kar and Fenggang is doing ... > I just want to raise a little word of caution here). Dear Sam: Greetings from Boston! The city is not quite the same since your left in May :-) Not quite sure what the last parenthesis means: the ambiguity of the antecedent to "which" leaves me hanging. In any cae, I was concerned with NEITHER the volume NOR the viewpoint, BUT the integrity of CAC itself. Elsewhere I wrote the following and I here quote in full: "To me, the far more important issue is the integrity of the mailing list, hence the integrity of the discussion. People who sign up for CAC should have the confidence that their names are not passed on to any other list withouth THEIR prior consent--no matter how valid anyone might think it is or how easy they could delete or filter out unsolicited mail. It ultimately concerns the credibility of CAC." I do understand that it is sometimes difficult to filter out all SPAM mail on technical grounds, but at least the principle should be upheld. Thanks for hearing me hout, Sze-kar -- End -- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 15:57:15 -0500 From: Fenggang Yang Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs To: Peter Szto , Cac@emwave.net Hi, Peter, How are things going? How is your dissertation writing? I didn't know you did such a study. Could I have a copy of the paper? It is a very interesting topic to me. I thought weddings of Chinese American Christians are all very much Westernized/Americanized. But I can be wrong. How about funerals? I like to read any writings about North American Chinese Christian rites (wedding, funeral, birth, etc.). Please forward any title/paper and advise about sources. Thank you. Fenggang --------------------------------------------------------------- Fenggang Yang, Ph.D. fyang@uh.edu Department of Sociology http://www.uh.edu/~fyang University of Houston 713-743-3943 (FAX) Houston, TX 77204-3474 713-743-3973 (phone) -- End -- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 17:03:25 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs Dear Peter: Your semiotic paper on AA weddings sounds positively intriguing. Any chance of posting an abstract of it and sending me the full version? I would agree with the need for "epistemologically self-conscious" awareness of the symbols involved. But these are also layered with meaning through continual use, so that the present, lived experiences of the AA community, not just their once-pristine Christian or Chinese meanings, must needs play a part, no? I say this because I just got married last year and I honestly could care less whether a certain part of the wedding was purely Christian or Chinese, or which part was cultural and which cultic. I just did what I knew would include all my relatives (majority nonchristian) as well as all my Christian friends. Time for me to understand why it was so enjoyable to all who came (400+), including my wife and me. Your work would help. Warmly, Sze-kar -- End -- From: Rlfong@aol.com Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 19:40:15 -0400 (EDT) To: fyang@uh.edu (fenggangyang), pszto@legacy.calvin.edu (peterszto), Cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs Dear Fenggang & Peter Szeto I too would be interested in a copy. Ronnie Fong Fremont, CA << snip >> In a message dated 97-10-23 17:09:03 EDT, fyang@uh.edu wrote: To: pszto@legacy.calvin.edu (Peter Szto), Cac@emwave.net Could I have a copy of the paper? It is a very interesting topic to me. I thought weddings of Chinese American Christians are all very much Westernized/Americanized. But I can be wrong. How about funerals? I like to read any writings about North American Chinese Christian rites (wedding, funeral, birth, etc.). Please forward any title/paper and advise about sources. <> -- End -- From: JLoFEC@aol.com Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 20:32:27 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: CAC mail vol All - actually, i think a digest version would be great! hear, here! john lo * * * * John Lo Pastor of Youth and Young Adults First Evangelical Church, Glendale, CA 818.240.5633 JLoFEC@aol.com * * * * -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:38:03 -0600 Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson) On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 17:03:25 -0400 Sze-kar Wan writes: >Your semiotic paper on AA weddings sounds positively intriguing. Any >chance of posting an abstract of it...Time for me to understand why it was so enjoyable to all who came...Your work would help. Dear Sze-kar, Peter, and Friends, The idea of posting this abstract is an excellent one. For me (and probably for many others) it would be very useful to have (web) access to the scholarship/sermons/misc writings/grievances/abstracts/wisdom, etc. of CAC. E.g Brother Fenggang wrote an in-depth email a few weeks ago which captivates the imagination and has an enduring quality to it. He and other Spiritual scholars in our (electronic) midst should have a place to post their weighty/weightier ideas--primarily for CAC, of course, but not un-public. Such a place could turn out to be like that ancient church door where a pudgy German monk named Luther both challenged and changed the course of history. And among us there may be another Luther--a Chinese one...And who knows, Sze-kar, it may be you:) Respectfully and Warmly, Gary -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 01:10:21 -0400 Subject: CAC_Mail: Press Release - Surgeon General Nominee From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang) Dear CACers: Are there other CACers who hold similar or different views regarding this issue? In HIm, J. Chang --------------------------------------------------------------------------- SURGEON GENERAL NOMINEE SUPPORTS LEGALIZED INFANTICIDE FRC OUTRAGED AT SATCHER'S SUPPORT FOR PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Dr. David Satcher, President Clinton's nominee for United States Surgeon General, has told a Senator in writing that he supports Partial-Birth Abortion to protect the "health of the mother." Dr. Satcher departs from thousands of his colleagues in the medical profession who emphatically declare that there is no health reason to puncture the skull of a partially delivered child and vacuum the child's brains out. "Appointing an advocate of infanticide to the bully pulpit on our country's health would send an absolutely tragic message to our nation and to the world," Family Research Council President Gary Bauer said Wednesday. "The position of the 'nation's doctor' should NOT be filled by an individual who acquiesces in a radical agenda that threatens the life and health of our nation's mothers and their unborn children. It would be a great tragedy if the members of the U.S. Senate, who voted overwhelmingly to ban legalized infanticide, endorse as Surgeon General of the United States an individual who legitimizes the gruesome practice of partial-birth abortion," Bauer continued. "President Clinton's second veto of the partial-birth abortion ban demonstrates that he is accepting misleading advice from those who put the politics of abortion over the principles and values of our nation," Bauer declared. "I call upon Dr. Satcher to explain in medical terms, not political ones, why his views on partial-birth abortion are contrary to the testimony of doctors around the nation who say this horrific and barbaric procedure is never medically necessary." American Medical Association President Daniel H. Johnson, Jr., M.D., wrote in the New York Times that "the partial delivery of a living fetus for the purpose of killing it outside the womb is ethically offensive to most Americans and physicians." In May, the AMA, a 297,000-member group of doctors, joined PHACT (the Physicians' Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth), a group of over 700 doctors nationwide -- many of them specialists in neonatology and obstetrics -- in saying this procedure is never medically necessary. Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop told the American Medical News in August of 1996, "... in no way can I twist my mind to see that the late-term abortion as described -- you know, partial birth, and then destruction of the unborn child before the head is born -- is a medical necessity for the mother. It certainly can't be a medical necessity for the baby." -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 01:49:11 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship Dear DJ et al.: My flu is about out of the door and I can once again try to do some intellectual lifting. I agree with your exposition of Mark 12.30f to which my original post also alludes. Loving God requires all our integrated abilities, among which counts our "mind." Rom 12.1-2, where Paul pivots his discussion from "theology" (chs 1-11) to "ethics" (chs 12-15), is another passage which emphasizes the centrality of our mental faculty under the renewing influence of the Spirit. NIV's "spiritual" in Rom 12.1 is literally "reasonable" (so KJV, NRSV note, etc.) or "logikos" in Greek (fr which we get "logic"). "Spiritual" is not wrong but masks a paradoxical point Paul is making here. The mind is the center of all intellection and thus all ethical decisions and actions, but it must be transformed by the Spirit. Then and only then can our life be a "reasonable" offering or worship. Such worship is "reasonable," because it will then be issued from a mind functioning at its best, under the transformative impulsion of the Spirit. But since the Spirit stands behind this reasonable life or worship, the latter is by definition "spiritual." Clearly Paul is making an assumption common in his days about the function of the mind. In so doing he endorses the assumption, but only to an extent. The mind, while central, must be continually transformed by the Spirit; it must be christianized (my word, not Paul's), as it were. But Paul does NOT bracket the mind out of the equation but rather reinforces its prime of place. This is my starting point for integrating scholarship and faith. Respectfully, Sze-kar -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 03:03:05 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs G Ottoson wrote: > ... Such a place could turn out to be like that ancient church > door where a pudgy German monk named Luther Dear Gary Son of Otto: Nice to be compared to Luther, tho I know better: I AM rather pudgy, but my wife tells me I am no monk! And my so-called theses rhyme with something unmentionable in polite company. :-) Seriously, DJ's archive of posted messages is a great place. Check it out. Warmly, Sze-kar -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 03:41:26 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship Dear Tim et al.: > Koreans, on the other hand, have pounded the doors and invited > themselves in (witness the Korean dominated Asian American ministry > programs in several mainline seminaries including Princeton, Garrett- > Evangelical, Claremont, Drew). > Bravo for laying it on the line! Your comparison to the Korean situation is apt. Our Korean brothers and sisters put us to shame. Everywhere I go--universities in Israel, Leiden, Tuebingen, Heidelberg, all over England, and definitely ALL over North American--I meet teams and teams of dedicated Korean students pursuing PhDs in theology. They are so many that I was constantly called "Koreaner" in German supermarkets. This does not count the many, many more (5-10 times more?) students at the masters level. I have no doubt they will alter the face of theological education worldwide in the coming decades if they haven't already. The vast majority of Korean students are theologically as conservative as we are. We both have similar strengths and limitations, similar cultural resources and histories of discrimination. One main difference, which CAC touched upon before, is that Korean culture does not stigmatize the ministerial professtion. Another is what Tim mentions here: Korean theological educators have a strategy that does not artificially discriminate against the theological stripe of an institution, be it "liberal" or "evangelical." The ultiamte goal seems to be an elevation and eventual development of their own theology, institutions, traditions, etc. We Chinese Christians have achieved far, far less in spite of our head start. I dont' want to romanticize the Korean situation, but I as an outsider can certainly sense far greater cohesion and support their theological students and educators enjoy than I have ever experienced among my own people. (Well, that's an understatement.) If there is any envy on my part, it is this. Respectfully, Sze-kar -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 09:48:04 -0400 (EDT) To: Cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs Peter: I'd appreciate a copy of your paper as well. Just a minor point with regards to your statement (and I'm included in this critique as well) - it makes too easy a transition between "asian american" and "chinese american." Asian American is a "political" construct created by the American government to put all the diverse groups from Asia and the Pacific Islands into one racial designation (this has both positive and negative features). Thus, it should not be confused with "cultural" characteristics usually identified with specific national groups like Chinese, Korean, Filippino, etc. In other words, there's no such thing as an "Asian American" culture since this category includes all the various immigrant cultures (this, of course, should be qualified since if churches like Evergreen Baptist should continue to draw more diverse Asians into its congregation, there is a possibility of the formation of a distinctive Asian American culture there; also, there are other instances of a possible Asian American culture emerging if one pays attention to all the literature, film, and activist groups). So, it would be helpful to be specific when talking about something that is Chinese (i.e., cultural) vs. something that Asian American (more or less political). Looking forward to reading your paper! - Tim In a message dated 10/24/97 12:56:09 AM, pszto@legacy.calvin.edu (Peter Szto) wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:00:18 -0400 (EDT) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Info about PAACCE Dear CACers: A number of you have requested information about the Pacific Asian American and Canadian Christian Education project (PAACCE). This 20 year old ecumenical group (which Sze-Kar and I have been involved with at some time in our past) provides Christian Education resources for Asian American congregations dealing with inter-generational concerns, Asian American ways of interpreting Scripture, experimenting with worship and liturgical practices which incorporate Asian American culture/history, resources for wrestling with anti-Asian racial discrimination, etc. PAACCE publishes newsletters and bibliographies as well. While they service primarily Asian Americans in mainline denominations (American Baptist, Reformed Church of America, Episcopalian, United Methodist, PCUSA, United Church of Canada, etc.), they welcome evangelicals who are open to working within a theologically and denominationally diverse framework. The current Executive Director of PAACCE is Prof. Wenh In Ng. She may be reached at: Rev Dr Wenh In Ng Emmanuel College, Victoria University Toronto School Of Theology 75 Queens' Park Crescent Toronto, ONT M5S 1K7 WK: (416) 585-4549 FAX: (416) 585-4516 EMAIL: gawi.ng@utoronto.ca ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: MChowAACF@aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 12:36:27 -0400 (EDT) To: wans@monet.bc.edu, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship Sze-kar, My understanding is that the difference between the Chinese view of a pastor and the Korean view of a pastor is quite different and that by having this view, the Korean son or daughter has the blessings of their parent to be in full-time ministry. From what I understand, it's almost like being a doctor. On the other hand, I haven't heard too many parents (except for Bill) who have encouraged their children to consider ministry as a career. Probably why the difference of the number of Korean American churches and ministries and their zeal for ministry is that some of the environmental and family stigmas aren't a problem like other Asian Americans. Melanie -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:46:39 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship Dear Melanie: Your observation about Korean-Am churches is right, so far as I can see as an outsider. Too bad we seem to have few Korean voices on CAC; it would be interesting to have a conversation on this with an insider who really knows. In any case, it may be too easy to blame the Chinese culture for deemphasizing theological education. Folks on this list represent a formidable contingent in Chinese-American churches--what with the talent, education, enthusiasm, spiritual maturity, influence, evident in every message I read. We have the potentials to address problems like lack of cohesion and support, anti-intellectualism, community change, and the rest, if we have the will. Let's pray for that vision. En Christo, Sze-kar -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:21:51 -0500 From: Fenggang Yang Subject: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism To: cac@emwave.net Sze-kar, Melanie, and everyone, I trust that your experiences with Korean Christians and Chinese Christians, especially in regard to encouraging children enter the ministry or seminaries, are real. But why is there such a difference between Chinese Christians and Korean Christians? Why Chinese Christian parents are reluctant to encourage their children to enter the ministry? Without finding the real causes, things may not be changed. One thing I have been contemplating /speculating is denominationalism. In the U.S., most Korean Christians are Presbyterians and some Methodists. A majority of them join or stay in the mainline denominations of the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United Methodist Church, although some churches also formed their own Korean Presbyterian Church denomination. But anyway, the point is: most Korean Christians belong to a denomination. However, nearly half of Chinese churches in the U.S. are nondenominational; many Chinese Christians are anti-denominationalism. So what, you may ask. Well, this may be one of the reasons why Chinese Christians are reluctant to enter the ministry, or rather, Chinese Christian parents are unwilling to let their loved children get into the ministry. With insitutional support from a denomination, young people who want to enter the ministry do not need to worry too much about how to make a living, because the denomination has pension plans, and would provide support in case of disputes between a pastor and his congregants. However, in the independent churches, the pastor often has no long term pension plan, and in case of conflict, he is often overthrown and driven out. In other words, to be a pastor in a Chinese church is more costly/difficult than one in a Korean church that belongs to a denomination. Similarly, Chinese churches often demand multilingual and multicultural capability of the pastor, whereas homogeneous Korean churches do not have such necessity. While denominationalism may be against Christian universalism, but anti-denominationalism may also mean sectarianism. Agree? disagree? Again, this is just my speculation, not based on sound empirical research or biblical interpretation. I can be wrong and I'm ready to change my opinions. Fenggang --------------------------------------------------------------- Fenggang Yang, Ph.D. fyang@uh.edu Department of Sociology http://www.uh.edu/~fyang University of Houston 713-743-3943 (FAX) Houston, TX 77204-3474 713-743-3973 (phone) -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:38:06 -0500 From: Fenggang Yang Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs To: Peter Szto , Cac@emwave.net Peter and everyone, Because several people have shown interest in your paper, I feel a burden to say this: I want to pay you the cost of reproduction and mailing, and will definately accredit your work in case I cite, quote, or otherwise use it. Meanwhile, won't you enjoy the popularity of your topic? :-) We really should have more folklore studies of Chinese American Christian practices. Also, if an electronic copy is convenient, please simply "attach" the file of the paper to an email to me. That is the simplist to do, I guess. Thank you. Fenggang -- End -- From: Rlfong@aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:16:13 -0400 (EDT) To: fyang@uh.edu, cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism It'd be my limited observation that denominationalism alone is insufficient as a root causation for the difference in encouraging people to enter the ministry. While it'd might be true the Korean-American Church is more affliated with denominationism, it is also my impression ( don't flame me ) that the Korean American experience is more full of schism and frequent church splitting resulting in smaller churches than the Chinese American church; with an even more tuffer pastoral experience. Is not the difference more atune to the differences in the amount of immigration from the homecountry to the USA? Ronnie Fong Fremont CA who really should be doing work instead of replying to this thread in the SF Bay Area In a message dated 97-10-24 17:37:14 EDT, fenggang wrote: << experiences with Korean Christians and Chinese Christians ... differ>> -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:32:57 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism Fenggang's line of inquiry, focusing on Korean denominationalism versus Chinese sectarianism, holds a lot of promise. I can verify it, albeit anecdotally, with my own experience. In 1982 after I left my home church, an independent local church, I shopped for a denomination. I had three important criteria (in no particular order): support (not financial, just general encouragement) for my scholarly pursuit, one that is strong in Asia (since I was planning to teach there), and has a Chinese congregation in the Boston area where I lived. The first two were compIetely lacking in my home church and were in fact responsible for much of the tension. I ended up with the Episcopal Church, because it was (still is) strong in the first 2 areas and a new Chinese congregation was opening up in Boston. I have been a part of that congregation ever since. My immediate experience in the Episcopal Church was tremendous institutional support. My scholarly pursuit was never questioned but simply assumed. I was able almost immediately to gain access to all sorts of national programs, all of which received me with open arms. I participated in PAACE (see Tim's post) as a representative of the Epis Church; I also visited Chinese and Hong Kong seminaries and attended Chinese theological conferences under its auspices. It and most every mainline denomination still look for ways to enhance the Asian presence which hitherto is predominatnly Korean; the Chinese lag far, far behind. On the other hand, the result of becoming a mainliner is that I've been virtually cut off from the majority of Chinese churches. It is a pity, for mainline denominations have a wealth of resources, a national and international infrastructure, the willingness to be supportive of Asian and Chinese causes. If only Chinese Christians weren't so suspicious of them, there is a great deal we could do. Fenggang's observation probably doesn't ultimately solve the question why theological education has such low standing in Chinese churches, for it merely pushes the question back one step: Why do Chinese churches eschew mainline denominations and Korean churches don't? That question will take us way too far afield. But Fenggang has given us a solid sociological context in which to understand the differences between Korean and Chinese Christians. En Christo, Sze-kar -- End -- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:48:53 -0400 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism Rlfong@aol.com wrote: > > ... the Korean American experience is more full of schism and frequent > church splitting resulting in smaller churches than the Chinese American > church; with an even more tuffer pastoral experience. Sadly, however, schism is a way of the Christian church life. From the days of Paul's Corinth to the Church Fathers to the split with the Eastern Church to the Reformation to the rise of denominations to North Am Chinese churches, it has been an unbroken string of schisms. Maybe I've become jaded, but I've come to accept schism as a way of life. :-( It seems to me that the real test is how we deal with differences once we have them. Will an oligarchy deal with them in a hush-hush manner behind closed doors? Or is there a clearly worked out, time-tested procedure to adjudicate between the warring parties? > Is not the difference more atune to the differences in the amount of > immigration from the homecountry to the USA? I think there is some truth to this. Does anyone have hard statistics comparing Korean and Chinese immigration patterns in the last 25 yrs? I suspect (nothing more than that) there have been more ethnic Chinese coming into the country than Koreans, but I could be wrong. Warmly, Sze-kar (who should be resting instead) -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible? From: jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro) Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:14:59 EDT I want to throw out a question for all Asian American church plants. How valid is it to start future "Asian American" churches if there isn't an strong identifiable "Asian American" culture in the US? Dr. Tim Tseng's comments are insightful and may have ramifications for future Asian American ministries. He writes: "Asian American" is a "political" construct created by the American government to put all the diverse groups from Asia and the Pacific Islands into one racial designation (this has both positive and negative features). Thus, it should not be confused with "cultural" characteristics usually identified with specific national groups like Chinese, Korean, Filippino, etc. In other words, there's no such thing as an "Asian American" culture since this category includes all the various immigrant cultures (this, of course, should be qualified since if churches like Evergreen Baptist should continue to draw more diverse Asians into its congregation, there is a possibility of the formation of a distinctive Asian American culture there; also, there are other instances of a possible Asian American culture emerging if one pays attention to all the literature, film, and activist groups)" Here are my thoughts: There is an identifiable White-Anglo culture. There is an identifiable Chinese culture. There is an identifiable Korean culture. What is an "Asian American" culture? "Asian American" seems to be a sub-culture of two or more dominant cultures. If that is the case, isn't it risky to plant an exclusively "Asian American" church? Is it worth it? Should it be attempted at all, especially if that church plant has no denominational or mother church support? Any feedback? Jon -- End -- To: Cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Korean, Chinese From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong) Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 03:42:44 EDT To the pastors in CAC; The emphasis on Biblical education can start at the churches. The church I was at used to have a senior (high school) retreat to help prepare them for college and to especially challenge them to consider Bible college to be grounded in their faith. This is not a popular focus since the concern is to get into a career to earn a living, to become successful and 3 to 4 years in a Bible college is a waste of time. Are our values conforming to the world? This is not the churches' focus because it has not been a concern nor goal of the churches. Are the Korean churches (not just parents and friends) giving more values to this? Ben PS The first senior class we took on a retreat had seven. Five went to Bible college. -- End -- To: Cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Surgeon General From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong) Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 03:42:44 EDT Hi J. Chang: I would be very grieved if David Satcher is approved as the surgeon general. Thanks for raising the issue. In Him, Ben -- End -- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 09:53:41 -0500 To: acmi-network@xc.org, cac@bccn.org From: Samuel Ling Subject: CAC_Mail: Book offer -- Essays by Christian PRC's BOOK OFFER -- NEW BOOK OF ESSAYS BY CHRISTIAN PRC'S SOUL SEARCHING has just been published by China Horizon. This is the first volume in the "Horizon Series." SOUL SEARCHING contains ten essays by mainland Chinese intellectuals (PRC's) living in the west, on the relationship betwee the Christian faith and society, art, Chinese culture, and the future development of Chinese institutions. These are thoughtful pieces which come from the depths of their minds and souls. I wrote an introductory chapter tracing the historical context to help the reader understand the tremendous significance of PRC's and PRC ministry today. China Horizon is offering this volume free to any international student ministry worker or Asian American church leader. Please request your copy BY (SNAIL)MAIL to: China Horizon, POBox 40399, Pasadena, CA 91114. Just give your name, address, and with whom/where you serve. We will send your copy by return mail. Keep in mind the costs of production of this book. Donations of any amount are appreciated, but are NOT required in order to receive your book. Ask for it by title: SOUL SEARCHING. (The cost for producing this book is stated on the copyright page of the book.) Samuel Ling, General Director China Horizon PO Box 40399, Pasadena, CA 91114 Office located at: 1605 E. Elizabeth, Pasadena, CA 91105 (626) 296-7615 FAX (626) 296-7616 -- End -- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 12:41:27 -0500 To: cac@bccn.org From: Gregory Jao Subject: CAC_Mail: Koreans, denominationalism, etc. While denominational affiliations may play a part in the Korean reverence for the pastorate, I think we need to look at Korean church history as well. According to Peter Cha, seminary was one of the few options available to Koreans desiring graduate/professional training during the Japanese occupation. Most other colleges and graduate schools were closed. As a result, the best and brightest students ended up going to seminary. In effect, the pastorate became the only "prestige" career available to families who valued education. Peter suggests that the Korean reverence and respect for the pastorate stems (in Korean and among immigrant churches) from this socio-historical context. (Incidentally I think this history also explains, in part, why pastors more thoroughly dominate the life and thought of their churches than many Chinese pastors do. Ambitious people had to go somewhere. And it may explain the fuller expression of the "gift of schism" among our Korean cousins. Nearly every Korean student I've met has been through at least one (if not two) church splits. While schism is part and parcel of our falled church life, I think the Koreans exerience it more often.) Anecdotally, we're finding increasing resistence to the pastorate as a valued career option for second generation kids on campus. The pastorate may have been a favored career for older 2d generation folk (i.e., around the later twenties and above), but I'm not seeing the same excitement for/among the younger folk. The esteem for the pastorate is dropping--both among the first generation and the second. Greg Jao -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 12:02:13 -0600 Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible? From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson) On Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:14:59 EDT jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro) writes: >I want to throw out a question for all Asian American church plants... >[Dr.Tseng:] "Asian American" is a "political" construct created by the American >government... >Any feedback? Jon Jon, Friends, One crucial point here, feel free to disagree, is that the government is part of the 'system'. (Thinking about Jonah once again) At this point of history our government _per se_ is 'systematized'. It is like a poor, barefoot, and pregnant mistress at the beck and call of corporations. E.g. When it comes to immigration, the corporate leaders are frantic for cheap labor here. (This hurts the laborers already in place, who want full-time jobs w/benefits, etc.) When it comes to showing commensurate appreciation, i.e. cultural/economic acceptance (forget 'inclusion') of new immigrant labor, corporations (inc their old labor, unions) say to the gov't (mistress), in effect, 'go have an abortion', don't bother 'me with additional housekeeping matters'. What can she do? She is so far 'in bed' and in debt (by design, I think) that the corporations OWN her. The key cultural idea in this scenario is that America is a 'corporation culture' because it is 'corporation's culture'. 'Government of, by, and for (ALL) the people' is being dismantled. IMHO, This corp.culture is organized like a big department store where 'Asian American' (and for that matter, 'Swedish American') is not a people. AA in particular now is an unreal place, a 'dept.' which exists to enable (white) negotiators to avoid the nomenclature like 'miscellaneous' or 'other workers'; i.e., to avoid the appearance of (immigrant) worker abuse which, in reality, they are lying about. Then, when, e.g., the Chinese Prime Minister comes to visit 'the store', to sing, dance, and shop, these corporate leaders can tell him there is a cool 'place' for all Asian 'people' here. 'Wanna see it?' The prime minister may say, 'Well, I'd actually like to shop in the Chinese department'. 'OK,then, let's go there'--and, there, he can buy, e.g. a beautiful silk tie made (by prisoners?) in China or an Elvis CD--all the same stuff. He would (and will!) be doing exactly what corporate culture wants him (and all 1.6 billion Chinese people) to do--on NBC--shop at the American store... Except, that what he is also feeling (a contempt, perhaps, which bodes of major war someday) is the pressure that the whole of China (partic it's booming economy) may/will be annexed to (systematically swallowed by) 'the store'. Enough on this (speculation? You can decide), but on one other, not unrelated theme, Sze-kar's idea that the Reformation is of a piece with the (Church) history of schism: Though not a scholar so I could offer a paper to mail or transmit, I still wonder in public (like you have done, thanks, Brother Jon) whether the genius of the Reformation lies in the fact that fractured/fragmented Euro-culture/cultures United. Isn't 'unity' at the crux of the current issue facing yourselves, Jon, and your (our:) leaders like Tim, Fenggang, Sze-kar, Grace, Sam, Garrick, Stephen, et. al... I wonder if there was a common enemy which Luther and his friends figured out how (to get people) to see (correctly)? What an accomplishment, (if) they all 'saw' something clearly..and acted...Yes, the Church split, but that was not the goal--to split... Years later, when the common enemy was no longer common or in correct focus, the Reformation churches (re-)splintered back to a new form of the pre-Reformation condition... Is this the (current) condition, perhaps, in which Germans hate French, Swedes mock the Norwegians and English, etc. (while Euro-economy consolidates/universalizes)..and perhaps in which (denominational) Koreans fight (anti-denominational) Chinese, vice versa...(while corporate Amerca instigates, expands)? Again, this would be the condition in which OUR common enemy is out of focus. Perhaps Brother Ben touch on it today when he asked 'Are our values conforming to the world?' I might add this dimension: Are WE presently departmentalized and further departmentalizing OURSELVES into oblivion? Can we clearly see that WE (each other) are not the real enemy? Bro. G -- End -- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 18:29:03 -0700 From: Ken Fong Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church To: MChowAACF@aol.com CC: wans@monet.bc.edu, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship my k-a christian friends now tell me that that parental attitude has changed to be more like the chinese, i.e., "don't become a pastor. too many hours, not enough pay." ken fong -- End -- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 18:47:07 -0700 From: Ken Fong Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church To: Fenggang Yang CC: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism Fenggang, I find your theory quite persuasive. I too have observed that our KA brethren are much more comfy in mainline denom's and in seminaries of all stripes. Not so for our CA brethren, who seem to have a penchant for independence. just validating your theory. ken fong -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 00:30:21 -0400 Subject: CAC_Mail: Religious Freedom in Public Schools From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang) Dear CACers: FYI. For all concerned students and parents of students: In Him, J. Chang --------------------------------------------------------------------------- RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: IS YOUR SCHOOL STILL IN THE DARK? "It appears that some school officials, teachers and parents have assumed that religious expression of any type is either inappropriate, or forbidden altogether, in public schools," President Bill Clinton accurately observed in a July 12, 1995 memo to the U.S. Secretary of Education. "As our courts have reaffirmed, however, nothing in the First Amendment converts our public schools into religion-free zones, or requires all religious expression to be left behind at the schoolhouse door." The president's memo went on to elaborate on religious freedoms in public schools, as listed below. This directive was mailed to school districts across the country, yet a climate of intimidation toward religion still pervades many public school campuses. Familiarize yourself and your public school officials with the guidelines to make sure public schools do not become "religion-free zones": Student prayer and religious discussion: Student religious expression is allowable in school settings to the extent that other types of expression are permissible. Students may read their Bibles and pray before meals or tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable non-disruptive activities. In informal settings such as hallways and cafeterias, students may pray together, read their Bibles, discuss religious issues, and even try to persuade their peers of their religious beliefs as they would their political views. Please see for an expanded summary of the following topics: Graduation prayer and baccalaureates: Official neutrality regarding religious activity: Teaching about religion: Student assignments: Distribution of religious literature: Religious excusals: Released time: Teaching values: Student dress: The Equal Access Act: Schools receiving federal funds must comply with the Equal Access Act, which allows student religious groups the same access to public school facilities as is afforded to other non-curriculum-related student groups. ACTION: Does your public school respect the rights of religious students? If not, tell school officials about these guidelines on religious freedom in public schools. Family Research Council is interested in the status of religious freedom in public schools. If someone you know has experienced religious discrimination in a public school, please contact Family Research Council by mail, fax, or e-mail. Please include the designation "RE: Religious Freedom in Public Schools." --------- End forwarded message ---------- -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 01:30:23 -0400 Subject: CAC_Mail: Ed Facts -From Family Research Council- 10/24/97 From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang) Dear CACers: Since the topic of cultural attitudes towards Christian education/Bible school/college has come up, this may be especially relevant for parents with school-aged children. This deals with a very practical aspect of it: the financial side. Could the Body of Christ/Christian parents/children benefit from such legislation? Perhaps eventually, and indirectly, helping to change such attitudinal barriers by lowering some of the upfront monetary educational expenses facing Christian parents today? In Him, J. Chang -------------------------------------------------------------- HOUSE VOTES TO PASS A+ EDUCATION ACCOUNTS The House voted Oct. 23 (230-198) to pass the A+ Education Savings Accounts bill. The House defeated a substitute amendment offered by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) to give $4 billion to school construction instead of the Education Accounts. The Senate plans to vote on the House bill in the next week or two. Sen. Paul Coverdell (R-Ga.), sponsor of the original "Coverdell Amendment" on education accounts, is working to defeat an anticipated filibuster in opposition to the bill. TALKING POINTS: * Any relative or business could contribute up to $2,500 in annual contributions per child. * Accounts would accrue tax-free interest, so the first dollars are already taxed. * Money could be used for ANY school -- public, private, parochial or home school. * The Congressional Joint Tax Committee estimates that 75 percent of the accounts will be used for public school children. * The bill expands the allowable use of education savings accounts, or education IRAs, beyond college provisions that were signed into law by President Clinton. * Money could be used for virtually any education-related expense, whether it be tutoring fees, school uniform costs, or children with special needs. ACTION: Please contact these SENATE targets: *Joseph Biden (D-Del.), Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), John Chafee (R-R.I.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), *Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), James Jeffords (R-Vt.), *Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Paul Sarbanes (D-Md.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). * indicates a previous vote in support of the Coverdell Education Accounts. Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 SCHOLARSHIPS TO "H.E.L.P." LOW-INCOME STUDENTS Representatives Jim Talent (R-Mo.), J.C. Watts (R-Okla.), Floyd Flake (D-N.Y.), and Frank Riggs (R-Calif.) introduced legislation titled the H.E.L.P. Scholarship Act geared toward Helping Empower Low-Income Parents. This legislation provides for scholarships for students whose families are at or below 185 percent of the poverty rate. The funds could be used to cover the cost of tuition at any public, private, or religious school located in an impoverished neighborhood. This provision would be implemented by allowing the use of existing federal funds in Title VI to provide for the scholarships. The House anticipates a floor vote during the week of Oct. 27. -- End -- To: jtc10@juno.com Cc: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Press Release - Surgeon General Nominee From: drwong1@juno.com (Richard L Wong) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:42:28 EST While I share your concerns about Dr. Satcher's views, I'm also a little concerned about the views of another individual going through the Senate confirmation process, i.e. Bill Lann Lee, President Clinton's nominee to serve as the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. While some Asian-Americans support his nomination, others have spoken out in opposition. I guess the Asian-American community isn't as unified as the outside world makes it out to be! Richard Wong Arlington, VA On Fri, 24 Oct 1997 01:10:21 -0400 jtc10@juno.com (J Chang) writes: >Are there other CACers who hold similar or different views regarding >this issue? -- End -- From: "DJ Chuang" Organization: Ambassador Bible Church To: cac@emwave.net Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:38:10 -0500 Subject: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible? ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 01:01:10 -0500 From: Peter Huang To: Jonathan c Ro Cc: CAC i want to address some of the issues that Jonathan mentioned in his last email about Asian American culture. My name is Peter Huang and I'm on staff at Evergreen Baptist Church as the Ministry Associate of Small Groups Ministries. I have been a web "lurker" (someone who reads but not comments - I heard this term from Jeanette Yip via Ken Fong) of CAC for quite some time - since it's beginning, I believe. Anyway, I haven't kept up with the past 50 or so messages so if I've missed some discussion from recent exchanges, please do excuse me. The question at hand is whether an Asian American culture exists. I believe it does, although it may be difficult to quantify it for now. Whether or not it can be defined independently of Chinese, Philippino, Korean, Japanese or Vietnamese American culture, I can't say for sure right now. But one thing I do know for sure - as Asians become more acculturated - inherently due to being here for many generations, there is a loss of original ethnic culture and the acquisition of the mainstream culture. Many 3rd or 4th generation Asians at our church do not speak any or much Chinese or Japanese. But this does not also mean that they are apple-pie Americans either. There is an identity that they assume as being part of a larger identity of looking like other Asians and perhaps sharing some residual Confucian and other Asian values. Part of what they share is also a common heritage of being different, being discriminated against, being somewhat marginal, being unable to completely assimilate as hard as they might try. I'm sure there's more. Even as I am having difficulty articulating what an Asian American culture looks like, I know for sure that with demographic trends, there is and WILL be an Asian American culture distinct from other ethnic-Asian-specific cultures. Perhaps it is also more apparent in Southern Cal. Other people wanna jump in and help me identify some specifics? With certain Asian ethnicities whose numbers are continuing to grow due to immigration, there will always be the first generation to uphold the Chinese or Korean or Philippino or Asian Indian culture. However, even within these groups, the new generations are growing up or have grown up with other Asian Americans. Their perception of being Asian and being Asian American is very different from the first generation who still have memories and understandings of being the majority culture and having loyalties towards their traditions. Being Asian American may mean something very different to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th generations. In our post-modern college environment, Asian American college students are finding Asian Americans from other ethnicities to be their best friends, future spouses, fraternity brothers, sorority sisters, etc. Although I am still trying to articulate what exactly this culture is, the gist of it is that there is a culture that is a blend of whatever the participants bring to contribute. Perhaps, this is why it's difficult to describe it. Evergreen happens to be primarily Japanese and Chinese American; but we are also seeing our Asian Americanness change as new people have contributed to who we are. I am sure that if Evergreen had been Chinese and Philippino American, our Asian American culture would look different too. Asian American culture is/will be reflected in who our children will be (or already are). Asian Americans have a high incidence of marrying other Asian Americans (other ethnicity). What then will be the culture of the children of interethnic (vs. interracial) marriages? Some would say that they have the best of both worlds. But is that really true? Yes to a certain extent. But with the difficulty already of each person maintaining the culture that they bring into a marriage, it is even more difficult for the children to maintain the best of both worlds. The likelihood of the parents as well as the children maintaining both cultures is low. The easier thing to do may be to synthesize their own culture with people who are like them - other Asian Americans who are dealing with similar issues. One last note: recently a bunch of us went to see the movie "My America - Honk if You Love Buddha," a documentary on the lives of Asian Americans produced by Rene Tashima-Pena (a great film - probably on its way to PBS - keep your eye out for it). I was particularly fascinated by the producer/narrator's concluding words - that what she ultimately realized in her attempt to discover her identity as an Asian American by traveling throughout America to find stories of Asian Americans, was that she had realized that she in fact had grown up not in America but in Asian America. Quite fascinating, I thought. What do you think? P.S. What is the Anglo-American culture? -- End -- From: MChowAACF@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:02:36 -0500 (EST) To: djchuang@cheerful.com, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible? Thanks Peter...for those of you who don't know...Peter and I have been working together a lot at Evergreen...Peter is the staffer and I'm the lay person responsible for small group and discipleship ministries at Evergreen, though I'm in full-time ministry (well, 3/4 time being a new mom and all) in the parachurch arena in campus ministry. Anyways, as there continues to be more interAsian marriages among the latter generations of Asians in America, there will be the product of those marriages, those like me (3/4 Chinese, 1/4 Japanese American) that for lack of having to continually identify my Asian ethnicity, I found it easier, especially for my age grouping to call myself an Asian American. Believe it or not , being at Evergreen, is the first time in my life that I have one less step to explain (or defend - yes there has been some negativism toward my mixed ancestry in past - but praise God I have overcome my frustration) regarding my identity. Being a new mom, I haven't seen a movie in a theater so I look forward to your recommendation...but yes, that does ring true that there is for Asian Americans a shelteredness to our identity mixing with others...a step in the forward direction for racial reconciliation within the Asian arena, and then the next step to the other cultures? Melanie Mar Chow -- End -- Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:06:40 -0800 From: Ken Fong Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church To: MChowAACF@aol.com CC: djchuang@cheerful.com, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible? Just as the Chinese, Pilipino, Japanese and Korean sugar cane laborers in old Hawaii learned to appreciate one another's lunches--and thereby invented the now legendary "plate lunch" or "mixed plate"--I believe there is tremendous potential for the Spirit to create a 'new plate lunch' these days, esp. as more of our more progressive mixed AsiAm churches move towards Multi-ethnicity. Of course, depending on the actual makeup of the congregation and surrounding communities plus the geographical location, each 'plate lunch' will have a distinctive flavor and mix. Evergreen-LA, for example, with its unusual mix of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Pilipino, Polynesian, Portugese, Indonesian, Thai, Burmese, Mexican, Anglo, East Indian, African American and biracial will potentially produce a very unique plate lunch. however, we're just beginning to appreciate that this 'plate lunch' will not come together all on its own. It will need wise and representative guidance. We may form a multicultural council to oversee this emergence. In an increasingly balkanized society, we believe that the church more than ever before needs to be a demonstration of the unifying power of Jesus. Interestingly enough, many of the Americanized AsiAms that we've 'targeted' for many years are apparently drawn to this kind of movement. So for those who feel that this evolutionary step means abandoning the evangelization of AAAs, I say "not necessarily; might be just the opposite." 'nuff said. time for bed. ken fong sr. pastor Evergreen Bapt. of LA Rosemead, CA -- End -- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:13:19 -0800 From: ohbrudder To: CAC Subject: CAC_Mail: WORD AND WORKS Ken Fong wrote: > but when confronted with unmistakable brethren who had > that gift, I felt compelled to alter my theology rather than write off > these brethren as not truly Christian bc their power source wasn't the > Spirit. appears to be a humble person with a teachable spirit . . . God can use more of such character. bill leong -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 11:15:45 -0500 (EST) cc: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: Press Release - Surgeon General Nominee Richard: Could you elaborate on your point here re: Bill Lann Lee? I've not followed this story very closely, but in general, I've had positive feelings about Lee's appointment. Since the Reagan "revolution" started the current "retreat" from Civil Rights (the burden of proof in demonstrating racial or other forms of discrimination has shifted away from corporations and institutions - i.e., plaintiffs now have to shoulder most of it; furthermore, disparate impact no longer holds sway - which means that plaintiffs now have to prove that an institution "intended" to discriminate - easier said than done), it has become more and more difficult to protect those discriminated against. So, one with Lee's background and training may help all who are discriminated against. If you are concerned about his views regarding gays/lesbians, abortion, etc. (which I confess ignorance), then elaborate on that. I've appreciated receiving Family Research Council materials, but I want to hear more reasons why these perspectives are Christian or biblical. Why are those who are political conservatives on this list so quiet about sharing their reasons for supporting such positions? Incidently, I watched a "Firing Line" debate on Friday in which William Buckley skewered Gary Bauer on the China trade question. I'm no fan of Buckley, but what this debate demonstrated was how some conservatives are so eager to get into a "witch-hunt" with regards to China. Suddenly, China was portrayed as an enemy to American values and a real threat to American virtue. And, brothers and sisters, if we stand with those who are willing to demonize China (even if we dislike China's human rights violations and persecution of Christians), we may unlease (if we haven't already) a witch-hunt against Asian Americans. [I wonder what that new Richard Gere movie is all about?] Tim In a message dated 10/27/97 1:57:58 AM, drwong1@juno.com wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Asian American church planting possible? The wrong question. From: jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 19:17:18 EST Thanks Peter, Ken, Melanie for your contributions. I apologize for posing a question that went in a direction that I hadn't intended on going. I also agree with you that an Asian American culture or "subculture" does exists and it is definitely growing, especially in Cal. In fact, I would also consider myself "Asian American." I'm half Korean, half Chinese. I was born in America and raised in Taiwan as a missionary kid. My father is a Korean (Born in Korea, educated in the US). My mother is an ABC (5th generation from Hawaii). The term "Chinese/Korean American" is too long for me. So I'd rather be called "Asian American." I guess I was intrigued by Dr. Tseng's statement about how the term 'Asian American' was created. He said the term "was a 'political' construct created by the American government to put all the diverse groups from Asia and the Pacific Islands into one racial." I also applaud the efforts of Evergreen and other churches who are actively reaching unchurched Asian Americans. I think more churches like them are needed. The question I'm more interested in is how are we going to plant these churches so that they will prevail. What I'm asking more specifically is this: how realistic it is to start future AA church plants without denominational or a mother church support if the target group is not a dominant culture such as American, Korean, Chinese, but a "sub-culture" of several dominant cultures? And even more importantly, how then should these churches be started? Would it be better to start with AAs and move toward multi-cultural or to start with a multi-cultural church reflecting its diverse community? Or maybe both are needed. What are the advantages and disadvantages of either way? What kind of unchurched AAs would be more attracted to an AA church? What kind of AAs would be more attracted to a community church? Your feedback... Jon -- End -- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:23:18 -0500 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: CAC_Mail: Women and Ministry Dear CACers: I wrote a long discussion on 1 Cor 11.2-16 (10K); here is a synopsis of my arguments. Write me if you are interested in the long version. Assumption: The Bible is not like a computer manual. It’s not enough to say the Bible is the word of God; we must also ask IN WHAT SENSE? (a) The issue confronting Paul here is proper attires.... Whatever we think of the meaning of “head” in this passage, we must realize that it is used to buttress a cultural practice which we no longer hold and which is NOT essential to AA spirituality. But I wholeheartedly embrace Paul’s underlying concern in this passage, which is not to misuse our freedom so as to cause others to stumble. One should consider giving up inappropriate dress if it scandalizes others. At work is Paul’s body-principle (1 Cor 12-14). (b) 11.3-10: Paul does seem to establish a hierarchy: God-Christ-husband-wife. No matter what one thinks of _kephale_, Paul is very clear that God is the head of Christ, Christ is head of Adam/man, man/husband is the head of woman/wife (v. 3).... (c) 11.11-12: As soon he has established this hierarchy, however, Paul immediately follows with an important qualifier in vv. 11-12. The gender-hierarchy is based on creation. But “in the Lord” (=“in Christ”), “neither is man without woman nor is woman without man” (v. 11).... What this amounts to is a massive exception... or, better, a new situation made possible “in the Lord.” (d) Points (b) and (c) together give us a rather confused Paul. Quite prepared to uphold the new gender-egalitarianism found in the Lord, Paul is nevertheless aware of the problems it creates. Freedom in the Lord evidently had caused the Corinthian women to flout the Corinthian headdress customs (whatever they be), and the results of reversing what to the Corinthians were gender-specific attires challenged Paul’s cultural sensibilities. I propose that Paul answers the challenge in kind--using tools available to him from culture, specifically the Jewish culture and popular Stoicism. All the while, however, such cultural argumentation is NEVER intended to replace gender-egalitarianism. (e) The Stoic argument: The argument from “nature” in vv. 14-15... comes from popular Stoicism and is one most of us do not buy.... One can legitimately reject Paul’s actual argument here--even as one embraces his underlying concern. (f) The Jewish argument: The whole argument from Jewish scripture in vv. 4-10 is also a cultural argument. It is parallel in structure to the Stoic argument. It is also called “tradition” in v. 2. (discussion of lexical data follows.) (g) Conclusion: Paul struggles between upholding gender-egalitarianism and maintaining gender distinction. As a product of 1st-cent patri-archalism Paul uses the commonly held assumption that man is the head of the woman to settle a question of clothing custom. As soon as he does, however, he runs up against gender-egalitarianism which defines our new existence as a body in the Lord. At the end, he thinks that equality in status should not blur the distinction between men and women. My own appropriation? Though endorsr Paul’s concern with gender distinction, I also question the arguments he uses to advance his point. I don’t want to trigger another round of unsubscription. More on my continual exploration later if there’s still interest. Respectfully en Christo, Sze-kar -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 19:58:09 -0500 Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: China Trade Debate From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang) Dear Tim: I appreciate your well-articulated views on many of the issues you touch upon. God has certainly gifted you with the ability to write well. I also had the opportunity to watch the "Firing Line" debates regarding trade with China. Before I listened to the program, I didn't have strong views either way. However, after hearing the arguments on both sides, I came away leaning towards the position of restricting trade with China. Some of the arguments I heard for maintaining trade with China: 1) Help to keep the channels of communication open through diplomatic exchange, dialogue, trade, student exchanges, scientific cooperation, etc. and thereby help China to see the positives of democracy, religious freedom, etc. 2) China is improving its human rights record, allowing for people in some villages the freedom to vote. 3) China is THE major economic superpower in the region. Any US trade restrictions simply won't work. China will just continue its trade with other countries. 4) We can't isolate China in this modern era; other countries are not following the footsteps of the US & fill in the vacuum. 5) Why restrict China's trade only; why not also other countries with similar human rights abuses like Saudi Arabia/Sudan? And if not these other countries then we shouldn't limit China's trade. 6) Having a unilateral US trade restriction will only hurt the US economic interests and not China. 7) China has a long history of many thousands of years; any attempts to improve or change China will take time; we must be patient. 8) Any US trade restrictions will only be symbolic in nature and will not be of much substantive significance. 9) We are demonizing China on a "witch-hunt" and Asian-Americans may suffer further discrimination. [reason given via email] Some of the counter-arguments I heard in favor of limiting trade: 1) We've already been regularly granting China MFN trade status and continuing all types of trading, diplomatic exchanges, etc. with little or no improvement in human rights abuses. 2) Human rights abuses have worsened since the 1989 Tianmen massacre. Student democracy protesters have either been executed, jailed, or exiled. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) runs slave labor camps which exports its products to the US. Christian pastors and believers are being persecuted for their religious faith, going to jail, being executed/tortured, losing work/community privileges, etc. Women who are pregnant with more than one child are forced to undergo abortions and/or sterilizations. A 1996 State Dept. report on religious persecution documented flagrant human rights abuses by the Chinese government, naming China as among one of the worse in the world. 3) We cannot elevate money above freedom, commerce above human rights, or the rule of trade above the law of justice. There must be a linkage of human rights progress with trade privileges. America was built on the foundation of religious values and freedoms. 4) US receives about 30% of China's exports, not an insignificant amount. Other countries may fill in part or all of the trade vacuum but the symbolism is just as substantive. The US must exert its international leadership where it can, even if no follows in the short or long run. US trade with South Africa was previously restricted over the issue of apartheid. Trade with Cuba is being restricted. 5) The US should be consistent in applying its trade restrictions across the board. Saudi Arabia and Sudan should be subject to the same limitations if necessary. 6) It has been 8 years since the Tiananmen killings. The present policy of gentle persuasion & gradual engagement has not helped at all. In fact, it has gotten worse. Imagine being a pastor jailed because of one's faith, imagine being a woman forced to have an abortion, how patient would one be in praying for the Chinese government to change its ways? 7) Holding the perspective of advocating trade restrictions with China should not be interpreted as an attempt to "demonize" China in a "witch-hunt." One can have a deep love for China, her culture, and her people and still be in favor of limiting China's trade with the US. Regarding the point about how this might overflow into more discrimination against Asian-Americans: the Chinese in China are enduring a much more severe situation and do not have freedom to publicly voice political dissent. At least in the US, there are more opportunities & more advocates to speak out and fight against such discrimination/"persecution." This is not an exhaustive list of the arguments on both sides. However. when the debates ended, I felt the trade limitation side gave more compelling arguments in its favor. Perhaps you or others can add more to points I may have missed. Did anybody else get a chance to watch the debate? Please join the discourse even if you haven't. In Him, J. Chang -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 02:31:14 -0500 (EST) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: China Trade Debate Hi J. Chang: Thank you for detailing the Firing Line debate! I didn't have the time to describe all the issues as well as you did. I want to also clarify what I meant when I said that Buckley "skewered" Bauer - it was at that point in the debate when Buckley asked Bauer why he did not apply the same criteria to Saudi Arabia. Bauer paused, realizing that pragmatic issues and American national "interests," in this case, superceded his call for human rights. To be consistent, he would have to call for restriction of trade with or removal of Most Favored Nation status from Saudi Arabia as well. IMHO, this begged the question - why pick on China at this point? Three other observations about the debate: 1. I was not clear what Bauer's team was advocating (perhaps I missed it): cessation of all trade with China (i.e., removal of MFN status) or limitating trade strategically. The proposal Buckley laid on the table was in favor of continuation of trade with China, but it was clear that the "realists" on his side (including Kissinger, Sen. Trent Lott, and a CEO from Netscape) were willing to engage in targeted trade restrictions so long as the policy of engagement was pursued. 2. I disliked Ariana Huffington's attacks on Kissinger's motives (i.e., Kissinger had investments in China which would be affected by interruptions of trade). While what she said was probably true, the shrill "witch-hunting" ad hominems, IMHO, was out of order. 3. Clearly the debate was framed within a politically conservative context. Former Gov. Jerry Brown should never have accepted the invitation to participate in the debate since it was clear that Buckley only invited him to trash him. Nor did Brown pursue his case with any real substance. My own assessment of the matter: Don't use the "trump card" so quickly, i.e., don't threaten China with the removal of MFN status so publically or so soon. There are other ways to "skin a cat" - take advantage of President Jiang's visit, talk about these matters less publically, use targeted trade restriction strategies. So long as we do not give China an excuse to accuse Americans and American Christians of hypocrisy and hegemonic motives, opportunities for change will continue. The American record in China and our own internal problems have not escaped the eyes of the Chinese leaders. So if we seek to call China to accountability before the entire world, we can only do it in league with other nations. Related to this is my reservations about American Christians speaking up at this time against religious persecution worldwide - not so much because I deny their existence, but because American Christians so easily forget their history of cultural imperialism and collaboration with colonialists. Thus, all our protests in support of our persecuted brothers and sisters in other nations must, I repeat, must begin with CONFESSION of our guilt and sin in the past and present. It always helps to take the log out of our own eyes before we take the log out of our brothers, sisters, or neighbors'. Thanks, again. And like you, I hope to hear from others, too. Tim Tseng ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:03:19 -0500 (EST) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American church planting possible? The wrong question. Hi Jon! Thanks for clarification! I also do not want to give the impression that the more politicized origins of the term "Asian American" meant that we should ignore Asian American churches or the emerging Asian American cultures. I think your "intrigue" begs the question about whether something that is a "political construct" is real or not - am I correct? If so, then I would say that constructs, whether social or political, may not refer to social reality, but they impact social reality significantly. E.g., while there really is no biological basis for racial differences, the social impact of racism has real life and death ramifications. So, even though the term "Asian Pacific American" is ascriptive (i.e., imposed upon us), it has a real impact on the way we are perceived and treated. The question then is one of strategy: Should we "Asian Americans" (who are involuntarily affected by the label) overcome the stereotypes and discrimination by virtue of individual heroism (pulling ourselves up by the bo otstraps) or by organizing as an Asian American constituency, power block, etc.? Should ethnic groups within the "asian american" umbrella pursue their own interests or work in coalition with other Asian ethnic groups? Asian Americans from different ethnic Asian backgrounds and pan-Asian churches like Evergreen will likely lead the way in addressing these questions. All the best, Tim In a message dated 10/27/97 10:41:03 PM, jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro) wrote: << I guess I was intrigued by Dr. Tseng's statement about how the term 'Asian American' was created. He said the term "was a 'political' construct created by the American government to put all the diverse groups from Asia and the Pacific Islands into one racial.">> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:08:57 -0500 (EST) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT Dear CACers: FYI, Tim ========= BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT =========== The Japanese Canadian Christian Churches Historical Project is pleased to announce the publication of the book _The Ministry to the Hopelessly Hopeless_. _The Ministry to the Hopelessly Hopeless: Japanese Canadian Evacuees and Churches During World War II_ This text draws on archival sources across the country, focusing on the critical nature of the support that churches provided. The churches promoted assimilation as its anti-racism strategy. It supported the gathering of church workers to empower the people, and it followed the evacuees east of the Rockies when the "ghost towns" were closed. The title is drawn from a study of the evacuated Japanese Canadians in 1944 by the Rev. K. Shimizu. The "Preface" is written by Dr. May Komiyama Vancouver, B.C. An invocation for Canada by a high school student in the Tashme Relocation Centre was written by Mr. Victor Kadonaga Hamilton, Ont. A reflective Postscript is by Miss Grace Tucker Richmond, B.C. The Rev. Dr. Roland M. Kawano is the editor of all the archival research material along with contributions from fellow clergy The Rev. Harold Aihara, The Rev. Shinji Kawano, and Pastor Stan Yokota. The cover design is by Mr. Peter Ito. _The Ministry to the Hopelessly Hopeless_ is available for $17.50 each plus $3.50 for postage/handling ($1.50 for each additional book). Please make checks payable to JCCCHP. Send request and check to: Pastor Stan Yokota 50 Regency Square Scarborough, Ontario M1E 1N4 Canada (416) 265-3386 Reserve your copy today! Also, look for these forthcoming titles: _The Rev. Francis Wm. Cassillis-Kennedy: Elder to the Japanese Canadians_ and _A History of Japanese Congregations in the United Church of Canada_. The JCCCHP is supported by: The Toronto Japanese Christian Interchurch Council The National Japanese United Church Conference The United Church Division of Mission in Canada The Japanese Canadian Evangelical Christian Society The Anglican Province of British Columbia The Anglican Foundation The Canadian Japanese Redress Foundation ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:19:40 -0500 (EST) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Religious Freedom in Public Schools Dear J. Chang: Equal access for all religious groups in public schools is one of the few issues where I agree with the FRC. However, having heard a number of Christians talk about doing away with the wall of separation between church and state, it makes me wonder whether FRC should be proactive in speaking against Christians who use the "take America back" language. In particular, my Sunday School class has been viewing Ravi Zaccharias's video series "Deliver Us from Evil" where it appears that Zaccharias is promoting a "conquest" model of Christian evangelism. - Tim In a message dated 10/25/97 11:19:09 PM, jtc10@juno.com wrote: << RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: IS YOUR SCHOOL STILL IN THE DARK?>> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:37:09 -0500 (EST) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Ed Facts -From Family Research Council- 10/24/97 My chief difficulty with this proposed policy is its inability to address the tremendous educational needs in our nation's poorest communities. While it may be attractive for middle-class families like mine to have school-choice, it will continue the process of pulling resources out of poor communities by privatizing education. The H.E.L.P. scholarships will not be enough to address the needs of our poorest. (Actually, it's more like crumbs for the unworthy) Even if 75 % is claimed to go into public education (which, of course, won't be distributed fairly), the legislation opens doors to social irresponsibility. Rangel's proposal to rebuild schools is, IMHO, a better way to use our tax money. Some questions: Why does FRC press for this type of legislation if they really care for the many poor Christians in our inner cities? Why does FRC promote a policy which will further undermine our public schools? In the end, who will benefit from this legislation? In a message dated 10/25/97 11:42:40 PM, jtc10@juno.com wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:47:49 -0500 (EST) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Women and Ministry Sze Kar: I'd be interested in the long version of your study of I Cor. 11:2-16. I hope anyone who unsubscribes will at least have a look at it first! :-) Judith Gundry-Volf and Miroslav Volf (of Fuller) wrote a critical review of Boyarin's _A Radical Jew_ (which I referred to some time ago) in the summer issue of _Books and Culture_. You might find that review interesting since they are defending Paul from Boyarin's charge of dissolving distinctives along gender lines. Your synopsis of I Cor. 11 sounds similar to a part of the Volf's arguments. I'll see if I can down load that review if you (or anyone) is interested in it. BTW, nice review of Bays' book on _Christianity in China_ - though I would have been a little more critical of certains aspects of the book. Have a nice one! Tim In a message dated 10/27/97 6:49:03 PM, wans@monet.bc.edu wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 02:26:11 -0800 From: ohbrudder To: CAC Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Asian-American Evangelism that Works??? Ken Tom . . . a little late for your Oct 25th seminar but what I received from the Lord, I'll pass on to you . . .very much experientially based but biblically sound. a couple of PRINCIPLES: 1. There is NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT PROGRAM OR STRATEGY FOR ALL CHURCHES. What works for one church does not necessarily work for another. If your theology allows you, seek the Lord for a specific program for your church. I believe we must partner with the Lord . . . so we should do what He has planned for that occasion and listen for specific instructions and follow the Spirit's lead. What He tells you to do is not always "logical." He himself did not use the same technique in his healing ministry, for example. If his spit and mud could heal all blind men, he could have packaged it and mass distributed. 2. THE "TOOLS" HE GAVE YOUR CHURCH OFTEN COINCIDE WITH HIS STRATEGY. Sometimes I had a group with a lot of talented musicians and singers, so we had a few music ministries touring the country. Another group was young (college and high school) with limited musical talents but a love for children. We did numerous Kids Klubs. These and others produced hundreds of souls for the kingdom. [One of my most memorable and blessed occurrence. One of my "tough" girls played a mean guitar but also happened to know "sign language" for the deaf. We happen to find or God gave us a small shy deaf girl in one of our tour stops. For a week, often with tears, we watched as a special relationship developed between Danette and the small deaf girl as Danette shared the gospel stories with the girl. "Tough" Danette changed and softened up, and the shy deaf girl got saved and came out of her shell. You had to be there. And they are still friends and in contact though 3000 miles and 7 years removed.] A STRATEGY THAT WORKed . . . During many summers, in various cities, for Sunday School and Kids Klubs, we looked up Chinese surnames in the White Pages, and obtained addresses. Divided the names among the teams of two and sent them out. They took flyers and balloons and visited the homes, inviting any children in resident and inquire about any other kids nearby to attend our event. We usually get a hundred kids in a single day of canvassing. We use our own vehicles to pick the kids and take them home. We give them such a good time, the kids come back Sunday . . . and Sunday after Sunday. Then its up to the local church to followup. Rapport with the kids, leads to relationship with the family . . . older siblings and parents. Those with ministries to the older members of the family are given leads to extend invitations to church services or cell groups and other events. Win the 1st generation thru the second generation. bill leong -- End -- From: SKYLeung@aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 07:54:16 -0500 (EST) To: CAC@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: China Trade Debate Dear CACers, Yes, Many arguments pro and con. Must pray that our "engagement" is wise and Godly. Ironic that we try to work these necessary agreements in the backdrop of a Market tailspin which in large part was triggered by the market happenings in S.E. Asia (even before East Asia). Some of us mused that it was just desserts for those "Asians" over there which have gotten so materialistic/individualistic, which to a degree is almost personified by the markets. But, then, how far can you point the finger? Who's king when it comes to individualism, self-reliance, and performance-driven appraisals? This is a global economy, and it takes as much, if not more gamesmanship, these days than even during the Cold War. Comments on the implications of global linkage on missions work, tentmaking ministries, and those that would embark upon them? One sad note concerns the "greed" in American Business that has led to a total disregard for holding the hard line on totalitarian regimes just because of the potential market they represent. Can't say much about the next guy's values or when your own isn't much to write about. Many of the communist and islamic countries will never receive more than token rhetoric from us now because they are our buyers, suppliers, or partners in business. And, do we really know what values drive our decisions anymore? Anyone read in Time about our fascination with all things Buddhist? I guess we're taking our cue from the Pacific Rim in more ways than one. Just some things to think about. (I'm really late for work!=) In the Redeemer, Stephen Leung Alexandria, VA **** Don't follow the crowd unless it's following Jesus -bumper sticker -- End -- From: "Peter Szto" To: Cac@emwave.net Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 13:05:47 EST5EDT Subject: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs Dear friends, I'm in the throes of doing academic advising. My apologies for not replying any sooner. Thank you for all the interest in my paper. I didn't think so many people really wanted a copy of it. I guess weddings and how we do them is a real area of curiosity. It'd be nice to collaborate with others on expanding my initial ideas, and even photographs. Over the weekend I dug up my copy in my files and would like to freshen it up before forwarding it to you all. It was written in 1993. I will have it ready before Thanksgiving. Again, thanx for your patience. Peter -- End -- From: dwliu@law.harvard.edu Date: Tue, 28 Oct 97 14:49:00 -0500 Subject: CAC_Mail: Request for info about Hong Kong To: cac@emwave.net Greetings! I am writing my third-year law school paper in conjunction with a seminar on the future of Hong Kong and was hoping to focus on the issue of Christianity. I was wondering if folks familiar with the issues could suggest research questions relevant to the Christian community in China. I've considered looking at PRC control over Christian churches and organizations in the HKSAR -- especially in light of many Christian groups' participation in the democratic movement and their ties internationally -- and the PRC's reaction to the efforts of Hong Kong missions organizations and international organizations using Hong as a base to work within China proper. My goal is to nail down a definite topic in the next week or two, and I would appreciate all thoughts on this matter. (From the academics out there, I'd also like some advice on how broad a topic it would be reasonable to pursue in what will probably be a 55-60 page paper.) Instead of cluttering up the list, please email me directly at dwliu@law.harvard.edu. Many thanks! ybiC, David Liu ps: Though I've thus far also just been a web "lurker," I've enjoyed many of the recent postings. Perhaps one day I will actually catch up on reading all of them! :) -- End -- To: "CAC" Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 06:28:14 -0700 From: "GE Liang" Subject: CAC_Mail: AA culture: dynamic with a constant theme CACers, For your consideration: The following well-articulated post on the soc.culture.asian.american newsgroup was provided in response to a question i posed to the newsgroup just over a month ago. Respectfully, G.E. --- Subject: Re: Asian Culture; Asian American Culture: Is there One? From: Walter Lee Date: 1997/09/28 Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american Yes. There is An Asian American Culture... but it is polyglot and multicultural experience - Read the back of each coin and it will read...E Pluribus Unum. It means "From the Many comes just the One." and so we are just that many that has become just one. Sharon Muramaru wrote: > > xformed@mailexcite.com wrote: > > : So many postings and discussions here and elsewhere assume there's a : > : single Asian Culture out there. Is that so? I've heard that Asian > : American studies on some of our college campuses also strive to define some > : nebulous, generic, AA culture. Are they successful? ... AA culture is not nebulous nor is it generic. It is concrete and specific. *It is a rainbow of different contributing sub-cultures. Each has its own story to tell - my advise is to focus on one sub-culture at a time (it's easier). *It has its own history - it has a different perspective than your generic USA History. Like Native North American Indian History, a story not very often told. A road not always taken. *It is a eastern-western culture of adaptations... very different from the normal strictly european cultures. A drummer doing two beats simultanously! :P *It is a story of a dynamic culture that is undergoing greater change than other contemporary cultures. But being dynamic doesnot mean that it is nebulous. There is a theme running constantly through AA culture: survival, family, education, and community. *It is a well document and there is alot of source material available. > : I am trying to assemble a piece on the diffuiculty of specifying a unique > : culture. I assert (perhaps mistakenly) that it's a futile effort.... The trip of a thousand miles, is started by one footstep.-old chinese proverb > > Perhaps you should take an Asian American studies course, then make a > judgement on whether or not your efforts are futile. You will be made > more > aware and sensitive to the many Asian American sub-cultures in the U.S. > Univ. of Calif. has a AA studies course. Univ. of MD has a AA studies course (elective- not available ever year) --- Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com -- End -- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 12:42:32 -0500 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: CAC_Mail: China Trades Dear Tim, J. Chang, Stephen, et al.: I have a cynical take on the current debate on China trades. I get exasperated every time I hear mainland Chinese rail against American decadence. After spending a month in this country, some of these critics know enough to use arguments developed out of the civil rights movt and Andrew Hacker's writings on race relation to conclude that the US is a racist country. These observations are sent back home and the Chinese press picks them up as "evidence" of American weakness. Same for such issues as the deficit (the American economy is in big trouble), inner city poverty (evil of captialism), AIDS (spiritual pollution), etc. Now, I happen to agree with the substance of these criticisms; I even make them myself. Trouble is, these criticisms are part of a dialogue; they retain their original, intended meaning only as part of a language-game (a la Wittgenstein) established by its interlocutors. Once they are lifted out of context, they mean different things and serve different purposes. In this case, self-criticism become propagandistic tool. A parallel phenomenon is taking place in the US debate on China trades. Wei Jingsheng, Wang Dan, Fang Lizhi, Liu Binyan, Harry Wu, and the Tiananmen students of 1989 have given us a glimpse of the internal struggles within China. Not many of us would question their sincerity or the substance of their critiques. Trouble is, do we think the American press is really doing justice to the Chinese debate? Have Hollywood, Richard Gere, Bratt Pitt, etc. earned the moral right to speak so indignantly about the sufferings of the Tibetans? Do we really think the presidents of AFL-CIO and other labor unions are concerned about the "injustice" of prison labor? Do we really trust Washington politicians, of both parties, to be concerned with morality? Do we really think American foreign policy is driven by human rights? In all these cases, self-interest rules, and the order of the day is Realpolitik. I am not saying I endorse it, but that's the game. This is why we should cut through the ethical rhetorics when we are talking about trades with China. I personally would rather not divorce politics from morality (I am Confucian after all). But given the fact that they are not and have never been wedded together in the American political culture, it would be naive to simply buy into the current rhetorics without also rasing the question of American interests. When I was in China this summer, what struck me most was not political repression (which I took as a given) but how capitalistic the whole culture was. China did not take over Hong Kong; Hong Kong captialism has taken over China. Hong Kong has become THE paradigm for the rest of the country. Shanghai looked and felt like the Hong Kong of the 60s and was closing in fast. What concerned taxidrivers, shopkeepers, waiters and waitresses, even university professors, ie ones I talked with first hand, was not political freedom (again, that's simply assumed) but corruption, inflation, disparity between rich and poor, pollution, job security, high rent, the next pay check, unemployed workers from the countryside. Prostitution was rampant in Shanghai: I was propositioned three times within 15 minutes of arriving the Bund in late evening! In sum, while no one would refuse political freedom, everyone had more urgent matters to worry about. If ever the US would cut off trades with China, the vast majority of the people would (a) never believe the human-rights motive (nor would I); and (b) blame it on American imperialism. What do I think about US-China trades? I endorse it--but for purely pragmatic reasons. There is no way in high heaven American companies are going to stop doing business with Chinese companies (which by the way are increasingly privatized), not when hundreds of billions of dollars is at stake. Can you imagine Bill Gates not jumping at the chance of making MS potentially twice or three times as big? Or Boeing, IBM, GM, etc.? Clinton or whoever's in charge would be impeached and lynched before that happens. Sze-kar -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 12:15:53 -0700 Subject: CAC_Mail: Notice: CACI Annual Meetings From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson) "The Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry will hold its 32nd annual meeting from 10 a.m. to 1:30 p.m Friday [tomorrow] at the Adam's Mark Hotel, 1550 Court Place in Denver. The keynote speaker will be C. Edward McVaney of Denver software developer JD Edwards & Co., speaking on: _Growth and Grace: A New Corporate Culture_ ...Tickets are available...$450 per corporate table of 10 in advance. For reservations and information call...303-866-9653." (Source: Denver Post, 10/29/97) ========== Comments: 1. Someone is making a ticket or two to this gala available. I'll go and behave myself, Lord willing; and, try to acquire a copy of the keynote speech to post somewhere, maybe with Bro. DJ. If you're in the area, hollar electronically, or call 303 781 7196, and I'll take you with and put you up. 2. Brethren and Sisters, Please realize that my last post to Jon was written while I was Rockin' out in the middle of the Blizzard :) One salient point about it. The idea ~ that "AA is not a 'people' '' refers to how the 'corporate culture' views and treats AA. Certainly AAs can see this, too, and take a place as 'cogs' if they want to, but, is this what is best (most desirable)? To me what you and we are as people and as 'a people' is due ONLY to the Grace of our God experienced each day. WE (in the Pauline 'inclusive' sense) are (a) chosen People in God's holy eyes no matter what anyone else thinks, says, or does. And, if in the end, this is all that really matters, what about it now--i.e. perhaps in terms of our ONLY-ness (not lonliness) ? Much Love to you all today, in Christ, the Lord, Bro. G -- End -- From: gdot@juno.com To: cac@emwave.net Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: cultures and sub-cultures Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:13:25 EST On Thu, 30 Oct 1997 17:42:52 -0500 (EST) JWongCDI@aol.com writes: >Let me see if I can put this right: > >There is a lot being written about culture. However, what is meant by >culture? and what then is a sub-culture? How do cultures differ from >one >another and then how do we discover a sub-culture? Brother Joseph, What happened to 'counter-culture'? e.g. here's a cool 'counter-cultural' concept: Psalm 27:4 - "One thing I ask of the LORD, this is what I seek: that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, to gaze upon the beauty of the LORD and to seek him in his temple." Too individualistic? Perhaps, but if the "I's" can be legitmately changed to "we's", then what? Consider: Matt. 26:61 - ... "This fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days...'" I Cor. 3: 16 - "Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?" Bro. G -- End -- From: JWongCDI@aol.com Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 17:42:52 -0500 (EST) To: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: cultures and sub-cultures Let me see if I can put this right: There is a lot being written about culture. However, what is meant by culture? and what then is a sub-culture? How do cultures differ from one another and then how do we discover a sub-culture? In refering to sub-cultures, are we saying any more than "All people are different, even from one another within the same ethnic and culture!"? Is there such a reality as "Miss America?" Can any individual represent a whole ethnic culture? No, only that there are many shared similarities. I would like to propose that culture is defined by two comprehensive categories: Values and Methodology/Ways. These represents the beliefs of what is GOOD and what are the RIGHT ways to achieve good. These beliefs drives (motivates) the people of that culture. Thus, "The good and the ways of a people" is the definiton for "culture." Is this an OVER simplification? I'D WELCOME ANY EXPANSION OF THIS DEFINITION. When we identify a small group of people shifting in their values and/or ways of doing things, I think, is when we propose the discovery of a sub-culture. Or what else do we recognize as distinguishing cultural characteristics? Now, a personal word: I believe there is also a "Kingdom Culture," not in existence in our world, but defined for us in Scriptures -and- the culture we are to be transforming our churches into, whether Chinese, American or Asian-American. The Gospel is not interested in creating Chinese churches, American churches, Black churches, nor World churchs -but- a Christian church. Ethnic churches and ministries are useful tools for reaching people of a particular culture,.. in order to transform them from their own culture's delusions. It seems then, that a pre-occupation with establishing our particular ethnic culture is a mis-direction of our heart's concerns. Let's not conform, but, by renewing our minds, transform our values and the ways we do things. Why should I be obsessed with thinking, being like an Asian-American? Why should I be seeking to encourage others into being more happy with their particular ethnic culture? IMHO, being a faithful Christian must become meaningful and identifyable as differing, culturally, from all other cultures. Of course, I am writing from the heart of a Minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And I am aware of many other vocations and concerns. Joseph @ Chicago Chinese Bapist. Church Dynamics International -- End -- From: GAPang@aol.com Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 01:54:26 -0500 (EST) To: TSTseng@aol.com cc: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Witch-hunting... In a message dated 97-10-27 17:23:41 EST, TSTseng@AOL.COM writes: << And, brothers and sisters, if we stand with those who are willing to demonize China (even if we dislike China's human rights violations and persecution of Christians), we may unlease (if we haven't already) a witch-hunt against Asian Americans. >> I am not for the "demonization" of anyone, however if China's human rights record is bad, then it is bad. If we are "witch-hunted" for stating the truth so be it. As a Christian, I personally will endure persecution (if in fact witch-hunting is persecution), if that's what it takes to stand up that which is un-just. (Having said that, there is a lot going on here in our country that I'm not so proud of either). Just a thought. Garrick Pang Pastor Wellspring Christian Church Bellevue, Washington -- End -- From: TSTseng@aol.com Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 02:13:37 -0500 (EST) cc: cac@emwave.net Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch-hunting... Garrick: No essential disagreement on my part. China's human rights record is not good, neither is everything about American the Kingdom of God on earth. But demonization and witch-hunting go beyond stating the truth. In fact, they distort the truth, do they not? They often are promoted without dialogue with or due process for the accused. Is this not persecution? Which reminds me...Christians are not only persecuted, but also persecute. Christian history is certainly littered with the blood of martyrs; it is also filled with the guilt of the persecutors. On the whole, I hope that more souls have been saved because of the example of the martyrs than lost because of the examples of the persecutors. Perhaps history will reveal whether the zeal of those who engage in today's "culture wars" will wind up advancing or regressing God's kingdom. Tim In a message dated 10/31/97 12:55:12 AM, GAPang wrote: <> ------------------------------------------------------------ Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History Colgate-Rochester Divinity School 1100 South Goodman Street Rochester, NY 14620 OFF: (716) 271-1320, ext. 260 FAX: (716) 271-8013 Email: tstseng@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------ -- End -- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 03:28:03 -0500 From: Sze-kar Wan To: CAC Subject: CAC_Mail: Boyarin Dear Tim: As you know, I've been asked to contribute a chapter to a book edited by Sugirtharajah and Segovia, _Interpreting beyond the Border_. I've decided to entitle my chapter (for now) "Diaspora Identity and Universalism: An Asian-American Reading of Galatians." It will take Daniel Boyarin's definition of "diaspora identity" as starting point but will also critique his reading of Paul and Galatians in general. But my real interests are to figure out (1) to what extent our double cultural identities help us understand Paul's own dbl ids; (2) to what extent the dialect betw cultural particularity (emphasis on difference) and universalism (emphasis on sameness) can be documented in Galatians; and (3) To what extent Gal 3.28 is a paradigm for AA Christianity. I am excited about the project. I am also anxious to hear from anyone who could contribute to my thinking. This, I hope, will help systematize my thinking on positive biblical warrant for AA theology--which I still owe you and all CACers. :-) Would you send me Volf & Volf's review of Daniel's book to me? Warmly, Sze-kar -- End -- To: cac@emwave.net Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:10:10 -0700 From: "GE Liang" Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Women and Ministry In light of Reformation Day, upon us tomorrow, i've posted another fictional story/dialog entitled "All Saints Day." However, the topic of discussion is really Women and Ministry. You may find the story at www.cyberjunkie.com/all_saints, or at its full address: http://www.geocities.com/athens/parthenon/5229/saints.html. This one's longer than the last one since there were more facets of this subject to touch. Enjoy! ; ] G.E. P.S. Thanks for review of the first draft go to some of the folks at the BIBLE@virginia.edu listserve, in which the following "numerical" commentary was found: --- I don't know if you have seen this or not Q: How many internet mail list subscribers does it take to change a light bulb? A: 1,392: 1 to change the light bulb and to post to the mail list that the light bulb has been changed... 14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently, 4 to complain that they were happy with the old one, 7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs, 27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs, 53 to flame the spell checkers, 156 to write to the list administrator complaining about the light bulb discussion and its inappropriateness to this mail list, 41 to correct spelling in the spelling/grammar flames, 109 to post that this list is not about light bulbs and to please take this email exchange to alt.lite.bulb, 203 to demand that cross posting to alt.grammar, alt.spelling and alt.punctuation about changing light bulbs be stopped, 111 to defend the posting to this list saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts **are** relevant to this mail list, 306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique, and what brands are faulty, 27 to post URLs where one can see examples of different light bulbs, 14 to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly, and to post corrected URLs, 12 to flame the AOL users for violating netiqutte and blame them for starting this whole thing, 3 to post about links they found from the URLs that "are relevant to this list, which makes light bulbs relevant to this list," 45 posts about weather or not AOL should even be allowed to exist, * 33 to concatenate all posts to date, then quote them including all headers and footers, and then add "Me Too," 12 to post to the list that they are unsubscribing because they cannot handle the light bulb controversey, 19 to quote the "Me Too's" to say, "Me Three," 4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ, 1 to propose new alt.change.lite.bulb newsgroup, 47 to say this is just what alt.physic.cold_fusion was meant for, leave it here, and 100 votes for alt.lite.bulb. 43 to post TEST to the list to just see if they are on it. The Revd Stuart D Rogerson http://www.cnetwork.co.uk Christian Network Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com -- End -- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 17:00:53 -0800 To: cac@emwave.net From: Samuel Ling Subject: CAC_Mail: Trade with China TRADE WITH CHINA -- A PLEA FOR A REASONED APPROACH 1. SIGNIFICANCE OF ISSUE Trade with China (with MFN status) is the very heart of the US-China relationship put into motion by Nixon and Carter. Without it, and we really don't have much of a relationship. 2. OUR PRIMARY MOTIVATION As Christians, our primary concerns are (a) the welfare of the Church of Christ in China, (b) the ability of the Church in China to be salt and light in mainland Chinese society, and (c) continued opportunities for overseas Christians to be salt and light in China. China really needs Christians (indigenous as well as foreign) to exemplify high moral standards in society. Christians are China's last great hope! 3. CHINA'S PERCEPTIONS When Christians in the west engage in confrontational politics concerning China, China is listening. China concludes that (a) American Christians (or America as a nation) are subverse and hostile to China, and worse, (b) American Christians are aiding the Church inside mainland China to be subversive. This really hurts the safety and welfare of the Body of Christ in China. 4. HAVE WE CONSULTED THE CHURCH IN CHINA? The fact is, persecuted Christians in China are NOT voicing their request that American Christians speak on their behalf to use sanctions against China on the basis of religious persecution!!! Christian leaders who urge the US government to use sanctions have, by and large, NOT consulted church leaders inside China (or among overseas Chinese church leaders) as to their real preference. 5. WHICH AGENDA: AMERICAN OR KINGDOM AGENDA? There is a real difference between promoting the agenda of the Kingdom of God agenda and promoting the American agenda (of a particular political party, and of a particular stripe within that party). Our primary concern is NOT the nuclear arms threat, or the trade imbalance, although these are legitimate concerns. The problem is, Christian leaders are misleading when they use PERSECUTION as the alleged basis for confrontational politics, if their REAL and PRIMARY motive is the threat to US military and economic interests. We are confusing issues, and we are confusing our audience. We must not use persecution and kingdom agenda items as a cover up to promote American economic and military agenda items, however legitimate the latter may be. 6. EFFECTIVE MEANS TO ADDRESS PERSECUTION Christians who are pleading for a more reasoned approach, avoiding confrontational politics, are suggesting that there are many other effective means to address the issue of religious persecution. On the top of the list would be: US government leaders should visit China (100 members of Congress have done so since Jan. 1, 1997), and in the context of engagement (investments, professional service and other humanitarian service projects etc.), bring to the attention of their counterparts in China (that is, members of the National People's Congress in China) the concerns of the Congressman/woman's constituency back home, about persecution. Members of Congress should do this without media exposure, one-on-one, and all the while expressing our intention to make contributions to China's development. Where Christians have been sentenced inside China, Christians from overseas can write the Religious Affairs Bureau to express their views. This is an effective means to let the Chinese government know our concerns. 7. OUR LONG TERM GOAL Our goal should not stop at stopping persecution. For the sake of argument, even if the Communist Party closes up shop tomorrow, there would still be the long term needs of nation buiding. If we are just going to applaud an congratulate ourselvesw for the collapse of Commnism in China, that's one thing. But if we are serious about being servants of Christ, and salt and light in China, then we must keep a long term perspective. 8. NO DENIAL -- ACTUAL ACTION NEEDED (AND FUNDS) We do NOT deny that religious persecution is occuring. We do NOT deny that China has a one-party dictatorship (which no longer believes in Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideology). Christians who are advocating a reasoned approach are ACTUALLY helping individual persecuted Christians! We are ACTUALLY seeking help for Christians who are able to leave China, to seek Bible and theological training to prepare for future ministry in China. If we do confrontational politics re. China, are we ready and available with funds to help specific individual persecuted Christians from China? I hear precious little efforts in this regard among those leaders who are so outspoken about what can About persecution. Perhaps they need to be educated and informed aCTUALLY be done about persecuted Christians. 9. FOR THE MAJORITY -- PRAY, JUST PRAY When we pray for the persecuted church, perhaps we should JUST pray, and not use it as a pretext to write our Congressmen/women? And when we DO write our members of Congress, we need to encourage them to take a positive, one-on-one/people-to-people, encouraging posture toward China. -- End --