The title just came to me.
The post you are reading was triggered by my men's small group meeting last week. We discussed Bishop Gordon Wong's sermon for AldersgateSG "Love God by Loving our Religious Neighbour" in which he covered Acts 10:22-35.
I thought it was a good sermon, and was thus quite surprised when the discussion was told that it was very 'controversial' (my leader's words) to some members. They wrote in to Pastor Raymond, and I suppose this may have led him to put in that qualification when he made some remarks after the sermon (which was recorded).
Pastor Ray said the sermon was not about a formula to show love, and that we should seek God's wisdom in finding the right way under the circumstances to show love in such a way that will "help them come to the saving knowledge that is Jesus Christ". When I first heard the sermon, and Pastor's remarks, I did not think anything of it.
There were no specifics mentioned about what had upset the members, but from what I understood, it had something to do with the story of how 'Bessy' had helped her mother buy items for prayers (presumably Taoist), and this show of love was what led her mother to be receptive to the message of the Gospel. We were then asked what we thought of the sermon, and I said I did not think there was anything controversial about it, but now that it had been brought up, I guessed people did not really listen closely enough to the sermon, and perhaps imagined or thought or believed that Bishop had suggested that Bessy had participated in the prayer in some (indirect) way by helping her mother and this was anathema.
I remarked separately later to Mummy that Pastor's clarification (if it was meant to be one) didn't help because in my mind, it would not appease those who disagreed. I should add here that without the full facts (of both the complaints and what Pastor had in mind with his clarification), I am just speculating anyway but it made me reflect a little more on the nature of the alleged unhappiness. And with the benefit of time and hindsight, I think perhaps this was the only way Pastor could address that unhappiness without taking issue with Bishop's sermon (he might totally agree with Bishop anyway).
Listening and letting something sink in first (before jumping in to disagree) so that we understand fully is essential. The tendency, which is perfectly human, is we have 'lenses' through which we view things and it is often difficult to have 'clear lenses' to view something objectively. So I think for some, any action that 'encourages' someone to continue their non-Christian faith is a bad thing. So Bessy's actions of helping to buy the food for prayers (if I recall the story correctly) is seen as a bad way of showing love and is objectionable. What would their reaction be if Bishop changed the story and said Bessy was adamant in not helping her mother with anything to do with her religion, but with the twist that the mother still loves Bessy, and irons her Sunday best that she wears to church?
Jesus died for us unconditionally, and he asks us to love the same way.
But I feel the church has become more intolerant and Christians become too political in trying to create God's kingdom on earth. We then become no different from those religions that impose their views on others. That is not the kind of love He wants us to show. We are asked instead to show our love to Him, and to our fellow man.
How do we do that? With empathy and compassion. We first need to listen without prejudice. It is not easy and takes great will and effort as I have learned during my coaching training. We have to suspend judgement to really listen with an open mind.
Second question. What do they want? In the case of other religions, they pretty much want the same thing we do. Hope for eternal life. And that makes us more alike than different and we have to find a way to help them understand there is only one hope and that is in Christ. Do we stand apart and say we're better than them?
Maybe this isn't the best analogy but part of the discussion with the small group led to one member saying he never goes to Ching Ming with his family as they are non-believers. He said they understood and when I said it was an opportunity to show love and have fellowship with them, he said he had other opportunities for fellowship and did not need to rely on this annual occasion. He had a point. Sort of.
I still feel in some ways it was an opportunity to show love and respect for their piety. He did not need to take part in the ritual, and could just be present. Ultimately it isn't about the form (the worship), but about the object of that form, which was to remember our ancestors. And being present sends a powerful signal of compassion and empathy, if not love. It is likely though they will say that they don't need to be there to show their respect to their ancestors, that they remember them in their own way. Which is true. But this misses the point about what their presence means to those who are living. And isn't that the command to love your fellow man?
In the case of atheists who want to be able to live their own lives in their own way, Christians become so obsessed with particular sins (LGBT) that they forget in His eyes, we are all sinners and lose perspective and context. So there's more than an element of self-righteousness when they argue against de-criminalizing gay sex. The easiest argument against this is why not criminalize all the other sins? When they argue that abortion should not be allowed, do they also campaign against the death penalty? Until they can reconcile these contradictions/hypocrisy, there should be more circumspection in campaigning.
Like it or not, we live in a secular world. There will be parts of the law we don't agree with (an aspect of democracy people often forget), and as long as the law does not force us to do things against our faith, I don't see any compelling call to force the government to change the law. Even where the government tries to force you to renounce your faith, what do you do? The movie by Martin Scorcese "Silence" depicts this powerfully.
The early Christians were among the most prosecuted in history but they just chose to worship our Lord, never demanding their rights, never fighting the government of the day. They chose to show their love in the most extreme way, not denouncing those who condemned them, singing as they went to their deaths. I am speculating here but I think this extreme show of love was probably instrumental in the growth of the church, against all odds.
