Part of it is that some American habits annoy Canadians. The behaviour of some celebrities and politicians south of the border seems, to those north of it, well, a little impolite. A little too much self-promotion, attention seeking, and Hey-look-how-great-I-am. We like Donald Trump, but like him even better for living in New York rather than London, Canada, and we get nervous seeing U. S. soldiers behave like cowboys when they invade Middle Eastern countries.
This is probably part of the reason Canadian commentators have been discussing Tim Tebow. He's become famous for his public quoting of the Bible, his calling on God, and his public prayers. When he isn't quarterbacking - and doing a mediocre job of it, which is strengthening the annoyance factor - he's talking about God at news conferences, and praying in the football field. Images of him kneeling on the sidelines while his Denver Broncos teammates celebrated have gone viral. His name has become a verb meaning, “To get down on a knee and start praying, even if everyone else around you is doing something completely different.” Pictures of imitators are all over the web.
Some people see Tebow's displays of prayer as an interesting curiousity. Others, as an affirmation of what they believe. Still others see it as a validation of America as a Christian nation. A few are offended. Sportscasters appear glad to see Tebow's football field faith as a great way to raise NFL tv ratings.
By way of comparison, most Canadians would not like to see Sidney Crosby on his knees after every goal; if he is thankful to God for each one, most want him to express that in some other way. Besides, if he were to get on his knees after every goal, it could seriously hold up the game.
Athletes, mostly American, praying on fields are a common sight. Their doing this publicly is not only a function of their personal faith - Tebow, for example, is the son of Christian missionaries; it is also attributable to the fact that American culture promotes the public expression of the individual. Tebow is expressing, in an American-appropriate big way, his individuality.
All that being said though, perhaps prayer on the athletic field is completely understandable for another reason. Imagine being adored by millions of fans. Five thousand or fifty thousand of them might be packed into a stadium where they (or about half of them) will do all they can to cheer you on. Imagine being part of a billion dollar spectacle that's streaming live onto screens on several continents. Including onto computer displays in Fanshawe College residences and the occasional study carrel.
It would be perfectly normal to feel overwhelmed with awe that you, yes you, are experiencing this rare and privileged moment. In fact, all over the planet parents are making sacrifices, and young athletes are practicing every day, in pursuit of such experiences. Not to mention the money that comes with them.
Perhaps every athletic match should begin with a brief public prayer of thanks that God has arranged his world in a way to make these spectacular experiences happen with amazing frequency in today's world. That spectators can come together to enjoy the game is truly something for which one can give thanks. Even experienced vicariously, a hockey game or a football match can be incredible.
I doubt that such prayers are going to be made over the sound systems in our arenas anytime soon. For the time being (in good Canadian fashion) we'll have to say them silently. And who knows, but doing that might help us thank God for a few other things too. And that would not be a bad thing.
Wednesday, 23 November 2011
Wednesday, 9 November 2011
Pastor Nadarkhani and Religious Freedom
In the late 1980s when I was still a seminary student I met Steve. Steve was from Egypt, and he told me how he had converted from the Islamic faith of his family to Christianity. I was very interested in his personal journey and asked him to tell me more. At one point, however, I had to stop him and ask if I had heard him correctly. Yes I had. He said that if he returned to Egypt, even for a short time to visit his family, his brothers would likely try to kill him. This was the first time I had come into direct contact with someone who endured death threats for his or her faith.
It would not be my last. Later in London I met a family who had arrived as refugees from Southern Sudan and the civil war that had been boiling there for decades. I learned that one of the most persistent dynamics in that war was that the Sudanese people to the north regard the Christianity of those in the south as inferior to Islam. Funda and his family fled, and with the help of the United Nations, made their way to London. Here, as Christian refugees (along with Muslim refugees), they were free to put into practice their understandings of God and faith.
This is not to say that all Muslims are antagonistic to Christians. That is certainly not the case. However, we need to recognize the painful struggle for the freedom of non-Muslims that is taking place in countries where Islam is prevalent and exerts strong influence on the government.
A more recent victim of those who oppress others because they reject Islam for Christianity is Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. Today Christians around the world are praying for his release from prison in Iran. And the United Nations as well as U.S. President Obama have issued public statements in his support.
Nadarkhani was first imprisoned for two weeks in Iran in 2006. The charges? Apostasy (renouncing Islam) and evangelising Muslims (trying to persuade them to become Christians). Then, in 2009 he learned that the reading of the Qur'an was now required for all students in school. Having children in school himself, Nadarkhani protested. In October of that year he was called before a tribunal on the charge of "protesting."
The next year his wife, Fatemeh Pasandideh, was arrested - also for apostasy - and sentenced to life imprisonment. She was released after four months of isolation from her family. According BosNewsLife the children may be taken away to be raised as Muslims (a parallel to the way the Canadian government used to take Native children away and raise them in residential schools).
Around the same time in 2010 the pastor himself was again arrested for apostasy and evangelism. This time he was sentenced to death by hanging. For about a year now there has been a lot of legal wrangling about procedural issues. In the meantime Nadarkhani has been under constant pressure to renounce his Christianity - which would mean escaping the death sentence. He has not recanted.
Likely the Iranian government does not want to appear hostile to religious freedom. It has signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In the light of this agreement the U.N. Commission on International Religious Freedom has declared the legal proceedings against Nadarkhani a "sham."
One apparent scheme that Iranian authorities have hatched to get out from under the scrutiny of agencies protecting religious freedom is to change the charges against Pastor Nadarkhani. The Iranian state media last month began saying that his death sentence is not for apostasy, but for rape and extortion.
But wait, it gets better. Perhaps fearing that the rape and extortion shtick won't work, Gholamali Rezvani, the Gilan Provincial Political Security Deputy stated, according to Wikipedia,
“Youcef Nadarkhani has security crimes and he had set up a house of corruption. ... Nobody is
executed in our regime for choosing a religion, but he is a Zionist who has security crimes.”
A little more than a month ago British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, paid "tribute to the courage shown by Pastor Nadarkhani." He called for the authorities in Iran to immediately overturn his sentence.
Pastor Nadarkhani is one of many around the planet who are risking everything in order to express their understandings of God and faith. Someday their courage may be celebrated in the same way that many celebrate rights pioneers such as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. For now prayer for Nadarkhani will continue along with efforts of rights advocates. Hopefully we will hear of his release soon. That will be a good day, not only for him, but for all people, including the people of Iran.
It would not be my last. Later in London I met a family who had arrived as refugees from Southern Sudan and the civil war that had been boiling there for decades. I learned that one of the most persistent dynamics in that war was that the Sudanese people to the north regard the Christianity of those in the south as inferior to Islam. Funda and his family fled, and with the help of the United Nations, made their way to London. Here, as Christian refugees (along with Muslim refugees), they were free to put into practice their understandings of God and faith.
This is not to say that all Muslims are antagonistic to Christians. That is certainly not the case. However, we need to recognize the painful struggle for the freedom of non-Muslims that is taking place in countries where Islam is prevalent and exerts strong influence on the government.
A more recent victim of those who oppress others because they reject Islam for Christianity is Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. Today Christians around the world are praying for his release from prison in Iran. And the United Nations as well as U.S. President Obama have issued public statements in his support.
Nadarkhani was first imprisoned for two weeks in Iran in 2006. The charges? Apostasy (renouncing Islam) and evangelising Muslims (trying to persuade them to become Christians). Then, in 2009 he learned that the reading of the Qur'an was now required for all students in school. Having children in school himself, Nadarkhani protested. In October of that year he was called before a tribunal on the charge of "protesting."
The next year his wife, Fatemeh Pasandideh, was arrested - also for apostasy - and sentenced to life imprisonment. She was released after four months of isolation from her family. According BosNewsLife the children may be taken away to be raised as Muslims (a parallel to the way the Canadian government used to take Native children away and raise them in residential schools).
Around the same time in 2010 the pastor himself was again arrested for apostasy and evangelism. This time he was sentenced to death by hanging. For about a year now there has been a lot of legal wrangling about procedural issues. In the meantime Nadarkhani has been under constant pressure to renounce his Christianity - which would mean escaping the death sentence. He has not recanted.
Likely the Iranian government does not want to appear hostile to religious freedom. It has signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In the light of this agreement the U.N. Commission on International Religious Freedom has declared the legal proceedings against Nadarkhani a "sham."
One apparent scheme that Iranian authorities have hatched to get out from under the scrutiny of agencies protecting religious freedom is to change the charges against Pastor Nadarkhani. The Iranian state media last month began saying that his death sentence is not for apostasy, but for rape and extortion.
But wait, it gets better. Perhaps fearing that the rape and extortion shtick won't work, Gholamali Rezvani, the Gilan Provincial Political Security Deputy stated, according to Wikipedia,
“Youcef Nadarkhani has security crimes and he had set up a house of corruption. ... Nobody is
executed in our regime for choosing a religion, but he is a Zionist who has security crimes.”
A little more than a month ago British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, paid "tribute to the courage shown by Pastor Nadarkhani." He called for the authorities in Iran to immediately overturn his sentence.
Pastor Nadarkhani is one of many around the planet who are risking everything in order to express their understandings of God and faith. Someday their courage may be celebrated in the same way that many celebrate rights pioneers such as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. For now prayer for Nadarkhani will continue along with efforts of rights advocates. Hopefully we will hear of his release soon. That will be a good day, not only for him, but for all people, including the people of Iran.
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
War, Pacifism, and a Third Alternative
James Loney sees war as an institution, obscene and perverse. It sweeps up people as perpetrators and as victims. Loney is a peace activist who was captured and held in Iraq in 2005. He and three others were abducted in Baghdad during the time they were meeting with Muslim leaders in the city. His captors identified themselves as the Swords of Righteousness Brigade. One of the four hostages, Tom Fox, was eventually taken away, and his bullet-riddled body was found later dumped in the street. Loney shares his story of being a hostage in the book, Captivity: 118 Days in Iraq and the Struggle for a World Without War (Random House, 2011).
War is an awful thing. Some say it brings out the best in people, especially courage. But it also brings out the worst. The Canadians who survived Vimy Ridge during World War One, for example, did so using poison gas, bayonets, shelling, bullets, underground explosions, tanks, and other technologies designed to maim the enemy to death. All sides in war commit acts of savagery. Our awareness of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is a recognition that those who commit them often reenter society broken.
From Loney's book we see the horror experienced by the citizens of Iraq during the U.S. led invasion. '"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad," a Pentagon official said.... The bombs and missiles fell day and night, fifty thousand strikes in thirty days. ...Chaos followed shock and awe. After securing the Ministry of Oil and the Ministry of Interior, the U.S. stood by and watched as libraries, hospitals, schools and every government building was looted and burned.'
Of course, there's an alternative to war: Pacifism. In principle Pacifism opens the way for the end of all war. It may not have many takers, but it has a lot of lookers. And, it would work, obviously, if there were enough takers.
But many have difficulty with Pacifism because it looks like simple passivity. It doesn't seem right that some just stand aside while others defend them from aggressors. As long as people or countries insist on getting their way through violence, Pacifism doesn't seem to be an adequate response.
Loney, a Catholic, a Canadian and a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT), offers a third alternative. The mission statement of CPT reads in part, "Christian Peacemaker Teams offers an organized, nonviolent alternative to war and other forms of lethal inter-group conflict. CPT provides organizational support to persons committed to faith-based nonviolent alternatives in situations where lethal conflict is an immediate reality or is supported by public policy. CPT seeks to enlist the response of the whole church in conscientious objection to war, and in the development of non-violent institutions, skills and training for intervention in conflict situations."
The organization provides the means for Christians to place themselves in situations of potential and real conflict in order to advocate for peace and for potential victims. Today Peacemaker teams are active in Palestine, Colombia, Iraq and other locations. On some occasions its members have been abused or killed.
This is a far cry from passive resistance to war. It is an active, but nevertheless non-violent, response to the "institution" of war, one that does not leave volunteers free from risk, but places them in the thick of it.
Canadians, it seems, are open to the values expressed by CPT. We prefer working with human rights and development intitiatives to going to war. We would rather set up schools than missile sites in Afghanistan.
Remembrance Day is here again. The day can be used by some to unquestioningly glorify war and those who perish in it. But it's also an opportunity to consider an alternative. As Jean Vanier says about Loney's book, "[It] is a story of hope. In a world of violence there are still many men and women who believe in working for peace... [They] risk following Jesus to the very end. May many be inspired by this story to be peacemakers not just in Iraq but where we are in our everyday lives."
War is an awful thing. Some say it brings out the best in people, especially courage. But it also brings out the worst. The Canadians who survived Vimy Ridge during World War One, for example, did so using poison gas, bayonets, shelling, bullets, underground explosions, tanks, and other technologies designed to maim the enemy to death. All sides in war commit acts of savagery. Our awareness of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is a recognition that those who commit them often reenter society broken.
From Loney's book we see the horror experienced by the citizens of Iraq during the U.S. led invasion. '"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad," a Pentagon official said.... The bombs and missiles fell day and night, fifty thousand strikes in thirty days. ...Chaos followed shock and awe. After securing the Ministry of Oil and the Ministry of Interior, the U.S. stood by and watched as libraries, hospitals, schools and every government building was looted and burned.'
Of course, there's an alternative to war: Pacifism. In principle Pacifism opens the way for the end of all war. It may not have many takers, but it has a lot of lookers. And, it would work, obviously, if there were enough takers.
But many have difficulty with Pacifism because it looks like simple passivity. It doesn't seem right that some just stand aside while others defend them from aggressors. As long as people or countries insist on getting their way through violence, Pacifism doesn't seem to be an adequate response.
Loney, a Catholic, a Canadian and a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT), offers a third alternative. The mission statement of CPT reads in part, "Christian Peacemaker Teams offers an organized, nonviolent alternative to war and other forms of lethal inter-group conflict. CPT provides organizational support to persons committed to faith-based nonviolent alternatives in situations where lethal conflict is an immediate reality or is supported by public policy. CPT seeks to enlist the response of the whole church in conscientious objection to war, and in the development of non-violent institutions, skills and training for intervention in conflict situations."
The organization provides the means for Christians to place themselves in situations of potential and real conflict in order to advocate for peace and for potential victims. Today Peacemaker teams are active in Palestine, Colombia, Iraq and other locations. On some occasions its members have been abused or killed.
This is a far cry from passive resistance to war. It is an active, but nevertheless non-violent, response to the "institution" of war, one that does not leave volunteers free from risk, but places them in the thick of it.
Canadians, it seems, are open to the values expressed by CPT. We prefer working with human rights and development intitiatives to going to war. We would rather set up schools than missile sites in Afghanistan.
Remembrance Day is here again. The day can be used by some to unquestioningly glorify war and those who perish in it. But it's also an opportunity to consider an alternative. As Jean Vanier says about Loney's book, "[It] is a story of hope. In a world of violence there are still many men and women who believe in working for peace... [They] risk following Jesus to the very end. May many be inspired by this story to be peacemakers not just in Iraq but where we are in our everyday lives."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)