The Journal of a Spiritual Wonderer

Christmas Message 2012

2011-12-25T12:14:00.007+13:00

As published in the Sunday Times - 25th December, 2011

Above all, Christmas is about sharing love.It is remembering that the Christ came into this world, because God loves us.It is about love for all regardless of our status in society. The lowlyshepherds were witness to this amazing phenomenon. Animals were present at thebirth of Jesus signifying that this event was important not just for humankindbut for the whole of creation, the whole earth.

St. Augustine, writing in the 4^thcentury CE reflects on the birth of Christ:

Heby whom all things were made was made one of all things. The Son of God by theFather without a mother became the Son of man by a mother without a father... Themaker of the sun was made under the sun. He who fills the world lay in amanger, great in the form of God but tiny in the form of a servant; this was insuch a way that neither was His greatness diminished by His tininess, nor wasHis tininess overcome by His greatness (Sermon187).

At the heart of the gospel of salvationis God’s incarnation in Jesus of Nazareth. “Incarnation” is a word whereby wejoin other orthodox Christians in upholding a difficult but saving truth: JesusChrist was completely human and fully God. Jesus was not God in disguise, or aman who was almost divine; he was truly human, truly divine.

God came to us as a baby, born in a humanfamily. Jesus hungered, thirsted, and hurt, just like us. He was tested andtemped like us (Heb. 4:15). He was no make-believe person and the final proofof that was his horrendous death on a cross. True, he was rightly human in away none of us are. Though he was “tested as we are” says the Letter to theHebrews “yet he was without sin” (Heb. 4:15). Though we “walked in darkness,”(Isa. 9:2) he was radiant light. Though we have this propensity to rebelagainst God and try to be gods unto ourselves, he was fully obedient, evenobedient to death on a cross.

So the messageof Christmas is both complicated -“In Christ, God was reconciling the world tohimself” (2 Cor. 5:19 ESV); and simple - “This is how much God lovedthe world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that noone need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lastinglife.” (John 3:16 The Message).

The act of giving gifts, ofcelebrating with feasts and parties, is in reality a joyful expression of love.What is important that the type of gift, the quantity and quality of food andthe intensity of the party not distract us from the intention of sharing lovewith one another. When the presents are put away, when the food is all finishedand when the party is over, Christ remains. God remains. God is love. God ispeace. God is good will toward all.

Rev.James S. Bhagwan – Associate Minister

GaepoMethodist Church,

Seoul,South Korea

25December, 2012

Ho! Ho! Holy Christmas! – Spreading the Love

2011-12-21T12:05:00.000+13:00

Published as "A Reason for the Season (Off The Wall With Padre James Bhagwan) in the Fiji Times, Wednesday, December 21, 2011 http://www.fijitimes.com/story.aspx?id=188911

Last Sunday was the fourth Sunday in theChristian Season of Advent. Advent, as shared in last week’s column meanspreparation, preparation in this case for Christmas - the celebration of thebirth of Jesus the Christ, and preparation also for Christians – for Christ’sreturn.

LastSunday fourth candle of Advent, the Candle of Love, will be lit. Its light ismeant to remind us of the love that God has for us. This Sunday will beChristmas Day when the “Christ Candle” signifying the birth of the Light of theWorld, will be lit.

LastSunday afternoon, I joined the members of Gaepo Methodist Church in Seoul, asthey took to the street to spread some Christmas cheer and spread the messageof God’s love through Jesus Christ.

Bravingthe cold, we sang Christmas carols on street corners and handed out small giftsto those we met, many of them non-Christian. In keeping with my taste for thetheatrical, I donned a Santa Claus outfit (fortunately I was able to find ajacket that fit) and so a number of people received presents from a “FijiSanta”.

I noticedthat as we approached some people they shrank back (I’m not surprised... manywould if some strange brown man in a red suit strolled loudly up to them..)until we handed them a gift. In a few places, people rushed back in to theirhomes, workplaces to tell others who came out.

While ourmotive was to spread the gospel, it was expressed as spreading the joy and lovewe experience at Christmas. For me that is the gospel, the Good News, the joyof experiencing God’s love. It is a joy and love that we simply wish to share.

When oneof the church staff emailed me pictures of my Santa Claus experience, I had tolaugh at some of them. But then I began to think about Santa Claus and hisrelevance as one of the most (in some cases the most) popular images ofChristmas.

This weekyou will see many Santas, outside shops ringing bells, in shop windows, onbillboards, in advertisements and even on plastic bags.

How doesSanta Claus or Saint Nicholas fit into the story of Christmas?

The true story of Santa Claus beginswith Nicholas, who was born during the third century in the village of Patara. At the time the area was Greek and is now on the southerncoast of Turkey. His wealthy parents, who raised him to be a devout Christian,died in an epidemic while Nicholas was still young. Obeying Jesus' words to"sell what you own and give the money to the poor," Nicholas used hiswhole inheritance to assist the needy, the sick, and the suffering. Hededicated his life to serving God and was made Bishop of Myra whilestill a young man. Bishop Nicholas became known throughout the land for hisgenerosity to those in need, his love for children, and his concern for sailorsand ships.

Under the Roman Emperor Diocletian, who ruthlessly persecuted Christians, Bishop Nicholassuffered for his faith, was exiled and imprisoned. The prisons were so full ofbishops, priests, and deacons, there was no room for the realcriminals—murderers, thieves and robbers. After his release, Nicholas attendedthe Council of Nicaea in AD 325. He died December 6, AD 343 in Myra and was buried in hiscathedral church, where a unique relic, called manna, formed in his grave. This liquid substance,said to have healing powers, fostered the growth of devotion to Nicholas. Theanniversary of his death became a day of celebration, St. Nicholas Day, December 6th (December 19 on the Julian Calendar).

Over the centuries St. Nicholas becameSanta Claus. Santa was then portrayed by dozensof artists in a wide variety of styles, sizes, and colours. However by the endof the 1920s, a standard American Santa—life-sized in a red, fur-trimmedsuit—had emerged from the work of N. C. Wyeth, Norman Rockwell and otherpopular illustrators. In 1931 Haddon Sundblom began thirty-five years of Coca-Cola Santaadvertisements that popularized and firmly established this Santa as an icon ofcontemporary commercial culture.

This Santa was life-sized, jolly, andwore the now familiar red suit. He appeared in magazines, on billboards, andshop counters, encouraging Americans to see Coke as the solution to "athirst for all seasons." By the 1950s Santa was turning up everywhere as abenign source of beneficence, endorsing an amazing range of consumer products.This commercial success led to the North American Santa Claus being exportedaround the world where he threatens to overcome the European St. Nicholas, whohas retained his identity as a Christian bishop and saint.

(To learn more about how Bishop Nicholasbecame Santa Claus and how we see him today visit: http://www.stnicholascenter.org/pages/origin-of-santa/)

It's been a long journey from the FourthCentury Bishop of Myra, St. Nicholas, who showed his devotion to God inextraordinary kindness and generosity to those in need, to America's jollySanta Claus, whose generosity often supplies luxuries to the rich. However, ifyou peel back the layers that have been added over the years, he is stillNicholas, Bishop of Myra, whose caring surprises continue to model true givingand faithfulness.

There is growing interest in reclaimingthe original saint to help restore a spiritual dimension to this festive time,for Catholic and Protestant alike. For indeed, St. Nicholas, lover of the poorand patron saint of children, is a model of how Christians are meant to live. Abishop, Nicholas put Jesus Christ at the centre of his life, his ministry, hisentire existence. Families, churches, and schools are embracing true StNicholas traditions as one way to claim the true centre of Christmas—the birthof Jesus. Such a focus helps restore balance to increasingly materialistic andstress-filled Advent andChristmas seasons.

St. Nicholas / Santa Claus wouldprobably agree with the saying, “Jesus is the reason for the season.”

This Christmas, spread the love, spreadthe joy, not just to those who know you but to those who need to experiencelove and joy, if only for once this year.

Have a happy and holy Christmas Fiji!

Rev.J.S. Bhagwan is a doting husband and father. He is currently astudent of the International Graduate School of Theology at the MethodistTheological University in Seoul, South Korea. Read more by visiting http://thejournalofaspiritualwonderer.blogspot.com/or https://www.facebook.com/PadreJames

Shining a Light into 2012

2011-12-14T14:26:00.004+13:00

Published as "Light over Darkeness" in Off the Wall with Padre James Bhagwan - Fiji Times (Wednesday 14th December, 2011)

As the HIV/AIDS wave began to crash on our shores and as communities were faced

not only with a new virus, that at the time, was a physical and emotional death sentence for those who contracted HIV and were rejected by their families, friends and communities, Sister Emi Oh, founder of CAPE (Churches, AIDS Pastoral care and Education), called on society to, “Instead of Cursing the Darkness, Light a Candle.”

While this statement was made in response to the attitude towards the epidemic and people living with HIV and AIDS, it is a phrase that rings true all the situations of apparent hopelessness that we find ourselves in.

I remember, living in London in 2000, coming across an article in the Evening Standard news paper which reported on the daily candlelight vigils taking place in the Holy Trinity Cathedral in Suva during the hostage crisis in parliament in 2000. These inter-faith prayer vigils which were organised by the National Council of Women in Fiji, of which my sister Sharon was Secretary at the time, continued in the years to follow, becoming a monthly safe space for reflection, solidarity and the expression of hope.

Candlelight vigils are usually held as a way to remember lives lost to some disease, disaster, massacre or other tragedy or protest the suffering of some marginalized group of people.

It is hoped that by holding a candlelight vigil, participants will create awareness of the problem by shining light onto something often kept hidden. Vigils are usually moments of silence which gives those taking part a space to quietly reflect in the issue. It is way to share a sense of peace, hope, and commitment in a community.

This year, I participated in three events that used candles to reflect and inspire. The first was at the AIDS Candlelight Memorial Service hosted by the Pacific Conference of Churches at Dudley Church in Suva in May. There the First Lady, Adi Koila Nailatikau lit the first of over 300 candles to remember those Fijians who have lost their lives to AIDS.

In August, at the Biennial Consultation of Hindi Speaking Fellowships, candles were lit for members of this community of the Methodist Indo-Fijian diaspora who had passed away in the last two years.

In both these occasions it was a time of reflection – of lives; some complete, some abruptly ended before their time; a time for reflection on what was and also what could have been.

But there was another event in which candles were lit for reflection but also in which they were lit for inspiration. At the welcome service for the consultation mentioned above, the youth of Dudley Church, a group of ethnically mixed, dynamic young people, performed a dance with candles and diya. The dance was to a Hindi translation of the song “Carry Your Candle” by Chris Rice:

There is a candle in every soul; some brightly burning, some dark and cold.
There is a Spirit who brings fire; ignites a candle and makes His home.
Carry your candle, run to the darkness; seek out the hopeless, confused and torn.
Hold out your candle for all to see it; Take your candle, and go light your world.

Frustrated brother, see how he's tried to light his own candle some other way.
See now your sister, she's been robbed and lied to, still holds a candle without a flame.

Carry your candle, run to the darkness; seek out the hopeless, confused and torn.
Hold out your candle for all to see it; Take your candle, and go light your world.

We are a family whose hearts are blazing, so let's raise our candles and light up the sky.
Praying to our Father, in the name of Jesus, make us a beacon in darkest times.
Carry your candle, run to the darkness; seek out the hopeless, confused and torn.
Hold out your candle for all to see it; Take your candle, and go light your world.

As we journey through the Christian season of Advent in preparation for Christmas, in many churches last Sunday we lit the candle of joy. In the previous two Sundays the candles of hope and peace were lit as a reminder that Christ will come again and bring us everlasting peace and joy.

This Sunday, the fourth candle of Advent, the Candle of Love, will be lit. Its light is meant to remind us of the love that God has for us.

The American civil rights leader, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jnr. Said, “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. “

Last week I posted a suggestion on my status page on Facebook. It read:

“How about a nation-wide Candlelight Vigil for the last 10mins of 2011? In every home, church, place of worship.... 10mins of silent reflection ... on the year that was... 10mins of silent meditation ... in preparation of the year to come... 10mins of silent prayer for our home and nation of Fiji... The candle to symbolise the light that will help us find our way.... Click LIKE if you think is possible and you are willing to commit and let’s see if we can get some positivity flowing!”

Encouraged by the response to this post, I invite, I urge every community of faith, every neighbourhood, settlement, village on December 31^st, and light a candle as a sign of hope, of your commitment to peace, compassion and justice and to making 2012 a better year for all in Fiji. Whether it is done in your church, mandli, kava session or in your home, each light can be a beacon of positivity and together they can herald 2012 as a year of enlightenment for our people and our country.

“There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it.” (Edith Wharton - American poet, novelist and short-story writer, 1862-1937)

On New Year ’s Eve this year, you have an opportunity to be a candle and shine, or a mirror to reflect, the light in your soul.

Carry your candle, run to the darkness, Seek out the helpless, deceived and poor. Hold out your candle for all to see it. Take your candle, and go light your world

“Simplicity, Serenity and Spontaneity”

Rev. J.S. Bhagwan is a doting husband and father. He is currently a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Read more by visiting http://thejournalofaspiritualwonderer.blogspot.com/

Goodwill Hunting...

2011-12-07T12:34:00.003+13:00

Published in the "Off the Wall with Padre James Bhagwan" Page 12 - Fiji Times, Wednesday 7th December, 2011

As we approach Christmas (which was almost cancelled last year if you remember the furor over the public holidays - http://www.fijitimes.com/story.aspx?id=162476), it’s always good to spend some time reflecting on the significance of the event.

Of course in Fiji most of us understand that Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ Jesus. Born in abject poverty (there was no room in the inn or perhaps Joseph could not afford to take the available but expensive suite, or was it social discrimination against Galileans?) and while still an infant subjected to political persecution and forced to seek refugee status in a foreign land (the future king hunted by the present one and forced to flee to Egypt, from where an adopted prince had once fled with a group of slaves), it wasn’t the happiest or most glorious beginning for the earthly life of the Son of God.

In fact that humble birth does not have much in common with the commercial event that sees billions spent globally on food, decorations, presents etc. With the secularization of Christmas, along with Yule (Pagan) and Hanukkah/Chanukah (Jewish) and the Winter (northern hemisphere)/Summer (southern hemisphere) Solstice all at the same time the reference in most cards and advertisements to “Seasons Greetings” along with a chubby Santa Claus as the mascot for Christmas, the deeper meaning sometimes seems to get lost, even with a quick dash to Christmas Eve Mass or stumble to Christmas Morning Service.

Or maybe not.

Shopping, excesses, preparation stress and partying aside, surely something can be said for the joy of family and friends coming together and sharing their love for one another in the giving of gifts, even small ones, the sharing of a meal – be it a family feast or a simple lunch or dinner with a piece of fruit cake or glass of juice on the side.

It is written in the Christian scriptures that when Jesus was born, angels appeared to shepherds. These shepherds were most likely tending the unblemished lambs for sacrifice in the temple of Jerusalem in special grazing grounds in the valley south and east of Bethlehem. These men, who because of the work they did, were unclean and not permitted to enter the Temple, even though the sheep they tended were pure enough for sacrifice in the Temple.

The message to these defiled men, excluded by religious tradition from having a meaningful encounter with God in the temple (the only place Jews of the 1^st century BCE could have expected to really worship) was one of hope and that was to lead, in their visiting of that baby in a stable, to a personal encounter with God.

A huge angelic choir appeared to these lowly shepherds singing God's praises, “Glory to God in the heavenly heights, peace to all men and women on earth who please him.” (Luke 2:13-14 The Message)

The King James Version of the Bible has the phrase “goodwill” instead of peace.

What is good-will?

Goodwill is defined as “a kindly feeling of approval and support : benevolent interest or concern;” or “ a disposition to kindness and compassion; ‘the victor's grace in treating the vanquished’”. It is the opposite of “ill-will”(hostility, animosity, bitterness, aggression).

The message at Christmas is of the presence of goodwill on earth to all humankind. Even the condition of “on whom God’s favour rests,” can be understood to mean all those who do what God asks: “to act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8 NIV), or “do what is fair and just to your neighbour, be compassionate and loyal in your love, and don't take yourself too seriously— take God seriously” (The Message). This is something that we all can do.

Goodwill is so important in this world that it is even accepted as an “intangible asset” in accounting terms – yes companies have a dollar value to their reputation or their “goodwill”.

How much is your goodwill worth? What good do you do?

Is it fair to be the recipient of goodwill without sharing it with others?

This Christmas, as we write our lists of what to get for whom and plan our budgets, or wonder where on earth we are to find the money for things we wish we could enjoy and give to others; lets place some value on goodwill.

Albert Einstein once said, “Nothing that I can do will change the structure of the universe. But maybe, by raising my voice I can help the greatest of all causes - goodwill among men and peace on earth.”

Einstein’s message is echoed in the words of the late Kenyan environmentalist and political activist Wangari Maathai who in 2004 won the Nobel Peace Prize for her "contribution to sustainable development, democracy and peace and passed away on what will be exactly three months on Christmas day (25^th September, 2011):

“We can work together for a better world with men and women of goodwill, those who radiate the intrinsic goodness of humankind.”

What kindness can you share this Christmas? To whom will you express compassion? Where and how will you enable peace as the world celebrates the birth of the prince of peace?

Act justly. Love mercy. Walk humbly.

Rev. J.S. Bhagwan is a doting husband and father. He is currently a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Read more by visiting http://thejournalofaspiritualwonderer.blogspot.com/

The Need for the Church to have Prophetic Voice in Fiji Today

2011-12-02T04:58:00.001+13:00

Excerpt from: “Towards a contextual theology of prophetic communication :Communicating the Prophetic Voice of the Mainline Churches and the Prophetic Role of the News Media in Contemporary Fiji-Island Society”

(SUVA: PTC/BDES Thesis, September 2006)

The coups of 1987 and 2000 had contrasting responses from the mainline Churches. On May 14^th, 1987, three hours after the military coup d’ētat of the democratically Labour–National Federation Party Coalition, the President of the Methodist Church contacted some of the leaders of the Churches and produced a message on behalf of the Methodist, Anglican, Presbyterian and Assembly of God Churches. The message which was broadcast at midnight that night and published in the local newspapers the next day appealed for the upholding of the Christian values of justice, peace, tolerance, goodwill, freedom and love, patience and forgiveness, sacrifice and obedience. The message called on the (at that time) Royal Fiji Military Forces to release all hostages and surrender to the sovereign authority of the land and for all people of Fiji of all religions to pray for the end of the crisis and immediate restoration of the democratically elected Government.[1] Nine days later the Anglican Bishop, the President of the Methodist Church, the Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Church, the Regional Commander of the Salvation Army and the minister of the Presbyterian Church issued a joint statement condemning the coup and calling for the nation to come together. In the days, weeks and months that followed the leaders of the Churches issued two further common public statements. The Fiji Council of Churches, having been silent received letters of solidarity from the Pacific Conference of Churches and the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa/New Zealand. The first public statement by the Fiji Council of Churches was in March of 1988 and addressed the issue of the Sunday Decree as well as Church and State. Further statements by the leaders of the Fiji Council of Churches were issued towards the end of the year (i) expressing concern on the constitutional process then underway and (ii) to give a combined Christmas message to the nation calling for the breaking down of barriers and creation of lasting peace.[2]

In May 2000 following the civilian coup, the prophetic solidarity of the Churches was not as evident as in 1987. The first statement on the events of May 19^th came the next day when Methodist Church General Secretary Rev. Dr. Ilaitia Tuwere strongly condemned the civilian coup and associated looting in Suva city.[3] The following Monday, the Fiji Times newspaper carried a photograph of the Methodist Church President, Rev. Tomasi Kanailagi outside the Parliament complex.[4] The next day, in an article in the paper, Rev. Kanailagi disassociated the church from the coup, calling for prayers for the nation and saying that the church did not want “meddle into the politics” of the coup.[5] Five days after the takeover, with hostages still being held in Parliament, the head of the Anglican Church, Bishop Bryce also called for prayer, saying that it was the “Christian duty to obey and support the lawful authority of the state.”[6] The same day, former Methodist Church President, Rev. Joseteki Koroi in calling on looters to repent and for church leaders to be part of the repentance process, criticised the Fiji Council of Churches for its silence.[7] The next day the Fiji Times published a statement from the Council stating that it was against the “unchristian act of those who seized members of the democratically elected government,” calling the takeover a, “very thoughtless crucifixion of democracy,” and called for Christians to assist in restoring order by “little acts of love and kindness.”[8]

By the following week, newspaper reports contained more statements from the Fiji Council of Churches and church leaders, calling for peace and calm as well as condemning the coup. There was coverage of the daily peace vigil at the Holy Trinity Anglican church.[9] As the hostage crisis continued for the next month with more statements from the churches calling for an end to the crisis and support for first the President of Fiji and then after his stepping down, the military. The Methodist church, in particular was trying to distance itself from the coup makers, having earlier looked like was supporting them. Their defence was that they were providing pastoral counselling to the rebels in Parliament. This was an issue for the Anglican Church, Roman Catholic Church and the Salvation Army, who as members of the Fiji Council of Churches:

….wanted to take a united stand against the activities of those involved in the coup but were frustrated by the leaders of the Methodist Church who were, at that time, nationalistic in sentiment.[10]

A lack of prophetic voice in the crises in 2000 when compared to 1987 is discernable. In 1987, there were common statements by the churches condemning the coup and calling for immediate release of the government. In 2000, the churches did not make common statements until the Fiji Council of Churches was criticised for its silence and began to raise its voice after almost a week. The Lund Principle of the World Council of Churches, Faith and Order Commission states that, “churches do not say separately, what they can say together,”[11] in order to maintain solidarity and a visible unity of the Church Universal. According to Yabaki:

The churches have reached a point of maturity in their journey towards unity where they have been able to agree on an understanding of scripture, doctrine, baptism, to the issue of trafficking of women and unmasking hypocrisy and speaking to each other and together, as in the case of the Fiji Council of Churches and the Assembly of Christian Churches in Fiji.[12]

There is also a danger that by not speaking out on injustice and tyranny, the church, in its silence, may be seen as making a statement: that it is supporting the status quo.

The Methodist Church and other non-mainline churches raised and supported, in 1987 and again in 2000, the issue of Fiji becoming a Christian state. This goes against the image of the church in the secular world, where religion does not have a governing role. When a church is too closely aligned with the state, or traditional culture it is in danger of losing its prophetic voice as it concentrates on maintaining its power base, which is either the government support or the support of the people who favour the status quo. However, the Church is not a maintenance Church but an apostolic one, sent out with a mission to contextually address the issues of today.

For the Church to have a prophetic voice in the Fiji Islands, therefore, means speaking the truth, in love, to the issues of injustice, poverty, of peace, of making the church home for everybody in the household of God and being concerned about society. In a multicultural and pluralistic society, the Church has a particular mission to communicate the Gospel to that society. Therefore to be able to read the ‘signs of the times’ might entail having to do research on issues of morality such as homosexuality, or social injustice such as privatisation of water supply. A church with a prophetic voice, as Nathan, Jeremiah and Micah, must communicate with people in power in a way that challenges them about the use of power, about peacemaking and peace building.

Ernst calls for the Church to engage in a fourfold task to interpret the signs find solutions to the challenges of our times:

Reconstruction, in an attempt to identify and acknowledge the kinds of changes that have taken place and have negatively affected the lives of people;

Critique, to uncover ideological underpinnings and connections in order to unmask how economic and political power is maintained;

Denunciation, by assuming the prophetic role of identifying sources of evil and oppression;

Resistance, by mobilizing those who are oppressed;

Advocacy, by joining in solidarity in the struggle or in the promotion of specific projects in specified areas.[13]

The prophetic church needs to know how to speak to and about power in its own way, being biblical and informed by the power of the Spirit. The prophetic church is a critique of power, of how power is used in the world.

[1] “Fiji Coups: Church Statements” in Pacific Journal of Theology, Series II No.1, Ed. Bruce Deverell, (Suva: SPATS, 1989), 38 – 53.

[2] “Fiji Coups: Church Statements”.

[3] “Burning, looting shocks church,” in The Fiji Times, (Saturday, May 20, 2000), 5.

[4] The Fiji Times, (Monday, May 22, 2006), 8.

[5] “Methodists stay out,” in The Fiji Times, (Tuesday, May 23, 2000), 15.

[6] “Bishop calls for prayer,” in The Fiji Times, (Wednesday, May 24, 2000), 8.

[7] Tanya McCutchan, “Repent, looters told,” in The Fiji Times (Wednesday, May 24, 2000), 13.

[8] “Churches unite against crimes” in The Fiji Times, (Thursday, May 25, 2005), 13.

[9] Organised by the National Council of Women in Fiji.

[10] Lynda Newland, “Fiji” in Globalization and the Re-Shaping of Christianity in the Pacific Islands, M. Ernst (Ed), (Suva: PTC, 2006), 356.

[11] Yabaki, Interview.

[12] Yabaki, Interview.

[13] Manfred Ernst, “Conclusion: The Role of the Church and Christians in a Globalized World,” in Globalization and the Re-Shaping of Christianity in the Pacific Islands, M. Ernst (Ed), (Suva: PTC, 2006), 750.

The Prophetic Voice in Our Time

2011-12-02T04:53:00.002+13:00

Excerpt from “Towards a contextual theology of prophetic communication :Communicating the Prophetic Voice of the Mainline Churches and the Prophetic Role of the News Media in Contemporary Fiji-Island Society”

(SUVA: PTC/BDES Thesis, September 2006)

The phenomenon of prophetic communication in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries is the result of two basic factors. The spread of Christianity globally, with effects comparable to the growth and development of the early Christian communities in the New Testament, has seen an increase in the number of people who have heard the Gospel as well as those who have accepted Jesus into their lives. Similarly, to the events of two millennia ago, the increase in number of Christians, and those who listen to God, interpreting “the signs of the times,” has led to men, women and children hearing the prophetic call to righteousness and holiness and accepting that call. Also at the same time, the development and expansion of communication technology has resulted in more accessibility, availability, and variety. With the pervasiveness of the mass media, opening of windows to many different worldviews and events, the stories of many prophets from other lands are received and retold. The following examples illustrate the common message within the diversity of the prophetic voice.

a. Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Rev. Dr. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a theologian, who left the security of the United States to return to Nazi Germany to work in the Confessional Church and during the second world war worked in opposition to the Nazis and was arrested and ultimately executed in 1945 for plotting against Adolf Hitler in 1945, just weeks before Germany surrendered. The publishing of his letters and papers smuggled out of prison have served as an example of the modern prophetic call for righteousness. An essay titled ‘After 10 years,’ written a few months before his arrest in 1943 serve as to the point of death:

Who stands his ground? Only the man whose ultimate criterion is not his reason, his principles, his conscience, his freedom or his virtue, but who is ready to sacrifice all these things when he is called to obedient and responsible action in faith and exclusive allegiance to God. The responsible man seeks to make his whole life a response to the question and call to God…. It is infinitely easier to suffer in obedience to a human command than to accept suffering as free responsible men. It is infinitely easier to suffer with others than to suffer alone. It is infinitely easier to suffer as public heroes than to suffer apart and in ignominy. It is infinitely easier to suffer physical death than to endure spiritual suffering. Christ suffered as a free man alone, apart and in ignominy, in body and in spirit, and since that day, many Christians have suffered with him. [1]

Bonhoeffer's story echoes the biblical tradition of prophecy. Like the prophets of the Old Testament who risked all to censure corrupt kings and priests, Bonhoeffer recognized that God calls us not only to care for the poor, oppressed and vulnerable, but also to challenge any religious or secular power that perpetrates injustice. His life exemplifies the prophetic call to action:

Loosen all bonds that bind unfairly, let the oppressed go free, break every yoke. Share your bread with the hungry, take the homeless into your home. Clothe the naked when you see him, do not turn from your fellow human beings.[2]

Bonhoeffer's work came to fulfilment only after his death. His insistence on the significance of a committed response to Christ's Sermon on the Mount, a call to social justice, inspired many of the world's great civil rights leaders, including Martin Luther King, Junior, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu. His concept of a "religionless Christianity"[3] has helped Christian theology face uncertain landscape of the future. It is an idea, which exposes the vitality and relevance of faith in a world, as Bonhoeffer put it, "come of age."[4]

b. Martin Luther King Junior

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Junior, can be considered a modern-day prophet who brought a message of freedom for his people while also speaking truths some did not want to hear. King's message was about more than civil rights. He was a dedicated defender of economic justice, bridging the gap between haves and have-nots, raising up the poorest to reach the fullness of their potential. He was opposed to war, not only because cost in terms of lives and destruction of property, but also because it sidetracks the society from addressing the terrible ills that exist within it.

King's legacy continues to inspire those who march toward justice and peace. Sadly, his dream, “that one day all children will live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character,”[5] still only remains a prophetic vision. King’s concept of the prophetic role of the modern-day Church held that the churches must affirm that, “every human life is a reflection of divinity and that every act of injustice mars and defaces the image of God in man.”[6] King agreed with DeWolf that:

To be truly Christian, a prophetic utterance must arise from love for the victims of injustice or other evil and desire to bring all who are involved into a community of forgiveness, grace and mutual assistance.[7]

Unlike Bonhoeffer’s posthumous publications and recognition, performing his prophetic role in the United States of America, King was surrounded by the media and the subject of news broadcasts on radio and television and articles in magazines and newspapers. He gave regular interviews and addresses to reporters and journalist associations. His “I Have a Dream,” address at the March on Washington for Civil Rights in August 1963 at the Lincoln Memorial was not only attended by hundreds of thousands of marchers and supporters of civil rights but also broadcast live on radio and television to an audience of millions.

c. Oscar Romero

In 1980, in the midst of a US funded war that the UN Truth Commission called genocidal, Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador promised history that life, not death, would have the last word. “I do not believe in death without resurrection,” he is quoted as saying. “If they kill me, I will be resurrected in the Salvadorian people.” On March 23, 1980, he preached his last radio broadcast sermon directed at the National Guard, the police and the military, which has been described as his most thunderous prophetic denunciation of repressive acts committed by the security forces[8]:

I should like to make a special appeal to the men of the army, and in particular to the soldiers of the National Guard, the police, and the constabulary. Brothers! We are the same people! You are slaying your campesino brothers and sisters! When a human being orders you to kill, the law of God must prevail: “You shall not kill!” No soldier is obliged to obey an order in violation of the law of God. No one is bound to obey an immoral law. It is time you recovered your conscience, and obeyed your conscience instead of orders to commit sin. The church is the defender of God’s rights, God’s law, human dignity, and the worth of persons. It cannot remain silent before such an abomination. We ask the government to consider seriously the fact that reforms are of no use when they are steeped in all this blood.

In the name of God, in the name of this suffering people whose cries rise to heaven more loudly each day, I implore you, I beg you, I order you in the name of God: stop the repression!

The next day, as he celebrated Mass, a sharpshooter murdered him. A number of those who attended his funeral were also shot in front of the cathedral. Romero had a prophetic view of the church’s voice and speaking truth to power at the peak of the repression and persecution:

If they ever take our radio [which had already been jammed and bombed], suspend our newspaper, silence us, put to death all of us priests, bishop included, and you are left alone – a people without priests – then each of you will have to be God’s microphone. Each of you will have to be a messenger, a prophet. The church will always exist as long as even one baptised person is left alive![9]

[1] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, “After Ten Years,” in Letters and Papers from Prison, (London: SCM Press, 1953), 134-147.

[2] Is 58:6-7

[3] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Prisoner for God: Letters and Papers from Prison, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1957), 123.

[4] http://www.bonhoeffer.com/bon2.htm, 6^th June, 2006.

[5] From the speech, “I have a Dream,” at the Lincoln Memorial, Washington: 28 August, 1963.

[6] Martin Luther King, Jr., Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community, (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1967), 99.

[7] L. Harold DeWolf, Responsible Freedom, (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1971), 209.

[8] Jon Sobrino, Archbishop Romero: Memories and Reflections, (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990), 116.

[9] Sobrino, 34.

Romero: "Stop the Repression!" from 1989 film about El Salvadoran Archibishop Oscar Romero

2011-12-02T04:34:00.002+13:00

Romero: "The mission of the Church.."

2011-12-02T04:22:00.002+13:00

Response to Beyond fear, is understanding

2011-11-30T15:14:00.002+13:00

On 30/11/11 at 8.01am

Hi James,

Indeed your article in the Fiji Times resonates the experiences of many others.

Perhaps some still face similar bullying here in NZ.

Good luck with your search of further knowledge.

With best wishes

Bhakta Naicker

Dear Bhakta,

Thank you for your email, and for reading the article.

Yes, I am sure many people of varied backgrounds experience the similar situation to mine - although these days, the perpetrators of racism and bullying are not limited to one social or ethnic group.

My point was our lack of awareness or understanding, leads to fear, which leads to discrimination. This happens when we allow perceptions based on stereotypes or prejudice to shape our understanding of others... those different from us, be it ethnically, culturally, socially, by gender or sexuality.

This is the core of the continuing ethnocentric mindset in Fiji. This must change if our nation is to move forward, truly.

Sorry for ranting and raving.

God bless you.

In Peace,

James

"Simplicity, Serenity, Spontaneity"

Beyond fear, is understanding

2011-11-30T13:13:00.002+13:00

Published in the Fiji Times (Off the Wall with Padre James Bhagwan)

Wednesday 30th November, 2011

I can still remember the point in my life when I realised that my colour and race mattered. Being a Fijian and raised in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural environment, my best friends were just that, my friends. That Hazel or Sunil were Indo-Fijian or Inoke or Orisi were i-Taukei, or that Ronald was Chinese, Philip and Peter – European (Peter was actually Australian, but it didn’t matter back then), that Timoci, Robbie, Michael and Jonathan were Kai-loma or Part European or that Visoni and Raymond were Rotuman were never things that really crossed our minds.

I mean I am sure we recognised it, but our friendship overshadowed any physical differences. We played, we fought, and we made up, hung out. What made us different were our abilities, our interests and hobbies, whether we liked soccer or swimming and whether we liked Western or Commando comics. (I liked Commando but loved Phantom).

That changed when I went to boarding school in New Zealand. I remember the afternoon in 1985 when I got into my first real fight. This was not the play fights or the “you-ate-my-lunch” / “you-cheated-in-marbles” / “you-like-the-girl-I-like” (yes we had those in primary school) fights. This was the first time I experienced the frustration, the rage of being ridiculed, of being made to feel worth less that the other human being who was taunting me because my skin was darker than theirs. I was only twelve years old at the time but if my friend had not stopped me, I don’t know if I would have stopped myself.

Racism became something I had to get used to when living in a foreign country. I was the stranger, the other, the different. I remember being told at night to “smile so that I could be seen”. Racial slurs, intimidation were part of my boarding school experience. So was sleeping with a knife under my pillow. I learned to stand my ground when I could and to seek support when I couldn’t from the other older Pacific Islanders in my boarding house (my first experience at regional cooperation) who, having experienced racism themselves, were always there to back me up. I learned to bear indignity silently; and how to make my point to someone (at knife point). I was thirteen years old.

The other boys were also thirteen years old. What did they know of the world? What did they know about this boy from Fiji except what they were told by their elders, by their role models, or what they heard from others? I believe we were all good kids. Yet we were all insecure. We were all afraid. Afraid of those bigger than us. Afraid of failing. Afraid of being seen to be weaker. So we made ourselves feel better through our bigotry. I became racist too. I made fun of the boy who was heavier or not as bright or cool as I was.

That I came back to Fiji at a time when the one place I thought ethnicity didn’t matter was experiencing ethnic conflict in all spheres of life – political, social, religious and economic was a rude awakening. I was made to realise that those kids at boarding school were not the exception to the norm. Contrary to what some have said, I believe the ethnic conflicts or discrimination that flared up three decades ago were not simply simmering embers of racial discontent but the fanning of insecurity. The reality is our aggression comes from not hate but fear. People still fear what they don't understand or what's not familiar. For so long many of us lived side-by-side but not together. So instead of loving our neighbour we remained suspicious of them. That suspicion led us to fear, to discriminate.

How quick we are to make judgments based on stereotypes. How quick we are to make assumptions based on physicality. We make judgements about people we don’t even know. What is worse, these days it seems that we don’t even take the time to get to know people. Our judgements, our perceptions of others are based on the judgements and perceptions of others. What happens when we get it wrong? What happens when the oppressive structures we have built up cause someone to suffer? What happens when we withhold the one thing no one is supposed to be able to take away from another – their dignity?

Last week my dear mother celebrated her 73^rd birthday. Her birthday is special for a number of reasons: it marks one month until Christmas and two months until my late father’s birthday. It also marks the start of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence. 16 days in which we need to remember how many women and girls suffer because their human dignity is not valued by those who would never wish the same suffering on themselves.

Tomorrow is World AIDS Day. Tomorrow many articles will be written about the ongoing response to the HIV and AIDS epidemic. I understand that this year the focus will be on discrimination of people living with HIV and AIDS. Again the phrase rings true - people still fear what they don't understand or what's not familiar. Those living with HIV and AIDS, those who are most at risk, and those in vulnerable and marginalised groups still suffer stigma and discrimination.

"Stigma is unacceptable, because stigma kills." These were the words of the Governor General of Papua New Guinea, Grand Chief Sir Paulias Matane, as he launched the Papua New Guinea Christian Leader's Alliance on HIV and AIDS last year. Tomorrow as you read, hear and see stories about those who suffer and the lives in the balance of the HIV and AIDS epidemic, ask yourself if you are person who is willing to transform the stigma and discrimination surrounding HIV and AIDS into understanding, or whether you are someone who keeps the vicious cycle going.

If you think that is a difficult question then, simply ask yourself if whether fear and suspicion will be the guide by which you relate to others or whether understanding and acceptance?

Many of us learn at an early age that, male and female, we are created in the image and likeness of God. Unfortunately, many of us also misunderstand this and make God in our own image. What doesn’t fit our image of God is to be feared, mistrusted, and eventually mistreated.

Let’s correct our perceptions together, let’s understand, accept and try to even love the stranger, the other, the different. Who knows, they may be trying to do the same to you.

One person at a time. One relationship at a time. One step forward at a time.

“Be still, stand in love, pay attention.”

ENDS

Rev. J.S. Bhagwan is currently a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Email: padrejames@gmail.com or visit http://thejournalofaspiritualwonderer.blogspot.com/

Are You Your Brother's (or Sister's) Keeper?

2011-11-23T11:07:00.004+13:00

Published in Off the Wall with Padre James Bhagwan - The Fiji Times Wednesday, November 23, 2011

In Fiji the term “brother” (and “sister” for that matter) is used to demonstrate a closeness of relationship that is not necessarily based on blood ties. The phrase, “my brother,” often means closeness between friends. It expresses a bond based on shared identity, shared experiences – it is a celebration of commonalities. Brothers (and sisters) not by blood but perhaps by “soul”.

I have many “soul brothers” and “soul sisters”. These men and women come from different backgrounds, ethnicities, cultures and social status. Yet the term “brother” and “sister” means we are part of a family, a mataqali. I know that this is not a unique to me. Many, if not all of you have people that, although not related by blood, you refer to as “brother” or “sister”.

Even in our cultures we continue to seek out ways to forge relationships. The terms kai, naita, tau, vasu are used beyond their traditional understanding to create a relationship with the other – a sense of closeness, a connection.

The Girimitayas, had their jahaji-bhai, their brothers (and sisters) on which they crossed the kala pani and left their mother-land to what would, for many, be their new home and the mother-land of their descendants. This bond of shared experience, shared suffering and shared hopes and dreams may not have lasted much beyond the second generation but in its time was an important support network.

Perhaps one of the more thought-provoking questions in the Bible is that one asked by Cain. According to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition, Cain had killed his brother because God had accepted Abel's offering, but not his own (Gen 4:3-8, Holy Bible). When the Lord inquired concerning Abel, Cain's response was: "Am I my brother's keeper?" (Gen 4:9)

This is a question we in Fiji would do well to ask ourselves today. Are we our brother's keeper?

Do we have a responsibility to watch out for and care for one another?

There is a saying in the Christian scriptures, “Anyone who claims to live in God's light and hates a brother or sister is still in the dark. It's the person who loves brother and sister who dwells in God's light and doesn't block the light from others. But whoever hates is still in the dark, stumbles around in the dark, doesn't know which end is up, blinded by the darkness.” (1 John 2:9-11 The Message)

You cannot be blind and be a good keeper. "Am I my brother's keeper?" confirms Cain's blindness. One cannot be a good keeper or mindful of other's welfare when they hold on to spite, bitterness, unforgiveness, jealousy, etc. If one claims to be kind, concerned, a lover of humanity, a peacemaker; yet clings to any of hateful attributes within him/herself, better that they not add hypocrisy to the lot by speaking about or marching for peace, justice or equality.

In his book “Stride toward Freedom, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jnr. wrote that the person who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as the one who helps perpetrate it. The person who accepts evil without protesting against it, is really cooperating with it.

When he received the Nobel Prize for Peace, he said in his acceptance speech:

"Ultimately a great nation is a compassionate nation. No individual or nation can be great if it does not have a concern for ‘the least of these.’ Deeply etched in the fibre of our religious tradition is the conviction that men are made in the image of God and that they are souls of infinite metaphysical value, the heirs of a legacy of dignity and worth. If we feel this as a profound moral fact, we cannot be content to see men hungry, to see men victimized with starvation and ill health when we have the means to help them…

… In the final analysis, the rich must not ignore the poor because both rich and poor are tied in a single garment of destiny. All life is interrelated, and all men are interdependent. The agony of the poor diminishes the rich, and the salvation of the poor enlarges the rich. We are inevitably our brothers’ keeper because of the interrelated structure of reality."

King was inspired in his non-violent action for civil rights in America by Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violent resistance to the British colonisation in India. Gandhi’s truth-force or satyagraha was not just a philosophy for the liberation of India but for the liberation of humankind, “My mission is not merely brotherhood of Indian humanity. My mission is not merely freedom of India,” he said. “But through realization of the freedom of India, I hope to realize and carry on the mission of the brotherhood of man.”

His words, “Humanity is an ocean”, if the few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty,” serve to remind us of the capacity for goodness that lies in each human being – in each one of us.

Brothers fight. Sisters fight. Brothers and sisters fight. This is sibling rivalry.

Psychologists believe that sibling rivalry comes from competition for parental attention, love, and approval. The amount of conflict depends on the perception of parents about the role of each child in the family , the personalities of the parents and children, the number and spacing of children in the family, outside resources available to the children, and parental beliefs about child rearing, including their attitudes toward gender, birth order , and competition. Sibling rivalry is also affected by the presence in the family of a special needs child, divorce or other family trauma, and ethnic and cultural attitudes toward family relationships.

How does sibling rivalry affect the brotherhood and sister hood of humankind?

Suggestions for parents to reduce sibling rivalry include:

· working to see each child as a unique individual with his or her own strengths and weaknesses

· spending some one-on-one time with each child every week

· encouraging children to develop their own interests and friends independent of the interests and friends of their siblings

· limiting the amount of care giving expected of older siblings for younger ones

· setting and enforcing firm rules about name calling, teasing, and physical aggression in the family

· praising cooperative behavior

· insisting that each child's personal possessions and privacy are respected by the other children in the family (http://www.healthofchildren.com/S/Sibling-Rivalry.html#ixzz1eLQvniau)

What would it mean to apply these suggestions to our absolute failure to watch out for and care for one another?

We persecute our brothers and sisters when we should be protecting them. We oppress our brothers and sisters when we should be empowering them.

Jesus once made a comment that took many by surprise. While he was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers showed up. They were outside trying to get a message to him. Someone told Jesus, "Your mother and brothers are out here, wanting to speak with you." Jesus didn't respond directly, but said, "Who do you think my mother and brothers are?" He then stretched out his hand toward his disciples. "Look closely. These are my mother and brothers. Obedience is thicker than blood. The person who obeys my heavenly Father's will is my brother and sister and mother." (Matthew 12:46-50 - The Message)

Those whom Jesus gathers around him are not marked by bonds of clan and kinship, blood and race – they a marked by obedience to the will that would have them love their neighbour, feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, care for the sick and have compassion for the imprisoned. They are their brother and sister’s keepers.

Are you?

“Be Still, Stand in Love, Pay Attention”

ENDS

Rev. J.S. Bhagwan is currently a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Email: padrejames@gmail.com

Civil Disobedience- A History of the Concept

2011-11-18T18:52:00.002+13:00

I came across the following page in my research for a term paper on Natural Law......

The concept of civil disobedience has evolved over a long period of time. Ideas drawn from different periods of history and from different cultures have contributed to its evolution. The idea that there is a law that transcends the laws of the state is found in Socrates (c. 470–399 B.C.E.), in some of the classical Greek tragedies, and in the Indian concept of dharma (duty). In these traditions, should the higher law and the laws of the state come into conflict, the individual had the obligation to disobey the laws of the state. In the Middle Ages, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) defended the natural-law view that unjust laws did not bind the citizen in conscience. John Locke (1632–1704) taught that the government derived its authority from the people, that one of the purposes of the government was the protection of the natural rights of the people, and that the people had the right to alter the government should it fail to discharge its fundamental duties.

Thoreau.

The writer who made the theory famous, put it into practice, and gave the practice the name "civil disobedience" was Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862). His ideas on the subject are found in the celebrated lecture that he delivered in 1848 to the Concord Lyceum in Massachusetts, under the title "On the Relation of the Individual to the State." It was first published in printed form in 1849 under a different title, "Resistance to Civil Government," in Aesthetic Papers, a volume edited by Elizabeth Peabody. It first appeared under the title "Civil Disobedience" only in 1866, four years after Thoreau's death, in a volume of his writings entitled A Yankee in Canada with Anti-Slavery and Reform Papers.

Two principles underlie Thoreau's conception of civil disobedience. The first is that the authority of the government depends on the consent of the governed. The second is that justice is superior to the laws enacted by the government, and the individual has the right to judge whether a given law reflects or flouts justice. In the latter case the individual has the duty to disobey the law and accept the consequences of the disobedience nonviolently. In Thoreau's case, he judged that the laws upholding slavery and supporting the Mexican War (1846–1848) were unjust. He chose to spend a night in jail rather than submit to the unjust laws.

Gandhi.

Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) broadened the scope of civil disobedience and internationalized its practice. Gandhian civil disobedience originated in 1906, in South Africa, as part of his campaign for the defense of the civil rights of the disenfranchised Indian immigrants. On his return to India in 1915, he made civil disobedience the primary moral force behind his leadership of the Indian nationalist movement.

His idea of civil disobedience drew from a wide variety of intellectual sources. Plato's Apology of Socrates was one of them. In 1908 he published a paraphrase of it under the title The Story of a Soldier of Truth. The Sermon on the Mount had a profound influence on him, especially as interpreted by Leo Tolstoy in his The Kingdom of God Is within You (1893). Patanjali's Yogasutra and the Bhagavad Gita also guided the development of his thoughts on nonviolence as it applied to civil disobedience.

When in 1906 he started the civil rights campaign in South Africa, Gandhi did not know what term to use to describe it. (He read Thoreau only in 1907). Some called the new campaign passive resistance, in comparison with the British Passive Resistance Movement against the Education Act of 1902. But he was unhappy with the comparison for two reasons. The first was that British passive resistance did not forbid violence as a means of achieving its goal; the second was that it did not require that its practitioners be free from hatred of their political opponents.

Gandhi called his practice "satyagraha," a Gujarati word meaning "firmness in adhering to truth." Satyagraha, free of the defects of passive resistance, introduced six elements into the theory and practice of civil disobedience:

First, its moral basis was grounded in truth, a basis much deeper than that provided by the theory of consent. To be binding, laws had to be truthful. All untruthful laws had to be resisted, though civilly—that is, by truthful means.
Second, civil disobedience presupposed the obligation to obey the state: only those had the right to practice civil disobedience who knew "how to offer voluntary and deliberate obedience" to the laws of the state.
Third, commitment to nonviolence was an essential component of civil disobedience. The commitment in question could be either moral or tactical, depending on the moral aptitude of the practitioner.
Fourth, the practice of civil disobedience required a minimum degree of moral fitness, to be acquired by the exercise of such virtues as truthfulness, nonviolence, temperance, courage, fearlessness, and freedom from greed.
Fifth, a practitioner of civil disobedience had to accept the punishment consequent to the disobedience voluntarily, and without complaint.
Finally, engagement in civil disobedience had to be complemented by engagement in organized social work.

For Gandhi, it was not enough to seek to improve the state; it was equally necessary to seek to improve civil society. To assist Indians to combine civil disobedience with voluntary social work, he wrote Constructive Programme (1941, revised in 1945). It identified the major social evils prevalent in Indian society, such as religious intolerance, caste violence, and discrimination against the untouchables, minorities, and women. The removal of these social evils by voluntary work was as important as the removal of unjust laws by civil disobedience. According to Gandhi, "civil disobedience without the constructive program will be like a paralyzed hand attempting to lift a spoon."

Martin Luther King Jr.

The third major figure who contributed greatly to the development of the practice of civil disobedience was Martin Luther King Jr. (1929–1968). He made civil disobedience the distinguishing feature of the civil rights movement in the United States. In this he was deeply influenced by Gandhi's methods. But he was also influenced by Christian humanism, as is evident in his "Letter from Birmingham Jail" (1963). The letter has been called the most widely read and discussed manifesto on civil disobedience since Thoreau's essay. Addressed to his fellow African-American clergymen, it explained why immediate, direct, nonviolent action was a duty incumbent upon every American who wished to rid the nation of segregationist laws. Here King faced a dilemma. On the one hand, the law had by 1954 declared segregation to be unconstitutional, yet on the other it also tolerated segregationist practices in certain states. How then could one advocate breaking some laws while obeying others?

One could do both, he contended, because one had the right to judge each law on its own merit. And the criterion he recommended for making such judgement was drawn from Christian humanism. According to St. Augustine of Hippo (354–430), an unjust law was no law at all. And according to Aquinas, an unjust law was a human law that was not rooted in eternal and natural law. Just laws uplifted human beings, while unjust ones degraded them. The segregationist laws were unjust and dehumanizing and therefore had to be disobeyed. King contributed greatly to making civil disobedience a respected tradition of American politics. In this he marks an advance on Thoreau, who seemed to appeal, hitherto, mostly to New England intellectuals. King actualized the potential that was in Thoreau.

In the late twentieth century, civil disobedience became a tactic adopted by various protest movements worldwide. The anti-nuclear weapons movement, the green movement, and the movement against globalization have adopted it with varying degrees of enthusiasm.

The Solidier of Peace Gets Scratched for Justice for the People

2011-11-17T00:59:00.004+13:00

Press play to hear: Mahatma Gandhi is a Solider of Peace. Albert Einstein's thoughts on Gandhi and Non-violence and Lee "Scratch" Perry sings "Give more justice to the people."

No pictures... listen if you have ears to hear!

An Airwave Surfer’s Lament

2011-11-16T10:50:00.004+13:00

Published in the Fiji Times as “Words of inspiration” in the Column “Off the Wall with Padre James Bhagwan,” Wednesday, November 16, 2011

With Fiji about to get its next “free to air” television channel the hype of who has the best coverage, programmes, and presenters is bound to intensify as the broadcast war shifts into a new genre – from radio to television. With a small share of the pie in terms of advertising revenue, competition across the media will be tougher, especially in the broadcast media

The “hype” around coverage, audience (listeners and viewers) and programmes around which businesses can market their products will benefit advertisers with competitive rates being offered. It will benefit whichever station can get the advertisers and audience to believe its “hype”. But will it really benefit the audience?

As someone who has had some experience in radio, television and print in the local commercial, state-owned and government media organizations, I continue to be increasingly concerned about what is being churned out on our airwaves, in terms of content.

As the commercial broadcast media strives to outdo its competition, the public interest has taken a back seat to “keeping up with the Joneses” – in other words international media marketing of music and television is dictating what we hear and see. Here’s a little newsflash: the “Joneses” don’t live here.

Of course there is a place for Top 40 music, the hits of US, UK, Australia and everywhere else on radio – it’s popular. Of course there is a place for the latest crime, action, comedy and drama television serials from the same countries – they’re popular. They are a big part of the global popular culture. But is that it? Is that all there is? Are the words at the end of the Warner Brothers’ Loonytoons Cartoons “That’s All Folks” true?

The sad thing is that, all those who run commercial broadcast companies, and they’re all commercial broadcast companies now, regardless of who owns them; all those who will talk about giving the listener or viewer what they want have the benefit of growing up in a time when they were exposed and shaped by the very things they now ignored. Yet even with the benefit of this exposure, they neglect to offer the same exposure to the next generation.

When I was growing up, radio was it. Even when video came in, radio how we connected with the world – the whole world. It was our world-wide-web. But it wasn’t just a diet of Top 40 music and news. I heard classical music, jazz, I learned about the world through the little transistor radio I had.

When people talked on the radio (not just the broadcasters or “personalities” but ordinary people – sometimes doing extraordinary things), we paid attention to what they said. We heard the voices and the words of people who inspired nations, and the world. We heard their messages.

Now we just listen to the music inspired by the people inspired by these words. Now we don’t listen but we watch. Image is what counts. We no longer pay attention to what is being said but what the speaking is wearing, how they look – shallow visual attraction wins over depth of message. How sad.

I believe that radio still is the dominant media in Fiji. Media theorist Marshall McLuhan writes about the difference between television and radio:

“TV is a cool medium. It rejects hot figures and hot issues [...]” He continues that hot characters appearing on TV appeared “rendered as a cartoon” while “Radio [was] a cool medium and [took] cartoon characters seriously.”

McLuhan states “Radio affects most intimately, person-to-person, offering a world of unspoken communication between writer-speaker and the listener. That is the immediate aspect of radio. A private experience. The subliminal depths of radio are charged with the resonating echoes of tribal horns and antique drums. This is inherent in the very nature of this medium, with its power to turn the psyche and society into a single echo chamber.”

McLuhan believed the power of intimacy and the potential for creating relationships in a shared personal and communal experience (kinship) through radio broadcasting by “offering a world of unspoken communication between writer-speaker and listener”.

Radio has the power to involve people in one another in terms of “the power to re-tribalize mankind” reversing individualism into collectivism. But this power is largely unnoticed in western cultures. Or it is noticed and for commercial interests, ignored.

It is ironic that despite a strong oral/aural culture and a traditionally relationship-oriented community, this has also proved to be the case in Fiji, as the introduction of television and certain aspects of commercial radio have fragmented the aural and oral community which radio once fostered.

While the internet is touted as the information superhighway, less than 30% of the world has access to the internet. That means the majority of the world – at least 70% is without internet access. Half of the now 7 billion people that inhabit this planet have water problems. A quarter of the world lives without electricity. Radio remains still the best means of communication, whether plugged into the “grid”, powered by batteries, hand, the sun or if you are fortunate to own one – on your mobile phone.

The funny thing is that whether it is radio or television, at the end of the day the same excuse is given. The choice of an audience that has a limited menu is really no choice at all. As for the advertisers, the sponsors – well, they will sponsor whatever the audience listens to – and in most cases they have had the same broad exposure that the broadcasters have had.

So broadcasters, is it going to be the same dismissive response and talk of commercial markets? Or are you willing to open your airwaves up to some radical radio and television programmes and content such as local music on the English language stations, history (and not just the “on this day in history” kind) , arts and culture?

You provide the narrative, the story of our nation. Please don’t let it be just a soundtrack or a short filler.

“Be still, stand in love, pay attention.”

ENDS.

Rev. J.S. Bhagwan has won awards in Radio (PIBA/AFTRS), TV (Commonwealth Vision Award) and Print media (FAME), and is currently a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Email: padrejames@gmail.com (Facebook/Twitter).

A vision of the whole human race

2011-11-13T20:06:00.004+13:00

Revolutionary ideas do not come from books and manifestos, but from experiences and connections with different peoples.

(Source: Al Jazeera)

On February 22, 1803, Colonel Edward Despard was hung and beheaded in London for organising a revolutionary conspiracy to overthrow King George III and establish a republic in Britain.

Among the crowd of 20,000 in front of the gallows was Colonel Despard's wife and partner in conspiracy, Catherine, an African American who Despard met during his military service in the Caribbean. She helped him compose the speechhe made with the rope around his neck:

"... his Majesty's Ministers... avail themselves of a legal pretext to destroy a man, because he has been a friend to truth, to liberty and to justice. Because he has been a friend to the poor and the oppressed. But Citizens, I hope and trust, notwithstanding my fate ... that the principles of freedom, of humanity and of justice will finally triumph over falsehood, tyranny and delusion, and [over] every principle inimical to the interests of the human race."

What Despard meant by the "human race" was far in advance of the political theorists of his time. He included in this concept not only white males, but women and men of every colour and every status and class, native peoples, slaves and all the mixtures of white, brown and black that he had encountered during his service in the Americas.

How did the son of a family of small, Irish landlords, who became an accomplished professional soldier, develop such an expansive view of humanity?

As a boy in Ireland, he watched peasants driven off the land as English-backed landlords enclosed land that had been held in common. As a young officer building fortifications in Jamaica, he was nursed by Afro-Caribbean women. He learned to effectively command multi-racial work parties, and saw firsthand the terror used to enforce discipline among slaves, sailors, soldiers and workers.

Along with a young Horatio Nelson, Despard led a harrowing expedition to evict the Spanish from Nicaragua. They successfully captured the main Spanish fort but then their men began to die from starvation and disease.

Challenging societal norms

Survival was possible only by cooperating with nearby free communities of Mosquito Indians - composed in fact of native Americans, runaway slaves and lower class whites who preferred freedom to backbreaking labour. (Nelson, who became Britain's greatest naval hero, would later unsuccessfully appeal for clemency for Despard and for a pension for Catherine.)

Despard then became the Crown's leading official in British Honduras. There he sought to distribute land to indigent men and women of colour. He set aside lands for common use; sought to keep food prices down "for the poorer sort of people"; and worked with Indians who understood the local ecology.

The landlords and big merchants were outraged. One railed that Despard had placed the "lowest Mulatto or free Negro" on an equal footing with the wealthy whites.

Not to be trifled with, the landlords and merchants appealed to their networks in London and had Despard removed. Despard and Catherine returned to London and started plotting their conspiracy which ended on the gallows.

What does the story of Edward and Catherine Despard offer us today, as we live through another moment of upheaval, revolution and counter-revolution?

One thing the Despards teach us is that new political ideas do not generally arise from intellectuals and theorists alone. Rather the cut and thrust of experience and practice throws up new political possibilities. 'Practitioners' like Despard draw on their stock of ideas to develop new and creative responses to the situations that confront them.

It is worth remembering that many of those we regard as great thinkers were also practitioners. Karl Marx was a revolutionary not an academic, and his comrade Friedrich Engels managed a factory. Karl von Clausewitz, the philosopher of war, was a Prussian officer with much experience of war. Socrates too was a veteran soldier; Freud a working psychologist; Keynes a civil servant. Gandhi was an activist.

Even Rene Descartes, the supreme rationalist philosopher, was a professional soldier who sought to 'gather experiences'. His worry that he might be a brain in a vat, fooled by his senses, was perhaps an early modern case of PTSD.

Despard developed his expansive concept of the human race because he had lived and worked in the multi-racial world of the 18th century Atlantic, not because he had read Immanuel Kant. In any case, Kant's cosmopolitanism was profoundly limited by comparison with Despard's. Kant believed that "Humanity achieves its greatest perfection with the White race".

In Haiti in 1801, revolting slaves managed to produce a constitution that went well beyond the liberal thought of the day. All slaves were freed and everyone made equal before the law. The US Constitution of 1787 regarded slaves as three-fifths of a person so that their white owners could have more representation in Congress.

Counter-revolution

And so, when we look upon the Arab Spring, we should not interpret it as a matter of Arabs having finally read John Locke and Thomas Jefferson and applied Western ideas. We should look instead for the new ideas, the new possibilities, the new politics created up by the protesters, activists and ordinary people who have made revolution.

We should be cognizant too that the Arab Winter will be a university of counter-revolution, as new forms of repression, of neo-imperialism and of exploitation are developed in response to novel circumstances.

The Despards have one last, difficult lesson to teach us. For over two centuries, liberal political theorists have been writing of human rights and democracy. Their well-intentioned acolytes have sought to spread the word around the world.

Yet today, despite globalisation and multiculturalism, it is difficult to imagine political activism, cooperation and resistance across lines of race, religion and region that match what the Despards achieved.

Think about it: A lordly Irish officer in the 18th century finds common cause, even love, with Indians, Africans and all manner of oppressed folk, and returns to the West as a revolutionary citizen of the world. Catherine, too, of slave origins and "violently in love" with her husband, crossed lines to help organise London's sailors (white and black), longshoremen, and other workers in the failed plot to create a republic.

Here and there, in our time, Westerners, Christians and Muslims may find common cause - as in the Palestinian solidarity movement; or whites, blacks and mixed race people, as in the resistance to the apartheid regime in South Africa.

But in a jingoistic age, when Westerners, Asians and Muslims are all convinced of their own superiority, a multi-racial, multi-regional, multi-cultural resistance movement on the model the Despards cooked up is almost unthinkable.

Despite our own delusions, we have regressed - not progressed - from the Despards' vision of the whole human race.

Tarak Barkawi is Senior Lecturer in the Centre of International Studies, University of Cambridge.

Al Jazeera readers can find out more about the Despard conspiracy in Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker’s The Many-Headed Hydra: The Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic (London: Verso, 2000)

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

Source:

Al Jazeera

“Five Bandits” (1970) By Kim Chiha

2011-11-13T14:31:00.003+13:00

The spring sun was warm, the day pleasant, the wind gentle, the clouds floating by. The 

five  bandits,  each  brandishing  a  golf  club,  each  determined  to  win,  set  out  to  display  their 

miraculous skills. The first bandit stepped forth, the one called the business tycoon, wearing a 

custom‑made  suit  tailored  of  bank‑notes,  a  hat  made  of  banknotes,  shoes  made  of  banknotes 

and gloves knitted of banknotes, with a gold watch, gold rings, gold buttons, a gold necktie pin, 

gold cuff links, a gold buckle, golden teeth, golden nails, golden toenails, and golden zippers, 

with a golden watch chain dangling from his wiggling ass.

…

Now the second bandit steps forth with his cronies from the National Assembly. Here 

come hunchbacks, alley foxes, angry dogs, and monkeys. Hunched at the waist, their eyes are as 

narrow and slanted as Ts’ao Ts’ao.

 Lumbering, rasping, covering their hairy bodies with the 

empty oaths of revolution, coughing up mucus, raising their golf clubs high into the sky like 

flags, thunderously yelling slogans, rolling on viper‑colored jagged floors: 

Revolution, from old evil to new evil! 

Renovation, from illegal profiteering to profiteering illegally! 

Modernization, from unfair elections to elections unfair!

…

Now the third bandit emerges, looking like a rubber balloon with viperous pointed eyes, 

his lips firmly closed. Portraying a clean government official, when sweets are offered, he shows 

that he doesn’t like them by shaking his head. Indeed, it must be true. But look at this fellow’s 

other  face.  He  snoops  here  and  smiles  there,  stout,  impudent,  sly;  his  teeth  are  crooked  and 

black from an over indulgence in sweets, worn out until they could decay no more. 

He sits in a wide chair as deep as the sea, before a desk as high as the sky, saying “no 

thank you” with one hand and “thank you” with the other. He cannot do possible things, but he 

can do impossible things; he has piles of documents on top of his desk and bundles of money 

under  it.  He  acts  like  an  obedient  shaggy  dog  when  flattering  superiors,  but  like  a  snarling 

hunting  dog  to  subordinates.  He  puts  public  funds  into  his  left  pocket  and  bribes  for  favors 

done into his right pocket. His face, a perpetual mask of innocence, conveys purity—the purity of a white cloud. His all‑consuming passion is asking after the wellbeing of madams of deluxe 

restaurants. 

The  fourth  bandit  steps  forth,  a  big  gorilla.  He  is  tall,  reaching  almost  to  the  heavens. 

The marching column of soldiers under his command is as long as China’s Great Wall. He has 

white tinted eyes, a tiger’s mouth, a wide nose, and a shaggy beard; he must be an animal. His 

breast is adorned with colorful medals made of gold, silver, white copper, bronze, and brass. 

Black pistols cling to his body. 

He sold the sacks of rice meant to feed the soldiers, and filled the sacks with sand. He 

stole the cows and pigs to be fed to the soldiers, and gave a hair to each man. No barracks for 

the  poor  enlisted  men  in  a  bitterly  cold  winter;  instead,  hard  labor  all  day  to  keep  them 

sweating. Lumber for the construction of barracks was used for building the general’s quarters. 

Spare parts for vehicles, uniforms, anthracite briquettes, monthly allowances, all were stolen. In 

accordance  with  military  law,  soldiers  who  deserted  their  units  because  of  hunger  and 

desperation  were  arrested,  beaten  and  thrown  into  the  brig,  and  harassed  under  orders. 

University students summoned for military service were assigned to the general’s quarters as 

living  toys  for  his  wanton  wife.  Meanwhile  the  general  enjoyed  his  cleverly  camouflaged  life 

with an unending stream of concubines. 

Now the last bandit and his cronies step out: ministers and vice ministers, who waddle 

from obesity, sediment seeping from every pore. With shifty mucus‑lined eyes, they command 

the national defense with golf clubs in their left hands, while fondling the tits of their mistresses 

with  their  right.  And,  when  they  softly  write  “Increased  Production,  Increased  Export  and 

Construction”  on  a  mistress’s  tits,  the  woman  murmurs  “Hee‑hee‑hee,  don’t  tickle  me!”  And 

they  jokingly  reproach:  “You  ignorant  woman,  do  national  affairs  make  you  laugh?”  Let’s 

export even though we starve, let’s increase production even though products go unsold. Let’s 

construct a bridge across the Strait of Korea with the bones of those who have starved to death, 

so we can worship the god of Japan! Like slave‑masters of olden times, they drive the people to 

work harder and longer, with the beating of burst drums and the sounds of broken trumpets, 

with one aim in mind: to increase their own wealth.

Voice of Dissent in South Korea Speaks in Verse

2011-11-13T14:13:00.006+13:00

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF, Special to the New York Times

Published: July 31, 1987

Some angry South Korean dissidents battle the Government with bricks and gasoline bombs; others hurl verse.

''The role of a poet in Korea is not just to write about sentiment, but also to write about movements in history,'' says Ko Un, one of South Korea's best known dissident poets. ''Poetry is the song of history.''

In this land imbued in poetry, where anthologies of verse sell the way spy novels do in the United States, it sometimes seems that the poems have been as effective as the bricks. The brick-throwers may lose their battles for control of the streets, but the poets have mostly won the battle for Korea's soul, for intellectual legitimacy, for middle-class sympathies.

''Poetry was a factor in the success of the democratic movement,'' said Paik Nak Chung, a prominent literary critic and professor at Seoul National University. ''The poems were important in spreading protest, in inspiring dissent.'' Poets Harassed, Works Banned

The Government apparently agrees, for it has harassed and imprisoned political poets, in addition to banning many poems and anthologies. Korea's most noted poet of protest, Kim Chi Ha, is a household name, largely because his poems have brought him repeated arrests and even a death sentence, which was later commuted

Yet dissident poetry is flourishing as never before. Angry poems are read aloud at vast anti-Government demonstrations, expanding the audience for the verse. Collections are sold under the counter at bookshops. And in the last half-dozen years, countless tiny printing establishments have sprouted illegally around the nation to publish poetry without the required Government permission.

''My book 'A Voice Calling for the Dawn' was banned but sold so well that it went into five editions,'' said Mun Bong Ran, a 52-year-old poet in the southern city of Kwangju. ''When the Government bans such books, that dramatically enhances their appeal.''

Poems are useful weapons in Korea, because the struggle here is not just for power but for legitimacy as well. The Confucian heritage, which emphasizes respect for learning, means that intellectuals and artists are a prime source of legitimacy and are particularly influential throughout society. Others Take Up Protest

All the arts, not just poetry, are being marshaled against the Government. Novelists, artists, photographers, dramatists and singers are all taking up the ideas of protest, while trying to retain their authenticity as artists rather than propagandists.

Dissident artists organized an ''Anti-Torture'' exhibition a few months ago of paintings and woodcuts, which the Government promptly closed down. A new genre of politically oriented dramas and masked dances is catching on around the country. Both of the two main opposition leaders, Kim Dae Jung and Kim Young Sam, practice the ancient Korean art of calligraphy to copy aphorisms and quotations laced with political meaning.

Yet it is in poetry that protest becomes most fervent and most effective, and it is poetry that has dabbled for the longest time in protest. A century ago, toward the end of the Yi dynasty in Korea, poets began to write against foreign influences, particularly the growth of the Japanese presence. More recently, poets challenged the Japanese occupation of Korea, from 1910 to 1945. The modern flowering of dissident poetry began after the student uprising in 1960 that ousted President Syngman Rhee, and gained momentum in the last few years with the growth of underground publishing houses. Some Ask 'Pure' Poetry.

Still, political poetry is not entirely accepted in literary circles. Debates rage between those who contend that poetry should be ''pure'' and aloof from the fray and those who say it must grapple with social problems. As recently as the 1970's, most critics objected to the political messages in poems by Kim Chi Ha and others, but these days the consensus seems to be that poetic beauty is not compromised - and may be enhanced - by making a political point.

''It is difficult to become a poet today without defining one's position with regard to the poetry of protest,'' said Kim Uchang, a critic and professor at Korea University.

The growing prestige of political poetry largely reflects its popularity. Kim Chi Ha's satirical poem ''Five Bandits'' initially drew some sneers from critics, but became one of the country's best-known ballads. It also helped that poets such as Mr. Kim and Ko Un were recognized as first-class craftsman, even by critics who objected to the nature of their poetry. Other prominent poets began to join them.

Most of the dissident poets insist that they would be remiss if they ignored the most important social issues and confined themselves to such traditional topics as nature and romance.

''Expressing sentiment is important, but you must also express reality,'' said Shin Kyung Rim, an energetic 51-year-old who is among Korea's best-known poets. ''The most important problems in Korea are democracy and reunification of North and South Korea. Without dealing with these problems, you cannot call yourself a poet.''

Oceans of justice and rivers of fairness

2011-11-09T11:01:00.001+13:00

Padre James Bhagwan
Wednesday, November 09, 2011

IN preparation for a sermon I preached last week in the English-language worship service here at the Methodist Theological University, I came across a translation of Amos 5:21-24, from The Message Bible.

The goal of The Message is to engage people in the reading process and help them understand what they read.

According to Eugene Patterson, the publisher of The Message, "Language changes. New words are formed. Old words take on new meaning.

"There is a need in every generation to keep the language of the gospel message current, fresh, and understandable-the way it was for its very first readers.

"That is what The Message seeks to accomplish for contemporary readers.

"It is a version for our time-designed to be read by contemporary people in the same way as the original koin Greek and Hebrew manuscripts were savoured by people thousands of years ago."

So this is what Amos 5:21-24 looks like in The Message translation:

I can't stand your religious meetings.

I'm fed up with your conferences and conventions.

I want nothing to do with your religion projects,

your pretentious slogans and goals.

I'm sick of your fundraising schemes,

your public relations and image making.

I've had all I can take of your noisy ego-music.

When was the last time you sang to me?

Do you know what I want?

I want justice-oceans of it.

I want fairness-rivers of it.

That's what I want. That's all I want.

When read in this translation, these are not comforting words. The point God was making to Amos is that if we ignore issues of justice and righteousness then even the best worship and gifts are unacceptable to Him. A true relationship with God was never about sacrifices, but was based on obedience.

The rejected worship wasn't true worship because it was not part to active obedience. It was not flowing out in abundance, like living water; it was still. It was stagnant.

We all know what stagnant water means. This issue was still a live issue in Jesus' day. It is still a live issue for us in 21st century Fiji.

What God, through the prophet was pointing out was that the division of private life with public life, and worship with day-to-day living, was a false one. It still is today.

You see we've created a false division in our lives, between the private and the public, between the Sunday worship and the day-to-day living, and between the spiritual and the physical.

I remember last December, as some of us lobbied for December 25th, which was a Saturday, to be clarified as a public holiday because of the public holiday on Monday 27th.

I began my campaign after a church member lamented to me about the fact that he would not be able to attend worship on Christmas day because his employers had said that because December 27 was a public holiday, December 25 was a normal working day.

Common sense prevailed, eventually, and most of those who wanted to observe the day or attend services were able to do so.

How I pray for a similar lament about social justice. Amos calls for social justice. He calls for the compassionate life. What is the compassionate life? It is a life of justice, peace and love.

The Hebrew word for justice is mishpat. It means justice or righteousness. Psalm 103:6 declares, "The Lord works vindication and justice (mishpat) for all who are oppressed."

The Hebrew word shalom means peace but it is peace with wholeness, unity, and balance. Shalom is a vision of an all-inclusive (every is welcome) community of loving persons. Shalom begins the bible and it is the end of the bible.

It is harmony with God; harmony with our neighbour; harmony with nature. Justice and mercy abound. Faithfulness prevails. Peace and unity reign. It is a caring and consideration for all people.

The Hebrew word for love is hesed. It is a word that is hard to translate. God's hesed love is "from everlasting to everlasting" (Ps. 103:17) and it "endures forever" (Ps. 106:1). It is a steadfast love full of compassion.

For example, the Hebrew law says that if a neighbour borrows your cart and leaves his coat as a pledge, you must give the coat back before sunset even if he doesn't return your cart. Why? Because the night is cold and he needs his coat for warmth. A widow's coat could never be taken as a pledge because it was probably all she had. This is compassion in the highest order.

Even the earth deserves some hesed.The land is to have a year of rest. This may all seem like nice but ineffectual words given the situation many of us find ourselves in. Basically the compassionate life means right relationships and right living. It means that we make fair judgments and have fair business dealings. It becomes a stewardship of integrity and justice.

Let us swim in that ocean of justice, let us sail in it. And let us drink and bring others to drink from the rivers of fairness and righteousness. All it takes is compassion... and courage.

* Reverend JS Bhagwan is a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Email: padrejames@gmail.com (Facebook/Twitter).

More than just lyrics of a reggae song - Haile Selassie's speech at the United Nations - October, 1963

2011-11-04T18:35:00.004+13:00

Mr. President, Distinguished Delegates:

Twenty-seven years ago, as Emperor of Ethiopia, I mounted the rostrum in Geneva, Switzerland, to address the League of Nations and to appeal for relief from the destruction which had been unleashed against my defenseless nation, by the Fascist invader. I spoke then both to and for the conscience of the world. My words went unheeded, but history testifies to the accuracy of the warning that I gave in 1936.

Today, I stand before the world organization which has succeeded to the mantle discarded by its discredited predecessor. In this body is enshrined the principle of collective security which I unsuccessfully invoked at Geneva. Here, in this Assembly, reposes the best - perhaps the last - hope for the peaceful survival of mankind.

In 1936, I declared that it was not the Covenant of the League that was at stake, but international morality. Undertakings, I said then, are of little worth if the will to keep them is lacking. The Charter of the United Nations expresses the noblest aspirations of man: abjuration of force in the settlement of disputes between states; the assurance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion; the safeguarding of international peace and security.

But these, too, as were the phrases of the Covenant, are only words; their value depends wholly on our will to observe and honor them and give them content and meaning. The preservation of peace and the guaranteeing of man's basic freedoms and rights require courage and eternal vigilance: courage to speak and act - and if necessary, to suffer and die - for truth and justice; eternal vigilance, that the least transgression of international morality shall not go undetected and unremedied. These lessons must be learned anew by each succeeding generation, and that generation is fortunate indeed which learns from other than its own bitter experience. This Organization and each of its members bear a crushing and awesome responsibility: to absorb the wisdom of history and to apply it to the problems of the present, in order that future generations may be born, and live, and die, in peace.

The record of the United Nations during the few short years of its life affords mankind a solid basis for encouragement and hope for the future. The United Nations has dared to act, when the League dared not in Palestine, in Korea, in Suez, in the Congo. There is not one among us today who does not conjecture upon the reaction of this body when motives and actions are called into question. The opinion of this Organization today acts as a powerful influence upon the decisions of its members. The spotlight of world opinion, focused by the United Nations upon the transgressions of the renegades of human society, has thus far proved an effective safeguard against unchecked aggression and unrestricted violation of human rights.

The United Nations continues to sense as the forum where nations whose interests clash may lay their cases before world opinion. It still provides the essential escape valve without which the slow build-up of pressures would have long since resulted in catastrophic explosion. Its actions and decisions have speeded the achievement of freedom by many peoples on the continents of Africa and Asia. Its efforts have contributed to the advancement of the standard of living of peoples in all corners of the world.

For this, all men must give thanks. As I stand here today, how faint, how remote are the memories of 1936.How different in 1963 are the attitudes of men. We then existed in an atmosphere of suffocating pessimism. Today, cautious yet buoyant optimism is the prevailing spirit. But each one of us here knows that what has been accomplished is not enough.

The United Nations judgments have been and continue to be subject to frustration, as individual member-states have ignored its pronouncements and disregarded its recommendations. The Organization's sinews have been weakened, as member-states have shirked their obligations to it. The authority of the Organization has been mocked, as individual member-states have proceeded, in violation of its commands, to pursue their own aims and ends. The troubles which continue to plague us virtually all arise among member states of the Organization, but the Organization remains impotent to enforce acceptable solutions. As the maker and enforcer of the international law, what the United Nations has achieved still falls regrettably short of our goal of an international community of nations.

This does not mean that the United Nations has failed. I have lived too long to cherish many illusions about the essential highmindedness of men when brought into stark confrontation with the issue of control over their security, and their property interests. Not even now, when so much is at hazard would many nations willingly entrust their destinies to other hands.

Yet, this is the ultimatum presented to us: secure the conditions whereby men will entrust their security to a larger entity, or risk annihilation; persuade men that their salvation rests in the subordination of national and local interests to the interests of humanity, or endanger man's future. These are the objectives, yesterday unobtainable, today essential, which we must labor to achieve.

Until this is accomplished, mankind's future remains hazardous and permanent peace a matter for speculation. There is no single magic formula, no one simple step, no words, whether written into the Organization's Charter or into a treaty between states, which can automatically guarantee to us what we seek. Peace is a day-to-day problem, the product of a multitude of events and judgments. Peace is not an "is", it is a "becoming." We cannot escape the dreadful possibility of catastrophe by miscalculation. But we can reach the right decisions on the myriad subordinate problems which each new day poses, and we can thereby make our contribution and perhaps the most that can be reasonably expected of us in 1963 to the preservation of peace. It is here that the United Nations has served us - not perfectly, but well. And in enhancing the possibilities that the Organization may serve us better, we serve and bring closer our most cherished goals.

I would mention briefly today two particular issues which are of deep concern to all men: disarmament and the establishment of true equality among men. Disarmament has become the urgent imperative of our time. I do not say this because I equate the absence of arms to peace, or because I believe that bringing an end to the nuclear arms race automatically guarantees the peace, or because the elimination of nuclear warheads from the arsenals of the world will bring in its wake that change in attitude requisite to the peaceful settlement of disputes between nations. Disarmament is vital today, quite simply, because of the immense destructive capacity of which men dispose.

Ethiopia supports the atmospheric nuclear test ban treaty as a step towards this goal, even though only a partial step. Nations can still perfect weapons of mass destruction by underground testing. There is no guarantee against the sudden, unannounced resumption of testing in the atmosphere.

The real significance of the treaty is that it admits of a tacit stalemate between the nations which negotiated it, a stalemate which recognizes the blunt, unavoidable fact that none would emerge from the total destruction which would be the lot of all in a nuclear war, a stalemate which affords us and the United Nations a breathing space in which to act.

Here is our opportunity and our challenge. If the nuclear powers are prepared to declare a truce, let us seize the moment to strengthen the institutions and procedures which will serve as the means for the pacific settlement of disputes among men. Conflicts between nations will continue to arise. The real issue is whether they are to be resolved by force, or by resort to peaceful methods and procedures, administered by impartial institutions. This very Organization itself is the greatest such institution, and it is in a more powerful United Nations that we seek, and it is here that we shall find, the assurance of a peaceful future.

Were a real and effective disarmament achieved and the funds now spent in the arms race devoted to the amelioration of man's state; were we to concentrate only on the peaceful uses of nuclear knowledge, how vastly and in how short a time might we change the conditions of mankind. This should be our goal.

When we talk of the equality of man, we find, also, a challenge and an opportunity; a challenge to breathe new life into the ideals enshrined in the Charter, an opportunity to bring men closer to freedom and true equality. And thus, closer to a love of peace.

The goal of the equality of man which we seek is the antithesis of the exploitation of one people by another with which the pages of history and in particular those written of the African and Asian continents, speak at such length. Exploitation, thus viewed, has many faces. But whatever guise it assumes, this evil is to be shunned where it does not exist and crushed where it does. It is the sacred duty of this Organization to ensure that the dream of equality is finally realized for all men to whom it is still denied, to guarantee that exploitation is not reincarnated in other forms in places whence it has already been banished.

As a free Africa has emerged during the past decade, a fresh attack has been launched against exploitation, wherever it still exists. And in that interaction so common to history, this in turn, has stimulated and encouraged the remaining dependent peoples to renewed efforts to throw off the yoke which has oppressed them and its claim as their birthright the twin ideals of liberty and equality. This very struggle is a struggle to establish peace, and until victory is assured, that brotherhood and understanding which nourish and give life to peace can be but partial and incomplete.

In the United States of America, the administration of President Kennedy is leading a vigorous attack to eradicate the remaining vestige of racial discrimination from this country. We know that this conflict will be won and that right will triumph. In this time of trial, these efforts should be encouraged and assisted, and we should lend our sympathy and support to the American Government today.

Last May, in Addis Ababa, I convened a meeting of Heads of African States and Governments. In three days, the thirty-two nations represented at that Conference demonstrated to the world that when the will and the determination exist, nations and peoples of diverse backgrounds can and will work together. in unity, to the achievement of common goals and the assurance of that equality and brotherhood which we desire.

On the question of racial discrimination, the Addis Ababa Conference taught, to those who will learn, this further lesson:

that until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned;
that until there are no longer first class and second class citizens of any nation;
that until the color of a man's skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes;
that until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race;
that until that day, the dream of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but never attained.
And until the ignoble and unhappy regimes that hold our brothers in Angola, in Mozambique and in South Africa in subhuman bondage have been toppled and destroyed;
until bigotry and prejudice and malicious and inhuman self-interest have been replaced by understanding and tolerance and good-will;
until all Africans stand and speak as free beings, equal in the eyes of all men, as they are in the eyes of Heaven;
until that day, the African continent will not know peace. We Africans will fight, if necessary, and we know that we shall win, as we are confident in the victory of good over evil.

The United Nations has done much, both directly and indirectly to speed the disappearance of discrimination and oppression from the earth. Without the opportunity to focus world opinion on Africa and Asia which this Organization provides, the goal, for many, might still lie ahead, and the struggle would have taken far longer. For this, we are truly grateful.

But more can be done. The basis of racial discrimination and colonialism has been economic, and it is with economic weapons that these evils have been and can be overcome. In pursuance of resolutions adopted at the Addis Ababa Summit Conference, African States have undertaken certain measures in the economic field which, if adopted by all member states of the United Nations, would soon reduce intransigence to reason. I ask, today, for adherence to these measures by every nation represented here which is truly devoted to the principles enunciated in the Charter.

I do not believe that Portugal and South Africa are prepared to commit economic or physical suicide if honorable and reasonable alternatives exist. I believe that such alternatives can be found. But I also know that unless peaceful solutions are devised, counsels of moderation and temperance will avail for naught; and another blow will have been dealt to this Organization which will hamper and weaken still further its usefulness in the struggle to ensure the victory of peace and liberty over the forces of strife and oppression. Here, then, is the opportunity presented to us. We must act while we can, while the occasion exists to exert those legitimate pressures available to us, lest time run out and resort be had to less happy means.

Does this Organization today possess the authority and the will to act? And if it does not, are we prepared to clothe it with the power to create and enforce the rule of law? Or is the Charter a mere collection of words, without content and substance, because the essential spirit is lacking? The time in which to ponder these questions is all too short.

The pages of history are full of instances in which the unwanted and the shunned nonetheless occurred because men waited to act until too late. We can brook no such delay.

If we are to survive, this Organization must survive. To survive, it must be strengthened. Its executive must be vested with great authority. The means for the enforcement of its decisions must be fortified, and, if they do not exist, they must be devised. Procedures must be established to protect the small and the weak when threatened by the strong and the mighty. All nations which fulfill the conditions of membership must be admitted and allowed to sit in this assemblage.

Equality of representation must be assured in each of its organs. The possibilities which exist in the United Nations to provide the medium whereby the hungry may be fed, the naked clothed, the ignorant instructed, must be seized on and exploited for the flower of peace is not sustained by poverty and want.

To achieve this requires courage and confidence. The courage, I believe, we possess. The confidence must be created, and to create confidence we must act courageously.

The great nations of the world would do well to remember that in the modern age even their own fates are not wholly in their hands. Peace demands the united efforts of us all. Who can foresee what spark might ignite the fuse? It is not only the small and the weak who must scrupulously observe their obligations to the United Nations and to each other.

Unless the smaller nations are accorded their proper voice in the settlement of the world's problems, unless the equality which Africa and Asia have struggled to attain is reflected in expanded membership in the institutions which make up the United Nations, confidence will come just that much harder. Unless the rights of the least of men are as assiduously protected as those of the greatest, the seeds of confidence will fall on barren soil.

The stake of each one of us is identical - life or death. We all wish to live. We all seek a world in which men are freed of the burdens of ignorance, poverty, hunger and disease. And we shall all be hard-pressed to escape the deadly rain of nuclear fall-out should catastrophe overtake us.

When I spoke at Geneva in 1936, there was no precedent for a head of state addressing the League of Nations. I am neither the first, nor will I be the last head of state to address the United Nations, but only I have addressed both the League and this Organization in this capacity.

The problems which confront us today are, equally, unprecedented. They have no counterparts in human experience. Men search the pages of history for solutions, for precedents, but there are none.

This, then, is the ultimate challenge. Where are we to look for our survival, for the answers to the questions which have never before been posed?

We must look, first, to Almighty God, Who has raised man above the animals and endowed him with intelligence and reason. We must put our faith in Him, that He will not desert us or permit us to destroy humanity which He created in His image.

And we must look into ourselves, into the depth of our souls. We must become something we have never been and for which our education and experience and environment have ill-prepared us. We must become bigger than we have been: more courageous, greater in spirit, larger in outlook. We must become members of a new race, overcoming petty prejudice, owing our ultimate allegiance not to nations but to our fellow men within the human community.

Soul Connections

2011-11-02T15:40:00.005+13:00

Off the Wall with Padre James Bhagwan

Fiji Times - Wednesday, November 02, 2011

TODAY is "All Souls Day" in the Christian calendar.

This follows All Saints Day (November 1) and perhaps more well known, as a result of commercialisation, All Hallows (Saints) Eve or Halloween.

All Souls Day is marked on November 2 (or the third if the second is a Sunday), directly following All Saints Day, and is an opportunity for Catholics and Anglo-Catholic churches to commemorate the faithful departed.

They remember and pray for the souls of people who are in Purgatory ù the place (or state) in which those who have died atone for their less grave sins before being granted the vision of God in Heaven (called beatific vision).

The reasoning behind this stems from the notion that when a soul leaves the body, it is not entirely cleansed from venial (minor) sins.

However, through the power of prayer and self-denial, the faithful left on earth may be able to help these souls gain the beatific vision they seek, bringing the soul eternal sublime happiness.

A 7/8th century AD prayer The Office of the Dead is read out in churches on All Souls Day.

Other rituals include the offering of Requiem Mass for the dead, visiting family graves and reflecting on lost loved ones.

In Mexico, on El Dia De Los Muertos (Day of the Dead), people take picnics to their family graves and leave food for their dead relatives.

While praying for the dead is an ancient Christian tradition, it was Odilo, Abbot of Cluny (France) who, in 998AD, designated a specific day for remembering and praying for those in the process of purification.

This started as a local feast in his monasteries and gradually spread throughout the Catholic Church toward the end of the 10th century AD.

In his letter for Millennium of All Souls' Day, Pope John Paul II wrote: "For the souls in Purgatory, waiting for eternal happiness and for meeting the Beloved is a source of suffering, because of the punishment due to sin which separates them from God, but there is also the certitude that once the time of purification is over, the souls will go to meet the one it desires."

As a Christian, I pay close attention to the special days within our community of faith, whether I participate in the ritual observances of them or not.

My wife is Catholic and I encourage her to share the rich heritage of her community of faith with my son and daughter (baptised in the Anglican Church).

However, as All Souls Day approached, I found myself on the phrase ù "All Souls".

Even removed from the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory, the concept of All Souls can have significance for every human being if we reflect on the unity of spirit that we share.

Most of us would agree in the existence of a soul, even though we may express our understanding of it differently based on our cultural and religious contexts.

Our souls, our atman, our yalo, do not exist independently of each other.

On that level we can connect with one another, even though we may because of our physical differences, (ethnicity, gender, culture, etc) be separate.

Sometimes I wonder what it is that, while some are able to make soul-connections, or recognise our common humanity in that we are "all souls", many either resist or neglect to recognise the commonality of our human experience.

For some, we seem only to acknowledge those we are familiar with or find it uncomfortable to look into the eyes of a stranger and recognise that the person is a creature just like you and me ù a person who lives and breathes just like you and me ù a soul that struggles with all the physical and emotional weaknesses the human condition contains. This other, this neighbour is also a child of God.

Then the King will say to those on his right: "Come, you who are blessed by my Father, take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.

For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.

"Then the righteous will answer him: Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?

"When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?

"The King will reply: 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me (Matthew 25:34-40)'."

While the above quotation is from the Christian Holy Scriptures, I am sure that one could find similar passages in the holy books of the many other faith communities of our fellow Fijians.

This week I invite you to reflect on the following:

Are we authentic in our response to the divine love we have and continue to receive?

What holds us back from recognising and embracing other children of God who are strangers to us?

What can you do today to show that you believe in the inherent goodness of human nature?

May your week be filled with light, love and peace.

* Reverend JS Bhagwan is a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Email: padrejames@gmail.com (Facebook/Twitter).

Liberation and Theology : Old Friends who hardly meet anymore?

2011-10-27T12:58:00.002+13:00

Published in the Fiji Times: Off the Wall with Padre James Bhagwan
Wednesday, October 26, 2011

One of the courses I am taking is a seminar on the History of the Israelite Religion.

This is not a study of the history of the Old Testament of the Bible or Jewish Pentateuch, rather it is a scientific study of the development of the Israelite people and their religion from pre-Israelite culture and religion to the shape of Israelite religion after the exile.

It is challenging, as we are required to approach this topic that is so close to our heart from an academic perspective - asking questions that cannot be answered by faith responses but by archeological and textual evidence including from outside the scriptures.

At the same time it is extremely interesting as we are exposed to the theories that help us fill in the gaps about the origins and development of not just the Israelites, but also what is at the foundation level of Judeo-Christian-Islamic religion.

One of the authors I am reading, Rainer Albertz, based on historical analysis, proposes that the early Israelites of the "Exodus" were not an ethnic group but "a detachment of prisoners-of-war, of ethnically differing origin," conscripted (not unlike indentured labour) to undertake the massive building projects in Egypt at that time.

The identification of the Exodus group is as Hebrew or hap/biru - an economically assimilated but socially declassed group of foreign conscripts, whose solidarity had been undermined by state measures.

In the light of this Albertz argues that the origin of Yahweh (and as a result Israelite) religion is "indissolubly connected with the process of the liberation of the Exodus group."

God, or Yahweh, is experienced for the first time by the Exodus group, the ethnically diverse and oppressed Hebrews or hap/biru as a God of Liberation, who will lead them to freedom.

For most Christians and even some church leaders, the terms "Liberation" and "Theology" are often only come together in the minds of radicals who seek to upset the status quo.

Liberation Theology is often seen as radical theology - on the fringe of doctrine and teachings. However, according to Albertz, the first major act of God for the Hebrews, the early Israelites was the act of liberation from an oppressive social, economic, political and even religious system.

This means that Liberation and Theology are friends who hardly meet. However, when they do meet, amazing things happen.

In South Korea, Liberation Theology was an essential element in Minjung theology which focuses on a politically oppressed people (minjung), given hope by biblical history and promise, to strive for their liberation in a messianic kingdom where Jesus the suffering servant is lord.

Other liberation theologies include, Dalit theology in India which, like American black theology, is a subjugated minority, the outcastes (the dalits), to which the promise of God comes, in their conflict with an oppressive majority.

Black theology draws especially on the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt to legitimate black people's fight for freedom.

According to Wikipedia, Minjung theology emerged in the 1970s from the experience of South Korean Christians in the struggle for social justice.

It is a people's theology, and, according to its authors, "a development of the political hermeneutics of the Gospel in terms of the Korean reality".

It "is firmly rooted in a particular situation, and growing out of the struggles of Christians who embrace their own history as well as the universal message of the Bible."

Minjung Theology reflects the quest for liberation of the poor of Korea. The word minjung means the masses of people, as opposed to those who are in power and who oppress them in various ways. Minjung theology arose when Korea was rapidly industrializing itself.

Many of the rural poor were attracted to the cities as industrial labour.

They had poor wages and miserable living conditions.

The rich industrialists who exploited them were supported by the political regime which was supported by military power.

The minjung experience is characterized by han, which is a feeling of resentment, repressed anger and helplessness. Han is countered by dan which is the experience of the divine in us which leads us to transform ourselves and the world through liberative action.

This drive for liberation finds expression symbolically in satyrical mask dances, known as mudang.

These dances help not only in releasing the tensions of han, but also in achieving a certain self-transcendence that makes one's response to the oppressive situation not a gesture of revenge but constructive and creative action.

Reading the Bible, the Minjung discover Jesus who becomes one with the minjung of his day - the sinners, publicans and prostitutes - in order to free them, assuring them of God's preferential love. Unlike Moses, who only led the people, Jesus becomes one with the people.

As the Minjung become aware of the presence and action of God in their midst, they also perceive God's action in their history. The history of the Korean people has been a history of oppression by foreign or local political power.

But the people have always revolted against their oppressors. The story of these successive struggles for liberation is read as a Minjung history of salvation, which inspires and encourages them in their present struggle.

It is interesting to note that these struggles have not always been 'Christian' struggles. However, particular attention is devoted to the period of Japanese colonization, during which the Bible was considered a subversive book and the circulation of the books of Exodus and Daniel were forbidden.

The Minjung refuse the political salvations of the colonizers, of the marxists and of the capitalists.

They also reject the other-worldly salvations offered by certain types of Buddhism and Christianity. Their own vision of the future is eschatological, rooted in history and yet transcending it. Minjung theology is noted for its rootedness in and inclusive vision of its history. (Source: dcrdialogue.com/admins/Seminars/amal-liberationtheologies_40.do)

Some thoughts for reflection, with love from the Soul of Asia. May the Divine Light shine within you and from you this Diwali.

* Rev. J.S. Bhagwan is currently a student of the International Graduate School of Theology at the Methodist Theological University in Seoul, South Korea. Email: padrejames@gmail.com (Facebook/Twitter).

“If the Costume Fits”

2011-09-26T04:28:00.001+12:00

Published in "Mai Word with Padre J. S. Bhagwan," in Mai Life – August, 2010

I recently attended the 21^st birthday celebrations of one Albert “don’t call me Robert” Ben Harry. As young Al was born in 1989 he decided to have an “Eighties” (1980’s... not 80 year-olds only) theme to his coming of age celebratory experience. I believe that for a brief, and rather scary, moment Al’s friends thought that this was a “what I wore during the eighties” theme party meaning nappies, diapers, plastic pants and baby clothes.

However the alternative, “inspired by the eighties” theme was also daunting. Especially as the official invite came in about a week and a half before the party. How do I grow a luxurious 1987-style Rambo-ka moustache in fifteen days when I stopped buying mushroom tea in case someone reported me importing suspicious chemicals? Most of us who were walking talking living dolls of the 80’s probably couldn’t fit the school uniforms, rugby jerseys or the bananaramic/madonnafication outfits we thought were so “rad” and “excellent”.

As I reflected on what the 80s meant to me and who my 80s icons were, I made some (what I felt were) poignant observations. For example, in the 80s LL Cool J was a rap artist – not just an actor; U2 had more hair and Kelly LeBrock had more curves than her future husband Steven Segal. In the 80s the term Brat Pack referred not to Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and Sammy Davis Jnr. But Judd Nelson, Emilio Estevez (Charlie Sheen’s brother) and Robert Downey Jnr. In the 80s, stuble, t-shirt under the suit and loafers or shoes with no socks was the smooth Miami Vice look not the 90’s grunge look or 2000’s lazy slob look. In the 80’s Diana was a princess not an ex-princess. In the 80s, the Transformers were just a bunch of fancy robot toys that became a cartoon series and movie. In the 80s, Sly Stallone had only made two Rambo movies. In the 1980s a word sounding like, “ho,” usually meant a farming implement.

My son, the boy wonder was inspired by his cousin to have his own thematic event for his upcoming 6^th birthday. However due to his eccentric tastes and thoughts, he has been inspired to set the theme of his party as The Body. That’s right you may only attend this shindig if you come dressed as a part of the Human Body. What is even stranger is that he has already decided on his costume. Daddy and mummy have two and a half months to conceptualise, design and create a urethra costume! For those of you not medically minded the urethra is the tube in mammals that carries urine from the bladder out of the body and in the male also carries semen during ejaculation! I have about 70 days to convince him that he is too young to be walking around dressed as the inside of a giant penis. Boy genius huh? More like evil genius, mad genius, genius who may scare the other children at his party.

It’s not his fault really. I was, at a young age, used as a human mannequin by my two sisters whenever it was a fancy-dress parade or costume competition or party. Unfortunately this meant a lot of feminine or gender-ambiguous costumes. Instead of a chef I went as a cook. Instead of Michael Jackson it was a ballerina. As a “beautiful child” (the words of the olden people) this would mean that I was seen as a girl dressed as a ballerina rather than an awarding performance of a boy forced to be a ballerina (“Boys Don’t Cry” got nothing on me!). My father would always try to put his ingenious costuming to good use to defend my masculinity and my coolness by turning me into a market vendor, Chinese farmer, skeleton, a Lautoka City Council rubbish tin and even Moses himself, complete with a moppy beard.

Over the years the costume twitch (or itch) remained with me stronger than the force. I made my own “Robinson Crusoe” clothes to wonder around my deserted backyard in; to my mother’s confusion (she did not know whether to be in horror for the destruction of sheets and pillowcase or joyful at her sons tailoring skills) I created the first made in Fiji ninja costume. I was able to turn a simple blue and red tracksuit into a Spiderman costume.

Then I went to New Zealand for boarding school and returned to the world of sister-dress-up. Fortunately this time I my sisters retained the masculinity (a Bowiesque one) in my outfits. However they were drenched in smooth. Slicked back hair, cravats, the Miami-Vice look - great for any male of 17 and above; boring for an eleven and half year old.

When I later returned to New Zealand, this time to train as an actor at the prestigious “Performing Arts School” in Ponsonby, Auckland (where everyone I trained with immediately went onto act on Shortland Street) my dramatic classmate and I would don our suits, overcoats and earpieces and walk around malls, the airport and act (pretend!) the roles of CIA/FBI-types, speaking into our hands or watches and smiling at the ladies while maintaining our distances from the kids for fear of looking less like heroes and more like paedophiles. Or we would find the nearest funeral and go and practice our mourning scenes.

All this talk or typing of costumes reminds me of two of my other dramatic buddies who were invited to a party where everyone had to come as an emotion. The only costumes they could find (or had) were from a photo-shoot or television commercial which involved custard and fruit. The hostess opens her door to find one guy with a bowl of custard placed strategically over his crotch and the other with a pear in the same place. “What emotions are you two supposed to be?” asked the suspicious hostess. The response was not quite what she expected:

“I’m deeply dis custard and he’s deep in dis pear.”

Indeed.

A sunbaked, self-confessed Jesus-freak, Padre James Bhagwan spends his time between doing laps in the pool, lecturing at Davuilevu Theological College, preaching at Dudley Methodist Church, playing with his children and driving his wife around the bend.

Introducing the Institute for Counter Terrorism

2011-09-26T00:13:00.000+12:00

ICT from GuySadot on Vimeo.

Songs in the Key of "J"

2011-09-26T00:08:00.001+12:00

(From MAI WORD with Padre James Bhagwan, in Mai Life - May, 2011)

During Holy Week last month (that is the week between Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem riding on a donkey and His resurrection after washing his disciples feet, eating a last supper, being arrested, tortured, interrogated, dragged from one show trial to another, flogged, mocked, tortured again and brutally executed by crucifixion) I was late for a church service and stuck for transport so I hailed a taxi.

As the driver, a rather jovial person (the type who you half expect to burst into song as he drives) was alert and steady at the wheel, which was a good thing as at a particular intersection he suddenly hit the brakes to avoid bumping a figure that strode purposefully onto the road.

At first I couldn’t make out the person who had either laid claim to the road or had special super mutant vision that enabled them to see pedestrian crossings on a different part of the light spectrum, or vibration, or frequency or dimension. This is because my face was busy getting intimate with the windscreen. Point to note, had I not been wearing a seatbelt (for a car not as a fashion accessory) instead of trying to “fix” the windscreen, I would have gone all the way into and out of the windscreen.

However as disengaged my face from I was able to make out the figure of the teen tropical hip-hopper (hoodie, hotpants and flipflops) noticing the white cord running from the mobile phone/discotheque to the earphones embedded and thumping in ... her ear. She kept strollin/grooving/boppin’ along her merry way. She hadn’t even noticed the scream of tyres on asphalt. I joked to the jolly taxi-driver who was shouting out a mixture colourful advice on pedestrian etiquette and one liners, that perhaps she was so busy listening to her theme song that she didn’t know that he was giving his dialogue.

As we raced (within the speed limit of course) to the church and as the driver began his own sing-a-long to the radio (trust me a chubby, hairy, sweaty man singing ‘Touch me touch me touch me, hold me hold me hold me...’ with gusto is not a pretty sight), I looked out the window and as my own theme song for that day or taxi-ride: a medley of a re-worded theme song from Shaft (who’s the talatala that can battle yo demons...can you dig it?),the rap remix of the hymn Trust and Obey and Bob Marley’s One Love; I wondered how many people have their own theme songs running through their earphones or even just through their mind.

Trucktimus Prime, my pickup truck (yes we name everything in my family, the dog is Perseus Thomas Bhagwan) does not yet have a radio installed. As a result my children sing their favourite songs as we travel to school and work every morning. My savant son (all 6 ½ years of him) is currently torn between a lifelong (make that life so far) commitment to UB40 and a rapidly growing appreciation of the guitar skills of Carlos Santana and the percussive talents of his band. His younger sister was part (the Class 1 part) of the school choir for their pre-Easter Service. Music genres, as a result, are varied in the morning ride (sometimes punctuated with “Morningside for Life”) musical.

We would begin with “What can wash away my sin? Nothing but the blood of Jesus,” followed by “Who you fighting for?” (usually a prelude to the morning episode of who you fighting with?). Reconciliation begins with “I will never forget you, my people” (which could also represent grudge harbouring) and continues with “Reasons why I love you 1, 2, 3 etc”. In the meantime wife/mother mulls over the options: “Happy to be stuck with you,” “This Kiss,” or “Kiss and say goodbye,” and “Someone come and take my kids away for a couple of days and the aliens can have my husband back,” ( well if it’s not a song , then it should be!!).

I am happy to sing along with everyone, just so long as every now and then I get to change some of the word of their songs, hence “Who you fighting with?” “What can wash away the grog stains from Daddy’s sulu?” at which my wife will interject, “nothing but the washing powder and the hands of Daddy!” The fact that my first love in music is jazz, most of my songs are instrumentals, which make for interesting eavesdropping on the morning ride to school:

“What can wash away my sin...(back up – what can wash away Dad’s kani), nothing but the blood of Jesus (back up – only the moisturiser)... You do the lootin’, they do the shootin’ you give the longbar, we eat the long bar.... bukatika bukatika bukatika bukatika tow ka tow tow bukatika bukatika ( a little baseline thrown in) reasons why you love me one – I light your day I’m your number one son... bukatika bukatika bukatika bukatika tow ka tow tow bukatika bukatika... who’s the talatala that can battle yo demons (and the kids shout:) Daddy! Can you dig it?”

Rev. J.S. Bhagwan spends his time splashing in the pool; preaching, teaching and do-gooding in the Dudley Suva Methodist Circuit and driving his wife around the bend. He is the proud owner of a collapsible three-legged stool.

You don't need to be a superhero to fight Racial Discrimination

2011-09-25T23:50:00.003+12:00

Even Superheroes get stumped.. not be evil intergalactic creatures... but a racisim...