“Put your life into Christ’s hands, then ask Him to use you to help others overcome both their material and spiritual poverty.”–Billy Graham
Aside from ministering His Word to the people, Jesus’ ministry also focused on rendering aid to the poor and needy. Christians have also been tasked to continue in His footsteps to reach out to the least among us (Luke 14:13–14). How then can we become more cognisant of poverty in today’s context?
In July 2019, a panel on the topic of privilege was organised by The Straits Times, with the aim of developing actionable ideas to encourage giving. One of the poverty myths addressed at the panel was the misconception that the poor in Singapore “aren’t actually that poor”. Contrary to this belief, the Lien Centre for Social Innovation found that one in five low-income households in Singapore grapple with severe food insecurity.
One of the reasons for this misconception is an inability to fully understand the experiences and stories of the underprivileged.
Dr Roland Chia, Professor at Trinity Theological College also echoes this view, “Justice to the poor… is about ensuring that they are not forgotten, that their conditions are improved.”
Poverty is not only detrimental to one’s physical well-being but can also affect one’s spiritual health. In an interview with the United Bible Societies, Preacher Qian from Shandong, China, shared a real-life example of how poverty affects spirituality in their community—“When financial stress arises due to family needs like children’s education or emergencies, people tend to focus more on earning money instead of coming for worship.”
As a body of believers, how then may we take the first step to walk alongside those who are in need of help?
Rev Ezekiel Tan, CEO of SowCare— a charity arm of The Bible Society of Singapore—provides us with some practical tips. With a heart for the vulnerable and marginalised in society, he hopes to create a platform where different partners may pool their resources, and come together to empower the poor and needy in Singapore.
“Just as Jesus actively ministered to the poor and needy in society, SowCare also hopes to foster the same spirit of charity within the Christian community in Singapore. We want to extend a helping hand to the often-neglected facets of society, such as the guest workers, foreign domestic workers as well as the rough sleepers in Singapore.
The first step to reaching out to these individuals is first to gain a better understanding of their stories and experiences—walking alongside them. Only by making an effort to know them, we can provide meaningful assistance to them.”
What are some of the ways in which Christians can extend a helping hand to the poor and needy?
“It is our call to go beyond, as a Christian community, to provide a shelter for the homeless, as mandated in Isaiah 58:7. The local Church can become journey-makers by providing them with holistic care, empowering them while connecting them to necessary service that will meet their immediate needs. If we pool our resources and expertise together, I believe that as a united Body of Christ we will be able to make a difference in their lives.”
As a practicing psychologist in Singapore, I have had the privilege of working with Christians in recovery from trauma, adverse childhood experiences, and a wide range of interpersonal challenges for more than two decades. These come, often as a last resort to seek professional help, presenting with symptoms of depression, anxiety and often, deep longings for healing and for heaven.
The greater tragedy however, isn’t that some don’t experience complete recovery, but that they are met by a host of well-meaning persons in the Church who make their suffering more isolated than necessary. I have personally heard a pastor conclude: “If Christians appropriate the truths of Scripture, there would be no need for full-time counselors in the Church.” Another more humble Christian leader remarked: “Christians active in service can still be depressed?”
These statements reveal little understanding about the true nature of mental conditions. A humbler perspective to adopt is to recognise that a combination of factors involving both nature and nurture can enter into the development of mental disorders.
Just physically speaking, chemical imbalance in the brain, hormonal changes in our glandular system, genetic predisposition and the use of illicit drugs can contribute to the development of mental illness. In our broken world, the experience of trauma, abuse, neglect, or violence, especially by persons we were meant to trust such as family members, result in profound afflictions with no simple answers.
The real danger in the Church, however, lies in the belief that we already understand all we need to know about why people suffer mental disorders, and the erroneous conclusion that practicing Christians should not suffer any mental afflictions. I wonder why this is so? Do Christians who appropriate the truths of the gospel not need a good dentist at some point in their lives? How about an undertaker?
Assumptions we carry about the nature of mental illness can severely limit how we respond to those who most need our understanding and patience. Mental disorders do not for the most part develop overnight. Some experience severe neglect and sexual abuse that are hidden for years because of shame and fears of rejection. Fears of being labeled or the inability to recognise symptoms result in many going untreated.
Results of the latest Singapore Mental Health Study released in December 2018 reveal that fewer than 1 in 4 persons who experience mental disorders seek professional help. We know that emotional healing takes place in the context of safe relationships. However, many Christians suffering depression and other mental disorders still feel they need to hide their afflictions for fear of judgment from believers who may deem them to be of weak will or insufficient faith.
Indeed, in his reflections on the Church’s attitude towards mental illness in Singapore, Dr. Roland Chia observed: “Stigma against people with mental illness does not just take place in society. It is sadly also evident in the Church. One of the reasons why there’s stigma against people with mental disorders in the Church is bad theology. Some Christians think that it is impossible for the follower of Christ to be plagued by mental conditions such as depression and bipolar disorder. This is in part due to their failure to fully appreciate what it means to live in the fallen world, a world that is in need of God’s Shalom.” Darkness Has Become My Companion (Ethos, June 8, 2019)
Leaning in to listen and learn
Rather we need a theology that fully incorporates the redeemed living in the present world. Scripture doesn’t hide human suffering but demonstrates repeatedly God’s response to his people. We have the example of Jeremiah, known as the “weeping prophet” whose ministry was during Judah’s decay as a nation. He was anything but weak as he persevered in communicating God’s truth. Lamentations and large portions of the book Psalms express the depth of human emotions when enduring suffering and injustice. They give us hope that God in his mercy and faithfulness is able restore all broken relationships with him.
Therefore, instead of liberally dispensing prescriptions of more truth or more faith, people suffering mental distress should be met with understanding and companionship. Like the friends of Job in the Old Testament, perhaps the most effective support will be the one who keeps silent while in the company of the afflicted.
What we need in our Churches is the courage to lean in and listen, so that we can learn more about the nature of the other’s suffering, rather than judge his or her faith and inadequacies. Some endure long roads in recovery as a result of other’s sins, inflicted upon them from early childhood. We communicate impatience with their efforts in recovery when we expect them to overcome their problems in ways that meet our own standards without having lived a single day of their lives. If we have never been betrayed, neglected nor abused by a caregiver, nor raised by an alcoholic parent, perhaps we should not be quick to judge those who have to mourn the loss of security, love and belonging that many take for granted.
On the contrary, consider the opportunities for faith development that are presented by someone who seeks refuge in the Church. A common finding in the history of persons with mental disorders is the experience of significant relational failures or trauma in their families of origin or with early caregivers. That they have the courage to continue seeking refuge in other relationships later in life is a statement of desperation or incredible courage and sometimes, both. If depressed and anxious persons express their needs in the Church, should not the people of God extend safe spaces for such to re-experience trust? When someone in the congregation coughs or sneezes, we respond empathically with a fresh packet of tissue or something to soothe the throat. Would that, persons among us with depression and anxiety be similarly accepted, rather than have symptoms dismissed and concerns invalidated.
Thankfully, signs of progress can be seen among some churches in Singapore with a recent conference on “The Church and Mental Wholeness” co-organised by Yio Chu Kang Chapel and Graceworks in September 2019. Clergy with personal experiences of mental disorders are most able to recognise that depression and anxiety can be normal reactions to abnormal life stressors. Whether we have personal experience with a mental condition, may the bride of Christ be a people of hope who extend to one another warm presence as representatives of our God who is with us and has already determined our final and eternal destination.
Dr. Eliza Lian-Ding practices as a Counselling Psychologist at KALL Psychological and Counseling Services in Singapore. She received her doctoral training at Georgia State University while completing her internship at Fuller Theological Seminary. She provides supervision to counsellors-in-training at Singapore Bible College and guest lectures at Trinity Theological College on Marriage and Family.
It is indeed a wonderful thing to be able to experience the missionary path that the apostle Paul traversed and the remains of the apostle John’s writings to the seven churches .
From October 26th to November 7th, 2020, let us follow the footsteps of the apostle Paul through Athens, Corinth, Thessalonica and Philippi, and also visit the ruins of the seven churches of Revelation together. Remember the labor of the apostles and the miraculous deeds of God.
Date: 29 February 2020 (Saturday) Time: 10am to 12pm Venue: Singapore Bible Society, Bible House, Morrison-Liang Seminar Rooms 1 &2, Bible House Level 4 7 Armenian Street, S(179932)
Terrorism poses a constant threat to many Christians and Bible translators in the western part of the Sahel region of Africa, where we are involved, through your generous support, in many Bible projects. In 2019 your generosity helped support vital Bible work in Cameroon, and in 2020 your donations enable work to continue in other countries in the region where Christians are targeted by extremists.
Translating the Bible is tough enough at the best of times, requiring years of dedication and sacrifice, but some translators also work in extreme danger – in regions plagued by terrorists who want to harm them.
Last autumn, for example, armed Islamist extremists arrived in a quiet village in Cameroon where Bible translator Marcel* lives with his family.
The gunmen, belonging to the notorious Boko Haram terrorist group, smashed their way into homes, beat villagers and ransacked the village. The chief and a young person were killed and, as has happened several times before in this and many other villages in the region, Marcel and other villagers fled to hide in the hills.
Boko Haram has killed more than 1,300 people in Cameroon and displaced around 200,000. At least 200 churches have been forced to close, with several of them burnt down. Boko Haram is also active in other countries in the area including Nigeria, Niger and Chad.
The continuous danger faced by Christians in the region is why the identities of villagers, the names of the languages into which they are translating the Bible and the names of the villages where they live and work cannot be revealed in this story, which is just one example of the danger and difficulties that are faced in many countries in the western Sahel area.
Red alert
“Just before the attack a woman was alerted and was able to inform some villagers,” Marcel said of the raid on his village.
“But we had no way to defend ourselves. On several occasions we have complained to the authorities to no effect. Sometimes we have been given two soldiers, but have had to pay for their transportation and food, and it is expensive. We were left with no choice but to desert the village,” said the Bible translator.
Marcel’s wife, Rose*, was in their house when the Boko Haram terrorists arrived, but managed to run out of the back door and hide among some nearby boulders.
Gunshots
“They broke open all the doors and there were so many of them that you could hear gunshots from all over,” she recalled. “They went into the house and carried all my belongings away.”
While the village men fled further into the hills – “because the terrorists are so violent with them”, explained Rose – many of the women hid in the bush closer to the village so as to take care of crops, the village food supply. For two nights everybody slept outdoors, unable to return home until Boko Haram had left.
Attacks like these are all too familiar for Marcel and the other Bible translators working in the Sahel region of Africa, a semi-arid area that lies below the Sahara Desert. In one attack a translator was kidnapped and remained missing for a week. Despite the constant danger they are in and the regular interruptions to their work when they have to hide in the hills, the translators are determined to keep on going until they have made God’s word available in their mother tongues.
Christians in the region need your continued support and your prayers.
In his epistle to the Christians in Rome, the apostle Paul instructs his readers to submit to the governing authorities. ‘Let every person be subject to the governing authorities’, he writes, because ‘there is no authority except from God and those that exist have been instituted by God’ (Romans 13:1-2).
These words have become the basis for the Christian understanding of the state or civil government. They can be said to be the locus classicus of the biblical foundation for any reflection on the relationship between the church and the state and between religion and politics.
This Pauline passage roughly delineates the specific role of the state or government. Essentially, this role has to do with the upholding of justice, the protection of the people under its jurisdiction from physical harm and other depredations and the maintenance of public order.
While the scope of the state’s responsibility may appear at first glance to be rather wide, the Christian view in fact delimits the government’s reach in significant ways.
Theologians have therefore described the role of the state as a subsidiary. In maintaining public order, the government provides the necessary support to nongovernmental bodies, agencies and spheres of authority and afford them the requisite freedoms to fulfil their specific roles.
As Robert George puts it: ‘Governmental respect for individual freedom and the autonomy of nongovernmental spheres of authority is, then, a requirement of political morality. Government must not try to run people’s lives or usurp the roles and responsibilities of families, religious bodies, and other character-and-culture-forming authoritative communities’.
In his celebrated Lectures on Calvinism, Abraham Kuyper – the neo-Calvinist theologian and former Prime Minister of the Netherlands (1901-1905) – makes the distinction between state (or government) and society and their respective sovereignties.
According to Kuyper, state and society differ in at least three significant ways. Firstly, unlike the state, which is a single sphere, society is a collection of small spheres: ‘the family, the business, science, art and so forth’.
Secondly, unlike the unity of the state, which is ‘mechanical’, the unity of society is ‘organic’ and spontaneous – arising, Kuyper would go so far as to argue, from the order of creation itself. And thirdly, according to Kuyper, God delegates sovereignty to each of these social spheres individually and in such a way that every form of social life is sovereign within its own domains.
In concert with a number of modern theologians – from both the Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions – Kuyper is broadly advocating the idea of ‘limited government’. The government, he writes, ‘may never become an octopus’ but must always ‘honour and maintain every form of life which grows independently in its own sacred autonomy’.
This does not mean, of course, that the state has no role at all to play in relation to these social spheres. As the maintainer of public order, the state can and must serve as adjudicator should a dispute arise between the different communities in society.
‘Whenever different spheres clash’, Kupyer writes, the state is to ‘compel mutual regard for the boundary-lines of each’. In addition, the state should also ‘defend individuals and the weak ones, in those spheres, against the abuse of power of the rest’.
This view has important implications on how we should understand the relationship between the state (government) and the Church (or any faith community for that matter), which is one of the social spheres in society.
The government, according to this view, must allow the Church to exercise sovereignty over its own domain. In other words, the State should let the Church be the Church. This is the position of significant theological voices in the last century and in ours, including Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas.
The nature of the Church as the community of the redeemed and its role in society and vis-à-vis the State must therefore be clarified.
The Church is the called-out people of God who have been reconciled to him through faith in Jesus Christ. Her mission is to proclaim the Good News that God’s salvation can be found in Jesus Christ, God’s incarnate Son. This means that the mission of the Church is fundamentally spiritual in nature, although it also has profound political and social ramifications.
As Carl Henry explains: ‘The Church’s mission in the world is spiritual. Its influence on the political order, therefore, must be registered indirectly as a by-product of spiritual concerns’.
It is, however, very important that we do not interpret this approach as advocating a kind of dualism or compartmentalisation that would eventually result in the privatisation of religion. What Henry and others are highlighting is to do with the distinction between the primary and secondary concerns of the Church, based on the kind of community it is.
Thus, while Henry is absolutely clear that ‘preaching and discipling constitute the church’s primary responsibility in the world’, he is equally clear about the Church’s political and social responsibilities.
The Church, according to Henry, must ‘encourage individual members to fulfil their political duties as a spiritual responsibility’, and ‘call rulers, even pagan rulers, to maintain order and justice [and] criticise those who violate, misapply, or refuse to enforce the law’.
But here again, it must be pointed out that the Church does this by being herself, namely, a prophetic community that embodies the justice and the love of God. The Church does not try to become what she is not, namely, the State. Nor does she seek to exercise the powers that do not belong to her, but are properly those of the State alone.
Thus Henry adds that although the Church must take a keen interest in the welfare of society and the common good, she must not get directly involved in what he calls practical politics. Neither must she ‘use the mechanism of the government to legally impose upon society at large her theological commitments’. Henry thus discourages the Church from engaging in any kind of ‘confrontational activism that promotes Christian legislation and a Christian state’.
The Church, while sovereign over her own domain, seeks to exert influence in the society of which she is a part not as a political party, but as the humble witness of her incarnate Lord that is always compelled to speak the truth in love.
In being true to the kind of community that she is and in fulfilling the mission given to her by God, the Church must also recognise the authority of the state or government that God has instituted. She must respect it and accord it the requisite freedom to fulfil its God-given role as the upholder of justice and the maintainer of public peace.
Head of Supporter Relations, Tom Newbold, reflects on his recent visit to the only school for the deaf in eSwatini.
“I like John chapter 3, verse 16 where it talks about Jesus loving the world. God is good. He sent Jesus to love us.”
The words above came from Thandolwethu, a lively little boy I met on a recent visit to eSwatini (previously known as Swaziland). But he didn’t speak them in the way you might expect. Like tens of thousands of others in eSwatini, Thandolwethu is deaf, and he was communicating with me through a sign language interpreter.
Thandolwethu attends the only deaf school in the whole of eSwatini. There, his school teaches him about the Bible using sign language. This is a vital ministry in the country, and it’s thanks to our generous supporters that the Bible is being translated into sign language.
Why not just read a regular Bible?
Before my visit, I had many questions: Why was a Bible translation into sign language necessary in the first place? The headteacher of Thandolwethu’s school helped me understand.
“The language of the deaf people is sign language – not English, not siSwati, but sign language,” she told me. “We use hands, we use our eyes, we use our brain, we use our body to understand the things in front of us. So when the Bible is in sign language, it helps us to understand it better.”
This was clearly true for Thandolwethu. He signed to me, “I can’t understand about chapters in the Bible, but I can understand the stories.”
It became apparent to me that for Scripture to be truly available to everyone – a core mission of Bible Society – we can’t just rely on existing formats and translations. We have to make God’s word as accessible as possible, to reach out to every tribe, nation and people.
Deaf people like Thandolwethu in eSwatini can be severely marginalised, struggling to feel accepted or valued in the society around them. They are often isolated by their communities, and might have limited access to education and employment opportunities.
“The parents feel like it’s a burden to them,” Thandolwethu’s headteacher told me. “One parent once said she would have killed her baby if she knew she had given birth to a deaf child.”
A vital source of truth for the deaf community
As I spent more time with Thandolwethu, I saw none of the hurt or shyness you might expect to see from his life as a deaf young person in eSwatini. He just exuded joy.
When I asked him what difference the Bible made to him, he said, “I thank God now because I know how to respect others.”
And then a remarkable thing happened. He started singing, in sign language. Springing up from his seat opposite me, he began to dance and make energetic signs. The interpreter translated it for us: “Wow, wow – God is good! Wow, wow – God is strong! Wow, wow – God made everything!”
The Bible underscores the need for unity among believers. We are exhorted to live in harmony with one another (Rom 12:16, NIV). We are many parts that form one “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27).
In his book on the Orthodox Church, the Russian theologian Sergius Bulgakov used the Slavonic term sobornost to describe the unity of the Body of Christ, the Church. Commandeered for theology by the 19th century Russian theologian and poet Alexis Khomiakov, sobornost points to the organic unity of the Church that includes but transcends its hierarchical structures.
Sobornost, according to Bulgakov, refers to the catholicity of the Body of Christ where “each member of the Church, equally with the assembly of the members, lives in union with the entire Church, with the Church invisible, which is itself an uninterrupted union with the Church visible and forms its foundation”.
In the great ecumenical creeds – the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds – churches from different traditions and denominations affirm the oneness of the Church, its ontological unity. Oneness is the basic characteristic of the Church, her inalienable essence.
Theologians as diverse as Irenaeus in the second century and Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth maintain that the unity of the Church is not fundamentally grounded on her immutable structure or inexorable mission. The Church’s oneness rests ultimately on the God who brought her into being by his Word and Spirit.
We may say that the unity of the Church, established by and grounded in the triune God, has a trinitarian foundation. The Church is elected by the Father, redeemed by the Son and united by the Holy Spirit. There is therefore no other compelling ground for asserting the unity of the Church.
This truth is expressed clearly in a document prepared by the World Council of Churches (WCC) at its third assembly in New Delhi in 1961, albeit from a slightly different angle.
“The love of the Father and the Son in the unity of the Holy Spirit”, it states, “is the source and goal of the unity which the triune God wills for all men and creation. We believe that we share in this unity in the Church of Jesus Christ…”
The unity of the Church is not inimical to diversity, for diversity signals her genuine penetration of human existence: God’s Church comprises people from all nations, tribes, and languages (Rev 7:9). As the Porvoo Common Statement points out: “Unity in Christ does not exist despite and in opposition to diversity, but is given with and in diversity”.
The unity of the Church is also inextricably related to the one faith she confesses and the sacramental life she shares.
The content of that faith is supplied by God’s revelation in Jesus Christ and recorded in the pages of the Bible. Christian unity can never be achieved without or in spite of the truth.
Thus, in his encyclical Ut Unum Sint (That They May be One), Pope John Paul II rightly stated that “The unity willed by God can be attained only by the adherence of all to the content of revealed faith in its entirety. In matters of faith, compromise is in contradiction with God who is Truth”.
But sadly, it is precisely here – in the content of the faith and in the practice of the sacraments – that total consonance among the different churches remains elusive, thereby presenting obstacles to unqualified unity.
To be sure, the different traditions share vast areas of common ground because it is the one and the same Gospel that shapes and nourishes them. But profound differences remain as impediments to unity.
“Thus, the strange unity of the Church is at once an indicative and an imperative; it is both a reality and a task. The Church must prayerfully strive to make the unity that is already hers in Christ visible and tangible.”
But Christians are not making an idle statement when they confess that “We believe in the one… Church”, even though there appears to be a striking discrepancy between what they hold by faith to be true and what is actually observed in the Church’s empirical life.
The high priestly prayer of her Lord and Master will be answered (John 17:21). The irrational dissonances that now fracture the empirical Church will be surmounted and her concrete oneness will become fully evident.
And the sobornost of the Church that we see today in flickering dimness will shine brightly to the glory and praise of the one true God.
The Humanist UK website describes a “humanist” as someone who (1) trusts the scientific method when it comes to understanding how the universe works and rejects the idea of the supernatural (and is therefore an atheist or agnostic), (2) makes ethical decisions based on reason, empathy and a concern for human beings and other sentient animals, and (3) believes that, in the absence of an afterlife and any discernible purpose to the universe, human beings can act to give their own lives meaning by seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same.
Presumably, this description would be accepted as a representative view by contemporary humanism movements. This view of humanism rejects supernaturalism and reduces human beings to materialistic objects without souls which would be antithetical to Christian beliefs. On the other hand, Christianity affirms virtues like empathy and concern for human beings and the importance of realising meaning and happiness in this life. Many Christian scientists apply reason and science to discover how the universe works, but they also insist that the quest for knowledge and betterment of life on earth should not preclude supernatural reality. These tensions call for a nuanced understanding of the relationship between Christianity and humanism. Perhaps clarity will emerge by analysing the outstanding features of various branches of the humanist movement since it gained prominence during the Renaissance in the 14th century.
Renaissance scholars who judged the contemporary church to be intellectually anaemic and morally inept to address the vices of the age tapped into their idealised memories of the Roman Empire and classical antiquity to serve as a model of cultural excellence and test the authenticity of conventional taste and wisdom. Rich patrons sponsored scholars to collect and restore ancient Latin manuscripts which served as the basis for the “New Learning” that included Roman rhetoric, poetry, history and moral philosophy. The curriculum was expanded with the study of Greek language, literature and philosophy with the arrival of Byzantine scholars in Italy as they fled from the Ottomans after the fall of Constantinople in 1453.
What struck the Renaissance scholars was the realisation that the ancient classics depicted the world in a man-centred way, that is, the dignity of man was defended on the basis of his special position within a well-developed metaphysical order. This man-centred focus and concern for the immediate life was a novelty to the zeitgeist of 14th century society which deferred human fulfilment and happiness to the after-life. The new curriculum of “humanism” which aimed at nurturing a universal man who combines intellectual excellence and self-development to master the world was enthusiastically promoted since it was vibrant and life affirming, in contrast to the abstract studies of logic, science and metaphysics of the medieval scholastics. Petrarch, the first great humanist criticised his contemporaries as they admired the mountains and the stars but neglected themselves whereas “nothing is admirable but the soul in comparison to which, if it is great, nothing is great.” Man and his soul are the true standards of intellectual achievements as man is superior to other creatures because of the variety of his arts and skills and his capability for humane feelings of personal virtue and solidarity with fellowmen.
However, the Christians who contributed to the Renaissance did not see any conflict between the New Learning and Christian faith. Erasmus, the renowned Christian intellectual of his time, advocated that the New Learning would bring social reforms when it is based on two foundations, namely the classical concept of humanitas and the Christian concept of pietas. Humanitas meant the love of humankind who alone among God’s creature is endowed with speech and reason. Pietas meant reverence for the Creator and the imitation of his qualities of truth, fortitude and compassion which is vital to bring reforms through persuasion rather than coercion.
The confluence of the two streams of classical culture and Christian faith in the humanist movement continued until they became separated during the European Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries. Humanism took a secular turn after it absorbed the ideas of Rousseau, Darwin and Marx. Secular humanism during the Enlightenment continued to view humans as unique and originally good, but his uniqueness soon became lost when man was reduced to just another member of the animal kingdom. For Rousseau, man was originally good but he became corrupted by society. Nonetheless, these flaws could be overcome through a therapeutic process and nurture under tutelage of a benevolent state that sponsors moral religion and promotes virtues, justice and respect for the Social Contract. However, the optimism of secular humanism which envisaged that society would progress from innocent and good-natured primitive communities to moral and just communities through therapeutic education was shattered by the disasters of the French and Bolshevik revolutions and the world wars in the twentieth century, and the social disintegration and moral decadence of contemporary Western society. Perhaps Blaise Pascal witty aphorism is more applicable, “Man is neither angel nor beast; and the misfortune is that he who would act the angel acts the beast. The first half of the thought is unexceptionable: man is indeed neither angel nor beast, but, amphibious as he is between matter and spirit, a hybrid and a riddle to himself.”
Rousseau famously judged Christianity to be unable to redress human corruption as it is a wholly other-worldly and too detached from this world to fight against domestic tyranny. However, Christians would dispute Rousseau’s verdict as they have found in Christianity moral resources for human fulfilment and social renewal. Christianity upholds Jesus Christ as the universal exemplar of an integrated personality and moral perfection since he is not merely human, but fully human even though he is fully divine. The incarnation of Christ affirms that God’s program of redemption not only prepares humans for life in the world to come but also enhances and enriches human life on earth. Christ provides a model of human wholeness in the midst of human brokenness and delivers individuals from isolation and despair by incorporating them into a community that imparts moral and spiritual renewal.
What are the fundamental features of Christianity that contribute to the flourishing of individuals and society?
First, theological anthropology: In contrast to secular humanism, Christianity posits that man benefits from his relationship with God. As the Shorter Catechism says, “Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever.” To this end, God has created the world and entrusted its care to human beings. The created world is given for human enjoyment. Material reality is cherished as a channel of divine blessings. With this enjoyment comes responsibility. As the Book of Genesis teaches, Adam was given the task of taking care of the Garden of Eden. The appointment of man as God’s vicegerent on earth is one of responsible stewardship. This is in contrast to secular humanism where the absence of transcendent accountability would tend towards exploitation of the earth. G. K. Chesterton puts the matter lucidly, “The main point of Christianity was this: that Nature is not our mother: Nature is our sister. We can be proud of her beauty, since we have the same father; but she has no authority over us; we have to admire, but not to imitate. This gives to the typically Christian pleasure in this earth a strange touch of lightness that is almost frivolity. Nature was a solemn mother to the worshipers of Isis and Cybele. Nature was a solemn mother to Wordsworth or to Emerson. But Nature is not solemn to Francis of Assisi or to George Herbert. To St. Francis, Nature is a sister, and even a younger sister: a little, dancing sister, to be laughed at as well as loved.”
Second, community flourishing: Jacques Maritain applauds the social project of secular humanism aimed at promoting human liberty and equality, but concludes that the project eventually fails because of it being anthropocentric; man is turned in upon himself and is cut off from his Creator. Marx’s great insight was to identify how proletarian man has been estranged from his true nature by being dispossessed of property and reduced to becoming a tool of economic institutions. Maritain suggests that the only adequate foundation is for a humanism that is ultimately theocentric. That is, humans may fully realise themselves only in right relation to God and achieve their fullest human potential developed under the exigencies of a supernatural order which the Bible describes as God’s new creation and God’s new society. The challenge for Christian humanism is to retrieve and integrates the best insights of humanism throughout history and establish a model community of human dignity and freedom, in contrast to the disastrous model of secular humanism based on secular political ideologies.
The Church as God’s new society emphasises that human fulfilment is not achieved in isolation but through meaningful relationships, the essence of human community. The Christian community at its best testifies that cooperative life is possible and enables creative culture and human flourishing. Christian humanism does not pretend to have worked out concrete solutions to every social and economic problem society faces today. But it sets forth a comprehensive vision of how individuals may realise their fullest potential in communion with Jesus who is fully God and fully man, and how society may flourish under God’s blueprint for created order.
Dr Ng Kam Weng is Research Director of Kairos Research Centre in Kuala Lumpur. Previously, he had been a fellow at the Oxford Centre for Mission Studies and a member of the Center for Theological Inquiry at Princeton University. From 1989 to 1992 he taught at the Malaysia Bible Seminary Graduate School. He has a PhD from Cambridge University.
Living apart from their families, for long periods of time, can be a lonely experience for guest workers here. Many of them may also be especially emotionally vulnerable during joyous occasions because they are unable to afford tickets home, to spend the holidays with their family. Yet, with a collaborative local community effort to embrace guest workers like our very own by opening our homes and sharing meals with them, we could make a whole lot of difference.
Aiming to build a more inclusive environment for guest workers in Singapore through sharing meals, Just An Extra Chair is a joint initiative by the Alliance of Guest Workers Outreach (AGWO)—a movement of Hope Initiative Alliance—and the Singapore Kindness Movement (SKM). The project seeks to connect individuals who have nowhere to go during festive seasons—such as Christmas, Lunar New Year and other holidays—with Singaporeans who have an extra seat or more at their dining table.
In an effort to reach out to guest workers during Christmas and Lunar New Year periods, AGWO joined the collaborative efforts to urge local communities to sign up to host workers for meals at their houses. As part of Just An Extra Chair, individuals could opt to either approach guest workers already present within their social circles or within their neighbourhoods. Each Host would then receive a Let’s Makan kit—inclusive of a guide to hosting guest workers, recipe cards, and other useful necessities.
Asokan, a 27-year-old Indian national guest worker, who was received as a guest, shared that the experience made him feel welcome and far from alone. “Even though my family is far away, it makes me feel very happy to know that Singaporeans can treat me like a friend to celebrate with too. Eating at my host’s house felt like I was eating at my own grandfather’s house. I am very thankful for the kindness that was shown to me. I will never forget it.”
Join us in taking the opportunity to bless these often-neglected guest workers with a hearty meal—as a gesture of gratitude and recognition for their contributions, which have worked towards building our city-state.
Visit kindness.sg/just-an-extra-chair for more information about the initiative.
