The Unbearable Being of Whiteness

Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 05:36:08 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: prayer appreciated

Dear Friends,

Please pray for me, my family and my ministry as the Lord
brings them to your minds.

Early this year (1997), I have shifted focus to concentrate
on writing, translating, editing, and recording materials
helpful for Christian workers in China ministry and
Chinese churches/ministries. I have attached a list of
projects in progress.

Our first English book, SOUL SEARCHING, has been printed,
praise God, and is on it way from Hong Kong to North America.

Pray that:
1. I will be spiritually and physically alert.
2. Mildred and I will adjust well after our move
(August 30) to Los Angeles. We will live in La Mirada, CA.
3. I will be able to concentrate on the writing/translating
and editing.
4. The Lord will direct us to a new church home.
5. That the Enemy be defeated, and all our needs met.

Life is an adventure in Christ!

Sam Ling

— End —

To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Asian-American church plant
From: steveandwinnie@juno.com (Stephen N Wong)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 20:12:58 EDT

Dear subscribers to the CAC Forum,

What I’m sharing is not controversial or of political importance, and I’m
not writing a book, so I’ll try to keep this brief.

I’ve been a pastor in 2 Chinese churches in the SF Bay Area for the past
13 years, most recently as the pastor of the English speaking congregation
of the San Jose Chinese Alliance Church for 7.5 years. However, God’s
called me out of the immigrant Asian church to plant an Asian-American
church which targets the young Asian-American engineers who are moving
to the Silicon Valley in droves. I feel that this is a unique window of
opportunity
to establish a beachhead in a community that the immigrant Asian church
has been unable to reach effectively. And I’m glad that God’s called me out
to reach “my own people,” since I’m a third generation Chinese who only
knows a few Chinese terms (all related to food).

Please pray for me. And if you’re interested in my vision for this
church plant, please contact me directly.

Living by God’s grace,

Steve Wong

— End —

Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 22:27:11 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: new article for anyone interested

Dear friends,

I wrote an article on freedom and suffering
for a (believe it or not) Christian sailing
club in Hong Kong(!). You are welcome to
read/use it in whatever way. “Public
domain,” as we say in hymnody.

Sam Ling

— End —

To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Mail
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 13:59:20 EDT

Ol’ Joe

travelin’ to the market in th’ growlin’ of cramps
ol’ Joe was movin’ fast as he could
from th’ city-county buildin’ under halogen lamps
as a neighbor in a nice neighborhood

where friendly ol’ Joe was th’ friendliest guy
all he wanted was his Father’s white hat
forever at peace in the back of his mind
near the river with his baskets and cat

he was headed to the big corner store
he was thinkin’ hard on nothin’ to eat
when under his shirt he felt a smokin’ revolver
in his mind another murder complete

from th’ mistiness quite
a figure had emerged
from the edges of th’ borders attacked
shots rang out, th’ murderer fled
and th’ vi’lence came to Joe in the act

like a shatterin’ clay
‘n axe to his roots
th’ bullet blowin’ out of th’ bore
dropped his bearded ol’ figure in some dirty brown boots
with th’ forces of th’ Colt 44

ol’ Joe th’ first witness to his shootin’ that night
had caught a deadly glimpse of th’ crime
ol’ Joe who heard his killin’ in th’ mist of th’ light
settled down there in an instant of time

collapsed to th’ street in a pool of his blood
hit hard against th’ grocery store door
cried out “tho’ I be dyin’ for the last time my friends
I was headed where we hunger no more..

..my Father’s white hat along th’ river

..wounded, goin’ home from th’ war

..dirty brown boots ‘n ma basket ‘n cat

..’n belongin’s I..leave..unta..th’..poor”

c. 1997 go || See: Lk. 23:46

— End —

To: steveandwinnie@juno.com
Cc: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: Asian-American church plant
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 02:28:09 EDT

On Fri, 08 Aug 1997 20:12:58 EDT steveandwinnie@juno.com (Stephen N Wong)
writes:

<>

Hi Steve/CAC: Maybe you’ve seen Business Week’s Aug. 25 issue, devoted
to activity in the Silicon Valley; fyi, a sample extracted from the
AOL/BW site which is loaded with SV info this week.

Gary Ottoson

===========================================

Business Week: August 25, 1997
Special Report — Silicon Valley — How It Really Works

`WHAT MATTERS IS HOW SMART YOU ARE’
What makes the Valley go round? Good ideas, mostly–plus a unique,
risk-taking ecosystem

They came from India, Pakistan, and the heartland of America, by way of
Illinois, Boston, and North Carolina. The three men quit good academic
jobs,
left their homes, and packed up their cars for the long drive across the
U.S.
Their Conestoga wagons were a Mazda, a Toyota, and a Jeep. Their campfire
stories were told over cellular phones as they barreled across the
plains.
Their dream was to build a high-tech company, and they believed to do
that,
they had to get to Silicon Valley. “We’re coming, no matter what,”
Resve
Saleh recalls telling a venture capitalist on the phone. “We have to be
near
Intel.”
The trek paid off. In an office park five minutes up the road from
Intel,
the trio has launched Simplex Solutions, which makes software for
simulating
chip designs. Just two years after their cross-country pilgrimage, the
company has raised $11 million and employs 55 people. Simplex’ software
already has won over such customers as Silicon Graphics Inc. and Hitachi
Ltd.
Now, Saleh and his partners are racing toward a new milestone: taking
their
company public within the next two years. Marvels the 40-year-old Saleh:
“This has exceeded our wildest expectations.”
PUMPING UP. Everyone else’s, too. Silicon Valley. Rich in ideas. Richer
in
dollars. And all on the back of the biggest industrial revolution since
the
internal-combustion engine: computer technology. Some 20% of the world’s
100
largest high-tech companies make their homes here. Zip 10 minutes down
Highway 101, the main artery that hums through the Valley, and you pass
powerhouse after powerhouse: Intel, Cisco Systems, 3Com, Sun
Microsystems,
Netscape Communications–those five alone boast combined revenues of $40
billion and a $257 billion market capitalization. More than the market
value
of General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler combined.
The region is intoxicated with such successes. In the past two years,
the
Internet craze and hot new startups pumped up an already vibrant economy
into
one busting at the seams. In 1996, on average, one Valley company went
public
every five days, adding 62 new millionaires every 24 hours. More than
50,000
new jobs were created, while wages grew five times the national average.
Last
year, the region led the U.S. in worker productivity and export growth.
“This is an economic miracle taking place, right before our eyes,” says
Thomas M. Siebel, the founder of Siebel Systems Inc., a software maker
that
raised $33 million when it went public in June, 1996.
Such vitality has transformed Silicon Valley into the quintessence of
the
American Dream: Any good idea in a garage can turn into a gold mine. No
pedigree required. What’s more, a big chunk of the wealth that’s being
created is being distributed far beyond the corner offices, thanks to the
Valley’s stock-option culture where employees can buy shares in startups
and
giants alike at prices below market value–then cash in big when the
stock
takes off.
That has made this 50-mile-long corridor, reaching from San Jose to
San
Francisco, the ultimate destination for those drawn to the digital land
rush.
In 1995 and 1996, Saleh’s company was just one of 900 startups that set
up
shop here. And the pace is only accelerating: In 1997’s first quarter,
147
new hopefuls joined the ranks, according to Price Waterhouse. “It’s an
elixir that you breathe in the air as you come to this part of the
world,”
says Christos M. Cotsakos, CEO of Palo Alto-based online brokerage
E*Trade
Group Inc., which went public last summer, raising $46 million. “I have
never seen anything like this. This is Mecca.”
Mecca maybe, but not heaven. The Valley has its dark side. For one,
it’s
expensive to live here–the median price of a single-family home hit
$319,000
in June, up 14% from a year ago and out of reach for 70% of the
residents.
Anyone caught on the clogged 101 knows that traffic delays are just one
of
the aggravations in the jam-packed Valley. And the reality is that few
dreams
are realized–only one in 10 startups hits it big, six limp along, and
the
rest are destined to implode, shattering dreams and swallowing hopes.
But that one that makes it–ah, that not only brings riches but the
chance
for an engineer or programmer to change the way people work and play. For
all
the talk of money in the Valley, there is just as much verbiage about
“making a difference”–in how people get information, crunch it, use
it,
and entertain themselves with it. “I’m not in it for the wealth
anymore,”
says Oracle Corp. CEO Lawrence J. Ellison, who’s worth $8.4 billion. Why,
then? “How much difference can one person make?” he asks. “All the
difference in the world.”
Making millions and making a difference is the Silicon Valley mantra.
But
the machinations behind that–the dissection of how that really works–is
a
complex study in amassing a deep talent pool, building infrastructure,
and
then overlaying it all with a can-do, break-the-rules culture. The
contribution of Stanford University and the University of California at
Berkeley, which have fed the maw for brainpower, cannot be
underestimated.
But that was just the first component in a complex formula that, so far,
has
not been repeated anywhere else in the world.
Perhaps the biggest factor in Silicon Valley’s success is its sheer
density. The region crosses 30 city lines, but it’s basically a
one-industry
town crammed with some 7,000 electronics and software companies, and more
in
the making. Even the tech heavies from elsewhere think they need a
presence
here–Microsoft Corp. has sales reps in Foster City and programmers in
Cupertino; Sony Corp. set up a research center in San Jose; and Taiwanese
PC
giant Acer Inc. built research and development, engineering, and
manufacturing facilities in San Jose.
That creates a synergy with exponential effect. Executives rub
shoulders
at work, at the corner Starbucks, and on hiking trails. A breakfast at
Palo
Alto’s trendy Il Fornaio or Woodside’s down-to-earth Buck’s quickly
becomes a
dealfest for a venture capitalist or a jam session for engineers on the
latest advances in gigabit ethernet. “You end up seeing each other at
parent-teacher nights,” says Heidi Roizen, a former Apple exec. Adds
Intel
CEO Andrew S. Grove: “Proximity helps. People have worked with each
other,
competed against one another. We have such a rich ecosystem.”
The result is nonstop cross-fertilization. Take Netmosphere Inc., an
Internet Java software startup. Like so many Silicon Valley stories, it
began
with a chance meeting between an engineer and a marketer at a January,
1996,
party in San Francisco. Eric Ly, now 28, had designed software for
General
Magic Inc.; Heather Rose, now 33, was the product manager who launched
Shockwave animation software for . Both were looking for new challenges on the Net. Ly
obtained
$300,000 in private seed funding, and the San Mateo-based company has
launched its first product: Net software for managing big projects. Now,
Rose
is looking for $3 million in venture capital.
This is where the Valley’s impressive infrastructure comes into play.
Over
the years, the region has fine-tuned the task of transforming concepts
into
companies. About half the nation’s 600 venture-capital firms are based in
the
Valley, according to the National Venture Capital Assn. And many of them
have
offices on Sand Hill Road in Menlo Park, smack dab in the center of the
action. These players fork over the necessary cash and knowhow in hopes
of
30% returns or a megahit.
They are essential to the Valley. Over the past four years, venture
capitalists have plunged some $5.5 billion into Valley tech startups, 37%
of
all information-technology investments in the U.S., according to
VentureOne
Corp. And they’re not alone. Hundreds of other supporting-cast members
have
been drawn to feed on the tech food chain, from lawyers who know the ins
and
outs of software and patents to suppliers of machine tools–all with
ready
expertise for a novice entrepreneur.
It’s an instant company-making machine. With the touch of a button,
boilerplate stock-option plans and prospectuses roll out of the word
processors at the law firm of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati in Palo
Alto. The nation’s largest human-resources outsourcing firm, TriNet
Employer
Group in San Leandro, can set up everything from payroll processing to
workers’ compensation insurance to a customized benefits plan overnight,
says
CEO Martin Babinec.
Even today, Sun Microsystems Inc. CEO Scott G. McNealy marvels at how
fast
the cogs whirl. In 1982, he and two other 27-year-olds with close to zip
experience managed to raise $250,000 in venture capital on the whisper of
an
idea–making powerful workstations. “We were able to open a checking
account
on our word. We were able to rent buildings without showing ID. We were
able
to get phone lines, and Wilson Sonsini filled a huge boardroom table full
of
documents for us to sign,” he says. “Actually, on their word processor,
they just changed a previous name to our name.”
But this is just half the formula. A big part of Silicon Valley’s
success
comes down to something that cannot be quantified: the culture. This is
one
of the most unusual business environments on the planet, where the
traditional ways of doing business have been turned on their ear. At the
core
of this is an all-things-are-possible attitude, an unerring belief that a
new
technology, an entrepreneur’s vision of the digital future, is the
absolute
right one. And if it isn’t, well, the next one will be.
It is Daredevil Business 101, where risk-taking is the norm and the
penalty is not for failure but for not trying. This has created a wide
swath
of so-called repeaters, entrepreneurs who may start a company and crash
but
will try it again with the blessing and the bucks from venture backers.
This
is how the theory goes: Good ideas are the most precious commodity, and
an
entrepreneur who has them and stumbles comes away with enough lessons to
get
it right the next time.
Lucky for William G. Paseman, a former oil-rig worker from Houston who
got
an engineering degree from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and
headed
West. In 1986, he started Atherton Technology to make object-oriented
programming tools for speeding up software development. For five years,
he
says, “we made every mistake we possibly could. You could have burned a
BMW
in the parking lot every day at our run rate.” The company went bust.
But soon, Paseman had another idea. He discovered that companies doing
business in Europe had trouble working with the varying
electrical-emissions
standards in different countries. He came up with a software program to
help
them navigate “the pain.” Knock, knock–he went calling on his Atherton
venture backers, including the Mayfield Fund. Once again, they took out
their
checkbooks to the tune of $2.9 million, backing Calico Technology Inc.
Says
Mayfield partner Yogen K. Dalal: “Failure is not a black dot in the
Valley,
it’s a badge of merit.”
IT’S THE IQ. The only thing more vital than taking a risk is having an
idea.
The push to come up with bigger, better, faster, and cheaper technology
has
thrown open the door to all comers. In the Valley, people rarely care
what
school you attended, your ethnic background, or your family pedigree.
They
want proof of IQ. And with the exception of the lack of women and African
Americans heading companies, it works. “Silicon Valley is a
meritocracy,”
says Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple Computer Inc. “It doesn’t matter
what
you wear. It doesn’t matter how old you are. What matters is how smart
you
are.”
That worked to the advantage of two entrepreneur-wannabes then at
FirePower Systems. The pair went to see venture capitalist Steve
Jurvetson at
Draper Fisher Jurvetson. But the investor was unimpressed by their idea
for
database software for the Net. As they were packing up to leave, he
asked:
“Do you have any other ideas?” Sabeer Bhatia, one of the engineers,
said
they’d noodled over a scheme to offer free, advertising-supported E-mail
over
the Web. A week and a half later, the venture capitalists ponied up
$300,000
(no business plan required), and Hotmail was born. Today, it claims some
4
million subscribers.
Such reinvention is the lifeblood of Silicon Valley. Throughout the
decades, from the days when industry pioneers Charles Sporck and Ken
Oshman
and venture backers Arthur Rock and Mike Markkula were the Valley’s
movers
and shakers, the Valley has constantly remade itself just in time for the
Next Big Thing. When the computer industry went into a tailspin from 1984
to
1987 and high-tech employment plunged 11%, to a low of 191,900 jobs, the
Valley emerged with desktop-publishing software and powerful
workstations.
POWER BROKERS. And nowhere were techies quicker to latch on to the Big
Kahuna–the commercialization of the Net. Now, the Valley, already in
overdrive, has entered Internet time.
Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers partner L. John Doerr, one of the
Valley’s top power brokers, carries a pager, phone, personal digital
assistant, or laptop wherever he goes–he can’t risk missing an
opportunity.
John R. Koza, a consulting professor of computer science at Stanford, has
a
massively parallel computer in a spare room of his hilltop home so he can
plumb the frontiers of programming at all hours. Who knows–maybe Koza,
who
made his fortune designing instant lottery programs, might hit it big
again.
These days, companies are trying every trick imaginable to cut even
minutes out of normal routines. Macromedia Inc., a multimedia software
company, has installed a slide between floors to get engineers to their
destinations fast. Internet startup ExciteInc. has stashed pink bicycles throughout its offices
so
workers can zip to one another’s cubicles in their cavernous digs.
Now, Valley companies are even beginning to look like 24-hour planned
communities. At Netscape, a
Winnebago stocked with dentists
shows up twice a week for workers who
can’t find time for checkups. At networking maker 3Com Corp., employees
can
get film developed at the company store and their car washed in the
parking
lot. And weary engineers at Net startup PointCast Inc. keep washers and
dryers humming around the clock. “These startups,” says Marc
Andreessen,
co-founder of Netscape, “demand virtually a Herculean effort from all
their
employees.”
So far, they’re getting it. Which is why Silicon Valley keeps spinning
good ideas into gold.

By Andy Reinhardt, with Joan O’C.Hamilton and Linda Himelstein in Silicon
Valley

Copyright 1997 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Any
use
is subject to (1) terms and conditions of this service and (2) rules
stated
under “Read This First” in the “About Business Week” area.

— End —

Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 22:15:05 -0500
To: skuroda@jcfn.org, cac@bccn.org, bfulton@wheaton.edu, clh555@aol.com,
osbur002@maroon.tc.umn.edu
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: A Chinese Christian’s prayer

Dear Lord, Creator of all mankind,

You have ordained our culture, that we
may come to know You (Acts 17:22-31). You
have given us ancestors, customs, our
language and festivals. We thank You
for imprinting Your image in our souls.

You wanted us to rule over the earth
and to love You with all our earth. Yet,
You know how much we the Chinese people
have been as we look upon other Asian
races. We have extolled our culture to
the point of making it our idol. We
repent for the pride and the idol worship
of our ancestors, and for the ethnocentric
and narrow vision of our contemporary
Chinese brothers and sisters. We have not
treated our fellow humans with the same
dignity with which You look down from
heaven upon them. Forgive us, O Lord.

We praise You for our brothers and sisters
from Japan and Korea who have reached out
to us. It shames us that we are asked to
grant forgiveness. It shows up the hate
and bitterness in our hearts.

Father, fill our souls with the love of
Jesus (Rom. 5:5), so that we may embrace
our brothers and sisters across the China
Sea, and across the Pacific. Indeed, Lord,
grant the day that our hearts will be truly
free to love all humanity.

In the meantime, O Holy Spirit, seal the
assurance of Your grace, presence and power
in our hearts each moment. Lord Jesus, rule
over Your people that we may overcome sin,
pride, guilt and worry. Enable Your church
to witness to Your grace, for such is Your
will and prayer (John 17).

We pray as unworthy yet beloved children,

In Your name, Amen.

— End —

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 14:09:25 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org
From: Gregory Jao
Subject: Statistics?

Hey, CAC-friends!

I’m doing two workshops for Lucent Technologies’s National Asian American
Affirmative Action Conference next week. The topic: “Raising a Bi-Cultural
Family.”

The material is pretty traditional, but as I was reviewing my notes, I’m
realizing that my data is a little old.

Specifically, I usually start the workshop with a “window” on Asian
Americans in the U.S., particularly 2d generation folk. In particular, I’m
trying to help the generally older, upper-middle class, suburban crowd get a
better feel for the stress issues that their children tend to encounter.

Does anyone have more current research or data on incidences of stress,
suicide, etc. in the Asian American community? If you do, would you pass on
the data or citations?

Thanks for your help.

Greg Jao

— End —

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 08:08:30 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: Help needed

Dear Friends,

1. Would anyone have extra helping hands to
assist us in moving our belongings from
our temporary apartment in BREA, CALIFORNIA
to LA MIRADA, CALIFORNIA, around 4 or 5 pm
Sept. 2 or Sept. 3?

2. As we settle down in La Mirada, Calif.,
I would appreciate some technical support in
setting up my computer for email, etc.

Thanks for your prayers, referrals or help.

Samuel Ling

— End —

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 11:27:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: TSTseng@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: About Netiquette

Dear CACers:

It has been brought to my attention that someone is complaining about the
large volume of email messages on this list. In truth, the CAC list is a
rather sedate discussion list. Personally, I would like to hear from more
members of the list so that more than just a few “perspectives” are
presented. If this list is to serve as an effective tool for reflecting on
the Asian American Christian experience in all its forms and shapes, more of
us could do better by taking the risk of sharing our views.

However, to request that another member of the list stop sending so much mail
is poor “netiquette”. If a member is “inconvenienced” by the volume of email
messages from this list, it may be better for that person to unsubscribe from
the list (hopefully temporarily) than to attempt to “regulate” other members’
freedom of expression.

Furthermore, one of the greatest frustrations I’ve had as a minister in a
Chinese American church and a person deeply concerned about and committed to
Asian American ministry is the lack of quality time and discussion to reflect
on issues related to Asian American Christianity. This discussion list has a
number of excellent Asian American Christian leaders and scholars who are
wonderful resources. The time and energy they contribute to this list should
not be trivialized or discouraged for the sake of maintaining more space on
one’s hard drive.

So I say, let’s hear from more people! And let’s appreciate each other’s
willingness to contribute to this list even though we may disagree about many
things. Let a thousand flowers bloom!

Tim Tseng

————————————————————
Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng
Sally Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
1100 South Goodman Street
Rochester, NY 14620
OFF: (716) 271-1320
FAX: (716) 271-8013
RES: (716) 473-2651 [until mid-Sept]
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 11:28:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: TSTseng@aol.com
To: gljao@midway.uchicago.edu, cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: Statistics?

Hi Greg:

I think an index of pychological or sociological articles (which can be found
in any academic library) will have a good detailed listing of recent research
related to your topic.

Since you are working with an Affirm Action conference, I thought you and
other CACers would be interested in an article by Eric Liu (Slate magazine)
at the end of this message.

Tim Tseng

In a message dated 8/12/97 8:20:26 PM, gljao@midway.uchicago.edu (Gregory
Jao) wrote:

<>

————————————————————
Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng
Sally Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
1100 South Goodman Street
Rochester, NY 14620
OFF: (716) 271-1320
FAX: (716) 271-8013
RES: (716) 473-2651 [until mid-Sept]
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

================================
Slate – White Like Me – June 13, 1997

The Unbearable Being of Whiteness

You worship your melanin level. Get over it.

By Eric Liu

(1,245 words; posted Friday, June 13)

What would it be like to be white?

It’s a question I’ve never really considered, but pondering it now,
I find the answer unsettling: It wouldn’t be all that different. Yes, of
course it would mean unstitching from my soul that thread of thoughts and
habits one might call “Chinese”–and who knows just how unraveled I’d
become without that thread? But as far as how the world would treat
me–ignoring me or not, abusing me or not, redeeming me or not–I can’t say
I would be much better off for being white.

For although I am Chinese-American and thus a “person of color,” I
am also this: child of the suburbs, product of mostly white schools, junior
officer of the overclass, skeptic of hard-core multiculturalism, friendly
with many minorities but friends with few, never once the victim of blatant
discrimination, husband now of a woman named Haymon. I am, by the reasoning
of racial ascription, already quite white.

What that says about me I’ll leave for those who know me to assess.
What it says about our idea of whiteness, though, is for all of us to
contemplate. In the cosmology of race, whiteness is something like a black
hole–a crushingly dense complex of myth and rumor that pulls us, invisibly
and irresistibly, into its hold. We move according to its properties, yet
we know not why we move.

Consider, for instance, the now-standard formulation that if blacks would
only surrender their race-consciousness, we could all ascend to a
colorblind nirvana. You hear this line from plenty of well-meaning whites.
But you also find it embedded in nasty right-wing polemics against
diversity and affirmative action. The idea is simple: Given “the end of
racism,” or at least the end of “irrational” discrimination, minority
bellyaching only upsets what would otherwise be the proper social
equilibrium.

I’m the first to concede the awful, balkanizing folly of many
left-liberals on race. And to be sure, we’ve stockpiled so much
“difference” over the years that a round of identity disarmament would be
welcome. But we should first acknowledge that it is white
race-consciousness–never quite named as such in our popular
discourse–that begets the compensatory identities of nonwhite Americans.
And it is whiteness that must first be revealed and surrendered before we
can ever hope to transcend race.

White race-consciousness manifests itself in two forms: as blessing and as
burden. In both cases, it exists mainly by negation; it nourishes itself
upon all that it excludes. Thus it is that whites don’t generally think of
themselves as having a race at all. To be white, really, is not to be many
things–most notably, black–and to derive both security and standing from
the absence of the stigma.

It is precisely this sense of “anti-race”–this affectation of
colorless neutrality–that has allowed whiteness to insinuate itself as the
social norm. This is whiteness-as-blessing: the knowledge whites have that
in law, in literature, in politics, and in a hundred other realms, “a
regular person” is, by default, a white person. Our vocabulary for
assimilation makes the point. How do we describe the method by which
nonwhites enter the mainstream and climb the class ladder? We say, or at
least think, that they’re “becoming white.”

It used to be, of course, that “becoming white” was an option open only to
European immigrants. But over the last generation, high-achieving
Asian-Americans have been anointed “honorary” whites, usually so ordained
by conservatives wary of black militancy. By striving and succeeding
without complaint, Asian immigrants have become, in the words of Irving
Kristol, “just another ‘European’ ethnic group.”

Ah, I see: Some are born white, others achieve whiteness, still
others have whiteness thrust upon them. This is sheer narcissism, the
notion that “making it” means whitening. And when it comes from the white
right, it’s narcissism in the service of hypocrisy. For some of the very
guardians of America’s alabaster template–Pat Buchanan, Peter Brimelow,
and their ilk–are the same ideologues who reflexively rebuke blacks for
any show of ethnocentrism.

The second variety of white race-consciousness–whiteness-as-burden–is no
less tangled up in hypocrisy. But while whiteness-as-blessing expresses the
arrogance of privilege, whiteness-as-burden reveals the willful ignorance
of privilege. Nowhere is that more clear than in the periodic appearance of
what I call the Left-Behind White.

In the ’70s, the Left-Behind White appeared in the form of the
“unmeltable ethnic,” that long-assimilated Italian- or Irish- or
Polish-American who, in the wake of the Black Power movement, felt it
necessary to dust off and revive the ways of the Old Country. He
re-materialized in the late ’80s, this time in the guise of the Angry White
Male, the forgotten victim of minority preferences and “reverse
discrimination.” A decade later, he has entered the scene again, dressed
now in the finery of the Euro-American, a pitiable white who can’t find his
heritage but doesn’t want to get left behind in the parade of affirming
identities.

The spectacle of the Left-Behind White tells us again that many whites who
complain about black obsessions with blackness are themselves obsessed with
whiteness. What they are obsessed with in this case, though, is the
cultural emptiness of whiteness. In a cruel reversal, it is the white guy,
with no tradition to call his own, no history but one laden with guilt and
apology, who is “truly disadvantaged.”

Just deserts, you might say, for those minority multiculturalists
who pretended that equality of cultural recognition was as good as equality
of actual power: Now whites want to play the same game, recounting to us
the sufferings of the Celts, the indignities borne by the Welsh, yet still
retaining the power premium they’ve long enjoyed–as whites.

But alas, we’ve hit a sure conversation-stopper now: the question of white
power. No one, really, wants to talk about that. Perhaps it’s because
“white power” sounds too much like an accusation. Perhaps it’s because
“white power” brings to mind those neo-Nazi supremacists, those hateful
extremists who, most white folks will say, “aren’t like us”–and who,
truly, aren’t like most white folks. But whatever the reason, we have an
almost allergic reaction to any serious consideration of the ideology of
privilege we call “whiteness.”

How else to explain the reaction to “whiteness studies,” an academic
discipline that has emerged in the last few years? Sure, whiteness studies,
which might include everything from the history of Irish laborers to the
folkways of suburban mallrats, is open to abuse, and therefore to ridicule.
It appears, at a glance, like ethnic studies gone fatuously awry–and some
of it is indeed loopy.

But whiteness studies has also been mightily, and deliberately,
misunderstood. It is not the self-adulation of an already dominant class,
or a crusade by the oppressed to demonize The Man. It is simply an attempt
to identify the ways that whites remain blind to, and blinded by, an
unspoken faith in race–and to expose the means by which white skin and
“white attitudes” still confer social advantage.

It seems to me that we could all use some of that schooling. For it
is whiteness–not blackness–that is the original sin of identity politics.
And it falls on all our shoulders–not just colored ones–to rid the
country of its viral color-consciousness. What would it be like to be
white? One day, perhaps, there will be a better way to measure the
blessings and burdens of American life.

Links

The Center for the Study of White American Culture Inc. “supports cultural
exploration and self-discovery among white Americans.” What do five
thirtysomething graduate students talk about when they talk about race? See
“5 White Guys Sitting Around Talking.” And for the ultimate take on
whiteness, consult Race Traitor magazine (“treason to whiteness is loyalty
to humanity”), edited by Harvard historian Noel Ignatiev.

Eric Liu, an MSNBC commentator, is writing a book on Asian-Americans and
the politics of race.

Illustrations by William L. Brown.

1997 Microsoft and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved.

— End —

To: TSTseng@aol.com
Cc: gljao@midway.uchicago.edu, cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: Statistics?
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 15:55:40 EDT

On Wed, 13 Aug 1997 11:28:10 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:

>================================
>Slate – White Like Me – June 13, 1997
>
> The Unbearable Being of Whiteness
>
>You worship your melanin level. Get over it.
>
>By Eric Liu
>
>(1,245 words; posted Friday, June 13)
>
> What would it be like to be white?
>

This is another good article, Brother Tim. Thanks…and here’s another
bloomin’ poem for you (all)

🙂 Love, G

========

kaput the wick of wickedness white

white people have three ways to burn
in their flesh, in their spirit, in their soul
th’ cool way of Jesus we discern
if to love His heavenly Father is our goal

our flesh is flesh is flesh is taciturn
in th’ senses, in th’ body, in th’ mind
the cool ways of God of no concern,
the burning goal of flesh’s daily grind

white spirit..not a pound of flesh’ll burn
in the spirit things of flesh burn in the head
th’ cool way of Jesus’ Spirit learn
if the third way to burn we choose instead

in the searching soul a searing of the flesh
if the soul receives the Spirit God supplies
in the soul the coolest ways of God refresh
the soul of Man on fire never dies

c.1997 go

— End —

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 19:06:29 -0700
From: Ken Fong
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal

For those who weren’t there, the first-ever Asian PK event, held in the
Bay Area 2 weeks ago, while not ‘perfect’ (who cares?!!), was an
historic and wonderful experience. As one of the 7 all-Asian speakers,
I couldn’t help sense that there was tremendous healing power just
having the whole thing led by us Asian men. Kudos to Louis Lee and
Keith Young for laboring to pull this off.

Just got back from a summit of Asian ministry leaders and the PK
muckymucks in Denver. Started off like a PK p.r. event…too much rah
rah for my tastes. But the 2nd day, we took it to them. Asked them to
stop talking and please listen to what we had to say about the Asian
male experience. Next two hours, we were very ‘un-asian’, sharing
honestly and painfully from the heart. I believe God’s purposes were
met.

One result: us SoCal leaders felt led to start planning for Asian PK-LA
sometime next year, maybe as early as Feb 98. Working title: The
Remaking of an Asian American Man: Exploring the Struggles and Values of
Asiam Men. Several of our churches are throwing our weight and some
serious dollars behind this, hoping that this will not only be a
rallying point for SoCal AsiAm Christian men, but SoCal AsiAm unchurched
men and others from around the nation. At this early juncture, we are
envisioning maybe 2-4000 men coming together for a morning-to-evening
time.

Please add your prayers to ours. If we’re going to have this in Feb.,
we’ve got a lot of work to do. Might do this once every 3 years, with a
smaller pastors’ conference on one of the off years and maybe a
leadership/church management conference on one of the other years.
Would also love to see an AsiAm women’s conference put together, too.

ken fong
evergreen baptist church of la

— End —

Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 01:04:59 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal

I need help on this PK stuff.

(1) What is the rationale for a revival meeting designed only for MEN?
Is it because the male identity is being threatened in North America?
Unlikely, given that the majority of power-holders in this country are
male (not to mention white). Is it because of a perceived militant
feminism that threatens to displacd masculinity from the center of
American society? Makes sense from a political point of view, since
interest groups in a representative democracy must stay cohesive before
they could be effective. But it does not make sense theologically,
since “in Christ there is … no male and female.”

(2) Even if PK were necessary in mainstream American society (I reserve
judgment on this), is it necessary, or even healthy, for
Asian-Americans? Gender politics were born and bred in the West, but is
gender-distinction a natural or productive construal for A-As to
conceptualize humanity? Here I have no committed answer, but I caution
the nonreflective way in which WE let the dominant culture set the terms
of OUR discussion.

(3) If we Asian-Americans must think in terms of male and female (I
dispute this), are A-A men truly the ones that need empowering? Look
around our churches: women make up the vast majority of the
congregations but a tiny fraction of their leadership. A-A women are
regularly excluded from the pulpit and other positions of authority.
What might they say about PK for A-As?

Sze-kar Wan (I am male)
42 Browning Road
Somerville, MA 02145
Tel & fax: (617) 776-4214

— End —

Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 06:40:28 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: Re: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal

Sze-Kar and friends,

I emphathize with your concern that gender-politics should not be
the basis for a revival meeting. I also agree that the majority
of power holders in this country are male / white. Of course,
I agree that in Christ there is no male or female. Yet women
make up the majority of workers in the church.

You have given us much food for thought.

I would offer one response: men need to be taught how to be men, both
strong and gentle. In this area, there is a great need in church
and society today.

In Christ,

Sam LIng

— End —

Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
To: cac@bccn.org
From: akginn@ns.net (Pastor Alan K Ginn)
Subject: Reflections – NorCal AsianPK

I, too was among the hundreds at the NorCal Asian PK held on Aug 9th. Just
as our brother, Ken Fong shared some reflections, I cast some of mine as a
pastor.

One: The comparison issue, while not exclusively Asian-American, was
brought up by one of the speakers in his message on self-esteem. As an
observer, it was easy for me to compare myself (a pastor, speaker, teacher)
to the those on the speaker platform. I was glad to hear this speaker (with
others following suit) make vulgar the speaker issue and just be brothers
in Christ. I could relate to their’human-ness’ and transparency.

Two: I shifted from the mindset of the ‘comparison game’ to how
appreciative I am to see no less than seven brothers model godliness in
life and ministry. I am proud of them because they reflect Christ-likeness,
servanthood, and love. I am extolled in knowing, seeing, and hearing Asian
American in the frontline trenches seeking to participate with God in His
kingdom work. My prayers: for followers to emulate their spiritual leaders
(even as Paul calls for the Corinthians to emulate him) in life,
relationships, marriage and family. Far from being perfect, we are pilgrims
on the road to progress. That’s what I saw with the men up there (and the
brothers out there).

Three: I had stepped out for a break at the end of a speaking session.
Unknown to me, one of the MC’s called for the pastors of the audience to
stand and be recognized. (Can you imagine missing this golden opportunity).
The shepherds of God’s flocks received public affirmation. That is seldomly
done. Not the Asian thing to do. After that event, I spoke to some of the
men as to what happened? They shared their comments to this serendipity!
They were proud about God’s shepherds, their shepherd. I was told that
there were 20 + pastors who stood up in the midst of hundreds of men. I
also spoke to some pastor friends. They were touched and tears fell from
their eyes. The church of Jesus Christ needs to continue to affirm those in
ministry, especially pastoral. By faith (not sight), I believed that
happened on that Saturday afternoon in Castro Valley.

Hats off to Louis Lee and Keith Young, and many others for their sacrifical
labor! I see and hear the rippling affects of the NorCal Asian PK picking
up waves! To God be the glory!

akginn@ns.net

— End —

Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 14:55:37 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: “James T. Wong” , CAC
Subject: Re: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal

James T. Wong wrote:
>
> Unlike women, men have a harder time relating to each other in terms of
> building significant biblical relationships where there is trust,
> accountability and transparency. Men do respond differently from women
> when it comes to the issue of relationships, whether it be relationships
> with God, their wives or other men.
>
> Furthermore, most men have difficulty establishing deep intimate
> relationships with other men. I’m talking about relationships that are
> necessary in their Christian life. While this is not PK’s main agenda, I
> do see PK as providing a platform where healing can take place and
> relationships can be built.

Of the three relationships James Wong mentioned–with God, wives, and
other men–the last ought to be the easiest to deal with. I defer to
social psychologists better informed than I, but I suspect this strong,
silent, brooding, individualistic male who has difficulties with
intimacy is a Hollywood stereotype for whites. Machoism is a less
prevalent virus among AAs. Second- and third-generation AAs,
especially, because of their strong mothers, tend to be more “feminine”
(in best sense of word) and sensitive. These qualities, in fact, have
made us such butting jokes in the mass media. How many male AA
reporters do we see in national networks as opposed to female? Or a
positive male AA image that is neither a kungfu freak nor a
number-crunching geek? It’s difficult to generalize, but we at least
ought to examine if the white PK model is at all applicable to us.

As regards our relationships with our wives, mothers, sisters, and
girlfriends, PK is not the answer. Who ever heard of learning how to
play team football by training alone exclusively? The weight room is
but prelude to the 10 hrs with your teammates in the practice field.

As regards God, Christ is our primary (if not in fact only) mediator to
God, and being “in Christ” (to use Pauline language) is the state in
which we relate to God in the profoundest sense. Then, once we “put on
Christ, there is… no male and female.” Corollary: we desperately need
our sisters in our relationship to God.

> PK is definitely a necessity for Asian men. More and more Asian men are
> coming out of disfunctional homes and families where there is no biblical
> model of a godly man. God has definitely called men to perform different
> roles from women especially in the area of responsibility for their
> families. Too many Asian men simply don’t know how to raise godly families
> and that’s because they haven’t learned it from anyone.
>
> AA men are truly in need of biblical healing and teaching. Most AA men do
> not deal with past and present hurts and as result do not know how to build
> open and transparent relationships. AA men need teaching and modeling in
> the areas of spiritual responsibility, especially being role models to
> their families and communities.
>

Again, I defer to experts, but I would love to see some hard data on AA
as opposed to white dysfunctional families. Would someone on the net
have access to such info? My suspicion (no more than that) is the
vaunted family values among AAs have some basis in reality, what with
the centrality of Confucianism among Koreans, Chinese, and to a lesser
extent Japanese.

I do question, however, the assumption behind the statement, “Too many
Asian men simply don’t know how to raise godly families.” This is
true–but NOT because “they haven’t learned it from anyone.” AA men
don’t know how to raise a godly family, because they have REFUSED to
learn from the experts, namely their mothers and their wives. The image
of a rugged individual singlehandedly defending his wife and children
against outside elements is a prevailing American myth coming to flower
during the 19-cent conquest of the west and reinforced by the suburban
flight of the 50s. It has served the white culture well, though there
are signs of wear and tear and PK and similar movements are efforts at
rescuing it. But Asian families have for millennia been based on
relationships, not sinlge individuals. Though this relation-based
principle was abused in medieval times, in the 20-cent and beyond, this
ought to mean equal partnership between husband and wife in the raising
of a family, not just the responsibilities of the man. And this
couldn’t be more natural for AA men, since many of us are raised by
strong mothers and are married to wives who have been taught how to
raise a godly family by their mothers. Again, a PK movement that has as
tenet the exclusion of the very experts who could most likely help us AA
men seems singularly deficient.

Sze-kar Wan
42 Browning Road
Somerville, MA 02145
Tel & fax: (617) 776-4214

— End —

Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 22:45:48 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: Peter Szto , CAC
Subject: Re: mail and fe-male: how is God sending us?

Peter Szto wrote:
>
> Dear Sze-kar Wan,
> Thanks for thinking aloud and your interesting queries. Your
> thoughts are important and vastly complex, especially if we think in
> terms of “kingdom outcomes.” How are we (Asian American Christian)
> to conceptualize our social role(s) in the North American & global
> context? It seems to me that we must be responsible to define
> ourselves – sociologically, psychological and theologically, if we are
> to develop self-understanding and insight into why God put us all
> here. The PK phenomenon is only a means to an end of glorifying God
> and actualizing the phrase “peace on earth……”, you know the rest.
>
> Peace,
> Peter Szto

Dear Peter:

Thanks for your words. You are quite right about a movt represented by
PK represents at best a means to an end. By the same token, how we AAs
ought to perceive ourselves is ALSO a means to an end; but at leat it is
OUR means to solving OUR questions.

Did you post your note to CAC, bc I think it’s important to get all of
us involved in the discussion.

En Christo,
Sze-kar Wan

— End —

From: leungs
To: “‘CAC'”
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 08:48:00 E

Brother Sze-kar,

I tried to send this yesterday. But, being a novice to the CAC, I sent it
to the wrong place (irenef). Actually, that was a good thing because I
misunderstood some of the context of your original questions — focused more
on Asian PK events. Nonetheless, this slightly revised submission is
contributed in response to your original three paragraphs.

*****

Not that this will necessarily help, but here are some observations:

a) Your observation in para (3) about the composition of our congregations
is indicative of what I might suggest as an answer to your first question in
para (1). Male power is not threatened, but the male identity (especially
as to what that means before God) sure is fuzzy. Would you agree that there
is general confusion among males (of all races) regarding what their part,
principles, priorities, and passions should be? I am not about to offer any
thesis of what these might be. (Although I certainly believe there are
absolute truths, I shy away from holding forth certain interpretations on
touchy subjects as absolute.) However, many have written on the subject,
and a central theme is that men are to vibrant and visible members of the
Body of Christ.

b) Taking the general PK mission statement on face value, I doubt that the
desire is to “target” militant feminism. There is a difference between PK
and secular mens movements and “psycho-babble” mens conferences/retreats. I
finally saw for myself at a PK gathering [not an Asian one, because we don’t
have them here on the East Coast] that the real product is recognition of
God, repentance of sins, and reconciliation among believers of different
races, walks of life, and denominations. (It’s actually the final aspect of
reconciliation that opens the general PK endeavor to the greatest volume of
attacks and questions.)

c) A final comment on para (1) concerns the often-quoted verse from
Galatians. While I won’t try to exegete here, I will say that the verse
taken in light of other scripture [also written by Paul] can probably be
understood as has having an already/not yet aspect to it. Much like other
descriptions of Christians in the NT, there’s the positional and there’s the
practical. Others speak more about a distinction between being equal and
corporately united versus being “clones”. While in Christ men and women
are “the same” — just as Jews and Greeks are “the same”, men and women
(even among the redeemed) are observed in our earthly existence to be
different in many practical senses. One observation: men tend to exhibit
their shortcomings in ways different from women. Another observation:
rightly or wrongly, men “react” differently to teaching from other men, and
men “act” differently in the presence of just men and as opposed to mixed
company. Hence, the question isn’t whether it makes sense politically or
theologically, but whether it makes sense practically.

d) Under my operating assumption that PK is not primarily about gender
politics, for the questions raised in para (2), I offer that just as there
are no differences between the genders, there should be no difference
between the races. I assume folks will readily point out that this may be
so positionally in Christ, but not practically. I think that’s precisely
why we remain so acutely aware that we are A-A’s. By all means, therefore,
reconciliation aspect of PK is healthy for A-A men, and I hope it’s not
missing in Asian PK objectives. A substantive demonstration of the unity of
Christ’s followers is not only a nice idea, it is embarrassingly a missing
element in our living out the Gospel. In no way am I seeking to deny my the
identity as an A-A here. I would just suggest that coming together in
Christ is not about letting a dominant culture set the terms for our
(multiple) discussions, it’s about recognizing that discussions are needed.
After all, the discussions on racial reconciliation to date have been led
by minorities in the PK literature and the larger conferences. Moreover,
these discussions are not being held to the exclusion of other discussions
involving our sisters in Christ. But, I do agree that following a PK model
for the sake of being PK-like instead of for the scriptural precepts and
principles espoused in the model would be foolhardy.

e) IRT para (3), A-A’s could benefit from PK. Are we in need of empowering?
The answer is uniformly yes for all Christians (male or female, Jews or
Greek, free or slaves). But more than empowering, A-A men need to recognize
our sovereign God in their lives and to repent of personal and corporate
sins. Okay, one might say the corporate sins are fewer for A-A men. But,
what about the personal? Do we deny God his proper place in our lives? Do
we fail to value women as God values them? Do we fall short in loving our
wives? Do we abandon responsibilities to our families and at home? Do we
abuse blessings and positions that we’ve received? Do we contribute to the
rebellion against or dismissal of God in this country, society, the larger
culture? My own response, regrettably acknowledging my true experience, is
“yes.” My personal experience also says that I have repented of these more
often in the presence of other men than in the presence of women. Indeed,
PK is only a means not the ends. And, it’s not so much the model that will
benefit A-A men. It’s the Master behind the movement that will ultimately
inform us and transform us.

In our Redeemer,
Stephen Leung
Alexandria, VA

— End —

To: leungs@hoffman-emh1.army.mil, wans@monet.bc.edu
Cc: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re:
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:22:10 EDT

On Fri, 15 Aug 97 08:48:00 E leungs
writes:
>
>Brother Sze-kar,

>
>c) A final comment on para (1) concerns the often-quoted verse from
>Galatians. While I won’t try to exegete here, I will say that the
>verse taken in light of other scripture [also written by Paul]…
>

Brethren, CAC, Just a quick comment about Galatians 3:28 (NIV). The
immediate context of the verse is something to do with (all of us,
astounding 🙂 as ‘sons of God’. How could we reconcile ‘neither…male
nor female’ with language particularly in verses 3:26, 4:2, 4:4, 4:6f.
(below) which is also heavy into ‘gender’? If we can’t reconcile these
Biblical ideas right now esp with all the other excellent discussion
going on now–I think it’s ok–according to Paul it sounds like there’ll
plenty of time later!

Shalom, G

26 You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus,
27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves
with Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for
you are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs
according to the promise.
4:1 What I am saying is that as long as the heir is a child, he is no
different from a slave, although he owns the whole estate.
2 He is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his
father.
3 So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic
principles of the world.
4 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman,
born under law,
5 to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of
sons.
6 Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts,
the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.”
7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God
has made you also an heir.
8 Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by
nature are not gods.

— End —

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 12:53:26 -0700
To: CAC
From: Jeffrey Kuan
Subject: Re: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal
Cc: Sze-kar Wan

Sze-kar:

Thank you for the critical questions you have raised on this PK stuff.
Sexism is a real and serious issue among A-As. I don’t think the A-A
community is ready to admit, let alone confront, this issue. The small
number of women in church leadership, particularly clergy, is a serious
matter. Unfortunately, it is not only the lack of women leaders that is of
concern; it is the way that women are still being treated in our
communities. I work closely with the few A-A women clergy colleagues in my
denomination and have heard them raised their concerns about sexism among
A-As. The sorry state of gender inequality is evident also in the CAC forum,
which is almost entirely dominated by men. How often do we hear the voices
of women in this forum? The gender exclusivism of PK only perpetuates and
compounds the problem that needs to be addressed.

You have raised the question: “What might [A-A women] say about PK for
A-As?” I hope that some women would respond to it.

Shalom,
Jeffrey Kuan
2332 Virginia Street
Berkeley, CA 94709
Tel: (510) 649-8949

— End —

To: wans@monet.bc.edu
Cc: jwong@nicom.com, cac@bccn.org
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:36:22 -0500
Subject: Re: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal
From: drwong1@juno.com (Richard Wong)

On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 14:55:37 -0500 Sze-kar Wan
writes:

>Of the three relationships James Wong mentioned–with God, wives, and
>other men–the last ought to be the easiest to deal with. I defer to
>social psychologists better informed than I, but I suspect this
>strong,
>silent, brooding, individualistic male who has difficulties with
>intimacy is a Hollywood stereotype for whites. Machoism is a less
>prevalent virus among AAs. Second- and third-generation AAs,
>especially, because of their strong mothers, tend to be more
>”feminine”
>(in best sense of word) and sensitive. These qualities, in fact, have
>made us such butting jokes in the mass media. How many male AA
>reporters do we see in national networks as opposed to female? Or a
>positive male AA image that is neither a kungfu freak nor a
>number-crunching geek? It’s difficult to generalize, but we at least
>ought to examine if the white PK model is at all applicable to us.

Wait a minute, according to your earlier e-mails, you said that AA males
need to learn more from our wives, mothers, sisters, and girlfriends,
the so-called “experts” in your book. But now you’re complaining that it
has made AA males the butt of jokes in the mass media, and excluded us
from network anchor roles. So what?!? Should it even matter? Are you
letting the “dominant culture” criticized in your initial e-mail affect
your self-image? (Incidentally, there are a significant number of AA
males in visible television media roles — Ken Kashiwahara, David Louie,
and Rick Quan, just to name a few).

>As regards God, Christ is our primary (if not in fact only) mediator
>to
>God, and being “in Christ” (to use Pauline language) is the state in
>which we relate to God in the profoundest sense. Then, once we “put
>on
>Christ, there is… no male and female.”

But to quote yourself, “Who ever heard of learning how to play team
football by training alone exclusively?” Although women have much to
offer towards our development as complete individuals, a male can only
learn so much from being around women his entire life. Notwithstanding
your excerpt from Galatians, human experience demonstrates that there are
significant differences between men and women — how we react to stress,
how we handle adversity, how we deal with people — that go beyond
environmental factors. We need a mixture of both male and female role
models in our life. To emphasize what my brother Steve Jeung pointed
out in his e-mail, instead of making us as clones, God deliberately made
us all different — Jew and Greek, male and female, leader and follower.
Not all of us can function as the hands, or as feet, or as eyes. This
diversity equips us to serve different roles within the Body of Christ,
so that the church may be complete.

>I do question, however, the assumption behind the statement, “Too many
>Asian men simply don’t know how to raise godly families.” This is
>true–but NOT because “they haven’t learned it from anyone.” AA men
>don’t know how to raise a godly family, because they have REFUSED to
>learn from the experts, namely their mothers and their wives. The
>image
>of a rugged individual singlehandedly defending his wife and children
>against outside elements is a prevailing American myth coming to
>flower
>during the 19-cent conquest of the west and reinforced by the suburban
>flight of the 50s. It has served the white culture well, though there
>are signs of wear and tear and PK and similar movements are efforts at
>rescuing it. But Asian families have for millennia been based on
>relationships, not sinlge individuals. Though this relation-based
>principle was abused in medieval times, in the 20-cent and beyond,
>this
>ought to mean equal partnership between husband and wife in the
>raising
>of a family, not just the responsibilities of the man. And this
>couldn’t be more natural for AA men, since many of us are raised by
>strong mothers and are married to wives who have been taught how to
>raise a godly family by their mothers. Again, a PK movement that has
>as
>tenet the exclusion of the very experts who could most likely help us
>AA
>men seems singularly deficient.

I would agree with James Wong’s point that too many Asian men simply
don’t know how to raise godly families, because they haven’t learned it
from anyone. From my perspective, there is a dearth of positive AA male
role models, both within the church and outside. According to your
previous statement, “many of us are raised by strong mothers and are
married to wives who have been taught how to raise a godly family by
their mothers.” You also observed that there is a strong female
influence within our churches, to the point of being dominant within
congregations. That’s fine for picking up sensitivity training from the
women in our lives, but where are AA males supposed to learn the skills
that are expected of men? From fathers who refuse to go to church on
Sunday? From fathers who spend their Sundays at the restaurant or at the
store trying to earn a living for their family? From fathers who are at
the family association hall spending their afternoons, smoking, gambling,
and playing mah jong?

If you want to see an example of a lack of strong positive male
influence, look at the inner cities, with a single parent, usually a
woman, raising a family, with the father(s) nowhere to be seen. In many
of those situations, although the mother takes the children to church
every Sunday and teaches her sons everything she knows, the boys will
still end up in jail or at one end of a gun. Is this because her sons
haven’t been properly taught? Probably not. Is this because her sons
refused to learn from her teachings? Probably so. And could her
teachings have been reinforced by the presence of a positive male role
model who was actively putting these principles into practice?
Definitely yes!

That’s why Promise Keepers is so important. Not to exclude women, but
rather, to hear men reinforce what the women in our lives have been
teaching us — sensitivity, reconciliation, teamwork, personal purity,
responsibility, a respect for others, and a fear of God. To me, that’s
what PK is all about.

Richard Wong
Arlington, Virginia

— End —

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 22:41:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: JTC1010@aol.com
To: CAC@bccn.org
Subject: Fwd: APA Decision on Homosexuality

CACers:
FYI, J. Chang

=================================================
If you have any questions or comments about this press release
or about the Family Research Council, please visit our web
site at:

http://www.frc.org

————————————————————–

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: AUGUST 14, 1997
CONTACT: KRISTIN HANSEN (202) 393-2100

APA RISKS SERIOUS MENTAL HEALTH
CONSEQUENCES FOR PATIENTS SEEKING CHANGE
FROM HOMOSEXUALITY

“GAY NORMALCY” REQUIREMENT THREATENS
RIGHT TO UNBIASED TREATMENT

WASHINGTON, D.C. — People seeking professional mental health
therapy as a way out of homosexuality may soon face a brick
wall erected by those who want to deny any hope of change.

A decision expected on Thursday by an American Psychological
Association governing body would force sexual reorientation
therapists to read a statement to their patients declaring
that homosexuality is normal and healthy. Many therapists
feel that this blatantly mischaracterizes the nature of
homosexuality, threatens the freedom to seek and to provide
treatment, and may condemn many patients to a life of
hopelessness and needless suffering, denying them a normal
family life.

“Forcing therapists to read any such statement to their
clients represents gross interference with therapists’ free
speech rights, conscience, and professional clinical judgment.
Therapists are going to have to lie to their patients about
what it means to be gay,” said Robert H. Knight, Director of
Cultural Studies for the Family Research Council. “This goes
against clinical knowledge and the tradition of professional
psychological training, not to mention 5,000 years of human
experience and the teaching of all major religions.

“The APA cannot claim that there is an absence of clinical
evidence showing successful therapeutic change for homosexuals.
They are well aware that people have been successfully treated
for decades and that a growing population of ex-gays is
becoming more visible in America today. Cowed by aggressive
homosexual activists who say–without credible evidence–that
people are `born gay,’ the APA is trying to snuff out genuine
hope for those struggling with gender identity problems.

“The National Association for the Research and Therapy of
Homosexuality (NARTH) has a consistent track record of success
on behalf of those willing to change. A Recent NARTH study of
850 individuals who claim to have made a degree of
sexual-orientation change and 200 therapists who have counseled
such individuals found that 99 percent of them believe
treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and
valuable. Exodus International, a Christian outreach staffed
by former homosexuals, also cites high rates of change by
those weary of their homosexual identity. The APA has also
chosen to ignore decades-old evidence from sex researchers
Masters and Johnson, who reported a 71.6 percent success
rate–even after five years–for clients who wanted to change
their sexual preference.

“We call on the APA to reject this disastrous retreat from
sound clinical practice and to acknowledge the truth–that
homosexual behavior entails inevitable physical and
psychological risks and that homosexuals can change.”

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR INTERVIEWS, CONTACT THE FRC PRESS
OFFICE.

———————
Forwarded message:
From: Family_Research_Council@townhall.com
Reply-to: corrdept@frc.org
Date: 97-08-14 15:44:35 EDT

If you have any questions or comments about this press release
or about the Family Research Council, please visit our web
site at:

http://www.frc.org

————————————————————–

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: AUGUST 14, 1997
CONTACT: KRISTIN HANSEN (202) 393-2100

APA RISKS SERIOUS MENTAL HEALTH
CONSEQUENCES FOR PATIENTS SEEKING CHANGE
FROM HOMOSEXUALITY

“GAY NORMALCY” REQUIREMENT THREATENS
RIGHT TO UNBIASED TREATMENT

WASHINGTON, D.C. — People seeking professional mental health
therapy as a way out of homosexuality may soon face a brick
wall erected by those who want to deny any hope of change.

A decision expected on Thursday by an American Psychological
Association governing body would force sexual reorientation
therapists to read a statement to their patients declaring
that homosexuality is normal and healthy. Many therapists
feel that this blatantly mischaracterizes the nature of
homosexuality, threatens the freedom to seek and to provide
treatment, and may condemn many patients to a life of
hopelessness and needless suffering, denying them a normal
family life.

“Forcing therapists to read any such statement to their
clients represents gross interference with therapists’ free
speech rights, conscience, and professional clinical judgment.
Therapists are going to have to lie to their patients about
what it means to be gay,” said Robert H. Knight, Director of
Cultural Studies for the Family Research Council. “This goes
against clinical knowledge and the tradition of professional
psychological training, not to mention 5,000 years of human
experience and the teaching of all major religions.

“The APA cannot claim that there is an absence of clinical
evidence showing successful therapeutic change for homosexuals.
They are well aware that people have been successfully treated
for decades and that a growing population of ex-gays is
becoming more visible in America today. Cowed by aggressive
homosexual activists who say–without credible evidence–that
people are `born gay,’ the APA is trying to snuff out genuine
hope for those struggling with gender identity problems.

“The National Association for the Research and Therapy of
Homosexuality (NARTH) has a consistent track record of success
on behalf of those willing to change. A Recent NARTH study of
850 individuals who claim to have made a degree of
sexual-orientation change and 200 therapists who have counseled
such individuals found that 99 percent of them believe
treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and
valuable. Exodus International, a Christian outreach staffed
by former homosexuals, also cites high rates of change by
those weary of their homosexual identity. The APA has also
chosen to ignore decades-old evidence from sex researchers
Masters and Johnson, who reported a 71.6 percent success
rate–even after five years–for clients who wanted to change
their sexual preference.

“We call on the APA to reject this disastrous retreat from
sound clinical practice and to acknowledge the truth–that
homosexual behavior entails inevitable physical and
psychological risks and that homosexuals can change.”

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR INTERVIEWS, CONTACT THE FRC PRESS
OFFICE.

— End —

To: drwong1@juno.com
Cc: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 02:45:37 EDT

On Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:36:22 -0500 drwong1@juno.com (Richard Wong)
writes:
>… sensitivity, reconciliation, teamwork, personal purity,
responsibility, a respect for others, and a fear of God. To me, that’s
what PK is all about.
>
>Richard Wong
>Arlington, Virginia

Dear Richard,

The word ‘all’ in the phrase ‘To me, that’s what PK is all about’ flags
attention. It would be beautiful if true that PK’s agenda is free of
politics. Are you arguing that PK is a-political? If not, please
describe PK political philosophy and positioning relative to American
politics as you see them.

Also, if you can work it in time wise, please comment on the political
positioning by churches/church-related organizations (e.g. Focus on the
Family with its ~ $100 million in annual revenues) relative to Jesus’
and/or Paul’s teaching and life style(s). To me, it appears that they may
have done some ‘organizing’ by, for instance, in Jesus’ case, carefully
selecting followers, even Judas, but they were not ‘organization men’.
What was the role of the Holy Spirit in what they did? What is the role
of the Holy Spirit in PK-style organizations?

I ask about this subject because the standard approach to ministry today
(somewhat evident, perhaps, in the original and second ‘report(s) on
Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal’) is to generate, to gain
access to, to exercise, power via organizations which require/grant
status to people as ‘organization men/persons’.

But I have this type of (illustrative) question about that: What is a
pastor, a ‘functionary’ in a ‘Christian organization’ who procedes,
‘functioning’, theoretically, in two realms simultaneously (i.e. in both
the kingdom of God and in the organization/organizational structure of
society)? Is this possible? Why wouldn’t this dual ‘function’ qualify as
a classic conflict of interest? What does this approach to ministry, if
not rejecting the form of the World, e.g. Romans 12:2, Eph. 2:2, have to
do with the ministry of the Holy Spirit? By opposing (certain) PK
politics would people be opposing the Holy Spirit?

Shalom as our God sends the Light of Life and His peace to us (via JUNO)
🙂

G

— End —

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 01:15:03 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Gal 3.28 & PK (pt 1 of 3)

Qns were raised about my use of Gal 3.28 and its relation to PK. Here
are some of my musings. This response has three parts; I do apologize
for the length and I promise future responses will be shorter.

Gal 3.28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male and
female, for all of you are one in Christ.”

[PART 1] Gal 3.28 defines a Hierarchy of Identities, acc to wh
Being-in-Christ supersedes all identities based on ethnicity, class-,
and gender-distinction.

[1a] “Sons of God” does not refer to maleness. G raised the supposedly
gender-specific language in 3:26, 4:2, 4:4, 4:6f. 4.2 & 4.4 have to do
with the maleness of God and Jesus, not ours. The masculine “huioi”
(literally “sons”) of 3.26 & 4.6 is a common way in Greek to refer to a
mixed group of men and women; it can mean “sons” or “sons AND
daughters.” The context of 3.26-4.7 has to do with the contrast between
heirs who are entitled to inheritance and slaves who are not (4.1-3, 5,
7; also 3.23-25), NOT between sons and daughters. The properly
translation of “huioi” in this passage should therefore be “children,”
ie, all those entitled to inheritance as opposed to slaves. The
singular “huios” of 4.7, accordingly, is a collective singular and
should also be translated as “child.” Compare the Cantonese “Chan tai
saang jo go jai [son], go jai [son] hai go nui [daughter].” A literal
translation (“Mrs. Chan gave birth to a son, and the SON IS A DAUGHTER”)
would make nonsense of the sentence, bc it would ignore the fact that
“jai” (lit. “son”) can mean “son” and “child.”

Paul was writing in a culture in wh daughters were not entitled to any
inheritance. If Paul had been writing in a culture in wh sons and
daughters could inherit, do we have any doubt that Paul would refer to
BOTH sons AND daughters? Paul’s point here is about inheritance, not
about the opposition between sons and daughters.

[1b] Gal 3.28 in all likelihood should NOT be placed in an
“already/not-yet” context (with due respect to Stephen Leung) but in an
ever-present mode. The whole letter to the Galatians is notoriously
devoid of apocalyptic or eschatological language. The only clearly
eschatological statement in Gal is 6.15: “For neither is circumcision
anything or uncircumcision, but new creation,” and “new creation” is
standard apocalyptic language. But even here the stress is on the
already. Paul’s concern in Gal is to integrate the Gentile Christians
(“uncircumcision”) into a hitherto Jewish (“circumcision”) movement
(early Christianity); this integration has to be carried out NOW, not
some distant future.

Gal 3.28, even more clearly, has to do with the here-and-now. What
makes it possible–and necessary–to do away with secondary distinctions
is that we are AT PRESENT “in Christ.” Paul tells the Galatians that,
bc they have ALREADY received the promise of the Holy Spirit (3.1-5, 14;
4.6, etc.), Gentiles have as much right in the new community/new
creation as Jews. What matters is that they are all in Christ NOW.

[1c] Gal 3.28 is both descriptive and prescriptive. It describes what
being in Christ means: Once baptized, we acquire a new identity defined
by our union with Christ. It also prescribes what we must do to realize
this new Christian identity. A marriage vow not only declares the love
between a man and a woman but also binds them to the responsibilities of
realizing that marriage. Gal 3.28 is, among other things, a call to
responsible Christian living.

[1d] The Christian identity supersedes other identities based on
ethnicity, class, economics, and gender. Identity is always based on
distinction–ie, on what we are not. A Christian identity, wh is based
on our union with Christ, distinguishes us from those who do not have
such union. Other identities are also based on distinctions: we are
Asian or Asian-American and not white, we are male and not female, we
are middle-class and not Kennedys, we are college-educated and not
illiterate, etc. But all these distinctions–real, valid, or
“practical” (so Stephen Leung)–must be secondary goods compared to the
broader, more important identity that groups us together.

[1e] This Hierarchy of Identities questions all ethnically-based,
class-based, economics-based, and gender-based structures of authority.
Paul’s whole point in Galatians is to make sure the Gentile
Christians–newcomers, minorities, marginalized, unschooled in
theological niceties–would not have to subscribe to an authority
structure defined solely by the Jewish majority and power-holders.
Hence his insistence on separation from the center of Jerusalem
(1.17-24; 4.21-5.1). Hence his diatribes against a circumcision that
would making Gentiles Jews first before they could be Christians.
Hence, also, his recitation of Gal 3.28, whose intent is to equalize the
statuses of traditionally unequal relationships. Outside the Christian
circle, the free had legal standings while the slaves did not; in
Christ, however, such “legality” would have no standing. Outside the
Christian circle, only men could be land-owners and office-holders; in
Christ, however, women could lead as well as men, bc now authority is
reconfigured under new, different criteria. Whatever else Gal 3.28
might mean–I don’t claim to have exhausted its meaning here–it tells
us at least how in-Christ authority ought NOT be negotiated: In-Christ
authority ought not be defined in terms of ethnicity, class, or gender.

[1f] Conclusion. We can maintain these secondary distinctions if and
only if we can at the same time maintain our primary Christian
identity. Indeed, if 1c holds, we must do more than maintain; we must
further, strengthen, deepen this identity. Negatively stated, we must
not maintain any of these secondary distinctions to the detriment of our
Christian identity. It is theologically inappropriate to define
Christian identity in terms of any of these secondary distinctions.
Positively stated, we could maintain these secondary distinctions only
insofar as they further, strengthen, deepen our Christian identity.

[Part 1 ends]

— End —

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 01:16:10 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Gal 3.28 & PK (pt 2 of 3)

[PART 2] PK trouble me bc they seem to uphold gender distinction as part
of their understanding of Christian identity.

[2a] I do not doubt the genuine religiosity of PK. They speak my
language, I can readily identify with the spiritual experiences
attendees of their meetings have, and respected friends have taken and
will continue to take part in the movement. I suspect I might even have
a good time if I attended one of their meetings–if only I could ignore
my misgivings.

[2b] If PK were only “only a means to an end of glorifying God” (Peter
Szto) and their structure reflected that, I’d have no difficulties. But
it is clear that PK intend to stay around for a long time. They are a
worldwide phenomenon, they command the allegiance of tens of thousands
(perhaps more) of men, they boast an astonishingly well-run (not to
mention permanent) infrastructure, and one hesitates to speculate the
amount of money and political power they control. It doesn’t look as if
PK wanted to work themselves out of existence any time soon. Nor do I
see any concrete steps they have taken to support the part of the
kingdom of God not directly connected with them. I would be happy to be
proven wrong on both counts.

[2c] I am suspicious of PK making universal claims. Stephen Leung wrote
of PK: “the real product [of PK] is recognition of God, repentance of
sins, and reconciliation among believers of different races, walks of
life, and denominations.” First of all, there is nothing here that is
particularly male-specific. I fail to see why we can learn these things
only from an exclusively male organization. Secondly, we can all
readily accede to these qualities, bc they are universal.
“Reconciliation,” at least as Paul defines it in 2 Cor 5.16-21, is a
universalistic category: it is the outward sign corresponding to what
God has put in train cosmically, namely the “new creation” ( 2 Cor
5.17). Just as the “new creation” ought to put a stop to any
authority-calculus based on ethnic distinction (Gal 6.15 ), it ought
also to put a stop to similar calculi based on class and gender (Gal
3.28 and 1d-f above). In light of the connection among reconciliation,
new creation, and Christian identity, PK fail the test of 1e, “In-Christ
authority ought not be defined in terms of ethnicity, class, or
gender.” By the same test I would fail radical feminist theologies that
do not take into account of maleness.

Thirdly, experience has taught me to be deeply suspicious of
exclusivistic groups’ making universal claims. Reason: they
universalize their own particularities and make everyone else submit to
them. It would be different if the group were not closed.
Christianity, after all, makes absolute, universalistic claims, but it
is an open system. It admits newcomers and, indeed, survives
(sociologically speaking) on evangelism. Newcomers can appropriate, and
in the history of the church HAVE APPROPRIATED, these universal claims
for themselves. To wit: Paul’s Gentile Christians entered a heretofore
Jewish religion but succeeded (beyond even Paul’s imagination) in
appropriating the Jewish universal claims for themselves. The result is
that the original claims became truly universal, and the Gentile
appropriation fulfilled the promise of universality. Openness is
constitutive of universal claims and exclusivism contradicts it. Closed
universalism is therefore another name for imperialism and subjugation.

[Part 2 ends]

— End —

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 01:17:42 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Gal 3.28 & PK (pt 3 of 3)

[PART 3] I am not at all convinced PK are a helpful model for AAs.

[3a] One kind of exclusivism can easily lead to another. If PK could
ignore the larger principle of Christian identity (all of Part 1 but
esp. 1d-f) and exclude women from their meetings, they will have to
convince me they won’t exclude on basis on ethnicity. So far, their
leadership in this country is drawn primarily from a certain sector
(white middle-class); elsewhere (eg, in Asia) they appeal to the
upwardly mobile and the very rich. If your meetings are held in
five-star hotels, the working class need not apply. No proof this, only
suspicion.

[3b] PK are built on a white model of a rugged, individualistic male. I
have already made this point elsewhere and won’t elaborate here.
Suffice to reiterate that dividing humanity into male and female is not
necessarily the most productive way to conceptualize Asian or
Asian-American reality. See below.

[3c] AA men can learn from a white, male organization–but ONLY
CRITICALLY. I am no isolationist; I happen to think AAs could profit
from the dominant culture. Practically speaking, we cannot but learn
from it if we are to survive in it. But given the cultural differences
between us (3b and elsewhere), shouldn’t we think in terms of our AA
identity FIRST before being assimilated into a movement that is only
marginally concerned about our ethnic identity and that tells us we
should be concerned about our male identity? PK define the issue for
us, and the issue DOES NOT concern our AA identity; it’s about our male
identity. Yes, PK have belatedly made overtures to AA men, and it is
probably an honest attempt at dealing with the ethnic issue
constructively. But they do so ON THEIR TERMS! Unless we grant them
the starting premise that men be separated from women, there wouldn’t
even be an opportunity to raise the ethnicity question. In short,
because someone else is setting the agenda for us, we now have to
choose–between our ethnic identity and our sexual identity. Surely
this is false dichotomy!

[3d] In the context of the Galatians Hierarchy of Identities, WE AAs
alone are responsible for prioritizing our identities. Paragraphs 1d-e
above outline a hierarchy that elevates our Christian identity above all
other identities but do not address the problem of competition between
secondary identities. That was not the issue in Galatians, but Gal 3.28
can still help us indirectly. If indeed “we could maintain [our]
secondary distinctions only insofar as they further, strengthen, deepen
our Christian identity” (1f), then we must think through our identities
from the top down. What issues confront AA CHRISTIANS and AA CHRISTIAN
churches today? Generation and language gaps between immigrants and
later-generations in our churches; difficulties with evangelizing
second- and third-generation kids; being overlooked by predominantly
white Christians (eg, young AA leaders overlooked by Christianity
Today); for those in ministry, being torn between a success-oriented
subculture, exacerbated by the wiz-kid stereotype and expectations that
come with it, and a fairly despised profession (pastor) within that
subculture; being torn between other AA social activists who want us to
take part in various causes and church demands; being ridiculed by
mainstream AAs for being religious; what it means to be Christian and AA
at the same time, etc. Others better informed than I can enumerate a
more representative list, I’m sure. But my point is simply that the
problem of male-female competition rarely, if ever, dominates the AA
field of problems. If fact, if Patty Chin Kashiwamura is right (and I
think she is), there is simply little or no competition between AA men
and women. AA women just don’t complain against their lack of visible
authority. It’s men like me who do, though I want to do it as PART of a
larger complex of issues that confront AAs. Likewise, I propose to deal
with AA male identity, a question which Stephen Leung raised and which I
would extend to include AA FEMALE identity, within the broader question
of AA identity. PK have to deal with the feminist issue, because white
male Christians realize–correctly in part–that THAT is their defining
issue. We would become so much poorer if it is ours as well.

[3e] My argument is 3d is not circular but spiral. It only appears
circular: I started by cordoning off AA Christians and proceeded to
argue what defined us was our AA identity. My starting point is a
“practical” is (Stephen Leung’s term): if we ask CACers which of the
two–our AA identity or our gender identity–defines our everyday life,
I suspect the answer will be “AA identity.” “Identity is always based
on distinction–ie, on what we are not” (1d above). As minorities
living in an otherwise white world, we are seen by others as well as by
ourselves, more readily than not, as AA first and only secondarily as
men or women. We might as well accept this as our starting point. Only
when our ethnic identity becomes secure enough can we afford to take it
for granted, to stop factoring it into our conscious actions. Then and
only then, I submit, could we afford to divide ourselves up into men and
women. At this point, let us not.

The conclusion of my argument, be very careful, does NOT end up with AA
identity. If it did, it would’ve been a circular argument and, worse, I
would’ve failed the same test I devised for PK and the radical feminists
(1e & 2c). Instead, my argument points towards our CHRISTIAN identity.
Finding out who we are as AAs is but a first, albeit a necessary first,
step towards realizing our Christian identity and, ultimately, towards
fulfilling the mystery in whose deepest recesses and profoundest depths
“there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male and female, for
all of [us] are one in Christ.”

[Parts 1-3 end]

Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 01:20:22 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: report on Asian PK NorCal and news of one for SoCal

Richard Wong wrote:

> Wait a minute, according to your earlier e-mails, you said that AA males
> need to learn more from our wives, mothers, sisters, and girlfriends,
> the so-called “experts” in your book. But now you’re complaining that it
> has made AA males the butt of jokes in the mass media, and excluded us
> from network anchor roles. So what?!? Should it even matter? Are you
> letting the “dominant culture” criticized in your initial e-mail affect
> your self-image?

Surely you misunderstood my point. One could complain of being made a
joke (a) bc others have misrepresented our facts; or (b) bc, tho they
have the facts, they have a negative evaluation of them. My “complaint”
(if one must call it that) here is of the second sort. I surely do not
object to learning from our mothers, wives, etc.; I advocate it. But a
macho culture will find it less than “manly” and will make light (and
fun) of it. What I hope to achieve with my observation is not to
cultivate better “self-image” but that the dominant culture would stop
judging us by its muscular standards, acc to wh we are weak and lack
leadership, and that we stop buying into it.

> … instead of making us as clones, God deliberately made
> us all different — Jew and Greek, male and female, leader and follower.
> Not all of us can function as the hands, or as feet, or as eyes. This
> diversity equips us to serve different roles within the Body of Christ,
> so that the church may be complete.

Let’s not collapse all differences into the same pile. “Jew-Greek” and
“male-female” are based on ethnic and gender differences that we cannot
change; God has made us so. “Leader-follower” is NOT God-given. The
different body roles in 1 Cor 12-14 are in fact NOT authority-laden but
functionally defined. We have different roles to play, different
responsibilities to discharge, but Paul’s main point is that the HOLY
SPIRIT has sole authority, bc the Holy Spirit is the AUTHOR of these
functions. When someone takes on authority, therefore, it is always
prudent to ask about basis of his or her authority, who defines it, who
gets to have it, who could question it.

> … You also observed that there is a strong female
> influence within our churches, to the point of being dominant within
> congregations. That’s fine for picking up sensitivity training from the
> women in our lives, but where are AA males supposed to learn the skills
> that are expected of men? From fathers who refuse to go to church on
> Sunday? From fathers who spend their Sundays at the restaurant or at the
> store trying to earn a living for their family? From fathers who are at
> the family association hall spending their afternoons, smoking, gambling,
> and playing mah jong?

Does it only strike me as strange that we have so few men in our
congregations but nothing BUT men in leadership positions?

> That’s why Promise Keepers is so important. Not to exclude women, but
> rather, to hear men reinforce what the women in our lives have been
> teaching us — sensitivity, reconciliation, teamwork, personal purity,
> responsibility, a respect for others, and a fear of God. To me, that’s
> what PK is all about.

My point is not that AA men must learn to raise a godly family from AA
women and not from other AA male role models. Rather, let us get beyond
our preoccupation with being a MAN or being a WOMAN. Being a man or
woman is not something etched in stone. To try to discover something
“out there,” as it were, for us to follow is futile. Learn, instead,
what it means to raise a family as Christian husband & wife, Christian
father & mother. “Husband,” “wife,” “father,” and “mother are all
RELATIONAL terms. They tell me what I must be IN RELATION TO someone
else. I am no husband except in relation to my wife, I am no father
except in relation to my children, etc. Raising a family is therefore a
joint-project, not the prerogative of the husband alone. Yes, I AM very
Asian in this regard. In sum, promising to keep women out of the
discussion makes little sense to me intuitively and is utterly foreign
to me culturally.

Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:00:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: TSTseng@aol.com
To: Hartzell3@aol.com, cac@bccn.org
Subject: Netiquette addendum

Dear CACers:

Because of commitments to conduct a wedding and preach, I did not check my
email messages over the weekend. But what a delight to discover a number of
exciting, substantial messages!

Also, since my first posting on “netiquette,” I’ve been reminded that perhaps
a few guidelines about postings would be helpful. Here are a few suggestions
(please add more)….

1. If you want to share a lengthy article (e.g., more than 6 pages), please
describe it in an abstract and invite subscribers to request it from you
privately rather than posting it on this list. I want to affirm the concerns
of those who may feel imposed upon by being overwhelmed by long messages.

2. Please send messages intended for all 500 + persons on this list to
. This way all of us can read what you would like to share.

3. Please guard against info overload (something I’m guilty of, I confess).
So don’t send too much too quickly – spread all that you want to share over
a longer period of time (or invite personal requests).

4. All types of messages, articles, poems, etc. are welcome on this list.
Debates are also welcome. However, I want to suggest a tone of civility and
respect in our postings – especially if we disagree with one another
strongly. This means “no flames” such as the message below.

In a message dated 8/15/97 9:08:43 PM, you wrote:

<>

God bless you all – and again, thanks, for making this list so interesting
and substantive!

Tim

————————————————————
Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng
Sally Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
1100 South Goodman Street
Rochester, NY 14620
OFF: (716) 271-1320
FAX: (716) 271-8013
RES: (716) 473-2651 [until mid-Sept]
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:28:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: SUWALI@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: unsubscribe

We have received all the tremendously lengthy mailings from the last few
weeks. While some have been very uplifting and informative, others have had
very little value. While we have found the recent “UNSUBSCRIBE” debates to
be some what entertaining, we do have to say that better judgement should be
used in the content, lengths, and distribution of e-mail messages through
this network.

While we are both Chinese American Christians, we find that the questioning
from the individual at the University of Houston to be inappropriate. We
feel that subscribers should not question the ethnicity of any individuals
who choose to receive CAC emails. CAC does provide information for the
Chinese American Christian community, but exclusivity based on ethnicity has
no place in the Christian world. In addition, if a non-Christian can benefit
from the information transmitted through CAC, it is all the better. See
Philippians 1:12 -18 for further elaboration.

Respectfully submitted,
Wang and Sunny Li

— End —

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 09:00:14 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org, acmi-network@xc.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: My articles

Dear friends and colleagues in the ministry,

I would like to offer my apologies to those of
you who have experienced information overload,
and whose hard-drive has been congested partly
because of the volume of the articles I put out.

I realize that we all have different expectations
when we join a list, and that there are different
ways to initiate debate/discussion. The latest
developments indicate that there are ways to invite
discussion other than posting lengthy articles.

I would like to invite those of you who are seriously
considering un-subscribing, to hang in there. The
Body of Christ is large, diverse, but capable of
change!

I will inform my friends of new articles as they
become available.

In Christ,

Samuel Ling

— End —

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:43:22 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Gal 3.28 & PK (Abstract)

Apologies for occasioning a debate on volume & length. Here’s a greatly
abbreviated abstract of my recent postings “Gal 3.28 & PK (pts 1-3).”
This does not replace my original postings but serves as index to them.

[Part 1] Gal 3.28 defines a Hierarchy of Identities: Being-in-Christ
supersedes all identities based on ethnicity, class, gender.
[1a] “Sons of God” does not refer to maleness.
[1b] Gal 3.28 is not about “already/not-yet” but here and now.
[1c] Gal 3.28 is both descriptive and prescriptive.
[1d] The Xn id supersedes identities based on ethnicity, class, gender.
These distinctions are secondary goods compared to the Xn id.
[1e] This Hierarchy of Identities questions all ethnically-based,
class-based, gender-based structures of authority. Gal 3.28 tells us
in-Christ authority ought NOT be defined in terms of ethnicity, class,
gender.
[1f] Sum: We can maintain secondary ids if and only if we can maintain
our primary Xn id. Negatively, we must not maintain secondary
distinctions to the detriment of our Xn id. Positively, we could
maintain secondary distinctions only insofar as they enchance our Xn id.

[Part 2] PK seem to uphold gender distinction as part of their Xn id.
[2a] I do not doubt the genuine religiosity of PK.
[2b] PK do not seem to be only a means to an end.
[2c] We should be suspicious of exclusivistic groups making universal
claims, and PK fail the test of 1e.

[Part 3] I am not convinced PK are a helpful model for AAs.
[3a] Exclusivism based on gender can lead to exclusivism based on race.
[3b] PK are built on a white model of a rugged, individualistic male.
[3c] PK define the issue: not AA id but male id. Bc they set the agenda,
we are forced to choose betw ethnic id and our id–a false dichotomy.
[3d] AAs alone are responsible for prioritizing our identities.
[3e] My argument does not end up in AA id but points upwards to Xn id.

Sze-kar

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
To: cac@bccn.org
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 12:43:37 -0500
Subject: info about CAC list

[This is a monthly posting; * marks What’s New]

FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions about CAC (18 Aug 97)

Q: What is this CAC mailing list?
A: The CAC Forum is an informal “mailing list” online discussion for Chinese
American Christians, where we discuss many issues related to (but not limited
to) Chinese American Christians, including campus ministry and ethnic church
issues, as well as some political issues concerning Asian Americans. As an
informal forum, you may also share ministry opportunities and prayer requests
accordingly.

Q: How do you post a message to the CAC forum?
A: Send an email message to “cac@bccn.org” [without quotes], and a copy of
your message will be sent to all CAC subscribers.

Q: How do you unsubscribe (stop receiving CAC messages)?
A: Send an email message to “listserver@bccn.org” and on the first line of the
message body, write “unsubscribe cac” [without quotes].

Q: How do you subscribe to CAC (start receiving CAC messages)?
A: Send an email message to “listserver@bccn.org” and on the first line of the
message body, write “subscribe cac your_name” [without quotes]. Put your first
and last name in the place of your_name. You’ll receive a confirmation/
welcome message to say you’re a new subscriber.

*Q: Is there an archive of old CAC messages?
A: There is an archive of selected CAC messages and posted articles at the CAC
web page

*Q: I’m only interested in some of the topics. What can I do?
A: As the list has grown, almost quadrupled in size within the past
year, there has been an increasing diversity of discussions and interests. We
encourage you to engage in discussion of issues relevant to Chinese American
Christians; please refrain from file attachments in order to conserve
bandwidth. Short informational articles are okay; if there is a lengthy
article or essay you’d like to share, a short announcement or reference
to the web site can be posted.

Q: What does CAC stand for?
A: CAC is Chinese American Christians. Although the scope of discussions
often discuss Asian American issues and sometimes generic topics, the name
stuck because of its origin.

Q: How many subscribers are there on CAC?
A: Currently we have more than 200 ministry leaders and laypersons. Please
forward this message to others who may be interested in the CAC forum.

*Q: How does a “mailing list” work?
A: CAC is run by an automated computer program, called a “listserver”, which
send copies of email messages to all CAC subscribers. Currently the
listserver is undergoing some technical transition, but that should be
transparent to you.

Q: When was CAC started and automated?
A: The list was started in 1995 by Drs. Timothy Tseng and Sze-Kar Wan. CAC
used to be a manually propagated carbon copy email, but was automated in
summer of 1996. We hope to bring Chinese American Christians together using
the latest technology so that we can share our ideas and resources on
furthering the cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in North America and around
the world. We hope that this CAC forum will serve as a “think tank” and/or a
networking vehicle for all of us.

*Q: Is there a moderator for CAC?
A: DJ Chuang is the list manager; there is not a
moderator for the ongoing discussions per se.

-end-


* * ICQ UIN 508675

— End —

Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 14:45:18 -0500
From: Fenggang Yang
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
To: SUWALI@aol.com, cac@bccn.org

Wang and Sunny Li write:

> While we are both Chinese American Christians, we find that the
questioning
> from the individual at the University of Houston to be inappropriate.
We
> feel that subscribers should not question the ethnicity of any
individuals
> who choose to receive CAC emails. CAC does provide information for the
> Chinese American Christian community, but exclusivity based on ethnicity
has
> no place in the Christian world. In addition, if a non-Christian can
benefit
> from the information transmitted through CAC, it is all the better. See
> Philippians 1:12 -18 for further elaboration.

I am “the individual at the University of Houston”. The reason I made the
previous point was not to exclude anybody from this open-list. However, I
was disturbed by those neither “Chinese” nor “Christian” remarks about
others’ articles and messages discussing issues relevant to our Chinese or
Asian Christians. For those individuals who cannot find the
articles/messages relevant, they can easily delete those messages or
simply unsubscribe the list quietly. This list is CAC, IT IS ethnically
defined. If you don’t like it, why should you join it and then complain
about it?

Vance Hartzell writes: (I am full Chinese).

This parenthesized sentence made me think again. Dear Vance, please
pardon me if my message offended you. In fact, Dr. Samuel Ling’s article
about ethnic Chinese alerted me about the existence of ethnic Chinese
whose names do not look Chinese. You might be one of them. Right? Then,
my question to you is:

What do you mean to be a Chinese? Simply biological? I have always
thought that to be a Chinese means to show respect and politeness to
others. However, those messages asking xxx xxx stop posting and so on are
not very Chinese. Don’t you think so?

Fenggang Yang
University of Houston

— End —

To: cac@bccn.org
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 18:51:13 -0500
Subject: re: Feminization of the Churches
From: drwong1@juno.com (Richard Wong)

In keeping with the spirit of minimizing the load on your Inboxes, I’m
attaching the thought-provoking opening paragraphs from an article I came
across today. I’ve seen symptoms identified by the author in many of the
churches I’ve visited and attended, including Asian-American ones.
Surprisingly, this article is not in praise of Promise Keepers. Rather,
the author criticizes Promise Keepers for promoting the love, acceptance,
and sensitivity fostered by a culture of feminization, which prevents men
from exercising their responsibilities as servant-leaders to boldly and
aggressively rebuke those who do fail to adhere to God’s absolute
standards of righteousness.

2 Timothy 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season;
reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance
of his friend.

Proverbs 27:6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an
enemy are deceitful. .

RLW

———————————-

FEMINIZATION OF THE CHURCHES

By Albert Dager

>From Promise Keepers: Is What You See What You Get?

Copyright 1994, Media Spotlight, Redmond, Washington

On the subject of major problems with the churches today, we find an
excellent statement from Robert Hicks regarding how the churches have
become feminized:

I have seen too many good men leave the church, or church leadership,
because they were tired of playing the games and they saw a lot of what
the church was doing as a waste of time. We must recapture the church for
men, defeminize it, and make our appeals to men where it will cost them
something more than their money or their time. Christ wants their lives
(Robert Hicks, Ibid., p. 155).

Its true that the churches have become feminized. Even many churches that
stress male leadership have succumbed to the feminization process

Most church ministries are geared toward women; churches may have as many
as five or more women’s ministries and nothing for men outside of a
once-a-month prayer breakfast and an occasional retreat–much of the time
for the latter being devoted to fun and games. Women’s Bible studies
abound both inside and outside the local body. Yet Scripture says that if
a woman wants to learn anything she should ask her husband at home.
Today, however, this biblical admonition is impractical for many couples.
The reason is that the churches have let them down by withholding sound
biblical teaching for the men, as well as proper discipleship.
Consequently wives often know more (or think they know more) about the
Bible than their husbands do. And not all they are receiving is biblical.

We must not lose sight of the dynamics within the modern church that have
led to Promise Keeper’s existence. It is the pathetic, feminized church
that has created the conditions for such an organization to come into
being. Unless men do take their rightful place, the churches will remain
powerless, simply because the Lord does not bestow honor where the men
are weak.

[To read the entire text of Dager’s article, visit:
http://www.balaams-ass.com/journal/warnings/pk-whygo.htm%5D

— End —

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:35:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rlfong@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
cc: fyang@uh.edu, SUWALI@aol.com
Subject: Re: unsubscribe

In a message dated 97-08-18 22:44:38 EDT, fyang@UH.EDU (Fenggang Yang)
writes:

<>

Asking folks to post politely does not seem disrespectful to me. And being
Chinese should not count as much as being Christian in our responses to each
other. Let’s not one-up one-another in our “Chineseness” but rather uphold
one another in brotherly love which includes asking restraint on our
postings. ‘ nuff said.

Ronnie Fong
Fremont, CA

— End —

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:02:39 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Let’s go forward instead

Dear CACers:

Let’s tone down our rhetorics before we say something we regret.

As a recent contributor to the large volume of mail on CAC, I regret not
having exercised enough editorial wisdom wh might’ve scaled my postings
back to a more manageable size. I thought the seriousness with wh
fellow-CACers had pursued our latest topic deserved consideration
with care. With too much care, evidently, since my preoccupation with
thoroughness turned initial musings into disquisitions. An occupational
hazard, no doubt.

I am of course saddened by the unsubscribers, but I suspect (hope?)
other, perfectly understandable factors are at work. We should not let
it distract us from continuing our exploration together of issues we
deem important. I do not regret having raised the issue with PK, for it
has helped me think thru pressing qns re AA Christian identity. (We
write for no one but ourselves, don’t we?)

I am equally saddened by the latest round of ad hominem postings. They
snuff out spontaneity and discourage openness. I for one am grateful
for this forum, for its nonjudgmental premise and its spiritual
texture. We’d all be poorer without it.

What we are going through is nothing new. Every e-group I am a member
of experiences something similar at least once. So, now that we have
tested our boundaries, let’s go forward, shall we?

Sze-kar

— End —

To: drwong1@juno.com
Cc: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: Feminization of the Churches
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 15:28:40 EDT

On Mon, 18 Aug 1997 18:51:13 -0500 drwong1@juno.com (Richard Wong)
writes:
>In keeping with the spirit of minimizing the load on your Inboxes, I’m
>attaching the thought-provoking opening paragraphs…[about Church]
feminization, >which prevents men from exercising their responsibilities
as servant-leaders
>…
>2 Timothy 4:2…Proverbs 27:17…Proverbs 27:6..
>
>RLW
>

Dear Richard:

Thanks for this provocative msg and verses!

You got me thinking and praying about a problem we have with hard-core
punks (and escalating drugs) in our middle-class neighborhood/schools. Do
you have sons, I mean boys 🙂 ; in this type of situation? We have
(only) two sons, one in early high school, one in middle school, and we
feel for them esp in this ‘punk’ environment. Although it’s a situation
like one saint (www.larrynorman.com) describes, where, ‘the darker it is,
the easier it is to see the light’, it takes unusual boldness and
courage partic for young people to ‘shine like the stars of the universe’
(Phil. 2:15). To help reinforce some of the qualities I also think are
required for anyone to ‘shine’ today, I wrote this poem, which I’ll
dedicate esp to you and your sons, if you have them, and to all the
‘sons’ of CAC (Sze-kar Wan variety 🙂

Blessings! G

===============

winter wonderland

till th’ coming cold day #
dusty ashes ‘n clay
and evil slide like watery stone

felon youth full strength,
mill the wisdom of the ages,
killin’ time until the age of God be known

on their cold day in Hell, #
molten embers in December,
now rememberin’ th’ Rocky Mountain ice,

th’ temperature climbin’
and, the colder the weather,
the more we feel like cherishing Christ

than chillin’ in Hell
in a Spiritual spell
where the super stars from heaven are cast;

to th’ powers that be
are comin’ hours of darkness
to the future like a nuclear blast

fear, th’ poles of th’ Earth
in liquid labor will engulf;
heat emerging cold in Jesus’ name

locomotion so much slower,
foggy strobin’ smokes unveil
vapor voices soundin’ frozen in flame

vapor voices howlin’ toothless ‘n tame

vapor voices with no-bod-y to blame

c. 1997 go

# A warning to those who keep saying, ‘it’ll be a cold day in Hell when
Jesus comes’.

— End —

To: cac@bccn.org
From: “Charles S. Yamamoto”
Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:30:22 +0000

Dear Subscribers,

I am the one who originated the “UNSUBSCRIBE” message a few days ago, and
now I am here to make a sincere apologies in the manner I have attempted to
unsubscribe. From the responses I have received in reply to the message of
“UNSUBSCRIBE”, it appears that I have generated some ill feelings, and
again, to which I offer my sincere apologies.

I didn’t know what I was doing when I sent the request to “cac@bccn.org”
that I was mass mailing to everyone of the subscribers. I thought I was
notifying the organization, and NOT the individual subscribers, to
unsubscribe me. Please understand that there was no insolence intend on my
part.

Just for your information, I pastor a small church in Martinez, California.
I am a Japanese-American and my wife is a Chinese American. My children are
half and half. As part of our ministry we operate conversational ESL
classes at the church to newly arrived Asians. The latest statistics shows
that in the state of California one out of every four people residing in
California are foreign born, so as you can see the ESL challenge is great.

If you care to see my local web site, please go to http://www.cogop.org/ and
click on “Local Church Listings” and click on Martinez, Ca. My wife and I
are into a specialized ministry of Asian outreach here in the bay area.
Please be praying for us as surely we are praying for you.

I do appreciate all Christian organizations doing the last days work just
before Jesus’ return; which I can hardly wait for. This will most likely be
my last mass mailing to cac. I just had to say something to clear the air
so as not to offend anyone.

May God richly bless you for all of your endeavors for Him,

Pastor Charles S. Yamamoto
Martinez, CA.

****************************************************************************

— End —

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:55:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Hartzell3@aol.com
To: sling@chinahorizon.org, cac@bccn.org, acmi-network@xc.org
Subject: Re: My apologies

Pastor Ling:

Please accept my apologies when I wrote “Please no more articles from
Samuel Ling.” My error came from not understanding how to “unsubscribe” from
this list. When I hit my “Reply” button, I thought I was sending it to the
list manager. I did not know it was also sent to everyone else. My apologies.

Vance

— End —

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:39:34 -0500
To: Hartzell3@aol.com, cac@bccn.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: Re: Your apologies

Dear Vance,

Your apology gladly accepted.
As Sze-Kar Wan says, let’s
all move forward.
I do appreciate your addressing
me personally, and in the company
of the community! That takes
grace and courage. Thank you,
Vance.

Sam Ling

— End —

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:38:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: TSTseng@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: FWD: Nat’l Conf on Asian Americans & Campaign Finance scandal

Dear CACers:
>From the AAAS list – apologies for duplications (if you are subscribed to the
AAAS list). – Tim

———- Forwarded message ———-
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 21:16:15 -0700
From: Ling-chi Wang
Subject: National Conference on Asian Americans and Campaign Finance

Dear Friends and Colleagues in Asian American Studies:

Below is the progam for the first national conference on Asian Americans
and the campaign finance scandal. It will be held on November 14-15 at the
Radisson Miyako Hotel in San Francisco.

The primary aim of the conference is to combine critical analysis with
workable policy ideas for campaign finance reform and Asian American
community development. In particular, the conference will examine the role
of Asian Americans in the unfolding campaign finance scandal and in the
media. However, we also think the scandal transcends racial and identity
politics: what we have, in fact, are political corruption and issues of
race, class, citizenship, transnationalism, extraterriality, US-China
relations, and the meaning of democracy. There are many theoretical,
policy, and practical issues related to the scandal that are not being
addressed in the on-going investigation and in the media and the academy.
We hope the conference will provide a forum for scholars, policy analysts,
journalists and community activists to explore the ramifications of the
current scandal for Asian Americans and for America in general.

Many nationally recognized scholars, policy experts, media analysts, and
community leaders are already committed to speak at the conference.

We invite you to participate in the conference and to register early.

Sincerely,

L. Ling-chi Wang, Chair
Conference Planning Committee

“Race, Class, Citizenship and Extraterritoriality:
Asian Americans and the Campaign Finance Reform”
A National Conference for Scholars & Community Activists
November 14-15, 1997

Radisson Miyako Hotel
San Francisco, CA

Background

Since early October 1996, several Asian and Asian American individuals have
been at the center of an unfolding political scandal involving allegedly
illegal campaign contributions and influence buying schemes. President
Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) have been implicated in
the scandal and both the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Congress
have been conducting massive probes.

Within the Asian American communities, two issues have dominated this
widely publicized debate: racism and political corruption. Are Asian
Americans, like John Huang, Charles Yah-lin Trie, Eugene and Nora Lum,
Chong Lo, and others, being unfairly singled out for hypocritical and
partisan attack by the media and the Republicans? Or, are they part of a
larger web of questionable practices inside a political system that
deserves examination and requires systemic reform?

The two issues-media racism and political corruption-have been pitted
against each other as if they are mutually exclusive. They have yet to be
framed analytically in relation to such crucial categories as race, class,
citizenship, and extraterritoriality and to be linked politically to
grass-root struggles for racial equality and social justice. In such areas
as immigration, jobs, education, health care, and shelter, many Asian
Americans remain disenfranchized. Political alienation is growing, and with
a political system dominated by corporate interests – and increasingly,
transnational ones – the answerability of government to social justice
rather than corporate interests is becoming an ever more elusive goal.

How does the scandal of Asian campaign financing call for a reflection upon
competing definitions of Asian American community? How does the scandal
point to a serious crisis of American democracy in need of reform? What
contemporary currents are reflected by the intersection of these issues?
What is to be done?

Conference Objectives

The conference will bring together a group of concerned individuals and
organizational representatives from a wide range of experience and
expertise to examine the meanings of the national scandal: Asian American
scholars, cultural critics, community leaders, journalists and media
critics, public policy analysts and advocates of campaign finance reform.
The overall aim is to combine critical analysis with workable programs for
community development and campaign finance reform. Fresh approaches will
be sought to Asian American participation, media representation, campaign
finance reform; and Asian American community structure and policy issues in
changing national and transnational contexts.

Tentative Conference Program

Friday, November 14

1 pm-3 pm Arrival and Registration

3 pm-5 pm Opening Plenary: Defining the Issues

3-3:15 Opening Remarks:

Ling-chi Wang
Asian American Studies
University of California, Berkeley

3:15-3:30 Campaign Finance in History

Edwin Epstein
Haas School of Business
University of California, Berkeley

3:30-5 Plenary Panel:

“Media Coverage”

Helen Zia, Former Managing Editor
Ms Magazine

“Asian Transnational Capital”

Arif Dirlik
Department of History
Duke University

“Asian Americans in Politics”

Don Nakanishi, Director
Asian American Studies Center
University of California, Los Angeles

“Money & Politics”
Larry Makinson, Deputy Director
Center for Responsive Politics, D.C.

5 pm-6 pm Informal Reception

6 pm-8 pm Banquet & Speaker

“Reform That Works for Everyone: Clean
Money Campaign Reform”

Ellen Miller, Executive Director
Public Campaign, Washington, DC

Saturday, November 15

9 am-10:30 am Plenary Panel: Transnation Capital and Asian
American Politics

Masao Miyoshi
Department of Literature
University of California, San Diego

Evelyn Hu-DeHart, Chair
Department of Ethnic Studies
University of Colorado, Boulder

Peter Kwong, Director
Asian American Studies Program
CUNY-Hunter College

Bob Wilson
University of Hawaii, Manoa

11 am-12:30 pm Concurrent Panels A: Analysis & Policy

Panel A-1: Nation-State & Citizenship in the Age of
Transnationalism

Panel A-2: Race & Class in the Campaign Finance
Scandal

Panel A-3: Political Empowerment of
Disenfranchized Groups in the U.S.

Panel A-4: Extraterritoriality in Asian American
Community Politics

Panel A-5: US-China Relations & Domestic Racial
Politics

12:30 pm-2 pm Lunch & Speakers

John Warren McCarry, Chair
Federal Election Commission

2 pm-3:30 pm Concurrent Panels B: Policy & Community Action

Panel B-1: Education and Mobilization of Asian
American Voters

Panel B-2: Sensitizing the Media

Panel B-3: Linking Communities to Campaign
Finance Reform

Panel B-4: Internet Resource for Access to
Government and Campaign Data

Panel B-5: Campaign Finance Reform: What Are the
Alternatives?

4 pm-5:30 pm Closing Plenary

John Bonifaz, Executive Director
National Voting Rights Institute, Boston

L. Ling-chi Wang, Chair
Conference Committee

5:30-6:30 pm Closing Reception

Conference Sponsors

The conference is being jointly sponsored by Asian American Studies at the
University of California, Berkeley, Asian Americans for Campaign Finance
Reform (AACFR), and Public Campaign of Washington, DC. For more
information, contact Prof. L. Ling-chi Wang of Asian American Studies at
the University of California, Berkeley.

Tel. (510) 642-6555 Fax (510) 642-6456

E-mail: LCWang@uclink2.berkeley.edu

Registration

Name ____________________________________________________
(Last Name) (First Name)

Organization ______________________________________________

Address ________________________________ Tel ( ) _________

________________________________________ Fax ( ) ________
(City) (State) (Zip)

E-mail ___________________________________________________

Areas of Interest __________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________

Registration Fees (Check One) (Regular registration fee includes
receptions, coffee breaks, Friday banquet, Saturday lunch, and all
conference related materials. The discounted fees for students and
community organization representatives do not include the meals. Only
limited numbers of space available for students and community
representatives).

Regular ______ Community Organization _____ Student _____
($150) ($50) ($30)

Please make checks payable to “Regents of the University of California-
CFR” and send it and the registration form to: Asian American Studies, 516
Barrows Hall, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-2570

Hotel Accommodation & Travel Information

The conference will be held at the Radisson Miyako Hotel, 1625 Post Street
at the center of San Francisco. The hotel, at the heart of Japantown, is
easily accessible by all means of transportation and parking at the hotel
is plentiful. The special conference rate is $119 single or double
occupancy. For reservations, call the hotel at 1-800-333-3333 and mention
the UC Berkeley sponsored conference for the special conference rate.
Reservations must be made by October 13 to receive the discount. The
official conference airlines is United Airlines. Call 1-800-521-4041 for
your reservations and use the conference ID Number 517WK to receive a
discount fare.

——————————————————————————

L. Ling-chi Wang Ethnic Studies
E-Mail: lcwang@uclink2.berkeley.edu University of California
ucblcw@violet.berkeley.edu Berkeley, CA 94720
Telephone: (510) 642-6555 United States
——————————————————————————

— End —

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:57:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: JTC1010@aol.com
To: CAC@bccn.org
Subject: Fwd: Press Release – Needle Exchange Poll Results

To CACers:
FYI,
J. Chang

=============================================
AMERICANS OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSE
NEEDLE EXCHANGE PROGRAMS,
SAY GOVERNMENT SHOULD PROMOTE DRUG
ABSTINENCE AND REHAB PROGRAMS

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A poll released today by the Family
Research Council reveals most Americans — 62 percent —
oppose needle exchange programs (NEPs) and 60 percent favor
drug abstinence and drug rehabilitation programs as a more
effective way to stop the spread of AIDS/HIV. Fifty-six
percent believe that federally funded exchanges represent an
official endorsement of illegal drug use, encourage more
teenage use of illegal drugs, and could lead to outright
illicit drug legalization.

The polling company, (sic) a national polling firm conducted
the survey of 1,000 registered voters and found that 60
percent of Americans want their members of Congress to stop
free needle exchange programs and focus on drug rehabilitation.

FRC President Gary L. Bauer said Wednesday that NEPs “are
nothing but a band-aid on a bullet wound. The only way to
stop the spread of HIV/AIDS among intravenous drug users is
to step up the war on drugs.” Bauer was joined by FRC Senior
Policy Advisor Robert L. Maginnis who provided detailed
analysis of the poll results.

“Congress and the Clinton Administration would make a radical
mistake to flirt with the idea of needle exchange programs as
sound and effective policy,” Bauer continued. “Some
ill-advised, reputable organizations have lined up in support
of NEPs, but Americans aren’t so quick to jump on the
bandwagon, especially when a program might be proposed for
their own neighborhood.

“Needle exchange programs won’t stop a desperate drug addict
to do anything to fulfill his craving. NEPs will scar urban
areas, snuffing out hopes for crime reduction and development.
Government-sponsored NEPs will move America down a disastrous
path towards drug legalization. With recent surveys showing
a surge in teen illicit drug use, our country can not afford
to spare more lives by sending a message endorsing drug use.”

A formidable group of anti-drug leaders and activists joined
FRC in speaking out against NEPs: James Curtis, Director of
the Department of Psychiatry and Addiction Services at New
York City’s Harlem Hospital Center; Dr. Janet Lapey,
pathologist and Executive Director of Concerned Citizens for
Drug Prevention, Inc. in Hanover, Massachusetts; Nancy Sosman,
member of New York City’s Coalition for A Better Community;
and Shepherd Smith, President and Founder of Americans for a
Sound AIDS/HIV Policy (ASAP).

———————
Forwarded message:
From: Family_Research_Council@townhall.com
Reply-to: corrdept@frc.org
Date: 97-08-21 00:33:25 EDT

If you have any questions or comments about this press release
or about the Family Research Council, please visit our web
site at:

http://www.frc.org

————————————————————–

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 20, 1997
CONTACT: Rebecca Biles, (202) 393-2100
FOR SOUNDBITES: FRC’s Direct Newsline, (292) 393-6397

AMERICANS OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSE
NEEDLE EXCHANGE PROGRAMS,
SAY GOVERNMENT SHOULD PROMOTE DRUG
ABSTINENCE AND REHAB PROGRAMS

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A poll released today by the Family
Research Council reveals most Americans — 62 percent —
oppose needle exchange programs (NEPs) and 60 percent favor
drug abstinence and drug rehabilitation programs as a more
effective way to stop the spread of AIDS/HIV. Fifty-six
percent believe that federally funded exchanges represent an
official endorsement of illegal drug use, encourage more
teenage use of illegal drugs, and could lead to outright
illicit drug legalization.

The polling company, (sic) a national polling firm conducted
the survey of 1,000 registered voters and found that 60
percent of Americans want their members of Congress to stop
free needle exchange programs and focus on drug rehabilitation.

FRC President Gary L. Bauer said Wednesday that NEPs “are
nothing but a band-aid on a bullet wound. The only way to
stop the spread of HIV/AIDS among intravenous drug users is
to step up the war on drugs.” Bauer was joined by FRC Senior
Policy Advisor Robert L. Maginnis who provided detailed
analysis of the poll results.

“Congress and the Clinton Administration would make a radical
mistake to flirt with the idea of needle exchange programs as
sound and effective policy,” Bauer continued. “Some
ill-advised, reputable organizations have lined up in support
of NEPs, but Americans aren’t so quick to jump on the
bandwagon, especially when a program might be proposed for
their own neighborhood.

“Needle exchange programs won’t stop a desperate drug addict
to do anything to fulfill his craving. NEPs will scar urban
areas, snuffing out hopes for crime reduction and development.
Government-sponsored NEPs will move America down a disastrous
path towards drug legalization. With recent surveys showing
a surge in teen illicit drug use, our country can not afford
to spare more lives by sending a message endorsing drug use.”

A formidable group of anti-drug leaders and activists joined
FRC in speaking out against NEPs: James Curtis, Director of
the Department of Psychiatry and Addiction Services at New
York City’s Harlem Hospital Center; Dr. Janet Lapey,
pathologist and Executive Director of Concerned Citizens for
Drug Prevention, Inc. in Hanover, Massachusetts; Nancy Sosman,
member of New York City’s Coalition for A Better Community;
and Shepherd Smith, President and Founder of Americans for a
Sound AIDS/HIV Policy (ASAP).

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR INTERVIEWS, CALL THE FRC MEDIA OFFICE.

— End —

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:11:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rlfong@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
cc: sling@chinahorizon.org
Subject: cyber pornography

In a message dated 97-08-21 10:42:45 EDT, Samuel Ling writes:

<>

At the Asian PromiseKeepers Conference, one of the topics was on the topic
of Asian men and their sexuality. Many who would not buy a porn magazine or
enter a porn shop or rent a porn video, because someone might see them,
are sorely tempted by the ease and privacy of cyber-porn. Is this a
particular worst for Asian males? for Asian-American males? thoughts?

Ronnie Fong
Fremont, CA

— End —

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 03:17:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rlfong@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Dennys

here’s the latest wire story update on the Dennys incident

BC-DENNYS (CORRECTED)

Denny’s faces bias lawsuit in New York

In SYRACUSE, N.Y. story headlined ”Denny’s faces bias lawsuit in New
York,” please read in 9th graf …Federal officials last week recommended
in a report that Denny’s fire one employee, suspend another and not allow
the two deputies to work for Denny’s again as security guards. Denny’s
agreed and took the recommended action… instead of …Federal officials
blasted the company last week when it was ordered to fire one employee,
suspend another and force the two deputies to never work as security guards
again for Denny’s.

(Corrects to show that federal officials did not order Denny’s to take
job actions, but recommended actions)

A corrected story follows

SYRACUSE, N.Y. (Reuter) – The Denny’s restaurant chain is facing a
lawsuit for the second time in recent years after a group of minority
students alleged they were refused seating and left vulnerable to an attack
by white youths.

In the civil suit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Syracuse,
N.Y., seven Asian-Americans and three black students who came to their
assistance requested unspecified monetary damages against Denny’s.

Others named in the lawsuit were Georgia-based NDI Food Inc., which owns
the Syracuse franchise, and Onondaga County, because two sheriff’s deputies
were working as security guards and were allegedly involved in the April 11
attack.

The company wrote each student a letter apologizing for the incident and
fired the responsible employees, Denny’s officials said. They said they were
disappointed that the students had filed the lawsuit.

It accuses the nationwide restaurant chain of failure to require its
employees to undergo antidiscrimination sensitivity training as stipulated
in a landmark 1994 civil rights judgment involving Denny’s.

The company agreed to a $46 million settlement of class-action lawsuits
brought by black Secret Service agents and by California students who said
they were discriminated against at Denny’s restaurants.

County officials said they were investigating the alleged brawl in a
Denny’s parking lot initiated by unidentified white youths. However, defense
attorneys said they were told by the district attorney’s office that arrests
were pending.

”We are very, very concerned that we have heard nothing and extremely
disappointed,” said Elizabeth OuYang, a lawyer for the Asian American Legal
Defense and Education Fund, which is representing some of the students.

Federal officials last week recommended in a report that Denny’s fire one
employee, suspend another and not allow the two deputies to work for Denny’s
again as security guards. Denny’s agreed and took the recommended action.

According to the lawsuit, the students’ civil rights were violated. They
said they had been waiting 30 minutes when they complained that their table
was given to someone else and were kicked out of the restaurant by the two
sheriff’s deputies.

The suit alleged that one of the deputies then shoved one of the students
several times in the parking lot and failed to protect them against a gang
of white youths who came out of the restaurant and attacked the students.

It also claims the guards threatened to use mace on the black students
who tried to stop the brawl and that several of the students were beaten
unconscious while their attackers went back into Denny’s to finish
eating.

REUTER Reut17:26 08-22-97

— End —

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:42:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: TSTseng@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: AAAS Community List

CACers:

A number of you have asked me about subscribing to the AAAS community list.
In order to be a member of that particular discussion list, you must be a
member of the AAAS. Check with the following…

* For more information about the list and the AAAS Email Network,
* email a request to .
—————————————————————–
* For information about AAAS membership, email a request to
* our national office at .

Also, the AAAS list generates about the same volume of email as the CAC list.
Like all lists, there are periods of little discussion and then periods of
high volume. – Tim
————————————————————
Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng
Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
1100 South Goodman Street
Rochester, NY 14620
OFF: (716) 271-1320
FAX: (716) 271-8013
RES: (716) 473-2651 [until mid-Sept]
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:46:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: TSTseng@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
cc: wans@monet.bc.edu
Subject: Re: Gal 3.28 & PK

Sze-kar:

I finally had a chance to reflect on your analysis of Gal. 3:28 and PK.
Thanks for all your effort to think through the issues raised in the
discussion. (Also, I wanted to congratulate you on receiving the ATS 1997-98
Faculty Fellowship for your intriguing project, “The Chinese Jesus and the
May-Fourth _Problematik_”!)

A couple of thoughts about your analysis…

1. An exegetical question: while it seems clear to me that the Paul
advocates the idea that in Christ our secondary identities (racial, ethnic,
gender, class, etc.) are subordinate to our identity in Christ, it is not
clear that he advocates the retaining of these identities. In fact, I think
Paul advocates the dissolving of our differences into a new creation (see
Eph. 2:14-16).

Daniel Boyarin, in his book _A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of
Identity_ (Berkeley: University of California, 1994) supports this point.
For example, with regard to Paul’s concern to integrate the Gentiles into
the Jewish community, he says…

“The very impulse towards universalism, toward the One, is that which both
enabled and motivated Paul’s move towards a spiritualizing and allegorizing
interpretation of Israel’s Scripture and Law as well.
“While Paul’s impulse towards the founding of a non-differentiated,
non-hierarhical humanity was laudable in my opinion, many of its effects in
terms of actual lives were not. In terms of ethnicity, his system required
that all human culture specificities – first and foremost, that of the Jews –
be eradicated, whether or not the people in question were willing. Moreover,
since, of course, there is no such thing as cultural unspecificity, merging
of all people into one common culture means ultimately (as it has meant in
the history of European cultural imperialism) merging all people into the
dominant culture.
“Rabbinic Judaism is in part a reaction against both of these Pauline
moves – or, at the very least, a typological antithesis.” (p. 8)

The second part of your analysis echos Boyarin by critiquing the very same
issue with regards to PK’s universal claims. This leads me to wonder whether
there are biblical (or Pauline) resources to support our concern to develop a
Chinese (or Asian) American Christian theology. At best, we can criticize
others for attempting to impose their particularities upon others by claiming
to speak for everyone. Also, it seems that we can do no more than confess
that we are looking at Scripture and the world through the lenses of our own
particularities. But I’m not sure there is biblical support for maintaining
or creating a Asian American Christian identity or theology (or any other
particular identity).

Please don’t misunderstand my point. I’m not suggesting that we use Paul to
exalt “color-blind” public policies, “ethnically neutral” attitudes, or
“integrated congregations” and therefore dissolve ethnic specific churches
and ministries. Indeed, that tactic would be more typical of politically
conservatives today who are unwilling to see that “color-blindness” is really
just a way to normalize Euro-American culture by erasing all other ethnic,
cultural, or racial distinctions. It is also a way to ignore the deeply
embedded ideology of elite white male supremacy in our culture (this is not
an attack on white men, but on a social system that privileges and rewards
white male elites). But, I’m dubious about New Testament warrant for
“identity politics.” I can see it in Post-Exilic literature, but not in the
Pauline vision of the New Creation.

So, unless evangelicals are willing to intentionally appropriate social
sciences in their theology (and not just for church growth strategies), it
seems unlikely that Asian Americans trained in solid evangelical bible school
or seminaries will be comfortable with developing anything like an Asian
American theology or ministerial praxis.

2. You seem to suggest that ethnic identity should be a priority over gender
concerns. If I understand you correctly, you seem to be saying that PK’s
agenda is a “white” agenda not necessarily relevant to AAs (i.e., PK is
addressing the tensions between white men and white feminists). I’m not sure
that I can agree with this point entirely. As Jeff Kuan noted, AA sexism is
a real problem – thus, gender issues should not be given less attention.
Among women of color, there are tensions with white feminists, who tend to
universalize their own form of oppression without realizing their privileges
as white and – usually – middle-class. Womanist writers like Alice Walker
and bell hooks tend to take their race or ethnicity much more seriously but
also want their male colleagues of color to take their concerns seriously as
well. Thus, I hope that we will not posit one factor in our identity
formation against another.

I think PK’s message is important for AA men, too. Like other men, AA men
also need to learn how to become more accountable to their families.
Excluding women is not, for me, as salient an issue as ensuring that the PK
movement does not (1) become sexist in their rhetoric [at this point, I’m not
ready to call PK sexist – though insensitive and naive comes to mind]; (2)
become connected with conservative political ideology; and (3) stop at the
rhetoric of racial reconciliation and begin to seriously “listen” to the
views of men of color (in particular, AA men). But, I’m not optimistic and
therefore not willing to invest too much personal energy into the movement.
I’d like to see some financial disclosure about where their funding comes
from (I suspect most of it comes from the extreme political right). I’d like
to see them embrace a more progressive social agenda which goes beyond
band-aid solutions and rhetoric. I’d like to see them work more ecumenically
with diverse Christian groups (having spoke with an American Baptist leader
within the American Baptist Men’s ministry – a ministry which predates PK – I
discovered that PK will not cooperate with our denomination’s men’s ministry
unless they had complete control; the “my way or the highway” attitude that
PK exhibits is troubling).

Any further thoughts? – Tim

————————————————————
Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng
Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
1100 South Goodman Street
Rochester, NY 14620
OFF: (716) 271-1320
FAX: (716) 271-8013
RES: (716) 473-2651 [until mid-Sept]
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

To: TSTseng@aol.com, wans@monet.bc.edu
Cc: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: Gal 3.28 & PK
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 14:47:29 EDT

Dear Tim and Sze-kar,

Rooted in Tim’s exegetical question is another one about the identity of
Jesus himself; perhaps, What happened to Jesus’ Jewishness during his
ministry and after his exaltation via resurrection? For example, in the
Sermon on the Mount Jesus seems to clearly differentiate Jewishness from
Gentileness by pointing out some (disgusting?) things Gentiles do–then
He says to his (Jewish) listeners–don’t be like them! And Tim is
talking, quite legitimately and quite interestingly now, about a New
Creation (rooted in Jesus) in which the ‘disgust’ we may feel for, say,
in the CAC circumstance, the dominant ‘elite white male’ priority in
America, is to become extinct like a dinosaur in Christ 🙂 Maybe going
toward ‘the root’ in this sense will be useful to CAC, but if not, let it
go. I appreciate the time and effort you devote to us! and to the Word of
God!

Much Love, in Christ, G

On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:46:30 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:
>Sze-kar:

>1. An exegetical question: while it seems clear to me that the Paul
>advocates the idea that in Christ our secondary identities (racial,
>ethnic,
>gender, class, etc.) are subordinate to our identity in Christ, it is
>not
>clear that he advocates the retaining of these identities. In fact, I
>think
>Paul advocates the dissolving of our differences into a new creation
>(see ph. 2:14-16).

— End —

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 10:48:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: TSTseng@aol.com
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: cyber pornography

Ron:

My take: I don’t think we Asian men are any better or worse than anyone else
when it comes to sexual temptations or pornography. However, though things
are changing, Asian males are usually viewed by Euro-American culture as
being either passive/subordinate/feminized or evil/masculine/inscrutible. I
often wondered how these perceptions influence Asian Americans. Also, I
believe that the particular sexism in Asian cultures (no better or worse than
Anglo cultures, IMHO) leads to a relatively unrestrained (rarely shunned)
view on pornography. I think about the Japanese businessman who frequents
NYC’s Times Square or the abundance of pornographic magazines on display in
many Chinese or SE Asian grocery stores. So while I may agree with the basic
thrust of PK’s concern about Asian male sexuality, I suspect that some deeper
thinking needs to take place – particularly with regards to the issue of
transforming Anglo-American perceptions of Asian males.

Anyway, glad to hear from you. – Tim

In a message dated 8/21/97 10:39:57 PM, Rlfong@aol.com wrote:

<>

————————————————————
Rev. Dr. Timothy Tseng
Sallie Knowles Crozer Assistant Professor of American Religious History
Colgate-Rochester Divinity School
1100 South Goodman Street
Rochester, NY 14620
OFF: (716) 271-1320
FAX: (716) 271-8013
RES: (716) 473-2651 [until mid-Sept]
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: jql@earthlink.net
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 1997 23:58:50
To:
Subject: Official Answers from Denny’s regarding the Incident in
Syracuse

To Any and All Concern Parties:

Denny’s has just placed a website to give their response to any and all
questions regarding the incident in Syracuse and provide a way for people
to submit additional questions that have not been asked. Their site covers
the facts, the Civil Rights Monitor’s investigation, the outcome, their
actions, their correspondences to key APA organizations, correspondence to
the student’s legal council (Mrs. Elizabeth OuYang, Esq./ Asian American
Legal Defense Education Fund) and other related issues.

Please review the facts enclosed in their website. They have placed a
“feedback” section within their site for comments and any other additional
questions that might not have been asked. In my conversations with them,
they have been very receptive to address any and all concerns related to
the Syracuse incident, along with any other discrimination issues. Please
take advantage of this opportunity to find the actual facts and a means to
contact them.

Please share this website to any concerned or interested parties who seek
official answers from Denny’s and/or want to submit any additional
questions. They are also seeking any and all comments, decisions or
actions by any of the political/government figures who have been involved.

Regards,

Jeff

=====================================================

here’s the latest wire story update on the Dennys incident

BC-DENNYS (CORRECTED)

Denny’s faces bias lawsuit in New York

In SYRACUSE, N.Y. story headlined ”Denny’s faces bias lawsuit in New
York,” please read in 9th graf …Federal officials last week recommended
in a report that Denny’s fire one employee, suspend another and not allow
the two deputies to work for Denny’s again as security guards. Denny’s
agreed and took the recommended action… instead of …Federal officials
blasted the company last week when it was ordered to fire one employee,
suspend another and force the two deputies to never work as security guards
again for Denny’s.

(Corrects to show that federal officials did not order Denny’s to take job
actions, but recommended actions)

A corrected story follows

SYRACUSE, N.Y. (Reuter) – The Denny’s restaurant chain is facing a lawsuit
for the second time in recent years after a group of minority students
alleged they were refused seating and left vulnerable to an attack by white
youths.

In the civil suit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Syracuse, N.Y.,
seven Asian-Americans and three black students who came to their assistance
requested unspecified monetary damages against Denny’s.

Others named in the lawsuit were Georgia-based NDI Food Inc., which owns
the Syracuse franchise, and Onondaga County, because two sheriff’s deputies
were working as security guards and were allegedly involved in the April 11
attack.

The company wrote each student a letter apologizing for the incident and
fired the responsible employees, Denny’s officials said. They said they
were disappointed that the students had filed the lawsuit.

It accuses the nationwide restaurant chain of failure to require its
employees to undergo antidiscrimination sensitivity training as stipulated
in a landmark 1994 civil rights judgment involving Denny’s.

The company agreed to a $46 million settlement of class-action lawsuits
brought by black Secret Service agents and by California students who said
they were discriminated against at Denny’s restaurants.

County officials said they were investigating the alleged brawl in a
Denny’s parking lot initiated by unidentified white youths. However,
defense attorneys said they were told by the district attorney’s office
that arrests were pending.

”We are very, very concerned that we have heard nothing and extremely
disappointed,” said Elizabeth OuYang, a lawyer for the Asian American Legal
Defense and Education Fund, which is representing some of the students.

Federal officials last week recommended in a report that Denny’s fire one
employee, suspend another and not allow the two deputies to work for Denny’s
again as security guards. Denny’s agreed and took the recommended action.

According to the lawsuit, the students’ civil rights were violated. They
said they had been waiting 30 minutes when they complained that their table
was given to someone else and were kicked out of the restaurant by the two
sheriff’s deputies.

The suit alleged that one of the deputies then shoved one of the students
several times in the parking lot and failed to protect them against a gang
of white youths who came out of the restaurant and attacked the students.

It also claims the guards threatened to use mace on the black students who
tried to stop the brawl and that several of the students were beaten
unconscious while their attackers went back into Denny’s to finish eating.

REUTER Reut17:26 08-22-97

— End —

From: jql@earthlink.net
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 04:52:15
To:
Subject: Official Answers from Denny’s regarding the Incident in
Syracuse that includes their new website

To Any and All Concern Parties:

Denny’s has just placed a website to give their response to any and all
questions regarding the incident in Syracuse and provide a way for people
to submit additional questions that have not been asked. Their site covers
the facts, the Civil Rights Monitor’s investigation, the outcome, their
actions, their correspondences to key APA organizations, correspondence to
the student’s legal council (Mrs. Elizabeth OuYang, Esq./ Asian American
Legal Defense Education Fund) and other related issues.

Their website address is

h t t p : / / w w w . d e n n y s i n c . c o m

Please review the facts enclosed in their website. They have placed a
“feedback” section within their site for comments and any other additional
questions that might not have been asked. In my conversations with them,
they have been very receptive to address any and all concerns related to
the Syracuse incident, along with any other discrimination issues. Please
take advantage of this opportunity to find the actual facts and a means to
contact them.

Please share this website to any concerned or interested parties who seek
official answers from Denny’s and/or want to submit any additional
questions. They are also seeking any and all comments, decisions or
actions by any of the political/government figures who have been involved.
If you are not getting any response from Denny’s, please let me know at
jql@earthlink.net.

Regards,

Jeff

— End —

Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 05:18:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rlfong@aol.com
To: jql@earthlink.net, cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: Official Answers from Denny’s regarding the Incident in Syracuse

In a message dated 97-08-24 03:39:08 EDT, jql@earthlink.net writes:

<>

What’s the URL for the website? I could only find the following Denny’s
sites which were interesting, but irrevelant

http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/1758/ gives you the Denny’s menu by a
Dennys fan!
http://www.concentric.net/~p7a77/dennys/ gives you Project Denny’s – an
attempt to visit all 1600 Denny’s !
http://www.dennyscards.com/ gives you a promo page for 59 cent 3-D hologram
baseball cards for sale at Dennys
http://www.mindspring.com/~dthames/denny’s/tricks.htm for tricks to do while
waiting for food at Dennys

SPARTANBURG, S.C.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Aug. 21, 1997–Statement from John
Romandetti, President of Denny’s: -0-

We deeply regret the treatment the Syracuse University students experienced
at the Denny’s franchise restaurant in Syracuse, New York, on April 11. I
have personally sent a letter of apology to each of the students on behalf
of Denny’s, Inc.

We are disappointed, however, that the students have chosen to file a
lawsuit knowing the franchisee, NDI Foods, Inc., and Denny’s, Inc., are
aggressively implementing all the recommendations made by the Office of the
Civil Rights Monitor after its investigation into the incident. The Monitor
is the court-appointed independent, third party accountable to the U.S.
Justice Department, responsible for monitoring Denny’s compliance with terms
of the 1994 settlements. We are also disappointed that the attorney for the
students has refused the request of our minority franchise owner to meet
with the students in an attempt to heal the wounds.

We are making good-faith efforts to ensure the treatment that occurred at
this franchise restaurant never happens again at any Denny’s restaurant. In
fact, the day the report was received, the franchisee took immediate action
and terminated all management, staff and security guards involved.

We have consistently met all training requirements of the 1994 settlements.
We have now implemented new procedures for monitoring non-discrimination
training of franchised Denny’s restaurants, which far exceeds the
requirements under the settlements.

Denny’s has signed an agreement to purchase all restaurants owned by the
Syracuse franchisee. When the transaction closes, NDI Foods, Inc. will
cease to be a Denny’s franchisee.

We join the students in calling for the Syracuse Police Department and
District Attorney to complete their criminal investigation and file charges
against those individuals responsible for the assaults. The franchisee has
offered full cooperation to the police in their investigation.

Denny’s has zero tolerance for discrimination of any kind, under any
circumstance. Our non-discrimination policies are clear. Every employee
must read, acknowledge and sign a statement of compliance with these
policies as a condition of employment. We have implemented extensive
on-going, non-discrimination education and diversity training for all
employees, including management. A toll-free number is posted prominently
in every Denny’s company and franchise restaurant urging customers to report
any claim of discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin
to the Monitor’s office for a full investigation. If discrimination has
taken place, we take swift, decisive action.

CONTACT:

Denny’s

Karen Randall, 864/597-8440

Debbie Atkins, 864/597-8361

KEYWORD: SOUTH CAROLINA NEW YORK

BW1152 AUG 21,1997

— End —

To: CAC@bccn.org
Subject: Back-to-school poem
From: gdot@juno.com
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 12:30:35 EDT

The poem is based on this text from Luke 4 NIV :

“Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit… The
scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found
the place where it is written: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is on me…’
Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat
down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, and he
began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your
hearing.”

=====

The Student of the game (Magna Cum Laude)

A student of the game stood up
he prophesized one day
caught the wary people by surprise
unrolled an ancient scroll upon the holy rollers there
he pleased Isaiah right before their eyes

The student of the game ablaze
the Teacher in disguise
rolled he four directions on the wind
darkness fled the light of day aroun’ the stroke of noon
Isaiah passed his mantle unto him

The Student of the game unphased
the Spirit he released
come to free the pris’ners from their cages
Isaiah from his chair did rise to offer up his love
to Yahweh calling from the yellow pages

“This prophesy unto your ears
was written long ago
I have set you free the words do speak
my father is a carpenter
my mother a handmaiden
I am I Am for seven days a week”

G

— End —

Date: 28 Aug 97 00:19:27 EDT
From: Paul Nagano
To: CAC Forum
Subject: In response to Tim’s suggestion for more substance

Dear CACers,
Let me quote from my article in our Pacific Asian Vision (CPAT
Quarterly Organ).

For the Christian, Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life that
represents the incarnation (“the word become flesh”)–Jesus, as a historical
human being, representing the creative energy (Logos) of the Creator/God
identifying with the human race (you and me). However, the creative energy
(Logos), that was from the beginning, was and is available long before Jesus,
and is God’s creative breath (spirit, life energy). Therefore, to limit
Jesus as the only way, is to limit God’s revelation to just one historical
person. God’s spirit (Logos) was “with God , and was God, from the
beginning,” (John 1:1-5). The universal Logos is not limited to Jesus, and is
the way, the truth, and the life that excludes no ways, but the uniqueness of
Christians is to confess that this spirit (Logos) was in Jesus, the Christ,
and mediates the character of God in human form. The great Asian religious
ways looks upon the divine as always and everywhere already true and real, the
universal present of God’s Spirit; and true spirituality is to identify
ourselves with the universal presence of the divine. The access to God’s
universal and available spirit (Logos) is not limited to the Bible or to
Jesus.

C. S. Song writes: “Preoccupation with his person (Jesus) would in
fact, have jeopardized the message he preached. It might have diverted the
attention of the writers of the Synoptic Gospels from the challenge of his
message to the cult of his person . . . . The heart of Jesus’ message was the
reign of God (basileia tou theou). In all he said and did he was at pains to
make clear that God’s reign is primarily concerned with the people victimized
by a class-conscious society and a tradition-bound religious establishment”
(C.S. Song, Jesus and the Reign of God, Minneapolis, MN. Augsburg Fortress,
Preface).

Hoping that the CAC Forum will become the means of some substantive
and meaningful dialogue from our Pacific Asian perspectives.

In God’s awesome love and grace,

Paul M. Nagano

— End —

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:14:23 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org, acmi-network@xc.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: a prayer for subscribers and un-subscribers

Lord, head of the Church
and commissioner of your servants,

I pray for cac subscribers tonight,
that you give us ears to listen,
hearts to accept and love,
and minds to discern …
all at the same time.

Guard our hearts
during those few precious moments
when we download email,
scan and skim
and try to compose a response.
Guard our hearts, Lord,
for from it
flows all the issues of life.

I pray for our dear un-subscribers
and all would-be un-subscribers
that you will keep their lives
(and computers) simple,
and that you will encourage them
to live in joy;
that you will prompt some of them
to pray for the rest of us,
that we, too,
may have ears to listen,
minds to discern,
and hearts to love and
agree to disagree with those
who don’t agree with us.

Until then, we trust that you are
the Lord of all matter and energy,
as well as all information!

Through Jesus Christ our Lord,
Amen.

— End —

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:18:12 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org, acmi-network@xc.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: Farewell, Chicago

Farewell, Chicago!

You taught me to
listen to diverse communities of people,
rejoice with those who marry,
weep with those who bury,
and dialogue with many
who may agree or disagree with me.

Farewell, Chicago!
Thank you for those precious moments
of prayer, reflection and renewal
whether by the Lake
or along cornfields
with the sun shining …
Thank you for teaching me
the meaning of rest and faith in the Lord of harvest.

Farewell, Chicago!
Farewell, nameless “little people”
who have ministered to me,
loved me and my family,
and stood by when we needed it the most.
Farewell, Christian leaders and pastors
who have challenged, encouraged and affirmed my call.

Farewell, Chicago!
Thank you for helping me
find my passion and my call.

Samuel Ling
August 28, 1997
(sitting in a dark, empty house
the night before we close on
our Illinois home)

PS After Sept. 3 we will be in
Los Angeles; email address
remains the same.

— End —