Being an atheist here is not the same as it is in Australia. In Australia, you're an atheist in a secular society. In Chile, you're an atheist in a religious society.
I don't yet know just what this means and I may never fully understand, having grown up breathing secular air. But one thing I know is that to be religious isn't fringe, it's normal. It's not taboo. Technically, it's not taboo in Australia either - speak about religion and people generally respond with courtesy, even warmth. But that's only some people and only if you keep the subject matter light. To anyone with social skills, it's soon abundantly clear that it would be preferable never to speak of such things.
So, I repeat, in Chile it's not taboo to talk about religion. This changes everything for me. In Australia, I aim to be bold, but the sensitive nature of the topic means that it's all too easy to come across as pig-headed and hatred-filled, even when that is far, far from the truth. There, I have to choose my words carefully, and speak only of personal experience or very gently nudge people towards the truth.
But here, it's okay to discuss matters of faith and folks won't think you're being rude. This means that I need to be okay with talking about Christianity. I need to present my beliefs with the same glad, gentle, forthright passion as when I tell my Spanish class how Tasmanians see themselves. I need to do this even when everyone in the class thinks that missionaries are bad and abortion is okay. I'm a person of faith; I need to act that way.
So please pray that I will be able to throw off the secular clock still weighing so heavy on my shoulders, and be a loving and courageous child of God in this new place.
H/T Frances and Mikey
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Beggars
A little while back, after thinking once again about beggars1, I decided to get practical and ask facebook "What is something useful or nice that I can have on hand to give to beggars?". Forty-one responses later I had a much better idea of what to do. People started by suggesting giving muesli bars, dried fruit and nuts, bananas, beanies, socks, gloves, bottled water, and marbles for the kids. Then the Colombians weighed in ;).
Here's an early suggestion: "find a local organisation already helping these people and direct him to it, go with him, volunteer your services or money to the organisation as they know best how to help. i used to carry bread & buy meals for people but later found out that even food, they (some, but how do we know which some) even manage to sell food to get cash for other things."2
These sort of comments made me think that it's probably best to give stuff - not money - to beggars. So I've been carrying around some muesli bars and packets of dried fruit and nuts (nice and light!) and giving them to the people I come across. It's straightforward, it gives you an opportunity to speak kindly to these people, and you've actually helped in some small way (well, that is unless they sell it for drink, but I'd prefer to err on the side of trust and generosity). And it's stopped me being scared of these people.
But what about those people who are disabled or elderly (like the man who begs most afternoons at my train station)? The Chilean government does provide them with a pension, but I'm told that it's not enough to live on. I could just do what I do for the other beggars, but what if the gentleman at my station is too frail or too out-of-the-loop to access an NGO's services?? Or what if there isn't an NGO in my local area? Perhaps supplementing his pension by giving him cash would be a great thing to do.
The jury's still out on this one. One of my friends thinks this is the good and respectful thing to do. But others think it's unhelpful. One friend said that
I'm also finding out about what government/NGO services are available in my area, so I can work out if he really does have the opportunity to access their services. Then I might let him know about them, or maybe even go along with him, you never know. I've also got the idea of funding a retirement home hovering around in the back of my mind, but I'll spend a good while getting to know him first. Oh yeah, that's the other thing I've been doing - having a passing chat with him each day. As well as giving him dried fruit and nuts and - sporadically - remembering to use the more formal "usted" form with him as a mark of respect. He seems to be a lovely man.
H/T Mel, Chris, Sally and others
1 I used to only think about this stuff on a big, systems level, but now I think that the Bible calls us to care for the actual people who are part of our life. (Of course we do this in the context of (a) the church community with all its different gifts, opportunities and responsibilities, (b) the knowledge that the poor will always be with us, and (c) the knowledge that easily the best way you can care for someone is to give them the gift of life with Jesus for ever.) Now I don't see serving poor and disadvantaged people as my particular gift/calling, but I do want to be a 'good Samaritan' to the people in my life. I want to live with integrity and love. This means that I need to work out how to help, not poor people in general, but the elderly gentleman who begs most days at my train station, as well as the other random individuals I come across.
2 "Part of the reason for this is because "Colombia has organised beggars. There is no welfare for the sick and disabled but people, not unlike drug lords, but with people not drugs, organise groups of people to beg and the person who is their boss takes the money at the end of the day and the people actually begging get to have somewhere to sleep. So you may not actually be helping anyone's welfare by giving directly to these people". Happily though, I'm told this doesn't happen in Santiago.
Another suggestion concerning kids begging was: "there is often an unscrupulous adult nearby "prostituting" them because it is well known in 'the business' that young famelic faces get more money out of the punters than old ones . . . . If you see one who looks genuinely hungry, get him a yoghurt or empanada and stay there while he eats it, or it could never touch his lips". (I haven't seen any children begging here, though I have seen them working.)
Here's an early suggestion: "find a local organisation already helping these people and direct him to it, go with him, volunteer your services or money to the organisation as they know best how to help. i used to carry bread & buy meals for people but later found out that even food, they (some, but how do we know which some) even manage to sell food to get cash for other things."2
These sort of comments made me think that it's probably best to give stuff - not money - to beggars. So I've been carrying around some muesli bars and packets of dried fruit and nuts (nice and light!) and giving them to the people I come across. It's straightforward, it gives you an opportunity to speak kindly to these people, and you've actually helped in some small way (well, that is unless they sell it for drink, but I'd prefer to err on the side of trust and generosity). And it's stopped me being scared of these people.
But what about those people who are disabled or elderly (like the man who begs most afternoons at my train station)? The Chilean government does provide them with a pension, but I'm told that it's not enough to live on. I could just do what I do for the other beggars, but what if the gentleman at my station is too frail or too out-of-the-loop to access an NGO's services?? Or what if there isn't an NGO in my local area? Perhaps supplementing his pension by giving him cash would be a great thing to do.
The jury's still out on this one. One of my friends thinks this is the good and respectful thing to do. But others think it's unhelpful. One friend said that
what i would do is ask around people who work at the train station how genuine his situation is. Whether they see him buying food etc or if they ever see him drinking alcohol etc . . . . I don't know if I'd ever go back to ever giving a beggar money but i think I'd prefer to buy them things to empower them another way ie the old frail man who 'appears' to not be able to get himself to an ngo service i would prefer to work out how i and others could come together to get him into a decent retirement place and fund his care.Another advised me to "ask him what he most needs - and get it for him. At least then he will HAVE what you purchased, as long as he is not so far gone as to exchange it for drink, which a lot do. Yes, money in cash is empowering, but in my experience, people begging on the street are rarely without vices... and rarely have the self-control to spend cash on food". And so I did just that with the man at the station the other day and he said he would like some clothes. I told him "maybe" but I do plan to gradually buy him a few things (if I can push past the awkwardness of buying men's clothes :/).
I'm also finding out about what government/NGO services are available in my area, so I can work out if he really does have the opportunity to access their services. Then I might let him know about them, or maybe even go along with him, you never know. I've also got the idea of funding a retirement home hovering around in the back of my mind, but I'll spend a good while getting to know him first. Oh yeah, that's the other thing I've been doing - having a passing chat with him each day. As well as giving him dried fruit and nuts and - sporadically - remembering to use the more formal "usted" form with him as a mark of respect. He seems to be a lovely man.
H/T Mel, Chris, Sally and others
1 I used to only think about this stuff on a big, systems level, but now I think that the Bible calls us to care for the actual people who are part of our life. (Of course we do this in the context of (a) the church community with all its different gifts, opportunities and responsibilities, (b) the knowledge that the poor will always be with us, and (c) the knowledge that easily the best way you can care for someone is to give them the gift of life with Jesus for ever.) Now I don't see serving poor and disadvantaged people as my particular gift/calling, but I do want to be a 'good Samaritan' to the people in my life. I want to live with integrity and love. This means that I need to work out how to help, not poor people in general, but the elderly gentleman who begs most days at my train station, as well as the other random individuals I come across.
2 "Part of the reason for this is because "Colombia has organised beggars. There is no welfare for the sick and disabled but people, not unlike drug lords, but with people not drugs, organise groups of people to beg and the person who is their boss takes the money at the end of the day and the people actually begging get to have somewhere to sleep. So you may not actually be helping anyone's welfare by giving directly to these people". Happily though, I'm told this doesn't happen in Santiago.
Another suggestion concerning kids begging was: "there is often an unscrupulous adult nearby "prostituting" them because it is well known in 'the business' that young famelic faces get more money out of the punters than old ones . . . . If you see one who looks genuinely hungry, get him a yoghurt or empanada and stay there while he eats it, or it could never touch his lips". (I haven't seen any children begging here, though I have seen them working.)
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Why it is I do what I do
I've only just realised how deficient my description of my work is :(. Usually I say something along the lines of "I want to help women make sense of the Bible so they know how to follow Jesus in their everyday lives". Which is fine as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. I fail to say why I want to do this - which leaves my listeners free to pick their own explanation. And what worries me - perhaps especially in a Catholic context - is that they'll assume that it's to win God's favour. The very last thing I wish to convey :(.
So yesterday over lunch, I worked out just why I do what I do. I want to help women make sense of the Bible and follow Jesus in their everyday lives because...
So now I just have to come up with an explanation that captures some or all of these four! Here goes... I want to help women make sense of the Bible so they can obey and bring honour to the Almighty God with their lives (reasons one and two). Or, I want to help women make sense of the Bible so they can lead beautiful lives (reason three). Or, I want to help women make sense of the Bible so they can follow their Lord Jesus who died for them (reason four).
My natural inclination is to go for the last one because it speaks of the heart of our faith. But I also need to consider the Catholic/post-Catholic context I'm in. My way of understanding Catholicism (a sweeping generalisation) is this: God is distant and powerful, Jesus is dead, and Mary is close and powerful. I yearn for people to see that, in truth, it is the risen Lord Jesus who is mighty and intimately connnected with his children, and that, through him, the Father God has also come very near.
So how about I switch my explanation round a bit... I want to help women make sense of the Bible so that, with the help of the risen Lord Jesus, they can grow closer to God each day (hinting at reasons three and four). Google Translate tells me that in Spanish this is: Quiero ayudar a las mujeres a entender la Biblia para que, con la ayuda del Señor Jesús resucitado, pueden acercarse más a Dios cada día. Looks right to me (but please feel free to correct me, any Spanish-speaking readers). Now I just have to remember it!
So yesterday over lunch, I worked out just why I do what I do. I want to help women make sense of the Bible and follow Jesus in their everyday lives because...
- God commands it and he is to be feared;
- He is above all else and deserves to be honoured and glorified;
- He is loving and good and his ways bring life, joy and wholeness;
- He died for me, so how else could I respond but to obey and please him.
So now I just have to come up with an explanation that captures some or all of these four! Here goes... I want to help women make sense of the Bible so they can obey and bring honour to the Almighty God with their lives (reasons one and two). Or, I want to help women make sense of the Bible so they can lead beautiful lives (reason three). Or, I want to help women make sense of the Bible so they can follow their Lord Jesus who died for them (reason four).
My natural inclination is to go for the last one because it speaks of the heart of our faith. But I also need to consider the Catholic/post-Catholic context I'm in. My way of understanding Catholicism (a sweeping generalisation) is this: God is distant and powerful, Jesus is dead, and Mary is close and powerful. I yearn for people to see that, in truth, it is the risen Lord Jesus who is mighty and intimately connnected with his children, and that, through him, the Father God has also come very near.
So how about I switch my explanation round a bit... I want to help women make sense of the Bible so that, with the help of the risen Lord Jesus, they can grow closer to God each day (hinting at reasons three and four). Google Translate tells me that in Spanish this is: Quiero ayudar a las mujeres a entender la Biblia para que, con la ayuda del Señor Jesús resucitado, pueden acercarse más a Dios cada día. Looks right to me (but please feel free to correct me, any Spanish-speaking readers). Now I just have to remember it!
Happy María
You know the postmodern idea that there's no truth and, even if there
was, no way to access it? Well there's a subtlety and cunning to this
philosophy that can be quite seductive. The best counter-argument I've
heard comes from another place - good old common sense. And it goes like
this - that's not how communication works.
We don't speak or write to another person - or, in more formal settings, an audience - expecting that they will take whatever they fancy from our words. We intend to convey something and we intend for it to be, more or less, understood by the other party. Certainly the success of this communication is made more difficult by distances of culture or time, but it's the same process.
This has come to mind again during my Spanish study. Sometimes there's no right or wrong grammatical form: the speaker just needs to decide what flavour they'd like to convey. So you choose "María está feliz" if you'd prefer to emphasise her current joy, or "María es feliz" if you'd prefer to highlight her fundamentally happy nature (something that Google Translate doesn't understand). This is a fairly clear example, but there are times when the choice between the verbs "estar" and "ser" is a delicate matter (or so I imagine).
This sort of thing happens in every language, including the biblical ones, and with a bit of knowledge, we can work out what the authors wanted us to take away. Whether they were speaking true or recounting myth is a discussion for another day, but at least we can feel confident that we can understand each other.
We don't speak or write to another person - or, in more formal settings, an audience - expecting that they will take whatever they fancy from our words. We intend to convey something and we intend for it to be, more or less, understood by the other party. Certainly the success of this communication is made more difficult by distances of culture or time, but it's the same process.
This has come to mind again during my Spanish study. Sometimes there's no right or wrong grammatical form: the speaker just needs to decide what flavour they'd like to convey. So you choose "María está feliz" if you'd prefer to emphasise her current joy, or "María es feliz" if you'd prefer to highlight her fundamentally happy nature (something that Google Translate doesn't understand). This is a fairly clear example, but there are times when the choice between the verbs "estar" and "ser" is a delicate matter (or so I imagine).
This sort of thing happens in every language, including the biblical ones, and with a bit of knowledge, we can work out what the authors wanted us to take away. Whether they were speaking true or recounting myth is a discussion for another day, but at least we can feel confident that we can understand each other.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Shoulder to shoulder
The people of Chile are perfectly capable. They don't need missionaries like me to come in and do everything for them. For historical and financial reasons, they need assistance in certain areas, but only so far and for so long. This means that I should always be working hard to do myself out of a job. And I'm told that as I seek to teach and exemplify God's Word, I need to be careful not to become an integral part of church life, or the result will be "dependence and a painful withdrawal".*
It's better to try to be a "facilitator or servant, who works parallel to the church", with involvement that is "temporary or sporadic in nature, deliberately not taking responsibility in the local church" and that endeavours to "create interdependence between the church and the Holy Spirit, under the authority of Scripture". This model means that "you always stay outside the developing structure of the church yet work with it".
The second model seems sound, but I can imagine that in practice there'll be a lot of grey. Maybe I should aim to be as involved as the most committed 'ordinary' church member (be on all the rosters, attend all events etc etc), but exercise caution when it comes to leadership roles. Obviously I want to exercise some sort of leadership or there's not much point me being here, but perhaps I should always make sure that the purpose of that leadership is to equip someone else (whatever that looks like), rather than just getting on and doing things myself. So I'm delighted that my pastor has asked me to team up with an older (Chilean) woman to run the women's ministry at our church. But that's for later - for now I'm just being a part of things, getting to know folks, and slowly picking up Spanish.
*Quotes taken from 'Pastoral & Apostolic', a paper that is part of the 'SIM Pacific and Andes Area: Chile: Orientation Journal'
It's better to try to be a "facilitator or servant, who works parallel to the church", with involvement that is "temporary or sporadic in nature, deliberately not taking responsibility in the local church" and that endeavours to "create interdependence between the church and the Holy Spirit, under the authority of Scripture". This model means that "you always stay outside the developing structure of the church yet work with it".
The second model seems sound, but I can imagine that in practice there'll be a lot of grey. Maybe I should aim to be as involved as the most committed 'ordinary' church member (be on all the rosters, attend all events etc etc), but exercise caution when it comes to leadership roles. Obviously I want to exercise some sort of leadership or there's not much point me being here, but perhaps I should always make sure that the purpose of that leadership is to equip someone else (whatever that looks like), rather than just getting on and doing things myself. So I'm delighted that my pastor has asked me to team up with an older (Chilean) woman to run the women's ministry at our church. But that's for later - for now I'm just being a part of things, getting to know folks, and slowly picking up Spanish.
*Quotes taken from 'Pastoral & Apostolic', a paper that is part of the 'SIM Pacific and Andes Area: Chile: Orientation Journal'
Monday, March 12, 2012
Beautiful paradox
I stole this from someone's prayer letter. How good is it!
Pray that we will be people who approach God with the humility of a contrite sinner and the confidence of a beloved child.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
El futuro de este blog
So I'm living in Chile now. Not 100% sure what this means for this blog. I have a dedicated 'Chile blog' which I think will be for news and brief(er) observations. This one will continue to have musings on life and ministry - only a lot of that is going to be specific to Chile as that's where I am. So it might end up sounding something like a travelogue. We'll see how it goes.
Posts
