Sunday, November 29, Mithi and I went straight to SM from our church service at Bulihan. We decided to meet with Tatay there. He was to bring the Smartbro bill which we had to pay on or before Nov 30.
Okay, Marian Rivera was scheduled to promote her album at SM Palapala. And "by hook or by crook" Tatay declared, "I'm going to watch Marian."
When Mithi and I arrived at SM the place was already bustling with people all eager to watch Marian.
"Eto ang ayaw ko sa SM, so crowded," I declared with frustration.
"E ano bang meron ang Marian na yan, at punong-puno na ang SM," Mithi complained.
So we went to a less crowded place in SM and treated ourselves with mango-pearl and leche flan and halaya while we waited for Tatay. Then we decided to tempt ourselves by window shopping. Mithi wanted to buy so many things. I challenged her to accept the "job" offering" of Bulihan so she can buy what she wants to buy.
Pretty soon, Tatay texted us. We met at the ground floor near where Marian was to perform. I took the smartbro bill and went to the business center to pay the bill while Mithi and Tatay joined Hiyas who has positioned herself near the stage where Marian was to perform.
But an hour passed, then, two... but Marian has not showed up. Mithi was getting frustrated, so she asked to leave us and meet with her friends somewhere in SM. Meanwhile, Hiyas decided to move even closer to where Marian would pass... or where she could have a better view of Marian.
Tatay and I decided to go around the place. But then I thought, we could not leave Hiyas by herself. So I asked Ruel to go look for Hiyas. "Para masung-ay nimo siya kung naa na si Marian," I prodded him.
Hours passed... Tatay came back to where I was standing and told me that he could not locate Hiyas.
Hiyas had Tatay's cellphone, so she could take a picture of Marian. I texted her asking for her location so Tatay could locate her.
The people started to scream... a signal that Marian was in the area.
I panicked. Both Tatay and I went looking for Hiyas, "Baka madat-ugan siya sa mga tawo!" With every scream of the people, more people rushed to the stage or the area where Marian was supposed to pass. There were uniformed sales personnel who left their stores just to have a chance to see Marian. Tatay's foot has ran-0ver by shopping cart. Nobody minded whether they were stepping on somebody's foot in their hurry to see Marian.
I then echoed Mithi's sentiment, "Ano bang meron ang Marian na yan?" so that people were unmindful that they are hurting other people? My only concern was to locate Hiyas and make sure that she is not hurt.
"Nanay, inaantok na aq," Hiyas texted.
"Ay di ka pdng matulog!" I texted her back.
The benches at the food court area where turned over. The counters served as bleachers where fans stood. Every now and then people scream. But no Marian was in sight.
After waiting like an eternity, Marian showed up.
I never saw her... I didn't even had a glimpse of her. I no longer care. All I wanted was to get out of the place. But we can't leave our daughter. We can't pull her out either, there was no way in getting closer to her. All we can do was to text her of our location so that she can easily locate us when this "craziness" is all over.
Hiyas joined us eventually. No, she was not gushing with admiration. Just a factual account that she saw Marian. She's beautiful at maputi.
"Where you able to take her picture?" we asked. No. She wasn't able to take picture "dahil ang bilis ng pagdaan nya."
"Did you get to touch her man lang?" "mabilis nga ang lakad nya at ang daming nakapaikot sa kanya."
An entire afternoon wasted in waiting for Marian Rivera. E ano bang meron sa Marian na yan that even I was willing to waste an entire precious afternoon just to have a glimpse of her?
Ewan ko. But I still waste half an hour every night watching her in "Darna."
"Maganda ba talaga sya?" asked my sister. "Siguro! Andaming nababaliw sa kanya e."
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
OUR 14th WEDDING ANNIVERSARY
Friday, November 20, two days before our anniversary, my husband came home from school with the children.
He did not kiss me as he usually does upon arriving home. He just sat at the sofa and looked at me. Thinking that something was wrong, I went to him and asked how his day was. He took my right hand into his hands then slipped a ring into my ring finger. I was pleasantly surprised. Then he kissed me and said, "Happy Anniversary."
I cried. He gave me a three-toned gold ring which by the look of it cost him his bonus.
Our wedding anniversary is on the 22nd of November. I was scheduled to preach at PCCL-University Church during Bible Sunday. And I thought, it was the best way for Ruel and I to thank God for His wonderful gift of marriage.
But then, our pastor requested Mithi Andrea to offer a song for the Offertory. It ended up, all three children sang, Hiyas Isabella and Katha Amiel joined their sister in singing "All of Me"
What a fiiting way to renew our commitment to God on our 14th wedding anniversary. The entire family thank God for a wonderful marriage and family lifeand commit all of us to God.
Glory to God!
He did not kiss me as he usually does upon arriving home. He just sat at the sofa and looked at me. Thinking that something was wrong, I went to him and asked how his day was. He took my right hand into his hands then slipped a ring into my ring finger. I was pleasantly surprised. Then he kissed me and said, "Happy Anniversary."
I cried. He gave me a three-toned gold ring which by the look of it cost him his bonus.
Our wedding anniversary is on the 22nd of November. I was scheduled to preach at PCCL-University Church during Bible Sunday. And I thought, it was the best way for Ruel and I to thank God for His wonderful gift of marriage.
But then, our pastor requested Mithi Andrea to offer a song for the Offertory. It ended up, all three children sang, Hiyas Isabella and Katha Amiel joined their sister in singing "All of Me"
What a fiiting way to renew our commitment to God on our 14th wedding anniversary. The entire family thank God for a wonderful marriage and family lifeand commit all of us to God.
Glory to God!
Placing the Bible Where It Belongs
INTRODUCTION
It’s been a long time since I stood before you --- Sitting behind the piano, I must admit has its comfort. I am behind the piano. Although being behind the piano has it’s disadvantages --- usually, I get to be an afterthought during Communion Service, and seldom do people come over behind the piano to greet me during “Passing of Peace.”
Setting that aside, sitting behind the piano gives me a different perspective of ministry and worship. I can say, that, many can preach, but very few can play the piano. As you may have known, mas sikat ako ngayon as pianist than as pastor. Pinag-aagawan ako ngayon. So that I have come to accept that I am tasked to do something that very few people could do… and that is play the piano. So much so, that every time I am asked to play the piano, I try to make it a point to encourage the church to develop its own church musician, and/ or encourage the larger church to be more intentional in its program in developing church musicians. If the church intentionally on a look out for prospective pastors, then the church should also be more intentional in sending prospective church musicians. Sadly, there are very few candidates for this area --- not only does it requires musical talent and ability, music requires more discipline. Therefore, I ask the church to take care of its church musicians.
But Pastor Connie did not ask me to talk about church music --- today we are celebrating Bible Sunday. Although there are more qualified scholars among us here to talk about the Bible, my unique contribution into the discussion on Bible would be in translation.
For the past years, I have surprisingly been involved in the translation work, first as translator of Bible Study materials including the Franklin Graham My Hope Philippines Manuals and Bible Study Notes, and now, as member of the Team that translates the Children’s Bible and the Full Life Study Bible.
Bakit ba daw, I was asked, “wala pa bang Cebuano Bible?” I said, meron na. Then why is still there a need to translate the Bible in Cebuano?
The Importance of Translation
Why indeed? In fact, if you go to Christian Bookstores, whether OMF, Christian Literature Crusade or Philippine Bible Society Bookstore , Bibles are also sold in National Book Store, you will find different versions of the Bible in any languages. So why are there so many versions of the Bible?
The different versions of the Bible are attempts to bring the Bible to the people in the language and form most easily understandable.
I’m sure if I ask you to recite the Lord’s Prayer, many of us will recite it in the King James Version, ‘Our Father who Art in Heaven… hallowed be Thy Name…” But then who uses “art thou” these days in their English conversation? Do you ask somebody you meet, “Where art thou goest?” The joke going around is that even the English people in London would have a hard time understanding the King James Version of the English Bible. E lalo na, who can read the Bible in the original language in which the Bible was written: Hebrew for Old Testament, Greek for New Testament and parts of Hebrew and Intertestamental books in Aramaic. Among Bible scholars nga, although Hebrew and Greek used to be a required course in the seminary, very, very, very few can read the Bible in its original language and understanding it readily.
So efforts have been made to translate the Bible into a language easily understood by the people. Even as early as the Babylonian exile, the Hebrew Writings where already translated into Aramaic, which was the lingua franca of that time.
Since then and until now, Bible has been translated to different languages
The United Bible Society announced, that as of 31 December 2007, The Bible, with deuterocanonical material was available in 123 languages. The Tanakh and New Testament were available in 438 languages. The New Testament was available in 1168 languages, and portions of the Bible were available in 848 languages, for a total of 2,454 languages.
Appreciating the work of translation
Untold effort and sacrifices had been place into making the Bible more understandable to the people in all possible languages and formats:
• Presentation of the different format of the Bible
So what do these different formats of the Bible tell us?
1. From the most basic, the Bible is the most popular book there is as of now. Is there any book in the entire human and literary history that has been translated and presented in so many languages and format?
2. But more importantly, hopefully, the Bible is that prominent and so important that people should never have any reason not to be able to read the Bible.
But the more serious question is how important and prominent is the Bible in our lives as individual and as a community of faith?
Biblical History and human history tell us that at any point in the history of the people when the Bible was hidden, obscured and unavailable, the nation slid in darkest moment: From the Hebrew history, when the Jewish kings forsook the reading of the Scripture, wickedness described the nation: there was corruption in the government, oppression and exploitation of the people, moral decline. It was the darkest time in their history.
In Biblical history, revival, reform and restoration coincided with the reading of the scripture. After the many years of exile from Babylon to Persia, Ezra and Nehemiah led the Jewish people in their return to their homeland. After Ezra rebuilt the temple and Nehemiah the walls of Jerusalem, the next thing that they reinstituted is the public reading of the Word of God. As accounted in Nehemiah Chapter 8, “Ezra read the Book of Law” The Torah, aloud from daybreak till noon… and the people listened attentively to the Book of Law. Immediately, there was revival amongst the people.
Amazingly, when the Holy Spirit manifested Herself, at Pentecost, she did not come in thunder or lightning, nor in miraculous sights, apparitions or miraculous acts. The Holy Spirit came… in languages that the people understood…. People who were present not only in the meeting, but even by those who were around them, listening, watching them. The WORD of God should never be obscured by language that cannot be understood.
So how important and prominent is the Bible to us?
1. Liturgically, it’s prominence is shown in the way we place the Bible in our worship area and act. The Bible is placed high so that people will symbolically look up to it. The Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Church even parade the Bible at its procession, high above the head to point to its prominence in the life of the church.
2. But in our personal, private and communal life, do we look up to the Bible for God’s guidance? The Bible is translated in a format and language you can understand so that you and I can read the Word of God and understand it. Then, we no longer have to depend solely on the reading and interpretation of the Word from pastors, Rick Warren and any other media personalities who interpret the Bible for us.
a. This encourages us to read the Bible in a personal level… study
b. This also challenges us to take the Bible Study and Sunday School offered by the church seriously. If the Bible is indeed, prominent and important then we should read it, study it. All efforts to translate the Bible in a language that we can understand will be of naught if we don’t avail of the Book… if we just delegate the study of the Bible to pastors and Bible study leaders.
3. The challenge of translating the Bible into our daily lives. The importance of the Bible is in its translation into our daily lives. When the Bible is seriously read and listened to, as proven by history, revival follows. In human history, Biblical interpretation has never been so obscure as during the Dark Ages. But when study and interpretation of Bible surfaced, human history came out of the Dark into Revival and Renaissance.
I have been privileged to be part of the work of translating the Word of God into a language closer to my heart, the Cebuano language. Efforts are made into making the Bible available in other Filipino languages. Today, the PBS and the Catholic Bishop’s Conference are joining forces for a Bible Distribution project called, “May They Be One” which aims at making the Bible available to every Filipino household, with the prayer that the Bible will unite the Filipinos. Again, I am privileged to be one of the writers in this project.
But I guess, the greatest challenge for us, for each one of us, not only for those who are in the seminary and are tasked to study the Bible, but to each one of us who takes seriously our faith in God to study the Bible, and be a living Bible, whose Word is translated in our daily lives. Amen.
It’s been a long time since I stood before you --- Sitting behind the piano, I must admit has its comfort. I am behind the piano. Although being behind the piano has it’s disadvantages --- usually, I get to be an afterthought during Communion Service, and seldom do people come over behind the piano to greet me during “Passing of Peace.”
Setting that aside, sitting behind the piano gives me a different perspective of ministry and worship. I can say, that, many can preach, but very few can play the piano. As you may have known, mas sikat ako ngayon as pianist than as pastor. Pinag-aagawan ako ngayon. So that I have come to accept that I am tasked to do something that very few people could do… and that is play the piano. So much so, that every time I am asked to play the piano, I try to make it a point to encourage the church to develop its own church musician, and/ or encourage the larger church to be more intentional in its program in developing church musicians. If the church intentionally on a look out for prospective pastors, then the church should also be more intentional in sending prospective church musicians. Sadly, there are very few candidates for this area --- not only does it requires musical talent and ability, music requires more discipline. Therefore, I ask the church to take care of its church musicians.
But Pastor Connie did not ask me to talk about church music --- today we are celebrating Bible Sunday. Although there are more qualified scholars among us here to talk about the Bible, my unique contribution into the discussion on Bible would be in translation.
For the past years, I have surprisingly been involved in the translation work, first as translator of Bible Study materials including the Franklin Graham My Hope Philippines Manuals and Bible Study Notes, and now, as member of the Team that translates the Children’s Bible and the Full Life Study Bible.
Bakit ba daw, I was asked, “wala pa bang Cebuano Bible?” I said, meron na. Then why is still there a need to translate the Bible in Cebuano?
The Importance of Translation
Why indeed? In fact, if you go to Christian Bookstores, whether OMF, Christian Literature Crusade or Philippine Bible Society Bookstore , Bibles are also sold in National Book Store, you will find different versions of the Bible in any languages. So why are there so many versions of the Bible?
The different versions of the Bible are attempts to bring the Bible to the people in the language and form most easily understandable.
I’m sure if I ask you to recite the Lord’s Prayer, many of us will recite it in the King James Version, ‘Our Father who Art in Heaven… hallowed be Thy Name…” But then who uses “art thou” these days in their English conversation? Do you ask somebody you meet, “Where art thou goest?” The joke going around is that even the English people in London would have a hard time understanding the King James Version of the English Bible. E lalo na, who can read the Bible in the original language in which the Bible was written: Hebrew for Old Testament, Greek for New Testament and parts of Hebrew and Intertestamental books in Aramaic. Among Bible scholars nga, although Hebrew and Greek used to be a required course in the seminary, very, very, very few can read the Bible in its original language and understanding it readily.
So efforts have been made to translate the Bible into a language easily understood by the people. Even as early as the Babylonian exile, the Hebrew Writings where already translated into Aramaic, which was the lingua franca of that time.
Since then and until now, Bible has been translated to different languages
The United Bible Society announced, that as of 31 December 2007, The Bible, with deuterocanonical material was available in 123 languages. The Tanakh and New Testament were available in 438 languages. The New Testament was available in 1168 languages, and portions of the Bible were available in 848 languages, for a total of 2,454 languages.
Appreciating the work of translation
Untold effort and sacrifices had been place into making the Bible more understandable to the people in all possible languages and formats:
• Presentation of the different format of the Bible
So what do these different formats of the Bible tell us?
1. From the most basic, the Bible is the most popular book there is as of now. Is there any book in the entire human and literary history that has been translated and presented in so many languages and format?
2. But more importantly, hopefully, the Bible is that prominent and so important that people should never have any reason not to be able to read the Bible.
But the more serious question is how important and prominent is the Bible in our lives as individual and as a community of faith?
Biblical History and human history tell us that at any point in the history of the people when the Bible was hidden, obscured and unavailable, the nation slid in darkest moment: From the Hebrew history, when the Jewish kings forsook the reading of the Scripture, wickedness described the nation: there was corruption in the government, oppression and exploitation of the people, moral decline. It was the darkest time in their history.
In Biblical history, revival, reform and restoration coincided with the reading of the scripture. After the many years of exile from Babylon to Persia, Ezra and Nehemiah led the Jewish people in their return to their homeland. After Ezra rebuilt the temple and Nehemiah the walls of Jerusalem, the next thing that they reinstituted is the public reading of the Word of God. As accounted in Nehemiah Chapter 8, “Ezra read the Book of Law” The Torah, aloud from daybreak till noon… and the people listened attentively to the Book of Law. Immediately, there was revival amongst the people.
Amazingly, when the Holy Spirit manifested Herself, at Pentecost, she did not come in thunder or lightning, nor in miraculous sights, apparitions or miraculous acts. The Holy Spirit came… in languages that the people understood…. People who were present not only in the meeting, but even by those who were around them, listening, watching them. The WORD of God should never be obscured by language that cannot be understood.
So how important and prominent is the Bible to us?
1. Liturgically, it’s prominence is shown in the way we place the Bible in our worship area and act. The Bible is placed high so that people will symbolically look up to it. The Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Church even parade the Bible at its procession, high above the head to point to its prominence in the life of the church.
2. But in our personal, private and communal life, do we look up to the Bible for God’s guidance? The Bible is translated in a format and language you can understand so that you and I can read the Word of God and understand it. Then, we no longer have to depend solely on the reading and interpretation of the Word from pastors, Rick Warren and any other media personalities who interpret the Bible for us.
a. This encourages us to read the Bible in a personal level… study
b. This also challenges us to take the Bible Study and Sunday School offered by the church seriously. If the Bible is indeed, prominent and important then we should read it, study it. All efforts to translate the Bible in a language that we can understand will be of naught if we don’t avail of the Book… if we just delegate the study of the Bible to pastors and Bible study leaders.
3. The challenge of translating the Bible into our daily lives. The importance of the Bible is in its translation into our daily lives. When the Bible is seriously read and listened to, as proven by history, revival follows. In human history, Biblical interpretation has never been so obscure as during the Dark Ages. But when study and interpretation of Bible surfaced, human history came out of the Dark into Revival and Renaissance.
I have been privileged to be part of the work of translating the Word of God into a language closer to my heart, the Cebuano language. Efforts are made into making the Bible available in other Filipino languages. Today, the PBS and the Catholic Bishop’s Conference are joining forces for a Bible Distribution project called, “May They Be One” which aims at making the Bible available to every Filipino household, with the prayer that the Bible will unite the Filipinos. Again, I am privileged to be one of the writers in this project.
But I guess, the greatest challenge for us, for each one of us, not only for those who are in the seminary and are tasked to study the Bible, but to each one of us who takes seriously our faith in God to study the Bible, and be a living Bible, whose Word is translated in our daily lives. Amen.
Monday, November 16, 2009
18K Gold for 14th Wedding Anniversary
Ruel, my husband for 14 years, and children came home from school. As our usual habit, they come to me and kiss me. Ruel did not kiss me. He just looked at me. Then he took my hands, slowly slipped an 18K white and yellow gold ring into my ring finger. Then he kissed me and greeted, "Happy Anniversary." I cried.
The reason for the emotions
When I was still single, I would collect genuine gold jewelries. I was not into fancy jewelries. Jewelries for me are investments... and I invested on them.
But when I entered the ministry, my investment was put into use. My Bangkok 22K gold necklace was pawned to bring a child to the hospital... that child died and my necklace was never redeemed.
My collection of gold rings and earrings and even my expensive bracelet slowly found their way back to the pawnshop to help someone in need....
When I got married, my last piece of jewelry financed the hospitalization of a woman with ovary tumor.
My ordination gold cross was pawned to finance our first few months in seminary study.
I would look at jewelry stores and wonder when would I be able to once again invest on jewelry. It's an investment, and hopefully, something to hand to my children and grandchildren.
I never realized that my husband noticed my visits to jewelry stores whenever we are in the mall.
A lady jeweler often visits PCU and offer "hulugan" jewelries to employees. Ruel connived with two staff members, Liza and Alma to contact the jeweler for a hulugan. He bought this piece of jewelry for me.
So while I was leading the chapel service yesterday, Ruel and Alma were transacting with the jeweler for the ring.
The ring is beyond his means. This is something I could really say as "sacrificial love." I cried at his effort to give me a ring.
But other than the effort, Ruel restored all the jewelries I surrendered to God with this ring. This is the most precious jewelry I will ever have.
Thank you, Tatay Ruel. You are sooooooooo dear! I don't think I'd be able to top this act. I love you now more than ever.
The reason for the emotions
When I was still single, I would collect genuine gold jewelries. I was not into fancy jewelries. Jewelries for me are investments... and I invested on them.
But when I entered the ministry, my investment was put into use. My Bangkok 22K gold necklace was pawned to bring a child to the hospital... that child died and my necklace was never redeemed.
My collection of gold rings and earrings and even my expensive bracelet slowly found their way back to the pawnshop to help someone in need....
When I got married, my last piece of jewelry financed the hospitalization of a woman with ovary tumor.
My ordination gold cross was pawned to finance our first few months in seminary study.
I would look at jewelry stores and wonder when would I be able to once again invest on jewelry. It's an investment, and hopefully, something to hand to my children and grandchildren.
I never realized that my husband noticed my visits to jewelry stores whenever we are in the mall.
A lady jeweler often visits PCU and offer "hulugan" jewelries to employees. Ruel connived with two staff members, Liza and Alma to contact the jeweler for a hulugan. He bought this piece of jewelry for me.
So while I was leading the chapel service yesterday, Ruel and Alma were transacting with the jeweler for the ring.
The ring is beyond his means. This is something I could really say as "sacrificial love." I cried at his effort to give me a ring.
But other than the effort, Ruel restored all the jewelries I surrendered to God with this ring. This is the most precious jewelry I will ever have.
Thank you, Tatay Ruel. You are sooooooooo dear! I don't think I'd be able to top this act. I love you now more than ever.
Monday, November 09, 2009
of dreams and visions
Last night, I had a very telling dream...
I brought the family back to Leyte to serve the church.
I called in Jonalyn and her family to help manage the house.
But later, I was already crying... my family has left me to return to Cavite. I wanted to follow them, but my heart is torn between serving the church and be with the family.
Eddie told me, "Ang dami mong connection jan....Makipagnetwork ka!" I looked around and found no significant connection. I just cried, and cried and cried, uttering, "gusto ko nang bumalik sa simbahan!" I woke up with a heavy feeling but also with a resolve to just do what God has given me to do... the task placed into my hand...
and that is to translate....
As I told myself,
"Maraming puedeng maging pastor... iilan lang ang puedeng magtranslate."
I should feel terribly blessed to be called into this sacred, yet, difficult ministry.
Most of the time, I am left alone in the house.
And if the children are home, but I need to concentrate on the translation, or rush a deadline...
painfully, I had to shut my kids out.
And it's painful.
It's hurting.
It's lonely.
Translation can be isolating...
You are isolated from the world
So that, there's only you and the Word of God.
Unadulterated relationship.
I brought the family back to Leyte to serve the church.
I called in Jonalyn and her family to help manage the house.
But later, I was already crying... my family has left me to return to Cavite. I wanted to follow them, but my heart is torn between serving the church and be with the family.
Eddie told me, "Ang dami mong connection jan....Makipagnetwork ka!" I looked around and found no significant connection. I just cried, and cried and cried, uttering, "gusto ko nang bumalik sa simbahan!" I woke up with a heavy feeling but also with a resolve to just do what God has given me to do... the task placed into my hand...
and that is to translate....
As I told myself,
"Maraming puedeng maging pastor... iilan lang ang puedeng magtranslate."
I should feel terribly blessed to be called into this sacred, yet, difficult ministry.
Most of the time, I am left alone in the house.
And if the children are home, but I need to concentrate on the translation, or rush a deadline...
painfully, I had to shut my kids out.
And it's painful.
It's hurting.
It's lonely.
Translation can be isolating...
You are isolated from the world
So that, there's only you and the Word of God.
Unadulterated relationship.
Thursday, November 05, 2009
The Day After
Crazy, but I feel ambivalent about the internet connection. For a while there, we were convinced that the internet connection is already a necessity, no longer a luxury but a need.
For me, the internet connection would make work easier for me since my work is basically internet based. In the past, if a client informs me through text that a job is available, I had to rush myself to the nearest internet cafe (kahit hindi pa nakaligo) to check the mail... and before I could open it, I already lost the job. And at other times, I could not submit the necessary document dahil umuulan at di ako makapag-wifi.
For the kids, many of their researches are internet based. When they come home from school, they have to change clothes and go to the internet shop to do their research - sometimes, they are out of the house even late in the evening - e yung internet shop where they go to hinold-ap. kaya nakakatakot din talaga.
So we decided to get connected even if, as Tatay puts it, "nadagdagan ang monthly bills on top of meralco, water, LPG."
We decided to get connected as a step of faith:
1. hoping that with the internet connection, more jobs would come my way (and thus be able to pay the internet monthly bill). This is in fact an investment, and not a luxury. This is God's way of providing for our needs.
2. trusting that this is God's way of protecting the family. The children need not be out at night to do their research.
But this is also a test of discipline. Already, I made arrangement with the children that during school days, internet use is for research, at puedeng pang-update ng friendster and facebook account. Weekends, puede games.
Humirit pa si Katha, "Nay, puede YOUTUBE?"
Now this is a test of censorship, do I check what youtube features they view? baka merong di kanaisnais.
This is where the ambivalence enter. Now I feel like, we opened our home to the invasion of the world ---how do I protect my family from not so pleasant information that saturates the world? How can I when I am not internet savvy. My children are more computer savvy (subject kaya nila to sa school. Ako, by experience lang). They know more sites than I do. Do I have to sit with them when they are behind the computer? Ano ba yan!
Hay! Welcome to the worldwide web. And I don't know if I'm happy about it.
For me, the internet connection would make work easier for me since my work is basically internet based. In the past, if a client informs me through text that a job is available, I had to rush myself to the nearest internet cafe (kahit hindi pa nakaligo) to check the mail... and before I could open it, I already lost the job. And at other times, I could not submit the necessary document dahil umuulan at di ako makapag-wifi.
For the kids, many of their researches are internet based. When they come home from school, they have to change clothes and go to the internet shop to do their research - sometimes, they are out of the house even late in the evening - e yung internet shop where they go to hinold-ap. kaya nakakatakot din talaga.
So we decided to get connected even if, as Tatay puts it, "nadagdagan ang monthly bills on top of meralco, water, LPG."
We decided to get connected as a step of faith:
1. hoping that with the internet connection, more jobs would come my way (and thus be able to pay the internet monthly bill). This is in fact an investment, and not a luxury. This is God's way of providing for our needs.
2. trusting that this is God's way of protecting the family. The children need not be out at night to do their research.
But this is also a test of discipline. Already, I made arrangement with the children that during school days, internet use is for research, at puedeng pang-update ng friendster and facebook account. Weekends, puede games.
Humirit pa si Katha, "Nay, puede YOUTUBE?"
Now this is a test of censorship, do I check what youtube features they view? baka merong di kanaisnais.
This is where the ambivalence enter. Now I feel like, we opened our home to the invasion of the world ---how do I protect my family from not so pleasant information that saturates the world? How can I when I am not internet savvy. My children are more computer savvy (subject kaya nila to sa school. Ako, by experience lang). They know more sites than I do. Do I have to sit with them when they are behind the computer? Ano ba yan!
Hay! Welcome to the worldwide web. And I don't know if I'm happy about it.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
NEGOTIATING THE DEMANDS OF MINISTRY AND FAMILY
NEGOTIATING THE DEMANDS OF MINISTRY AND FAMILY
A NanayPastor’s Interpretation of Luke 14:26
by
NanayPastor Carmel Villar-Paet
Introduction
NanayPastor is my blog’s identity . With this identity, I set my location, experience and embodiment: I am a mother and at the same time, a pastor, a minister, a worker in God’s wider church. Judith Berling mentions that “hermeneutics inevitably begins from one’s own location.” Location, according to Wilfred Cantwell Smith, “is not just about the personal identity (what labels or strands of influence we claim), but self-critical analysis of our particular location within the historical, geographical, or cultural ranges of the various religious and cultural traditions in which we partake.
I am a Filipino mother and at the same time a UCCP pastor. I have been a NanayPastor for 13 years now (my eldest child will turn 13 this year) and all these years, I tried to keep a balance between the demands of motherhood and ministry. I must admit that there were occasions, the demands of motherhood and ministry ensue a major tug-o’-war. A very recent incident clearly shows this tension between motherhood and ministry:
Sunday morning, as I was preparing to leave for church, my youngest son cried out, “Nay! Di ako makahinga!” After administering his medicine, I set off to a major mental and emotional debate: should I go to church and leave my son in his condition or should I stay with him and possibly prevent the worsening of his asthma attack.
That I even had that debate depressed me. I called my husband into the debate, “Tay… ano, alis ako?” This was an act of futility because my husband did not release me from my anguish, “Ikaw ang bahala, ‘Nay!” was his reply. You see my husband is the Salakot Temple-keeper and thus could not be absent from his ministry. And so I texted one of the church elders about my predicament. They went on with their worship service without a piano accompaniment.
Was I really released from anguish after this decision? Frankly no. I begin to ask, where is this tension coming from? Why don’t I feel relieved after having made the decision to stay with my son?
Admittedly, the tension comes from this recognizably difficult text found in Luke:
“If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26, RSV)
“Those who come to me cannot be my disciples unless they love me more than they love father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, and themselves as well. (Luke 14:26, GNT)
Maybe you are one of those who encountered this text during your Discipleship Training Camp and with this text you were taught that the prerequisite for discipleship is our ability to leave not only our riches (as if we have) but our own family to follow Christ. Unless we are able to do this, we are not worthy to be called disciples of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
As a UCCP Pastor, I saw how young people keep this verse literally at heart. Young people who were raised in a family who are not members of the UCCP struggle over obeying the wishes of their family to stay at home or to participate in youth fellowship and activities.
Now as NanayPastor, I recognize the tension between my commitment to Christ’s mission and my role as a mother. From this identity as NanayPastor, I set out to revisit this text and to try to understand the meaning of the text from my location and my story.
The Text
Luke 14:26 is classified under prophetic pronouncement. This pronouncement is said to be addressed to a large crowd. The intent of this pronouncement is “to urge persons who are seeking to be disciples to consider first the demands of discipleship.” The preceding verse, 25, describes the setting of the pronouncement. “Large crowds were traveling with Jesus…” To this crowd, Jesus addressed this pronouncement. Imagine these multitude of people following Jesus, perhaps, leaving their field, their boat and fishnets, their family, and all he could tell them was ,”If you do not hate your family, you are not worthy to be my disciple.” Wow!
Did Jesus really say those words? Could Jesus, who has preached on love and whose ethos is love, espouse hating ones family to be his disciples? Luke 14:26 appears to contradict Jesus’ message of love and reconciliation.
The problem in the text is the word “hate” which is Greek (misew)) means to despise; to disregard, to be indifferent to one’s family. This pronouncement must have shocked, even offended the hearers. Among the Jews honoring ones parents was considered to be the highest obligation and ones family was considered as ones greatest joy. How could this rabbi Jesus demand from his followers to hate the very thing that gives them ultimate joy and to go against the basic demand of their society of honoring parents?
Is it because Jesus did not value his own family? Or is it because like many male pastors, they can leave their family behind knowing that a capable and loving mother, wife or sister is taking care of the family?
A popular episode could possibly give light to how Jesus regards his family. In Luke 2:41-52, Jesus went with Mary and Joseph to Jerusalem for the yearly Passover Festival. Upon their return, Mary and Joseph discovered that Jesus was no longer with them. They searched for him but could not find him among relatives and friends. So they went back to Jerusalem. There they found Jesus discussing with the teachers. Of course the parents reprimanded Jesus for leaving without permission, for causing them anguish. But his response to their reprimand astonished Mary and Joseph, for instead of apologizing, Jesus said, “Why did you have to look for me? Didn’t you know that I had to be in my father’s house?” In our time, Jesus would have been regarded as “bastos.” Even in the Jewish context, this response of Jesus would have been regarded as a violation of one of the most important commandments, that of honoring ones parents.
In another incidence, much later in Jesus’ adult life when he was already thick into his ministry, Mary, his mother, and brothers and sisters went looking for him. As crowds surrounded Jesus, they could not go near him, so they sent in words that they wanted to see him. What would have been the expected response was for Jesus to meet his family, introduce them to the crowd as his beloved family and attend to them first. But instead, Jesus addressed the crowd saying, “Who are my mother and my brothers? ... Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.” (Luke 8:19-21).
His response could be viewed as very insulting to Mary and his brothers and sisters who only have his best interest at heart. These two incidents could be evidences of Jesus’ attitude to his family. “He had not shown respect, loyalty and obedience as was expected of him.” Even Rose Sallberg Kam accused the adult Jesus to have abandoned his family.
Is this the example that Jesus expected his disciples to emulate?
No commentaries ventured as to remotely suggest that this is what Jesus wanted his disciples to emulate. Instead, commentaries tried to soften the intent of the pronouncement by saying that the pronouncement is a typical Semetic hyperbole, and exaggeration; that what Jesus meant with hate is to “love less” instead of hate. But John Nolland insists that
the language of hate is intended with all seriousness (Ps 139:21–22; 1QS 1:10; 9:2113). The point here is that where there is hate no “ties that bind” limit one’s freedom of action (cf. 9:59, 61). There is likely to be an allusion to Deut 33:9 with its link in turn to Exod 32:27–29, where the Levites demonstrate that they are on the Lord’s side by carrying out the required slaughter with a single-mindedness that disregarded their own family ties
So how are we going to take this pronouncement? Are we going to take this as a figure of speech or take this literally with all of its “intended seriousness’?
Another way of looking at this pronouncement is to look at the source of the pronouncement. Kee identifies this pronouncement as part of the Q material. According to Kee, the central interest of the Q tradition is the preparation for the coming of the coming age; that eschatological expectation characterizes the call of discipleship. Therefore, discipleship calls for extraordinary lifestyle, which included abandoning ones family. As Kee explains,
Routine family obligations, burying one’s father, even bidding the family farewell – are to be ignored in the light of the urgency of announcing God’s kingdom as disciples of Jesus.
The Q tradition overturns society’s set up where one’s identity was intimately bound with the family. In the Q tradition, the family is no longer the locus of identity and security. There was a complete break from family and familial network. According to Kee, this is so, because the disciples lived an itinerant existence. They set out without food or money and were only dependent on whatever the village offered them and their hospitality. Kee is convinced that the community that preserved these traditions has adopted them as their own.
Luke 14:26 as a Dangerous Text
Unfortunately, the text is being read literally. This text becomes a requirement that ministers impose on themselves and which the church imposes on its workers. There is no indication in the Minister’s Manual or in Church Workers’ Magna Carta that anyone who wishes to become a worker of God has to hate his family. But in the unwritten tradition, ministers are expected to put church ministry over and above family concerns. What is even scarier is when ministers impose this on themselves, so much so, that a minister prided himself of being able to attend to a Bible Study rather than be with his family in their mourning. A woman minister told me that she left her child convulsing in fever for an evangelistic meeting in a remote barangay.
Shiela struggled over the demand of the church for her to serve the church for two years after she finishes her Seminary education. Her husband was assigned in Mindanao, her conference was in Cavite. She wanted to join her husband right after graduation so they can start building a family. As she shared with me her concern, I comforted her by saying, “You will find out that the church is merciful.” After graduation, I learned that she served her conference first and was separated from her husband.
Grace struggled over leaving her child high with fever to go to her church assignment.
On my way to church, I heard a high school teen tell her friend that if her father would accept a church assignment, she would really beg her mother to stay where they were and just let her father take the church assignment by themselves.
In many Bible Studies, the requirement of Jesus to “sell what you have…” to be able to qualify as his disciples, is a favorite topic. And for many of us, this is a rather acceptable requirement. So we have in our midst ministers who left their profession in medicine, their millions in business and their popularity to heed God’s call and be ministers. We applaud their commitment to the ministry. But we have been silent regarding Jesus’ requirement “to hate our family.”
But this “biblical principle” is in practice. Ministers leave their family to study in seminary. Of course economics has a lot to do with this decision. In Local Church setting, ministers leave their family to pastor a small church in a remote barrio without the possibility of work for the spouse or schooling for the children. Does the church care regarding these matters? In cases like these, the pastor leaves their family where his wife can look for a job (perhaps a public school teacher) and where his children can go to school. He leaves for his ministerial assignment.
As a result of this separation, and this devaluing of family, we have in our midst pasaway na pastor’s kids. The church seems to expect pastors’ kids a problem in the church in stride. A school guidance counselor told me of a case of problematic student who is a pastor’s kid. She then asked, “bakit karamihan ng mga anak ng pastor problematic?”
The church continues to be silent regarding marital problems created by this devaluing of family as a cost of ministry.
Hermeneutics of Narrative Disclosure, the Methodology
In my MDiv Thesis, I introduced an hermeneutical approach which is called The Hermeneutics of Narrative Disclosure:
The Hermeneutics of Narrative Disclosure begins with a stance of respect – the narratives of women are respected; the community, who receives the narratives, is given due respect and the authority of the Scripture is affirmed.
As a starting point, the community of faith recognizes that women’s stories bear truth and this truth discloses how to be a community. In the exchange of stories, the bearer of the narrative and the community who receives the narrative grow in a never-ending cycle of growth.
The community then looks at the Scripture for enlightenment and affirmation of these narratives. In this engagement, the community looks at the Scripture for validation of women’s experiences. “This validation leads to further and more intense engagement with the community, the individuals in the community and the text itself in an ever increasing degree of intimacy and identification until the Scripture narratives of long ago becomes in a true sense the actual experienced story of the individual and the community of faith.”
I am convinced that some difficult Biblical text would be given new perspective or understanding when they are evaluated and validated by women’s experience. As a starting point, women’s stories are brought into fore. As Carol P Christ claims,
Women’s stories have not been told and without stories there is no articulation of experience… Without [a woman] cannot understand herself. Without stories she is alienated from those deeper experiences of self and world that has been called spiritual or religious… The expression of women’s spiritual quest is integrally related to the telling of women’s stories. If women’s stories are not told, the depth of women’s soul will not be known.
We need to look at Luke 14:26 from the perspective of women’s experience, particularly, from women clergy’s experience.
The church structure had been fashioned and designed based on male clergy – male clergy who can leave their family behind knowing that their wife can very well look after the family.
As this paper was read, a male colleague commented, “Hindi ko yan problema kasi andyan naman si Misis na mag-aalaga sa mga bata.” Precisely the point of this paper. Male clergies can easily get into their ministerial task, even take on church assignments away from their family confident that their wife will take on the task of taking care of the family single-handedly. Male clergy can dust off their hands and smugly say that they have complied Jesus’ requirement for discipleship.
But how about the women clergy? They who dedicate themselves to the demands of the ministry as well as lovingly hold on to the task of rearing a family? How does she negotiate the demands of ministry and family?
Venturing into a solution.
The clergy woman need not negotiate this all by herself. She can take this up with the church council up to the church hierarchy. She can declare to the church how important her family is to her and will appreciate it if the church is willing to give her space to be able to function as a wife, mother and pastor.
Sharon has a special child. Her child needs to be in a special school. When her conference assigned her to a church located in a remote barangay, she insisted that she be assigned in a church where there is a school facility that meets the need of her child. Insist women clergy must. If this means challenging the existing structure of the church, so be it.
Get the community and the church to support your family and its needs. As an Indian proverb says, “It takes a village to raise a child,” so it takes the entire church community to raise a pastor’s family.
A NanayPastor’s Interpretation of Luke 14:26
by
NanayPastor Carmel Villar-Paet
Introduction
NanayPastor is my blog’s identity . With this identity, I set my location, experience and embodiment: I am a mother and at the same time, a pastor, a minister, a worker in God’s wider church. Judith Berling mentions that “hermeneutics inevitably begins from one’s own location.” Location, according to Wilfred Cantwell Smith, “is not just about the personal identity (what labels or strands of influence we claim), but self-critical analysis of our particular location within the historical, geographical, or cultural ranges of the various religious and cultural traditions in which we partake.
I am a Filipino mother and at the same time a UCCP pastor. I have been a NanayPastor for 13 years now (my eldest child will turn 13 this year) and all these years, I tried to keep a balance between the demands of motherhood and ministry. I must admit that there were occasions, the demands of motherhood and ministry ensue a major tug-o’-war. A very recent incident clearly shows this tension between motherhood and ministry:
Sunday morning, as I was preparing to leave for church, my youngest son cried out, “Nay! Di ako makahinga!” After administering his medicine, I set off to a major mental and emotional debate: should I go to church and leave my son in his condition or should I stay with him and possibly prevent the worsening of his asthma attack.
That I even had that debate depressed me. I called my husband into the debate, “Tay… ano, alis ako?” This was an act of futility because my husband did not release me from my anguish, “Ikaw ang bahala, ‘Nay!” was his reply. You see my husband is the Salakot Temple-keeper and thus could not be absent from his ministry. And so I texted one of the church elders about my predicament. They went on with their worship service without a piano accompaniment.
Was I really released from anguish after this decision? Frankly no. I begin to ask, where is this tension coming from? Why don’t I feel relieved after having made the decision to stay with my son?
Admittedly, the tension comes from this recognizably difficult text found in Luke:
“If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26, RSV)
“Those who come to me cannot be my disciples unless they love me more than they love father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, and themselves as well. (Luke 14:26, GNT)
Maybe you are one of those who encountered this text during your Discipleship Training Camp and with this text you were taught that the prerequisite for discipleship is our ability to leave not only our riches (as if we have) but our own family to follow Christ. Unless we are able to do this, we are not worthy to be called disciples of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
As a UCCP Pastor, I saw how young people keep this verse literally at heart. Young people who were raised in a family who are not members of the UCCP struggle over obeying the wishes of their family to stay at home or to participate in youth fellowship and activities.
Now as NanayPastor, I recognize the tension between my commitment to Christ’s mission and my role as a mother. From this identity as NanayPastor, I set out to revisit this text and to try to understand the meaning of the text from my location and my story.
The Text
Luke 14:26 is classified under prophetic pronouncement. This pronouncement is said to be addressed to a large crowd. The intent of this pronouncement is “to urge persons who are seeking to be disciples to consider first the demands of discipleship.” The preceding verse, 25, describes the setting of the pronouncement. “Large crowds were traveling with Jesus…” To this crowd, Jesus addressed this pronouncement. Imagine these multitude of people following Jesus, perhaps, leaving their field, their boat and fishnets, their family, and all he could tell them was ,”If you do not hate your family, you are not worthy to be my disciple.” Wow!
Did Jesus really say those words? Could Jesus, who has preached on love and whose ethos is love, espouse hating ones family to be his disciples? Luke 14:26 appears to contradict Jesus’ message of love and reconciliation.
The problem in the text is the word “hate” which is Greek (misew)) means to despise; to disregard, to be indifferent to one’s family. This pronouncement must have shocked, even offended the hearers. Among the Jews honoring ones parents was considered to be the highest obligation and ones family was considered as ones greatest joy. How could this rabbi Jesus demand from his followers to hate the very thing that gives them ultimate joy and to go against the basic demand of their society of honoring parents?
Is it because Jesus did not value his own family? Or is it because like many male pastors, they can leave their family behind knowing that a capable and loving mother, wife or sister is taking care of the family?
A popular episode could possibly give light to how Jesus regards his family. In Luke 2:41-52, Jesus went with Mary and Joseph to Jerusalem for the yearly Passover Festival. Upon their return, Mary and Joseph discovered that Jesus was no longer with them. They searched for him but could not find him among relatives and friends. So they went back to Jerusalem. There they found Jesus discussing with the teachers. Of course the parents reprimanded Jesus for leaving without permission, for causing them anguish. But his response to their reprimand astonished Mary and Joseph, for instead of apologizing, Jesus said, “Why did you have to look for me? Didn’t you know that I had to be in my father’s house?” In our time, Jesus would have been regarded as “bastos.” Even in the Jewish context, this response of Jesus would have been regarded as a violation of one of the most important commandments, that of honoring ones parents.
In another incidence, much later in Jesus’ adult life when he was already thick into his ministry, Mary, his mother, and brothers and sisters went looking for him. As crowds surrounded Jesus, they could not go near him, so they sent in words that they wanted to see him. What would have been the expected response was for Jesus to meet his family, introduce them to the crowd as his beloved family and attend to them first. But instead, Jesus addressed the crowd saying, “Who are my mother and my brothers? ... Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.” (Luke 8:19-21).
His response could be viewed as very insulting to Mary and his brothers and sisters who only have his best interest at heart. These two incidents could be evidences of Jesus’ attitude to his family. “He had not shown respect, loyalty and obedience as was expected of him.” Even Rose Sallberg Kam accused the adult Jesus to have abandoned his family.
Is this the example that Jesus expected his disciples to emulate?
No commentaries ventured as to remotely suggest that this is what Jesus wanted his disciples to emulate. Instead, commentaries tried to soften the intent of the pronouncement by saying that the pronouncement is a typical Semetic hyperbole, and exaggeration; that what Jesus meant with hate is to “love less” instead of hate. But John Nolland insists that
the language of hate is intended with all seriousness (Ps 139:21–22; 1QS 1:10; 9:2113). The point here is that where there is hate no “ties that bind” limit one’s freedom of action (cf. 9:59, 61). There is likely to be an allusion to Deut 33:9 with its link in turn to Exod 32:27–29, where the Levites demonstrate that they are on the Lord’s side by carrying out the required slaughter with a single-mindedness that disregarded their own family ties
So how are we going to take this pronouncement? Are we going to take this as a figure of speech or take this literally with all of its “intended seriousness’?
Another way of looking at this pronouncement is to look at the source of the pronouncement. Kee identifies this pronouncement as part of the Q material. According to Kee, the central interest of the Q tradition is the preparation for the coming of the coming age; that eschatological expectation characterizes the call of discipleship. Therefore, discipleship calls for extraordinary lifestyle, which included abandoning ones family. As Kee explains,
Routine family obligations, burying one’s father, even bidding the family farewell – are to be ignored in the light of the urgency of announcing God’s kingdom as disciples of Jesus.
The Q tradition overturns society’s set up where one’s identity was intimately bound with the family. In the Q tradition, the family is no longer the locus of identity and security. There was a complete break from family and familial network. According to Kee, this is so, because the disciples lived an itinerant existence. They set out without food or money and were only dependent on whatever the village offered them and their hospitality. Kee is convinced that the community that preserved these traditions has adopted them as their own.
Luke 14:26 as a Dangerous Text
Unfortunately, the text is being read literally. This text becomes a requirement that ministers impose on themselves and which the church imposes on its workers. There is no indication in the Minister’s Manual or in Church Workers’ Magna Carta that anyone who wishes to become a worker of God has to hate his family. But in the unwritten tradition, ministers are expected to put church ministry over and above family concerns. What is even scarier is when ministers impose this on themselves, so much so, that a minister prided himself of being able to attend to a Bible Study rather than be with his family in their mourning. A woman minister told me that she left her child convulsing in fever for an evangelistic meeting in a remote barangay.
Shiela struggled over the demand of the church for her to serve the church for two years after she finishes her Seminary education. Her husband was assigned in Mindanao, her conference was in Cavite. She wanted to join her husband right after graduation so they can start building a family. As she shared with me her concern, I comforted her by saying, “You will find out that the church is merciful.” After graduation, I learned that she served her conference first and was separated from her husband.
Grace struggled over leaving her child high with fever to go to her church assignment.
On my way to church, I heard a high school teen tell her friend that if her father would accept a church assignment, she would really beg her mother to stay where they were and just let her father take the church assignment by themselves.
In many Bible Studies, the requirement of Jesus to “sell what you have…” to be able to qualify as his disciples, is a favorite topic. And for many of us, this is a rather acceptable requirement. So we have in our midst ministers who left their profession in medicine, their millions in business and their popularity to heed God’s call and be ministers. We applaud their commitment to the ministry. But we have been silent regarding Jesus’ requirement “to hate our family.”
But this “biblical principle” is in practice. Ministers leave their family to study in seminary. Of course economics has a lot to do with this decision. In Local Church setting, ministers leave their family to pastor a small church in a remote barrio without the possibility of work for the spouse or schooling for the children. Does the church care regarding these matters? In cases like these, the pastor leaves their family where his wife can look for a job (perhaps a public school teacher) and where his children can go to school. He leaves for his ministerial assignment.
As a result of this separation, and this devaluing of family, we have in our midst pasaway na pastor’s kids. The church seems to expect pastors’ kids a problem in the church in stride. A school guidance counselor told me of a case of problematic student who is a pastor’s kid. She then asked, “bakit karamihan ng mga anak ng pastor problematic?”
The church continues to be silent regarding marital problems created by this devaluing of family as a cost of ministry.
Hermeneutics of Narrative Disclosure, the Methodology
In my MDiv Thesis, I introduced an hermeneutical approach which is called The Hermeneutics of Narrative Disclosure:
The Hermeneutics of Narrative Disclosure begins with a stance of respect – the narratives of women are respected; the community, who receives the narratives, is given due respect and the authority of the Scripture is affirmed.
As a starting point, the community of faith recognizes that women’s stories bear truth and this truth discloses how to be a community. In the exchange of stories, the bearer of the narrative and the community who receives the narrative grow in a never-ending cycle of growth.
The community then looks at the Scripture for enlightenment and affirmation of these narratives. In this engagement, the community looks at the Scripture for validation of women’s experiences. “This validation leads to further and more intense engagement with the community, the individuals in the community and the text itself in an ever increasing degree of intimacy and identification until the Scripture narratives of long ago becomes in a true sense the actual experienced story of the individual and the community of faith.”
I am convinced that some difficult Biblical text would be given new perspective or understanding when they are evaluated and validated by women’s experience. As a starting point, women’s stories are brought into fore. As Carol P Christ claims,
Women’s stories have not been told and without stories there is no articulation of experience… Without [a woman] cannot understand herself. Without stories she is alienated from those deeper experiences of self and world that has been called spiritual or religious… The expression of women’s spiritual quest is integrally related to the telling of women’s stories. If women’s stories are not told, the depth of women’s soul will not be known.
We need to look at Luke 14:26 from the perspective of women’s experience, particularly, from women clergy’s experience.
The church structure had been fashioned and designed based on male clergy – male clergy who can leave their family behind knowing that their wife can very well look after the family.
As this paper was read, a male colleague commented, “Hindi ko yan problema kasi andyan naman si Misis na mag-aalaga sa mga bata.” Precisely the point of this paper. Male clergies can easily get into their ministerial task, even take on church assignments away from their family confident that their wife will take on the task of taking care of the family single-handedly. Male clergy can dust off their hands and smugly say that they have complied Jesus’ requirement for discipleship.
But how about the women clergy? They who dedicate themselves to the demands of the ministry as well as lovingly hold on to the task of rearing a family? How does she negotiate the demands of ministry and family?
Venturing into a solution.
The clergy woman need not negotiate this all by herself. She can take this up with the church council up to the church hierarchy. She can declare to the church how important her family is to her and will appreciate it if the church is willing to give her space to be able to function as a wife, mother and pastor.
Sharon has a special child. Her child needs to be in a special school. When her conference assigned her to a church located in a remote barangay, she insisted that she be assigned in a church where there is a school facility that meets the need of her child. Insist women clergy must. If this means challenging the existing structure of the church, so be it.
Get the community and the church to support your family and its needs. As an Indian proverb says, “It takes a village to raise a child,” so it takes the entire church community to raise a pastor’s family.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
introducing NUMBERS
Numbers
The book of Numbers is an interesting book to read despite the numerical listings recorded in its pages. Incidentally, the book’s name is derived from the Greek name of the book Arithmoi which was translated in Vulgate as Numeri probably based on the censuses conducted from the moment Moses gathered the Hebrew people at the foot of Mt Sinai up to the time they were about to settle in the promised land.
Beyond the numerical listings, Numbers tells the story of the experiences of the Hebrew people as they journeyed for nearly forty years in the desert on their way to the land promised to them by God, thirteen months after they left slavery in Egypt. This is the reason why the Hebrew name for the book is bemidbar which means, “In the Desert.”
Numbers, Israel was a young nation going through the painful process of growth as God led the people to trust Him as their leader and provider. What makes Numbers remarkable is that the book establishes God’s faithfulness despite the people’s unfaithfulness, impatience, murmurings and outright rebellion.
The book also provides us with a dramatic portrait of God, Moses and the people as they struggle to turn the disasters in their wilderness journey into a success and blessing. The book tells of how the Hebrew people learned the bitter consequence of unbelief and unfaithfulness.
Numbers also contains materials for the worship patterns of Israel. It contains the Aaronic Benediction, instructions on Passover and instructions for worship. At the end, the pulse of the book is worship, as it challenges us to worship God, trust his plans and promises for us.
Other interesting stories in Numbers:
a. The story of the 12 spies
b. The water from the rock
c. The story of the Bronze Snake
d. Balaam and the Talking Donkey
e. The claim of women for inheritance
The book of Numbers is an interesting book to read despite the numerical listings recorded in its pages. Incidentally, the book’s name is derived from the Greek name of the book Arithmoi which was translated in Vulgate as Numeri probably based on the censuses conducted from the moment Moses gathered the Hebrew people at the foot of Mt Sinai up to the time they were about to settle in the promised land.
Beyond the numerical listings, Numbers tells the story of the experiences of the Hebrew people as they journeyed for nearly forty years in the desert on their way to the land promised to them by God, thirteen months after they left slavery in Egypt. This is the reason why the Hebrew name for the book is bemidbar which means, “In the Desert.”
Numbers, Israel was a young nation going through the painful process of growth as God led the people to trust Him as their leader and provider. What makes Numbers remarkable is that the book establishes God’s faithfulness despite the people’s unfaithfulness, impatience, murmurings and outright rebellion.
The book also provides us with a dramatic portrait of God, Moses and the people as they struggle to turn the disasters in their wilderness journey into a success and blessing. The book tells of how the Hebrew people learned the bitter consequence of unbelief and unfaithfulness.
Numbers also contains materials for the worship patterns of Israel. It contains the Aaronic Benediction, instructions on Passover and instructions for worship. At the end, the pulse of the book is worship, as it challenges us to worship God, trust his plans and promises for us.
Other interesting stories in Numbers:
a. The story of the 12 spies
b. The water from the rock
c. The story of the Bronze Snake
d. Balaam and the Talking Donkey
e. The claim of women for inheritance
LEND or DEDICATE, What Did Hannah Do?
What did Hannah do with Samuel?
1 Sam 1:28
Rcpv : gitugyan ko siya sa Ginoo
Gnt: I am dedicating him to the Lord
Rsv: I have lent him to the Lord
LXX: kavgw. kicrw/ auvto.n tw/| kuri,w - -to lend – And I dedicate him to the Lord
WTT BHS: hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w> -I have asked/inquired/borrowed/beg him to (recent translation, occasionally, from) Yahweh
LXX used the verb kicrw (to lend where rsv translated using the verb; the LXX tense is in indicative present active first person singular.
rsv: although using the verb lend – but is rendered in present perfect first person singular
gnt: uses the verb dedicate in present progressive first person.
dedicate vs lend
dedicate means - to devote to the worship of a divine being; specifically : to set apart (a church) to sacred uses with solemn rites
lend - to give for temporary use on condition that the same or its equivalent be returned
Theological Implication on the choice of word:
The term “dedicate” has a churchy, sacred sound in it. I can very well understand the translator’s choice of a more “churchy” sacred term “dedicate” over “lend” which has a more utilitarian, commercial sound in it. But if LXX is to be consulted, Hannah lent to the Lord Samuel on condition that God will return Samuel or its equivalent.
Theologically, when we use the term “dedicate” we offer to the divine being (to God) something (our lives, the product of our labor, etc) unconditionally. It’s an act of worship. It is a lifetime commitment.
On the other hand, to lend something, whether we put a religious connotation on it or not, is for temporary use, and always, we expect that that which we lent will be returned at an appointed time.
LXX claims that Hannah only lent Samuel to the Lord. Although Klein thinks this is
“more idiomatically, she “lent him to Yahweh,” repeating one more time the pun on the letters שאל. For all his days he will be a “Saul” for Yahweh.”
If we go by Klein’s idea that the term “lent him to Yahweh” is more idiomatic than literal, then what could lent mean? Mirriam-Webster provides an explanation on the use of the verb lend:
lend is the verb used for figurative expressions, such as “lending a hand” or “lending enchantment.”
But to lend a life, a person to the Lord, what does this mean? For a mother to lend her child to God?
Let me venture into some theological concepts:
1. Our life is borrowed from God. Technically, God lends us our life and all that we have. That’s why in our act of dedication, we say, “all that we have comes from you, our God, the source of our lives and all that we have.”
a. In the act of dedication, usually through offering, we return back to God what he lent to us: our life, our talent, our treasure, etc.
b. In the act of child dedication, we thank God for the life that God so graciously allowed us to have and nurture. But in this liturgical act, we offer back to God disowning ownership of the life borne and acknowledging that God is the sole owner of the life of our child and we are temporary care-givers.
2. Created in the image of God means that we take part in the creative and salvific work of God. The lives given to us, the child(ren) we bore are the product of the creative act of a man and a woman. Nurturing the child(ren) into full-maturity is the continuing creative and saving act of God. We become partners of God in creating and saving lives. So when we offer this life back to God, we acknowledge we are never on our own in rearing up our child(ren). God is our partner and we partake in God’s continuous work in the lives of our child(ren).
3. That we are stewards of the lives born to us. Our child(ren) are not born to us so that someday they will be of used to us. On the contrary, as stewards of the lives given to us, it is our duty and obligation to develop them into the person that God designed them to be.
Given these theological concepts, how then are we going to understand the LXX use of the word kicrw (English: to lend):
There are other uses of the term lend:
a. to give the assistance or support of : AFFORD, FURNISH 〈a dispassionate and scholarly manner which lends great force to his criticisms —Times Lit. Supp.〉
b. to adapt or apply (oneself) readily : ACCOMMODATE 〈a topic that lends itself admirably to class discussion〉
a. if we apply the first definition of the word lend which is to give assistance or support of, then Hannah [gives assistance of support] to the Lord. In the sentence, the Lord is the recipient of the assistance of support. This is participating the creative and saving work of the Lord in the life Hannah’s child, Samuel.
b. if lend means to accommodate oneself readily to God, then Hannah commits herself readily for the purpose of God into the life of Samuel. Hannah accommodated upon herself into God’s plan for Samuel.
It becomes more interesting when we look at the Hebrew rendition of 1 Sam 1:28:
hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w>
WhTil.aiv.hi (verb hiphil perfect 1st person common singular, of the verb שאל which means ask, inquire, borrow, beg, suffix 3rd person masculine singular - (I) have asked/inquired/borrowed, begged him)
(And so, I have asked/inquired, borrowed begged him to/for Yahweh).
Where is the act of dedication here? This is only a declaration that what she had prayed for has come true. And that Eli’s blessing “Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition which you have made to him” (1Sa 1:17) has been fulfilled and is now a reality.
Where then is the idea that dedication (kicrw ) means bringing the child to stay in the temple and be a minister? In verse 22, Hannah declared, “As soon as the child is weaned, I will bring him, that he may appear in the presence of the \nd Lord\nd*, and abide there for ever.”
Implications:
A. Translation
kicrw has been rendered in English as lend (RSV, NRS, KJV) and dedicate (NAS, GNT); Cebuano has two renditions : gihatag (give) (Bugna, Pinadayag) and gitugyan (dedicate) (MBB, RCPV). Lend has not been rendered in any CEB translation.
a. Is dedication a faithful rendition of the LXX kicrw? Where did the contemporary versions base their use of dedication? It is not in LXX and definitely not in Hebrew Bible.
b. Dedicate vs Lend. Dedicate may be a good choice of word for what Hannah did to her child Samuel. But the depth of the meaning of lend is lost with the use of dedication. Unfortunately, if we use dedicate, we create an idea of passive surrendering of the child to the Lord whereas as discussed above, lend gives active and more participative act on Hannah’s part with regards to her child.
On the issue of tense: at the start, we noted the differences of tense between RSV and GNT (RSV is formal translation, GNT uses dynamic equivalence). RSV uses present progressive tense while GNT uses present perfect tense.
Grammar books tell us the progressive tense is a weak tense and should be used with care. Progressive tense suggest incomplete act or tentative act. On the other hand, GNT’s rendition in perfect tense suggests a completed act. However, LXX renders the verb in indicative present active. RSV was able to render the indicative present active only that RSV renders the verb in present progressive tense, which again is a weak tense. The intense resolve of Hannah in her act of kicrw has been muffled at the very least or lost at its worst. Why hasn’t there been a translation that renders Hannah’s act in simple present tense: And so I lend/dedicate him to the Lord. Renders this way, we see that lending/dedicating her child to the Lord becomes a habitual, daily act, not a one-time completed act, leaving the rearing of her child into the hands of God (or the church) but an active daily participation, which is the very essence of the term lend. All these meanings are lost at the choice of word and the setting of tense.
B. Parenting Guidelines
Hannah’s prayer and action has been a model act of godly parenting (or godly mothering). A bible study notes says:
“Hannah is a great example of a godly mother. From the time she first desired for a child, in prayers and intentions she has dedicated to God the future of her child”
Unfortunately, “dedicated” in this passage had always been misunderstood as offering ones child to the ministry (literally, giving up custody of the child into the church; or figuratively, dedicating the child to the Lord to become a minister). How many stories have we heard of a person forced into the ministry because he/she had been dedicated to God as first born and following the example of Hannah to her Samuel.
Ok, I will not go any farther. This has been my experience. My parents dedicated me to God and so they expected that I will serve the church. (My gosh! My parents have good connections in heaven!). But I resented this. I resented losing my freedom to choose the path I wish to trod or the freedom to accommodate for my own God’s plan for my life. This is what I call the passive dedication.
Given my analysis on the verb and its tense in verse 28, we can glean some parenting principles:
1. kicrw whether translated as lend or dedicate, tugyan or hatag, means: Our children are not our own, they are God’s. Parents are only temporary care-takers, stewards. And if we kicrw them to the Lord we
a. commit ourselves to participate in the continuing creative and saving work of God in our children’s lives. The operating word here is “participate.” We do not control. We do not design. We do not impose. The way I read this text, it is US, the parents who commit ourselves to God so that God can implement or fulfill his purposes in the lives of our children.
b. We should therefore accommodate God’s plan into the upbringing of our children. Does this mean passive rearing of children? Far from it! This is an active nurturing. When we accommodate God’s plan – we lend our children to God’s plan, as what Hannah did- we give support or assistance. We cannot be the one to thwart God’s plan, instead, we support it in every possible way. We cannot jut fold our arms and be fatalistic, que sera, sera, whatever will be will be – with the future of our children.
c. the act of kicrw begins long before conception. If this is so, parents cannot be careless. They should prepare, pray intently and work hard, and as Eli told Hannah, “and may the God of Israel give you what you have asked him for.”
2. kicrw is indicative present active, first person. Translated in first person simple present active form, kicrw is a daily habitual thing to do. Not a one-time, completed act. Perhaps we can glean from Susanna Wesley (the mother of John and Charles Wesley) who was said to daily, by hour or by minute pray and commit her children to the Lord. Parenting principles and guidelines and books and tv shows on parenting have overflowed. But nothing beats habitually lending our children to the Lord.
Conclusion:
So what did Hannah do with Samuel? She lent him to the Lord. Lend here had been given a deeper meaning and should be reflected in its translation.
Issues to be considered in translation:
1. which is easier understood, dedicate or lend? If lend is to be used, how should this be rendered in Filipino, pinahiram (TAG), gipahulam (CEB) for formal translation.
2. How about functional equivalence, how should this be rendered: Given the suggestions above, this writer is certain that v28 will have a totally new meaning when read.
Up next, still on verse 28 of ch 1, what did Samuel do in the temple? English translations say, he worshipped there, CEB, misimba, mag-alagad. Ows, talaga?
1 Sam 1:28
Rcpv : gitugyan ko siya sa Ginoo
Gnt: I am dedicating him to the Lord
Rsv: I have lent him to the Lord
LXX: kavgw. kicrw/ auvto.n tw/| kuri,w - -to lend – And I dedicate him to the Lord
WTT BHS: hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w> -I have asked/inquired/borrowed/beg him to (recent translation, occasionally, from) Yahweh
LXX used the verb kicrw (to lend where rsv translated using the verb; the LXX tense is in indicative present active first person singular.
rsv: although using the verb lend – but is rendered in present perfect first person singular
gnt: uses the verb dedicate in present progressive first person.
dedicate vs lend
dedicate means - to devote to the worship of a divine being; specifically : to set apart (a church) to sacred uses with solemn rites
lend - to give for temporary use on condition that the same or its equivalent be returned
Theological Implication on the choice of word:
The term “dedicate” has a churchy, sacred sound in it. I can very well understand the translator’s choice of a more “churchy” sacred term “dedicate” over “lend” which has a more utilitarian, commercial sound in it. But if LXX is to be consulted, Hannah lent to the Lord Samuel on condition that God will return Samuel or its equivalent.
Theologically, when we use the term “dedicate” we offer to the divine being (to God) something (our lives, the product of our labor, etc) unconditionally. It’s an act of worship. It is a lifetime commitment.
On the other hand, to lend something, whether we put a religious connotation on it or not, is for temporary use, and always, we expect that that which we lent will be returned at an appointed time.
LXX claims that Hannah only lent Samuel to the Lord. Although Klein thinks this is
“more idiomatically, she “lent him to Yahweh,” repeating one more time the pun on the letters שאל. For all his days he will be a “Saul” for Yahweh.”
If we go by Klein’s idea that the term “lent him to Yahweh” is more idiomatic than literal, then what could lent mean? Mirriam-Webster provides an explanation on the use of the verb lend:
lend is the verb used for figurative expressions, such as “lending a hand” or “lending enchantment.”
But to lend a life, a person to the Lord, what does this mean? For a mother to lend her child to God?
Let me venture into some theological concepts:
1. Our life is borrowed from God. Technically, God lends us our life and all that we have. That’s why in our act of dedication, we say, “all that we have comes from you, our God, the source of our lives and all that we have.”
a. In the act of dedication, usually through offering, we return back to God what he lent to us: our life, our talent, our treasure, etc.
b. In the act of child dedication, we thank God for the life that God so graciously allowed us to have and nurture. But in this liturgical act, we offer back to God disowning ownership of the life borne and acknowledging that God is the sole owner of the life of our child and we are temporary care-givers.
2. Created in the image of God means that we take part in the creative and salvific work of God. The lives given to us, the child(ren) we bore are the product of the creative act of a man and a woman. Nurturing the child(ren) into full-maturity is the continuing creative and saving act of God. We become partners of God in creating and saving lives. So when we offer this life back to God, we acknowledge we are never on our own in rearing up our child(ren). God is our partner and we partake in God’s continuous work in the lives of our child(ren).
3. That we are stewards of the lives born to us. Our child(ren) are not born to us so that someday they will be of used to us. On the contrary, as stewards of the lives given to us, it is our duty and obligation to develop them into the person that God designed them to be.
Given these theological concepts, how then are we going to understand the LXX use of the word kicrw (English: to lend):
There are other uses of the term lend:
a. to give the assistance or support of : AFFORD, FURNISH 〈a dispassionate and scholarly manner which lends great force to his criticisms —Times Lit. Supp.〉
b. to adapt or apply (oneself) readily : ACCOMMODATE 〈a topic that lends itself admirably to class discussion〉
a. if we apply the first definition of the word lend which is to give assistance or support of, then Hannah [gives assistance of support] to the Lord. In the sentence, the Lord is the recipient of the assistance of support. This is participating the creative and saving work of the Lord in the life Hannah’s child, Samuel.
b. if lend means to accommodate oneself readily to God, then Hannah commits herself readily for the purpose of God into the life of Samuel. Hannah accommodated upon herself into God’s plan for Samuel.
It becomes more interesting when we look at the Hebrew rendition of 1 Sam 1:28:
hw"hyl; WhTil.aiv.hi ykinOa' ~g:w>
WhTil.aiv.hi (verb hiphil perfect 1st person common singular, of the verb שאל which means ask, inquire, borrow, beg, suffix 3rd person masculine singular - (I) have asked/inquired/borrowed, begged him)
(And so, I have asked/inquired, borrowed begged him to/for Yahweh).
Where is the act of dedication here? This is only a declaration that what she had prayed for has come true. And that Eli’s blessing “Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition which you have made to him” (1Sa 1:17) has been fulfilled and is now a reality.
Where then is the idea that dedication (kicrw ) means bringing the child to stay in the temple and be a minister? In verse 22, Hannah declared, “As soon as the child is weaned, I will bring him, that he may appear in the presence of the \nd Lord\nd*, and abide there for ever.”
Implications:
A. Translation
kicrw has been rendered in English as lend (RSV, NRS, KJV) and dedicate (NAS, GNT); Cebuano has two renditions : gihatag (give) (Bugna, Pinadayag) and gitugyan (dedicate) (MBB, RCPV). Lend has not been rendered in any CEB translation.
a. Is dedication a faithful rendition of the LXX kicrw? Where did the contemporary versions base their use of dedication? It is not in LXX and definitely not in Hebrew Bible.
b. Dedicate vs Lend. Dedicate may be a good choice of word for what Hannah did to her child Samuel. But the depth of the meaning of lend is lost with the use of dedication. Unfortunately, if we use dedicate, we create an idea of passive surrendering of the child to the Lord whereas as discussed above, lend gives active and more participative act on Hannah’s part with regards to her child.
On the issue of tense: at the start, we noted the differences of tense between RSV and GNT (RSV is formal translation, GNT uses dynamic equivalence). RSV uses present progressive tense while GNT uses present perfect tense.
Grammar books tell us the progressive tense is a weak tense and should be used with care. Progressive tense suggest incomplete act or tentative act. On the other hand, GNT’s rendition in perfect tense suggests a completed act. However, LXX renders the verb in indicative present active. RSV was able to render the indicative present active only that RSV renders the verb in present progressive tense, which again is a weak tense. The intense resolve of Hannah in her act of kicrw has been muffled at the very least or lost at its worst. Why hasn’t there been a translation that renders Hannah’s act in simple present tense: And so I lend/dedicate him to the Lord. Renders this way, we see that lending/dedicating her child to the Lord becomes a habitual, daily act, not a one-time completed act, leaving the rearing of her child into the hands of God (or the church) but an active daily participation, which is the very essence of the term lend. All these meanings are lost at the choice of word and the setting of tense.
B. Parenting Guidelines
Hannah’s prayer and action has been a model act of godly parenting (or godly mothering). A bible study notes says:
“Hannah is a great example of a godly mother. From the time she first desired for a child, in prayers and intentions she has dedicated to God the future of her child”
Unfortunately, “dedicated” in this passage had always been misunderstood as offering ones child to the ministry (literally, giving up custody of the child into the church; or figuratively, dedicating the child to the Lord to become a minister). How many stories have we heard of a person forced into the ministry because he/she had been dedicated to God as first born and following the example of Hannah to her Samuel.
Ok, I will not go any farther. This has been my experience. My parents dedicated me to God and so they expected that I will serve the church. (My gosh! My parents have good connections in heaven!). But I resented this. I resented losing my freedom to choose the path I wish to trod or the freedom to accommodate for my own God’s plan for my life. This is what I call the passive dedication.
Given my analysis on the verb and its tense in verse 28, we can glean some parenting principles:
1. kicrw whether translated as lend or dedicate, tugyan or hatag, means: Our children are not our own, they are God’s. Parents are only temporary care-takers, stewards. And if we kicrw them to the Lord we
a. commit ourselves to participate in the continuing creative and saving work of God in our children’s lives. The operating word here is “participate.” We do not control. We do not design. We do not impose. The way I read this text, it is US, the parents who commit ourselves to God so that God can implement or fulfill his purposes in the lives of our children.
b. We should therefore accommodate God’s plan into the upbringing of our children. Does this mean passive rearing of children? Far from it! This is an active nurturing. When we accommodate God’s plan – we lend our children to God’s plan, as what Hannah did- we give support or assistance. We cannot be the one to thwart God’s plan, instead, we support it in every possible way. We cannot jut fold our arms and be fatalistic, que sera, sera, whatever will be will be – with the future of our children.
c. the act of kicrw begins long before conception. If this is so, parents cannot be careless. They should prepare, pray intently and work hard, and as Eli told Hannah, “and may the God of Israel give you what you have asked him for.”
2. kicrw is indicative present active, first person. Translated in first person simple present active form, kicrw is a daily habitual thing to do. Not a one-time, completed act. Perhaps we can glean from Susanna Wesley (the mother of John and Charles Wesley) who was said to daily, by hour or by minute pray and commit her children to the Lord. Parenting principles and guidelines and books and tv shows on parenting have overflowed. But nothing beats habitually lending our children to the Lord.
Conclusion:
So what did Hannah do with Samuel? She lent him to the Lord. Lend here had been given a deeper meaning and should be reflected in its translation.
Issues to be considered in translation:
1. which is easier understood, dedicate or lend? If lend is to be used, how should this be rendered in Filipino, pinahiram (TAG), gipahulam (CEB) for formal translation.
2. How about functional equivalence, how should this be rendered: Given the suggestions above, this writer is certain that v28 will have a totally new meaning when read.
Up next, still on verse 28 of ch 1, what did Samuel do in the temple? English translations say, he worshipped there, CEB, misimba, mag-alagad. Ows, talaga?
A DIALOGICAL SERMON with my DAUGHTER
SADYANG KABUTIHAN
a Dialogical Sermon by Carmel and Mithi
Intro…
I would like to present to you a dialogical sermon… it’s a conversation with my daughter (call Mithi). I invite you to join with us in this conversation.
Nanay: Siguro naman (address students) alam nyo ang story ng Good Samaritan. Ikaw Mithi alam mo ang story ng Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Siempre naman, ako pa! Ano nga bay un? Yun ba yong…. (ad lib narrate the story)
Nanay : (address the students) Tama ba ang kwento ni Mithi? Agree ba kayo? Medyo nga lang modern ang rendition, but faithful to the story. That’s good, Mithi. I’m sure your Bible teacher is proud of you. But do you know the answer to Jesus’ question: Who among the three was a real neighbor to the man who was held-up?
Mithi: Siempre, yung Good Samaritan. Kaya nga tinawag na Good Samaritan, kasi he stopped to help a dying man?
Nanay: Oo nga. But do you know, tama din naman ang ginawa ng mga priest at levites?
Mithi: Tama ba yun? Tama bang iwan ang isang taong nakahandusay sa kalsada at hindi tulungan! Hello! Kahit ganito ako, alam ko namang mali siguro yung hindi tumulong sa nangangailangan, lalu na yung mga biktima ng hold-up!
Nanay: Tama ka jan. Mali talaga ang iwan lang ang isang taong nakahandusay at hindi tulungan. Pero para sa mga priest at levites, tama din yung ginawa nila.
Mithi: Ha? Panong nangyari yun?
Nanay: Do you know who the priests were?
Mithi: Siempre naman. Pari – o kaya pastor sa ngayon, katulad mo Nanay. Pero, naku, Nay, kapag ginawa mo yung ginawa ng Priest sa story natin, kahit ako sasabihin ko, magaling ka lang magsermon, pero wala sa gawa!
Nanay: Kasi nga you are looking at the story from our present time. But during Biblical times, priest ….
Mithi: Dib a, priests are mediators between people and God?
Nanay: Tama ka uli. But during Biblical Times, priests do not only represent God before people, they also bring people to God. They were the ones who ask forgiveness for the sins of the people. They were the ones who burn sacrifices offered by the people for the forgiveness of their sins. They have to be ceremonially clean to do this.
Mithi: Ano daw yun? cere,,,
Nanay: ceremonially clean! Dapat malinis sila… pure! They cannot approach God defiled. They go through complicated ceremonies of bathing, cleansing and many purification rituals before they can do their task of approaching God in behalf of the people. And one of the things that will defile them is if they touch corpse. They are forbidden to touch a corpse… mapatawo man yan o animal.
Mithi: Bawal silang humipo sa patay? Pero hindi pa naman patay yung tao sa story, di ba ?
Nanay: Because you know the story. But if we follow the story, the robbers left the man half-dead. Ibig sabihin, puede mong mapagkamalang patay na yung tao. And the priest could not take the risk of touching a possibly dead body or else, he could not function as a priest. Kawawa naman ang maraming mga tao na nangangailangan ng kapatawaran ng Dios sa kanilang kasalanan!
Mithi: E yung levite…
Nanay: Levites are temple helpers. They have the same purification requirement before they can serve in the temple!
Mithi: Mukhang mali pa rin yung iwanan mo lang ang isang tao na nakahandusay na hindi tulungan…
Nanay: I’d like us all to listen to this song. Entitled,
PLAY CD cut 9
Nanay: the song says, lahat ng mga paniniwala ay may layuning kabutihan. Lahat ng paninindigan ay para sa kabutihan ng kapwa. Yun ang kailangan nating isipin. Lahat tayo, magkakaiba man ang ating paniniwala at paninindigan, may sadyang kabutihang taglay. The priest and the levite had good reasons not to touch the victim, otherwise, they won’t be able to do what they needed to do.
Mithi: Ok. Pero para sa akin, hero ko pa rin ang Samaritan. Dib a magkaaway ang mga Jews at Samaritan? Pero kahit na, tinulungan pa rin niya ang kaaway ng kanyang lahi! Yan ang hero!
Nanay: At yan din talaga ang gusto nating iparating sa ating lesson ngayon. Alam mo ba ang daming makakahadlang sa atin upang gumawa ng kabutihan. Ang daming boundaries…
Mithi: Katulad ng yan, (point to the school boundary), boundary ng PCU High School – hindi kami puedeng lumabas ng wala sa oras?
Nanay: Pero higit na nakakatakot yung boundaries na hindi nakikita. Andyan, yung pagkakaiba ng paninindigan at paniniwala… pagkakaiba ng gusto at hilig…
Mithi: Ya right… like gusto ko ng anime… ayaw mo naman…
Nanay: Uh-huh! Like gusto ko ng tahimik, ang lakas ng patugtog mo ng mp3…
Mithi: Nanay, ha! Wag mo akong ibisto…
Nanay: But do you see my point? We have created boundaries. In fact, kahit siguro sa inyong classroom may kanya kanya kayong boundaries – boundary ng pagkakaibigan--- kami-kami – sila-sila.
Mithi: Tama po. Kung minsan, dahil kami ang magkafriendster at magka-gm…
Nanay: posibleng na exclude nyo na ang iba, dib a? Instead na magkatulungan, nagiging ka-kompetensya na.
Mithi: at sa halip na magkasundo, nagkaka-asaran pa.
Nanay: You know what is the greatest lesson of the story of the Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Yung tinulungan nya yung victim.
Nanay: But more than that, the Samaritan was able to cross over the boundaries of racial enmity, o pag-aaway ng lahi, pagkakaiba ng paniniwala (magkaiba kasi sila ng relihiyon), pagkakaiba ng estado at posisyon sa buhay. Yan ang greatest goodness. Please listen to this song:
PLAY CD cut 10
Nanay: (to the people) Let this be a prayer dance.
Group as a class. Form two circles: One from the inside. And another outer circle.
Each time you touch a person’s hand and say ‘kaibigan’ let it be a real prayer, that you are a friend, maasahan, karamay, masasandalan sa lahat ng panahon.
(Choreo of the Prayer Dance):
KAIBIGAN
Lyrics movement
Ang Kaibigan mo’y point to the person in front of you
kaibigan ko, point to self
Kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place
Maaasahan mong may karamay ka hold the hands of the person next to you
at sandigan lean on the person next to you (nty)
Ang kaibigan hold the hand of the person nty
ng kaibigan ng kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place until the end of the song….
Ng kaibigan from inner circle to outer circle
ko’y kaibigan mo. try to touch as many hands as possible
towards the end of the song… form one big circle… arms locked into you neighbors arm and sway or do the “chorus line” movement.
Benediction:
Nanay: You know what Mithi, brothers and sisters, Jesus no longer calls us servant or slaves… but friends. So go out and be a friend, cross boundaries and Do good at all times, at all places, with all that you can.
Mithi and Schoolmates: Amen. Amen. Amen.
a Dialogical Sermon by Carmel and Mithi
Intro…
I would like to present to you a dialogical sermon… it’s a conversation with my daughter (call Mithi). I invite you to join with us in this conversation.
Nanay: Siguro naman (address students) alam nyo ang story ng Good Samaritan. Ikaw Mithi alam mo ang story ng Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Siempre naman, ako pa! Ano nga bay un? Yun ba yong…. (ad lib narrate the story)
Nanay : (address the students) Tama ba ang kwento ni Mithi? Agree ba kayo? Medyo nga lang modern ang rendition, but faithful to the story. That’s good, Mithi. I’m sure your Bible teacher is proud of you. But do you know the answer to Jesus’ question: Who among the three was a real neighbor to the man who was held-up?
Mithi: Siempre, yung Good Samaritan. Kaya nga tinawag na Good Samaritan, kasi he stopped to help a dying man?
Nanay: Oo nga. But do you know, tama din naman ang ginawa ng mga priest at levites?
Mithi: Tama ba yun? Tama bang iwan ang isang taong nakahandusay sa kalsada at hindi tulungan! Hello! Kahit ganito ako, alam ko namang mali siguro yung hindi tumulong sa nangangailangan, lalu na yung mga biktima ng hold-up!
Nanay: Tama ka jan. Mali talaga ang iwan lang ang isang taong nakahandusay at hindi tulungan. Pero para sa mga priest at levites, tama din yung ginawa nila.
Mithi: Ha? Panong nangyari yun?
Nanay: Do you know who the priests were?
Mithi: Siempre naman. Pari – o kaya pastor sa ngayon, katulad mo Nanay. Pero, naku, Nay, kapag ginawa mo yung ginawa ng Priest sa story natin, kahit ako sasabihin ko, magaling ka lang magsermon, pero wala sa gawa!
Nanay: Kasi nga you are looking at the story from our present time. But during Biblical times, priest ….
Mithi: Dib a, priests are mediators between people and God?
Nanay: Tama ka uli. But during Biblical Times, priests do not only represent God before people, they also bring people to God. They were the ones who ask forgiveness for the sins of the people. They were the ones who burn sacrifices offered by the people for the forgiveness of their sins. They have to be ceremonially clean to do this.
Mithi: Ano daw yun? cere,,,
Nanay: ceremonially clean! Dapat malinis sila… pure! They cannot approach God defiled. They go through complicated ceremonies of bathing, cleansing and many purification rituals before they can do their task of approaching God in behalf of the people. And one of the things that will defile them is if they touch corpse. They are forbidden to touch a corpse… mapatawo man yan o animal.
Mithi: Bawal silang humipo sa patay? Pero hindi pa naman patay yung tao sa story, di ba ?
Nanay: Because you know the story. But if we follow the story, the robbers left the man half-dead. Ibig sabihin, puede mong mapagkamalang patay na yung tao. And the priest could not take the risk of touching a possibly dead body or else, he could not function as a priest. Kawawa naman ang maraming mga tao na nangangailangan ng kapatawaran ng Dios sa kanilang kasalanan!
Mithi: E yung levite…
Nanay: Levites are temple helpers. They have the same purification requirement before they can serve in the temple!
Mithi: Mukhang mali pa rin yung iwanan mo lang ang isang tao na nakahandusay na hindi tulungan…
Nanay: I’d like us all to listen to this song. Entitled,
PLAY CD cut 9
Nanay: the song says, lahat ng mga paniniwala ay may layuning kabutihan. Lahat ng paninindigan ay para sa kabutihan ng kapwa. Yun ang kailangan nating isipin. Lahat tayo, magkakaiba man ang ating paniniwala at paninindigan, may sadyang kabutihang taglay. The priest and the levite had good reasons not to touch the victim, otherwise, they won’t be able to do what they needed to do.
Mithi: Ok. Pero para sa akin, hero ko pa rin ang Samaritan. Dib a magkaaway ang mga Jews at Samaritan? Pero kahit na, tinulungan pa rin niya ang kaaway ng kanyang lahi! Yan ang hero!
Nanay: At yan din talaga ang gusto nating iparating sa ating lesson ngayon. Alam mo ba ang daming makakahadlang sa atin upang gumawa ng kabutihan. Ang daming boundaries…
Mithi: Katulad ng yan, (point to the school boundary), boundary ng PCU High School – hindi kami puedeng lumabas ng wala sa oras?
Nanay: Pero higit na nakakatakot yung boundaries na hindi nakikita. Andyan, yung pagkakaiba ng paninindigan at paniniwala… pagkakaiba ng gusto at hilig…
Mithi: Ya right… like gusto ko ng anime… ayaw mo naman…
Nanay: Uh-huh! Like gusto ko ng tahimik, ang lakas ng patugtog mo ng mp3…
Mithi: Nanay, ha! Wag mo akong ibisto…
Nanay: But do you see my point? We have created boundaries. In fact, kahit siguro sa inyong classroom may kanya kanya kayong boundaries – boundary ng pagkakaibigan--- kami-kami – sila-sila.
Mithi: Tama po. Kung minsan, dahil kami ang magkafriendster at magka-gm…
Nanay: posibleng na exclude nyo na ang iba, dib a? Instead na magkatulungan, nagiging ka-kompetensya na.
Mithi: at sa halip na magkasundo, nagkaka-asaran pa.
Nanay: You know what is the greatest lesson of the story of the Good Samaritan?
Mithi: Yung tinulungan nya yung victim.
Nanay: But more than that, the Samaritan was able to cross over the boundaries of racial enmity, o pag-aaway ng lahi, pagkakaiba ng paniniwala (magkaiba kasi sila ng relihiyon), pagkakaiba ng estado at posisyon sa buhay. Yan ang greatest goodness. Please listen to this song:
PLAY CD cut 10
Nanay: (to the people) Let this be a prayer dance.
Group as a class. Form two circles: One from the inside. And another outer circle.
Each time you touch a person’s hand and say ‘kaibigan’ let it be a real prayer, that you are a friend, maasahan, karamay, masasandalan sa lahat ng panahon.
(Choreo of the Prayer Dance):
KAIBIGAN
Lyrics movement
Ang Kaibigan mo’y point to the person in front of you
kaibigan ko, point to self
Kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place
Maaasahan mong may karamay ka hold the hands of the person next to you
at sandigan lean on the person next to you (nty)
Ang kaibigan hold the hand of the person nty
ng kaibigan ng kaibigan hold the hand of the person in the inner circle and exchange place until the end of the song….
Ng kaibigan from inner circle to outer circle
ko’y kaibigan mo. try to touch as many hands as possible
towards the end of the song… form one big circle… arms locked into you neighbors arm and sway or do the “chorus line” movement.
Benediction:
Nanay: You know what Mithi, brothers and sisters, Jesus no longer calls us servant or slaves… but friends. So go out and be a friend, cross boundaries and Do good at all times, at all places, with all that you can.
Mithi and Schoolmates: Amen. Amen. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)