So, I am going to start with a quote from Michael Wakely, an OM missionary, from his book, “Can it be true? A personal pilgrimage through faith and doubt”. Quote is from chapter 2 (“Cerebral Faith”)

The Bible has a lot to say about using our minds. Jesus commanded his disciples to “love the Lord your God with all your… mind,” and then “opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.” It is stating the obvious to say that the mind is useful, but there are Christians who advise that it is only when we shut down our minds that God will be able to take over. That’s just what the critics of Christianity have been saying for years: Faith is intellectual suicide

John Stott states in his helpful booklet “Your Mind Matters.” “If we do not use the mind which God has given us, we condemn ourselves to spiritual superficiality and cut ourselves off from many of the riches of God’s grace.” I like that. God has given us a mind, and expects us to submit it to Him and then use it. Our minds are there to search for good answers to the hard questions… and if those answers are still not satisfactory, to have the wisdom to submit in faith to the certainty that there is a superior wisdom above.

… The popular conception is that the Christian faith requires closed eyes and closed minds, followed by a surge of comfortable feeling. As long as the feel-good factor is there, the irrational leap is justified. That is a travesty of a faith that is rooted in space, time, and history. I have lived long enough with other great world religions to know that there are other ways of looking at faith, which do not invite close intellectual examination. But it is not so with Christianity.  … The plain fact is that few world religions invite examination under the microscope and prefer, or even claim, to be regarded either as a mythology, because they deal with abstract concepts rather than concrete realities, or as above inspection, because examination is viewed as an insult to the divine.

It is unfortunate when Christianity is judged in the same light and the impression is given that one needs to turn off the mind in order to believe– “Choose faith or brains, you can’t use both together.” Or “Close your eyes, submit yourself to your emotions. God is an experience to make your feelings tingle. Switch off your brain before it gets in the way. ” Sadly, a lot of Christian teaching– and even more Christian experience– would agree with these popular travesties.

Related articles

• Aristides for Today (missionmusings.wordpress.com)
• John Stott’s ‘Balanced Christianity’ (arthurandtamie.com)

Image via Wikipedia

Short quote from a longer blog post by Simon and Henrietta Cozens

The idea of contextualization is that it is “receptor-oriented”; in other words, it lets the world set the agenda. Of course putting it in those terms is a pretty harsh charge, and it’s usually answered by Hiebert’s concept of “Critical Contextualization.” But this does not go far enough; it is still ultimately positive towards cultural trends. The “critical” dimension extends simply to merely not letting every part of culture into the Church—some things should be rejected.

But the Church is also meant to challenge culture. There is room for another concept beyond contextualization; there should also be counter-contextualization.

The full blog is at Counter-contextualization: Keeping our saltiness

The writer uses the term Counter-Contextualization, but it is the same thing as Counter-cultural contextualization. The article gives some interesting thoughts on this form of contextualization within Japanese society.

Related articles

• Subversive Fulfillment and the “Datu Mentality” (missionmusings.wordpress.com)
• Wonderful Example of Contextualized Interpretation (missionmusings.wordpress.com)
• Role of Contextualization in Biblical interpretation (aplace4.wordpress.com)

<div style=”width:477px” id=”__ss_10450934″> <strong style=”display:block;margin:12px 0 4px”><a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/bmunson3/wholistic-ministry-and-nehemiah” title=”Wholistic Ministry and Nehemiah” target=”_blank”>Wholistic Ministry and Nehemiah</a></strong> <div style=”padding:5px 0 12px”> View more <a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/” target=”_blank”>documents</a> from <a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/bmunson3″ target=”_blank”>Bob Munson</a> </div> </div>

<div style=”width:477px” id=”__ss_11361853″> <strong style=”display:block;margin:12px 0 4px”><a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/bmunson3/visual-model-for-christian-relief-and-development” title=”Visual Model for Christian Relief and Development” target=”_blank”>Visual Model for Christian Relief and Development</a></strong> <div style=”padding:5px 0 12px”> View more <a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/” target=”_blank”>documents</a> from <a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/bmunson3″ target=”_blank”>Bob Munson</a> </div> </div>

Related articles

• Christian Community Development (missionmusings.wordpress.com)
• Medical Mission Events in the Philippines, Part I (missionmusings.wordpress.com)

So I go to the hospital. Most of the patients there have as their first language Ilocano, Kankana-ey, or Ibaloi. I speak English and some Tagalog. Working in the academic and professional settings of Baguio City, Philippines, English is more than adequate, and any Tagalog I know just adds another dimension. But in the provincial hospital I am at, it is different. In the end, a lot of my conversations with the patients ends up as a mutually uncomfortable “Taglish” (mix of English and Tagalog). I would like to say that my presence is welcome, but I don’t really know. Filipinos are normally exceptionally gracious, so I generally feel welcomed enough.

But as an introverted person feeling inadequate due to my language inadequacies, I have the desire to step away from what I am doing periodically. My way of stepping away has been to go to the hospital chapel and sit down. I am not sure why I chose that spot. I suppose it is because it is quiet. It is also possible that the structure and symbols of the chapel make me feel refreshed… but I doubt that is why. Most of the symbols and images are for a different religious tradition than my own.

I suppose, on further analysis, I would stay at the chapel because I felt I needed a place that was quiet where I felt that I “belonged.” As a foreigner with inadequate language skills working as a chaplain with limited social skills, I feel like I don’t belong in the hospital. Maybe, however, the key point is that as a chaplain, I feel that the chapel is the one place in the hospital that I do belong (there is no chaplain office at this hospital).

Once I came to that realization, I made an adjustment. I moved out of the chapel and into the hallways of the hospital. Unlike many Filipino hospitals, this one has lots of seating. I still recharge my introversion battery, but I do it with the people rather than cloistered away from them.

I feel that I am not alone in this. A lot of Christians have been conditioned to feel uncomfortable anywhere but in church. Some of this was deliberate programming from others. When believers enters a church they are often barraged with all sorts of activities to ensure that they don’t “backslide into the world.” Eventually, many feel out of place anywhere except their own house and church. Their friends are at church, their ministry is at (and in) church. They, obviously, leave church but feel awkward, out of place, strangers. They look forward to minimizing these uncomfortable moments.

I do like the idea of church as a refuge (I have posted on that as well). But I believe it should ideally be a refuge for the hurting soul not from the world. The world CAN be a scary place (sadly, so can church) but hiding in church can make it seem even more scary.

Related articles

• As a Little Child (missionmusings.wordpress.com)

A quick read and one may be tempted to already come up with the details of the story as follows:

While the story of the Prodigal Son from the Bible may be an obvious example of this structure, it is now alone, consider another possibility.

The origin story for Spiderman also fits this structure. It can also be thought of as a story that resonates with culture. We would probably call Spiderman a myth, since it provides a story that supports a regional value system. In this case, “Where there is great power, there is great responsibility.” In many cultures, this message would not be mythic, but parabolic, particularly in cultures where the use of power for personal gain or even aggrandizement is promoted.  But consider the Prodigal Son… what message would the story as shown above be? Probably it would be that something like “Father Knows Best” or “There’s No Place Like Home” (Wizard of Oz also has a mythic function built off of this story structure). But the lesson of the story above resonates rather than challenges the culture (at least most cultures) so it has a mythic function rather than a parabolic function.

So… should we call it “The Myth of the Prodigal Son” rather than the “The Parable of the Prodigal Son“? No… because Jesus did an amazing thing. He attached a parabolic ending to a mythic beginning. The elder brother promotes a mythic ending… acceptance back into the family but suffering shame and loss. However, the father provides a parabolic ending, magnanimously forgetting, forgiving, and celebrating. It violates our cultural sense of justice.

The example I have given in this post is quite useful in missions. After all, one could argue that the structure is the same as the Grand Narrative of the Bible. Man is living as a created child of God in harmony with both God and Nature. Man gets greedy and decides that God is holding back from him. He rejects God and goes his own way. But going his own way eventually means great suffering and loss. Man eventually realizes his own foolishness and (with the miraculous working of God as Savior) he is able to return, restored into the family of God in harmony. In some forms of Christianity, the concept of “purgatory” is added. Purgatory is the mythic ending. It satisfies our cultural demand for justice… the erring one must suffer. Yet the Bible appears to show that the Grand Narrative is not merely mythic, but parabolic. God welcomes back those who repent with no regard to justice. That is certainly an ending that should shock any of us.

In missions we need to use stories to support the good and surprise and shock the bad. To do this we need to know the culture we work in, know God’s message and tailor our stories to support, shock, and surprise people in understanding the truth.

Related articles

• Mythic and Parabolic Stories in Culture, Part II (missionmusings.wordpress.com)
• Mythic and Parabolic Stories in Culture, Part I (missionmusings.wordpress.com)
• “Parables from the Back Side” Quote (missionmusings.wordpress.com)

Statue of Lapu-lapu. Image via Wikipedia

If one takes the definitions for “mythic” and “parabolic” from the previous post, then,

Myth: A story that has power within a certain culture because it resonates with the culture’s deep-seated values.

Parable: A story that has power within a certain culture because it is dissonant and challenges the culture’s deep-seated values.

First, clearly, using these sort of definitions, the term myth or parable cannot be applied generally to a story, but only within the context of a resonant or dissonant culture. A story may be a myth in one culture, a parable in another culture, and simply an interesting (or uninteresting story) in a third culture.

A second, related, issue is that even if a story has mythic power in two cultures, it may have it for different reasons. In the previous post, this was noted with the story of David and Goliath where the mythic power of the story within ancient Israel is different from that of modern-day United States.

A third issue is that there are common themes in myths and parables that transcends culture even if their role in the culture varies.

Let’s take this third issue to the Philippines. The story of David and Goliath is built around a more universal construct… a seemingly weak protagonist overcoming a stronger antagonist. In the Philippines, a comparable story is the story of Magellan and Lapu-lapu. It fits the definition of a myth because it resonates with a deep Pilipino worldview. The story is well-grounded in history even if romanticized by some. It is, for example, unlikely that Magellan personally fought Lapu-lapu. In the event, Magellan was a Portuguese explorer serving Spain to explore the world for purposes of the spice trade. Magellan landed in the Philippine archipelago around 1521 and began trying to convert people and place them under the authority of the Spanish flag. Lapu-lapu, a leader in the region, refused obey Magellan. When Magellan tried to intimidate Lapu-lapu and his men (that behavior worked in Central and South America), a battle ensued in which Magellan was killed and his men routed. Only a few survived to make it back to Spain.

For its mythic quality, the characters needed to be redefined. At that time, there was no such thing as the Philippines (simply an archipelago of islands having many local tribes and leaders) but Lapu-lapu becomes the representative of the peace-loving Philippine people. Magellan was an explorer and spice trader who had the utter foolishness to forget his charter and dabble in local politics (a dangerous thing even today in the Philippines). However, Magellan comes to represent the powerful and violent outside imperialist (whether it be Spain, America, Japan, or another). So in its mythic form, the historical story of Magellan and Lapu-lapu becomes the rallying story of the Pilipinos quest for peaceful self-determinacy in the face of more powerful outside powers.

In missions, it is good to recognize that stories that are important to us may be unimportant in one culture. It may even have the opposite effect (as Don Richardson noted in Peace Child, that the tribe he was working with found Judas to be the protagonist of a myth demonstrating the power of clever deception). It requires a deep understanding of the beliefs of a people to successfully identify the effect. On the other hand, though, there are common story structures that transcend culture that provide a pattern to build stories on. We will look at this in the next post.

Image via Wikipedia

As many know, within the religious context the term “myth” does not necessarily mean fiction (as in “not true”). However, I have noticed that even within religious circles there is a tendency to link the term myth with fiction. Take, for example, the story of David and Goliath. I believe that the story of David and Goliath is based on history, but if I call it a myth, people tend assume that I am saying it did not actually happen. Therefore, I tend to like to say that a story has a mythic function, rather than saying it is a myth.

The same can happen with the term “parable.” There is nothing in the term that says whether the story is based on fact or fiction. Thus the parable of Jesus about the Unjust Judge may or may not be based on a real woman in need of justice and a judge in need of a conscience. However, people tend to believe that a parable is fiction. Therefore, I would rather talk about a story having a parabolic function.

A story functions as a myth or a parable based on the culture it is expressed in. So what defines a mythic or parabolic function of a story? Let me suggest the following (no, I am not being original here):

MYTHIC: having the quality of supporting, justifying, or explaining a cultural value.

PARABOIC: having the quality of challenging or contradicting a cultural value.

Consider the story of David and Goliath. I believe it is a historical event, but it was told and retold because it had a mythic function. Ancient Israel saw itself as small compared to big and powerful nations around it. Yet it saw itself as having a special relationship with God, such that if it was faithful to God and courageous, Israel would be victorious. The story of David and Goliath explained and supported this self-perception with David being the faithful and courageous Israel, and Goliath the big, strong and Godless nations surrounding Israel.

In some other cultures David and Goliath also has a mythic function even if the symbols change. In the United States, for example, the high value placed on the individual and individualism gives a different interpretation to the story. Goliath is the powerful unfeeling corporation or government bureaucracy. David is the seemingly powerless individual. However, when he stands on the side of what is right and refuses to give up, David (and individualism) can again be victorious.

However, one could imagine a culture where David and Goliath has a parabolic function. A highly disciplined and militarized culture may find itself cheering for Goliath. David and Goliath may be a cautionary tale in this culture where strength, discipline and maturity can sadly be overcome. The hearer must be taught the sad truth that all matter of training and weaponry can be overcome by “a lucky hit.”

Since missions involves expressing divine truth in a way that is accessible to a specific culture, the proper use of stories with mythic or parabolic functions within the culture is valuable. Few people are impressed by propositional truth. Most find narrative as being more compelling… as long as it hits home with the culture it is shared in.

Thus, understanding the culture and utilizing (or creating) stories that resonate mythically or parabolically is vitally important for being both an agent of change as well as an agent of preservation.  

Related articles

• Counter-Cultural Contextualization (missionmusings.wordpress.com)

Image via Wikipedia

I really enjoy the book “Parables from the Back Side: Bible Stories with a Twist” by J. Ellsworth Kalas. It looks at some parables in the Bible but focuses on a different aspect of the story than is commonly dealt with. It has been argued (such as by Julicher) that parables are a story built about one basic meaning or point. Clearly, the structure of some parables point to more than one understanding. For example, in the Prodigal Son, if the single point was about the relationship between the younger son and the father, the older son element would be unnecessary, even confusing. If the single point was only about the relationship between the older son and the father, the younger son would still be necessary, but should have been dealt with much more briefly. The elements to the story guide the range of perspectives.

Kalas’ book attempts to look at some parables from a perspective that is Biblically sound, yet is different than the most common perspective. The following is a part of the discussion on the Parable of the Talents. Kalas looked at this parable from the perspective of the relationship between the rich man and the 1 talent servant.

“J. B. Phillips, the Anglican rector who gave us such a special translation of the New Testament, disagreed sharply with the line from a familiar hymn: “O to be nothing, nothing…” Dr. Phillips said he searched the New Testament in vain to find an endorsement for that point of view. If ever a book taught people to be “something, something,” he said, and to stand and do battle– “to be far more full of joy and daring and life than they ever were without God– that book is the New Testament.”

How can we claim to believe in heaven if we have so little regard for the potential of life in the here and now? Perhaps there is no better way to prove that we cherish the prospect of eternity than to take hold of life on this earth with a passion and a gladness. Those who wrap their gold in a napkin and bury it, while they think of the world to come, show that they don’t have much regard for eternity, because they have so little regard for time.

So the timid soul for whom I feel so sorry is, in truth, a villain. And the villain I see in him too often shows himself in me. On dark days of self-doubt (which are likely to be those days when I doubt the goodness of God), in times when weariness shuts out the sunlight of vigor and hope, or at times when I’ve simply lost heart, I bury the gold. Usually it’s only for a brief time. But if life is such a precious thing, then why do I bury it for even a brief time? Sadly, some people bury the gold for all of their days– not because they’re bad or because they hate God, but simply because they, like the timid soul in Jesus’ story, are afraid.

I want to do something for that timid soul, partly because I have a picture in my memory of good but inadequate people who are somewhat beaten by life, who can’t imagine themselves as winners. They’ve lost so often for so many years that they can’t conceive of winning. I want to help those persons who are so timid about life and so doubtful of God and of themselves. I want to help those persons who are so timid about life and doubtful of God and of themselves. I want to see them break free from their sense fo worthlessness or helplessness, so they might fulfill the confidence shown in them by the One who entrusted them with their gold. 

God’s vision for us as workers ought to deliver every timid soul, for now and for eternity.   <p. 31>

<div style=”width:425px” id=”__ss_10666002″> <strong style=”display:block;margin:12px 0 4px”><a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/bmunson3/counseling-in-cross-cultural-environment” title=”Counseling in cross cultural environment” target=”_blank”>Counseling in cross cultural environment</a></strong> <div style=”padding:5px 0 12px”> View more <a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/” target=”_blank”>presentations</a> from <a href=”http://www.slideshare.net/bmunson3″ target=”_blank”>Bob Munson</a> </div> </div>