intellectualism vs. experientialism

From: KRMMB@aol.com
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 02:23:39 -0400 (EDT)
To: CAC@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: New Topic: Asian-American Evangelism that Works???

Hello Everybodee!

Trust that the Lord is blessing the socks off of all my “newfound” brothers &
sisters and christian friends in CAC land.I truly appreciate all of your
contributions even tho I might not have always agreed with some of you. It
did helped me to understand and to learn so I am that much more enriched
because of y’all.

Dj gave me once in a lifetime deal. It was “an offer I couldn’t refuse”.
Here’s the deal – If I could signed up 10% more CACers to the mailing list,
then, I could sign on for free and receive unlimited access to all these
godly guys and gals. Isn’t that right, DJ? Boy, did I pull a fast one on
him…I only signed up four guys and still got access to y’all (my best
Texas drawl)

Hey, just a brief bio statement about myself since this may be my “first and
ONLY” posting.Where do all you brothers and sisters find the time to write
(y’all must have some cushy job somewhere, uh, d’ya have any openings where
you work. (*-*)

My name is Ken L. Tom. (Psss…please do not reverse my last name with my
first). As you can well imagine, I had a rough childhood as Tom Ken. Am a
“bona fide” ABC who sings along to Bruce Springsteen’s anthem “Born in the
USA”. Am just an average East Coast “t-shirt & jeans” kinda of guy who
serves the Lord in our Metro-NYC/NJ tri-state region.Have pastored four
churches both in Texas and in New York. Finished a graduate program at
Alliance School of Theology & Missions (now, ATS ”76) and graduated from
Dallas (Th.M/MA ’87).

Presently, I am the founder, director & (sigh) the “one” and the ONLY staff
of a small resource agency known as VisionQuest which “stands in the gap” as
a pastor to our pastorless churches. Basically, as a church aerobics
instructor, I seek to spiritually re-conidtion both churches(w/o a pastor)
and ministers (w/o a church) while they’re in transition. VisionQuest
mission seeks to advance the English Ministry developments within our
Chinese/Asian Churches into the 21st century. (Actually, sucess is being able
just to maintain and sustain any local church English Mnistry (EM) in this
20th century).

As a catalytical missionary, VQ jumps starts the start-up of new EM
church-plants, refocuses towards renewal mature EM congregations and creates
church growth environments for new EM groups. In my “visions of grandeur”, I
use to think it was “my great preaching” that ” knocked opened” close to 50
pulpit doors for a VisionQuest ministry. Alas, I have come to humbly realize
its wasn’t my great preaching (sic) but, rather, it was the great (and
desperate) need that churches “called me”…and usually, late at night at
that when they needed someone? anyone?.
Help…

So, as Hendricks wisely taught us DTS guys, we’ve got to stop believing those
press reports we keep on creating and reading about ourselves. Now, I’ve
developed this Eleanor Rigby/ Father McKensie syndrome of “writing sermons
that no will hear”. Just look upon the glazed eyes of some of the young
people who look like they are s in cyberspace while they might think I am
still “lost in space” (*-*)!

Sometimes, I lament to God ala Nancy Kerrigan “why me?” – why wasn’t I born
a Ken Fong (instead of) a Ken Tom.By the way, Ken. I met you in LA when I was
in late Sept amongst a swarm of folks.You’re our closest icon to a “rock”
star. Evergreen worship was a joyful and you were awesome. Sign me up for a
year supply of tapes. (Hope you don’t have any copyrights from us copycats)
(*-*) As we chatted, VQ will try to set-up something here on the East Coast.
As Tommy Smothers might have said about his brother, Dickie “God always liked
you better” Did the “angelic” nurses switch us at birth?

Nevertheless, I had always dreamed, probably, it more “wishin, hopin &
praying” that one of our ABC senior FACE leaders would have responded to the
East Coast “Macedonian call” but, no one came to help… so, when the Lord
looked around and saw no one else, He scraped the bottom of the barrel and
said “Tom – You’re it!” (gulp) and with a, Bill Cosby’s impish grin as
Noah…”I said…”right????” Now, I always wanted to be one of West Coast
kinda guys, especially, since my teen-age sons were always humming (out of
tune, of course) the Beach Boys ” I wish they could all be California girls”
:-). Now, that’s pressure…Nevertheless, we remain faithful to bloom where
the Lord has planted us for now. If any of you brothers…and sisters would
like to talk with me about your current or church situation or learn more
about VisionQuest. You should be encouraged to either email me or await a
future posting about VisionQuest. I am likened to Barnabas – a minister of
encouragement who would be more than happy to hear you out.

Sorry, had so much fun that I almost forgot my purpose for writing
y’all…I’ve been invited to share in a seminar on Asian American Evangelism
for Sat. Oct 25th. Part of my challenge is to encourage our of our tri-state
Chinese/Asian churches on the East Coast to mobilized for ministry in
evangelism. Where I hope the CAC family of readers might be able to help me
is to share briefly. first hand either, your story of Evangelism that Works
(Barna’s title) or didn’t work and/or your church “sucess/failure” results
story in Evangelism. Pls share any personal/church story, AA conversion,
evangelistic strategic approach or any insight that you think might be
helpful that will inspire others to do the Lord’s work in evangelism that
works. Your contributions are most appreciated and will make invaluable to
the seminar. I will in turn will share your stories and my pastoral
aspirations to see evangelism happen within Chinese/Asian our churches.

Greetings and Thanksgiving to y’all.

Joyfully in Christ,

Ken L. Tom
VisionQuest
226 Milltown Road
East Brunswick, NJ 08816

732 613 0637 (VQ fone/fax)
732 238 4409 (family fone/ans mach)
Email address – KRMMB@aol.com

— End —

From: JWongCDI@aol.com
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:02:35 -0400 (EDT)
To: RevCow@aol.com, cac@emwave.net
cc: JWongCDI@aol.com
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Reality vs. Virtuality

Well, a deeper apology is needed;

I have switched to AOL 2.7, since coming to Chicago and did not realize that
my response to Ted Kau did not get sent out properly. But today’s email from
Bill L. to Bro. G caused me to realize that I never received a copy of my
email either. (I hope my personal email to Bill got through.)
Please allow me to reconstruct what I tried to write, since I no longer have
a copy of it.

I wish to apologize for the anguish my comments caused. My writing was
probably too obtuse. I was, however, encouraged by Ken Fong’s analysis,
which was correct, of what I was saying. I was prophetic over the potential
reaction to my comments, which confirms my foolishness in offering it. :-{

First of all, I do not know Michelle, with no reasons whatever to attack
her, but am very sorry for offending her FATHER with my comments. It is not
my practice to comment on a person’s integrity, even when I know that person.
My comment was directed at the practice of praising a person’s sincerity,
perhaps at the cost of reality. But with this missed focus, what I had hoped
to provoke will probably be dissolved.

Here is an excerpt of what I wrote to Bill Leong,..

“Thank you for responding to my inquiry, which was from a pastoral concern
that our faith be based on what is real. I do not attack nor do inquisitions
on young Christians, but do challenge their thinking, believing that they are
ready to learn and eager to know what is true in Christ.

I knew when I wrote that the brevity is capable of brewing misunderstanding,
knowing the natural patterns… Cynicism is not what I was writing from, but
I acknowledge, can be interpreted as such. Neither was I writing to the one
who gave testimony.

Instead, I was writing to those charged with guiding Christians, asking for a
deeper evaluation of how well we are doing. I remember, as a young
Christian, many times when I shared my testimony or observations, I was
hoping that a more mature believer would help me evaluate the accuracy or
validity of what I said. “Should I say it again? Should I teach others that
it’s reliable?” I did not believe that I had it all right. But, you know
what? I rarely got any input. I didn’t know whether to interprete the
silence as “You’re right on!” or “Oh no, did he say that?”

I’m concerned that there are Christians who spoke as I did, but no one chose
to interact with, to guide them. Instead, they are simply “branded” (maybe
ostracized by the “orthodox”) or “praised.” I suspect that the young
believer would appreciate a caring person who would provide wise evaluation
of what was shared, to refine, to make more accurate. I believe Apollos
appreciated those who helped him. I guess for most believers, being an “eye”
witness is all they need to do. However, I’m concern about raising leaders
who will feed and disciple.

In the vocabulary of your “paycheck,” I receive considerable satisfaction
also, from those who have been guided toward a renewed mind, who have the
confidence to guide other believers toward a greater faith.

I hope this enlarged sharing of my perspective is useful. Again, thanks,
Bill for the inter-action.”

In Christ,
Joe

— End —

From: RevCow@aol.com
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 05:14:19 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: The accuracy of reported experience…

3 C notes:

1. CREDIT
>…encouraged by Ken Fong’s analysis, which was correct…
If interested in accuracy, Tim had the original analysis, Ken
subsequently agrees (Tseng 10/11, 1:09AM EDT; Fong 10/11, 12:46PM EDT).

2. CRUX
>Bill (10/6): WOMEN IN MINISTRY. My daughter loves the Lord…
>Joe (10/13): …oops, I didn’t know you were writing about your
> daughter…

Joe, if you’d known it was from Mich’s father, I’m sure you’d have
written differently. Within this context, I’d be surprised if a father
did NOT take the following personally:
>Joe (10/7): Is the description given by those closest to the
> experience really real?…As long as the person is happy
> with their own description…

Bill, when Joe said “fools rush in [where angels fear to tread]”, I
believe he was referring to himself. He immediately states that “I’m not
sure I’m ready for the results from this 10 cents input,” which seems to
support this view.

3. e-mail CREDO
read carefully
give more grace
write even more clearly

The accuracy of our reported experiences must be preceded by the accuracy
of our understanding of the experience itself.

I’ve been enjoying CAC postings of late, and hope they continue to remove
bottlenecks to our unity and His revival.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program…

Shalom,
Ted

Rev. Ted Kau
Harvest San Gabriel Valley

A pastor needs three bones to remain upright: a backbone, a wishbone,
and a funny bone.
–Anon

— End —

From: RevCow@aol.com
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:16:38 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: the WORK and WORD of God

Challenging, re Ken’s “God’s Work sometimes interpreting God’s Word”
(10/16) and Bill’s “how we relate to God” (10/14, #1).

I’m intrigued, Ken, that you point out:
>…it was easy for me to point to Scripture and say
>that that gift no longer exists…

************ CASE
Intrigued, because I didn’t believe in tongues until I studied Scripture
(WORD). This, with an understanding of the relatively recent development
of dispensationalism, the substantiation of tongues used throughout
church history, and the lives of those who practiced tongues (WORK), led
me to accept the biblical exercise of tongues. I accepted tongues
because of God’s Word interpreting God’s Work.

Despite my original bias against it, the only way I could reason tongues
had ceased was to 1) employ an eclectic approach to Scripture, 2)
redefine biblical terms, 3) disassociate text from its context, or 4) all
of the above. I know that intelligent, scholarly, genuine believers
stand on both sides of this issue. With my limited resources, however, I
couldn’t rule out God’s use of spiritual gifts of tongues today.

This issue can be quite emotional, but Ken,
you opened up this can of tongues. 😛 :b

************ MY INTENT
My intent is not to highlight tongues, but to better understand the
underlying process of how we are to relate to and reconcile the tensions
encountered between predisposition, experience, and Truth, or to borrow
Bill’s phrase, “how we relate to God.”

************ THE ISSUES
This leads me to my Real Questions:
1. How does a believer determine when God’s Work interprets God’s Word?
2. Are pastors to preach/teach this?
3. How can we safeguard ourselves from subjectively re-interpreting
God’s Word?
4. For Chinese/Asian American churches, which seems to you to be
the greater abuse: experiential-ism or intellectualism?
5. What organizations have been successful in discipling believers
to be mature both in their personal relationship with God AND
in their study of His Word? I’d really like to know about this
one, because I’d like to learn. Remember mentorship (9/29)?
If you’re too modest, please e-mail me personally.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Btw, for more background, I had been on staff at EFCLA’s English
congregation (1 of the 3 congregations under EFCLA’s roof) from 1988 to
1997. 25/160 EFCLAers branched out with EFCLA’s blessings on Easter of
1997. I’d appreciate any prayers you’d lift up on our behalf. Thank you.

For His Kingdom,
Ted

Rev. Ted Kau
Harvest San Gabriel Valley

“The Bible was not given to increase our knowledge but to change our
lives.”–D.L. Moody

“Most people are bothered by those Scripture passages which they cannot
understand. But for me, the passages in Scripture which trouble me most
are those which I do understand.”–Mark Twain

“He who teaches the Bible is never a scholar; he is always a
student.”–Vern McLellan

“Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their
only Law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the
precepts there exhibited…What a paradise would this region be!”–John
Adams, 1756, America’s Second President

— End —

From: AsianPK@aol.com
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:25:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: CAC_Mail: Fwd: KimSt@aol.com: Fwd: fwd: International Day of Prayer for the Suffering …

Please read and participate as you feel lead.
———————
Forwarded message:
From: petelindborromeo@juno.com (PETER P BORROME)
To: ianweb@sonic.net, chung7@aol.com, pholey@MSN.com, AsianPK@aol.com,
Date: 97-10-16 14:32:11 EDT

——— Begin forwarded message ———-
From: KimSt@aol.com
To: beng.him.teh@nsc.com, DENALI@leland.stanford.edu,
Subject: Fwd: fwd: International Day of Prayer for the Suffering
Churches
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 14:05:30 -0400 (EDT)

———————
Forwarded message:
From: kimst@ul.com (Steven Kim)
To: support@rational.com, lloydc@compuserve.com, HERMESA@aol.com,
Date: 97-10-16 12:55:34 EDT

————-
Original Text
From: Bryan Young@316K@Eng_Srvc, on 10/16/97 9:21 AM:
To: imail[youngb@ul.com]

Hi yall,

My great friend, Godly man, sent this message to me. I encourage you to
read the following message.

Bryan

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

To all my friends,

I’m deeply distressed by the following news but I hope that
we will all pray together.

Eddie (pls forward this message)

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

Dear fellow brothers & sisters:

More Christians have been martyred in the 20th century than in the
previous 19 centuries combined.(1) Pastors are being arrested and
sometimes
shot in China and Cuba. Believers are forbidden to buy goods or own
property in Somalia. Christians who testify to their faith in Iran or
Saudi
Arabia may be put to death for blasphemy. Mobs have wiped out whole
villages of Christians in Pakistan.(2) And it goes on. For all this, the

western Church is mostly silent. “I am in prison,” says the Lord, “and
you
are not visiting me.”(3) It is time to shatter the silence. Sunday,
November 16, 1997, has been declared an International Day of Prayer for
the
Suffering Church. Until then, we need to educate our churches and our
friends concerning the extent of persecution which Christ is suffering
throughout the world. Later in this message, I suggest 3 specific steps
we
can all take, and I will let you know where to get information. (NOTE:
NONE
of the suggestions include “send your donation…”)
The International Day of Prayer (IDOP) was initiated by the World
Evangelical Fellowship (WEF), but it has earned the endorsement of
Christian
leaders of all types and denominations (I’ve attached a list to this
message). This is as it should be; this call is for everyone. When a mob,
fundamentalist Islamic policeman, or communist government investigator
comes
looking for Christians, they DO NOT ask any of the following questions:

– Do you believe the Bible to be inerrant, infallible, and uniquely
inspired?
– In whose name do you baptize?
– Do you acknowledge the Priesthood of all believers?
– Do you believe in a pre- or post-tribulation rapture?
– Do you believe in the Holy Trinity?

No, they ask one thing, and one thing only: will you bow down to
another
god, or will you remain faithful to Jesus? If the answer is “Jesus,” you
are under arrest. It’s that simple.

I AM ASKING EVERYONE WHO RECEIVES THIS MESSAGE TO DO 3 THINGS:
1) Please, please forward this message to every Christian
in your
personal electronic mailing list. If we are all diligent
to do
this,in a few weeks this message could reach every
Christian in
the
world who owns a modem. (No, this is not the only way
we’re
spreading the word, but it could turn out to be one of
the more
efficient ones.)

2) Please pray for your brothers and sisters under
persecution
around
the world on November 16. Pray every day, for that
matter, but
especially pray that day. Fast if you can.

3) Inform your pastor, your church’s prayer ministry, and
your
friends
(especially those who don’t have email) about the
International
Day
of Prayer on November 16, and about the persecution
Christ is
suffering.

Information concerning the suffering of Christians worldwide may be
obtained, in the US and Canada, from the US headquarters of IDOP. The
address is:

International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church
P.O. Box WEF, Wheaton, IL 60189-8003

INFO: 800-LETS-PRAY (1-800-538-7772)
OFFICES: 630-668-1754 FAX: 630-668-0498
EMAIL: IDOP@xc.org
WEB SITE: http://www.persecutedchurch.org

National Coordinator: Steve Haas
Director of Communications: Dr. Ed Bez

IDOP has a packet of information designed for informing your church group

and joining the day of prayer. The packet contains a Prayer Journal
containing several articles concerning the persecuted church, a 21-minute

video tape for your church or home group, several letters, and a Prayer
Commitment Sheet to send to IDOP to register your support(this is
optional.
Please pray, with or without notifying anyone.) They ask for $15 to cover

the cost of printing and shipping.

If you really can’t afford $15, ask for the packet anyway. Whatever you
do,
please don’t allow this message to stop traveling. Keep the word
moving.
Real people are dying real deaths out there where we can’t see them, and
they need our help. Do it now rather than later.

International Day of Prayer Board of Advisors:

Dr. Joseph Aldrich, President
Multnomah Bible College

Dr. Donald Argue, President
National Association of Evangelicals

Hon. William Armstrong, Senator
U.S. Senate, retired

Dr. Scott G. Bauer, Co-Pastor
The Church on the Way

William Bennett, President
Empower America

Charles E. Blake, Bishop
West Angeles Church of God in Christ

Dr. William Bright, President
Campus Crusade for Christ International

Dr. Paul Bubna, President
Christian and Missionary Alliance

William F. Buckley, Jr., Editor at Large
National Review

John Burke, Management Team
Willow Creek Community Church

Anne Buwalda, Director
Jubilee Foundation

Dr. Anthony Campolo, Professor
Eastern College

Rev. Dwight Chapman, President
General Association of General Baptists

Charles Colson, President
Prison Fellowship International
(Chairman, IDOP Advisory Board)

Johan Companjen, Intl. Director
Open Doors

Rev. Stan DeBoe, Priest
Trinitarian Order

David Engelhard, Gen. Secretary
Christian Reformed Church – N. America

Keith A. Fournier, President
Catholic Alliance

Dwight Gibson, N.A. Director
World Evangelical Fellowship

John Gimenez, Bishop
Rock Church

Dr. Os Guinness, Sr. Fellow
Trinity Forum

William J. Hamel, President
Evangelical Free Church of America

Hon. Mark O. Hatfield, Senator
U.S. Senate

Gary A. Haugen, President
International Justice Mission

Kent R. Hill, President
Eastern Nazarene College

Dr. John R. Holland, President
Intl. Church of the Foursquare Gospel

Michael Horowitz, Sr. Fellow
Hudson Institute

Jim Jacobson, Director
Christian Solidarity International

Dr. D. James Kennedy, President
Coral Ridge Ministries
Diane Knippers, President
Institute on Religion & Democracy

Dr. Richard Land, Exec. Director
Christian Life Commission, SBC

Paul E. Larsen, President
The Evangelical Covenant Church

Dr. Duane Litfin, President
Wheaton College

“For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”

-Philippians 1:21

——— End forwarded message ———-

— End —

From: Rlfong@aol.com
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:53:10 -0400 (EDT)
To: RevCow@aol.com, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the WORK and WORD of God

Ted

good quotes! I think it would be broadbrushing to paint all CACers in the
same category of either intellectualism or experientialism. I believe that
our younger / youth up to the 20 somethingers are into the experientialism
arena because of the mass culture in the USA; on the other hand, those who
get higher education or are immigrants agers 12 and up are probably more
intellectual oriented;

hence, as a sterotype, I would guess most MITers are intellectual; more
younger people immigranting from the PRC are experiential than intellectual (
older immigrants more intellectual ); most ABCs today’s age 30 and younger
experiential.

does this jive with anyone else’s opinion?

Ronnie Fong
Fremont, CA ( somewhere in nor.Calif. on the Hayward EQ fault being home
sick )

In a message dated 97-10-16 08:33:29 EDT, Ted Kau writes:

<>

— End —

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 23:47:42 -0700
From: OHBRUDDER
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Personal Experiences as a Scholar

Sze-kar Wan wrote:
>
> Dear Bill, I know you didn’t mean it this way, but your remark cuts
like
> a hot jab to my soul.
>

Dear Sze-kar,
I was deeply touched by your reaction and response to my remarks about
relating to God. I obviously opened up some very old wounds and touch
some deep, raw nerves. I hope you truly believe that I did not mean
to offend nor hurt you. Like yourself, some of my most painful
offenses received in the past was wrought by other Christians . . .the
body of Christ shooting itself in the foot! And as you may recall, I
prefaced my remarks by saying I was not trying to judge which was the
right or wrong way of relating to God but to point out that there was
a difference. And obviously I left little doubt as to which I favored.

There is much I want to say about your position on scholarship but
sometimes wisdom is in the silence. At the moment, I don’t think there
is much I could say that would not offend you just because I do think
differently.
I’d rather be thought wrong than to hurt or offend you any further.
So I hope you could accept my apology, and may the peace of God
reign between us.

bill leong

— End —

Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 14:26:14 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship

Dear CACers:

My last post was one of those you hit the “send” command and immediately
wondered if you had exposed too much of yourself.

Well, so be it.

Thank you, Ray, Bill, and Gary for your words of understanding. Thank
you Bill for not taking it too personally. Yes, there are old wounds
and decade-long hurts, but my post was not intended as self-therapy so
much in vogue these days. Rather, I was hoping to bring to the fore the
anti-intellectual tendency I see in the Chinese church today (can’t say
for sure about other ethnic groups), using myself–wisely or
unwisely–as illustration.

I don’t know where this anti-intellectual bias came from. Maybe it’s
from the indigenous Chinese churches of the 20s and 30s, our spiritual
predecessors. Maybe it’s the anti-intellectualism so prevalent in North
American culture. Truth is, I hold scholar no higher or lower than
pastor. Both ought to be held to a standard of accountability based on
his or her faithfulness to the gospel. Both contribute to the Kingdom
in substantial and nonreducible ways.

When I hear public statements like “The Chinese church does not need
PhDs” or “Scholarship only gets in the way of saving souls” (not uttered
on CAC but frequently heard in Chinese churches), I bristle with
disappointment. What in fact is so wrong with serving God with the best
of one’s intellectual abilities? What is so destructive with loving God
with all our mind? We encourage our children to be doctors, lawyers,
engineers, scientists, and occasionally pastors; when will we start
encouraging our children to be scholars and theologians? No wonder
Chinese-Americans are so underrepresented in our theological schools. If
Chinese American Christianity is to chart a future course that can
ensure its sruvival and bring glory to God, we’ve got to think in terms
not only of church growth, evangelism, discipleship, etc. (all of which
are important), but also of seminars, serious and rigorous studies,
theological education. Talk is NOT cheap, true understanding is NOT
easy. Let’s not cripple ourselves.

Being daily transformed,
Sze-kar

— End —

From: Rlfong@aol.com
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 16:00:43 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: MEDIA / GAYS ISSUE * Fwd: Vote

CACers

media poll on the gays kissing on TV on ELLEN. Take a position and vote as
the CAC vote portion of the populace.

Ronnie Fong
Fremont, CA ( SF Bay Area )
———————
Forwarded message:
Subj: Vote
Date: 97-10-17 09:47:32 EDT
From: Mypyface
To: djchuang@ix.netcom.com,Rlfong

Hi, Everyone:
Sorry, I had an error in the abcnews address. It should be as follows:
Cast your vote at http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/ellen109.
I got the following message Oct. 15, and the vote was 65% for and 35%
against. I thought I should act on it so I got on just now Oct 17 6AM, and
the scale is tipping the right way. 60.8 for and 39.1 against.
In Him,
Peter

Forwarded message:
> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:15:36 -0700
> Subject: FYI-Lesbian Kiss Poll
>
> This is a forwarded message!>
> >
> >Subject: Lesbian Kiss Poll
> >
> >Brothers and Sisters,
> >
> >I encourage you to go to
> >http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/ellen109
> >today and place your vote.
> >
> >ABC is taking a poll to determine if you would
> >allow your children to watch lesbians kiss on TV.
> >(this is in reference to the Ellen show where that occurred).
> >
> >Currently the stats show 65% for and only 35% against.
> >I beleive the stats show a high gay response as info about
> >this poll originally came from a pro-homosexual page.
> >
> >I really can’t believe any parent in their right mind would
> >allow their children to watch something like that.
> >I don’t know any parents (believing or not) who would allow it.
> >Ellen and her mother actually had the arrogance to complain
> >about the warning message for parents ABC ran before that episode.
> >That is a clear indication that the gays will not stop until they
> >force everybody to accept their lifestyle.
> >
> >This is urgent as we don’t know how long ABC will run the poll.
> >
> >————- End Forwarded Message ————-

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
Organization: Ambassador Bible Church
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 00:04:00 -0500
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the WORK and WORD of God

On 16 Oct 97 at 8:16, RevCow@aol.com wrote:

> 4. For Chinese/Asian American churches, which seems to you to be
> the greater abuse: experiential-ism or intellectualism?

Ted,
this is an interesting question, but a good one.. I’m not sure it can be
compared on which is the greater abuse, and from my instinct and
experience(!), I believe both are abused depending on the context/ situation..
that’s not to say that there is abuse everywhere, but there are both extremes
and tendencies by individuals.

Some people value experiences much more than anything else (and I think this
may be a Asian cultural value), where life experience (thus respect for older
people, I believe is tied in to this) is more valuable than expertise (from an
educated “expert”). What may happen in an extreme situation with this person
is that an idea that is outside of this person’s experience is rejected; also,
this person will use his/her experience to interpret the Bible, using the line
of reasoning “it’s obvious that this is a good thing that God is blessing, so
it must be of God, and the Scripture must mean thus and so.”

Some people value intellectualism more, though this may or may not be
theological intellectualism, and experiences are put through an extreme
scrutiny, and ideas may be rejected because their former intellectual
training and reasoning disallows other concepts, and disallows valid
experiences. Where Asian culture fits here may be unique, for as a people,
education is highly treasured, but in the realm of the spiritual and mystical,
educated logic is sometimes set aside, it seems, for something that relates to
the supernatural. Thus in some circles, spiritual mystical practices are
prized over planning or strategizing. A line of reasoning common on this
extreme might be proof-texting, or intellectual pride.

What conclusion do I draw? I believe education and experience are not
antithetical nor absolute contrary, I believe they go hand-in-hand. How they
go together as to avoid extremes is much more challenging to define… as we
see our new discussion under way, we can see just how challenging of a task
this is.

DJ

* * new email

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: I Tim. 3″Ray Downen”
From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:32:05 EDT

Hi Ray:

Good to hear from you. I appreciated your affirmation and wish to seek
to pursue a greater unity between us in God’s Word. This is posted on
CAC as an invitation to reach unity with others.

Ray you wrote:
Prophets (directly receiving and transmitting to God’s people
words from God) were temporary workers in the early church. It
appears that their work was done after the N.T. scriptures were
available to the church.

I’m out of sequence here because I responded to this at the end of this
letter.

You also wrote:
And here there’s a problem. Leadership in the Lord’s church is
made
the work of a “committee” of elders rather than in any one man of any
age. We choose to veer from the Bible plan. We have set up a clergy
system which makes the clergyman the leader of the congregation.
That’s not what the Bible teaches. There we see evangelists (where
age is no barrier to service) teaching the Word and seeking to win
the lost. We see those who were won gathering in congregations, which
are then led by the “committee” of elders selected from among
themselves (not hired from outside the group). Do you see in the
Bible a different pattern for church government than I’ve here
outlined? Have we the right to set up alternate church governments
and still claim to be following the Bible as our guide? I think not.

I believe that the leadership of the church is best served thru a
plurality of elders. I do not know of a passage of Scripture that says
it MUST be plural; (This is confessing ignorance and not a challenge to
produce it.). That the word “elder” was plural does not mean it MUST be
plural but is sufficient to understand that in general the churches were
ruled by elders. This would be the goal. When Paul started a new church
I would understand that he was the only elder until others were qualified
to be elders. When Paul left Titus behind to pastor the church, my
impression is that Titus was the only elder for a time until he obeyed
Paul in appointing elders. My own experience in starting a new church
was that for some time we only had one person who was qualified to be an
elder. I did not know how to have a plurality of elders. This is the
goal of the Biblical church, but the goal does not prohibit the process,
since the process is not veering from the goal. My comment of a “single”
man is not in reference to one man but to an unmarried man; which leads
us to:

I earlier said,
“The “husband of one wife” is not that he should be a husband, (cf.
Paul’s exhortation to celibacy) but that if he is a husband, he has
only one wife. So also, if he happens to be a father, he must be
“keeping his children under control with all dignity”. But the
qualification is not that he must be a father.”

You responded:
You surely have a right to your opinion. But the qualification is

that an elder MUST be, not only of mature age, but also that he be
the husband of one WIFE. This disqualifies any unmarried man, even if
otherwise fully qualified, from serving in the “office” of elder if
that office is being conducted according to scriptural requirements.
A problem some have is that they want to impose on what is taught a
different form of church government and still be doing things God’s
way. We shouldn’t look to the Bible for proof that our unscriptural
church government is acceptable to God.

Your focus for this qualification is on the word HUSBAND. My focus
for this qualification is on the word ONE WIFE. My understanding would
be expressed this way, “as a husband he must have ONE wife.” The concern
that he be “above reproach” is that he doesn’t have more than one wife,
not whether he is married or not. The other qualification I referred to
is similar; “as a father, he must keep his children under control with
all dignity.” The concern that he be “above reproach” is in keeping his
children under control with all dignity, not whether he is a father or
not. Would you say any man who is not a father is not qualified to be an
elder? How is a single man or a childless man not “above reproach,” in
what sense? In this passage I see the issue of qualifications is that he
is “above reproach.”

Again you wrote:

Ben”
I’m not clear as to the intent of the question here (Would you say
that this is really a verse of excluding rather than including them
into our salvation?).

[[This has to do with Gal. 3:28]].

Sorry for the confusion caused by a closing spontaneous question
that is to pursue “irony” (?). ( “Them” is the differences, Jews and
Gentiles, male and female). Another following question would have
helped. ” Isn’t it strange to interpret this verse as to mean inclusive?”

Just a quick comment on prophets. It is late and the letter is too long.
More on this another time. Definition of “priest” is a spokesman for
man to God. Definition of “prophet” is a spokesman for God to man. The
definition does not required him (prophet) to have special or new
revelation from God nor new predictions about future events.

Question: Where in the Bible do you defend your statement that prophets
were temporary and that they ended after the NT was completed? If it is
from I Cor. 13:8-10, what is the “perfect”? and how did you arrive at
that? I would like to suggest that the “perfect” is the Church, the Body
(soma: neuter) of Christ. The context of this passage is dealing with
spiritual gifts for the edifying of the Church.

Ben

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net, CdBacDenC0@aol.com, pastorc@ecentral.com,
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 14:01:56 -0600
Subject: CAC_Mail: Poem
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

To whom true love rings true

Cool carbon stones afire
Brilliant studded golden band
Only thee, my one desire
be my glory hand in hand
Grand design, taking time
I, the maker of the mines
Coal, coal, black and light
Diamonds flaming, blue and bright
Visions of Me on the verge
Inklings an iota
risen like a tree of life
in Deadwood, South Dakota
Soon the early will be chosen
Morning be at night
Santa Anas freeze the frozen
Icebergs will ignite
Darkness light upon the sun
Sickles slay the hammers
Freedom free without a gun
Learn-ed learn some manners

Tumble stars from lofty heights
Light devour darkness
Wickedness no more be right
Left be few, the righteous
Poets grope for wedding words,
politicians answers
Oceans offer up in thirds
death to necromancers
Thy design, Lord, taking time
Mine Thee, maker of the mines
Coal, coal, black and light
Diamonds flaming blue and bright
Pressure-treated stones inspire
Brilliant like Thee Son of Man
Love me all-consuming fire
Grace me with Thy wedding band
Love, Thee all-consuming fire,
take me to Thy Holy land
Love me, Spirit, my desire
Touch me with Thy hammered hand

c. 1995-1997 go

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
Organization: Ambassador Bible Church
To: wans@monet.bc.edu
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:52:59 -0500
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship
CC: cac@emwave.net

On 17 Oct 97 at 14:26, Sze-kar Wan wrote:

> I don’t know where this anti-intellectual bias came from.

Sze-Kar,
I’m sure if we dig around a little bit, we might find out where it came from
*grin* (perhaps from the theology of Kant and the enlightenment, perhaps from
other prominent or not-so-prominent pastor/teachers, or as Asians prefer,
“preachers”, who passed along some teachings, where the intellect is strongly
separated from spirituality)

Suppose we look at Jesus’ summary of the faith, say from Mark 12:30-31, which
is: “love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul
and with all your mind and with all your strength.” and the second (perhaps
demonstrative) “love your neighbor as yourself.” For some streams of
spirituality, heart and soul become a greater priority than mind and strength
(and even to the neglect of the latter), so that spirituality seems to be
only discerned and defined by mysticism, attitude, emotions, and experience,
and spirituality seems to have nothing to do with planning, or strategizing,
or management/organization, or quality scholarship.

What can one say to a spirituality like that?

Is not what Jesus saying totally comprehensive and integrated (not a list of
priorities, not a dichotomy to neglect), that everything that we have, all
the capacities and abilities and faculties are to be used unto Him, for His
purpose, and for His kingdom?

DJ

* * new email

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 00:55:56 -0400 (EDT)
To: ben_mel@juno.com, Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: I Tim. 3″Ray Downen”

Ray has been in dialogue with me about the “woman’s issue” as well. It is
clear that we disagree with each other’s interpretation of Scripture – but
I’m glad that the conversation is continuing – with one qualification:
perhaps we men should stop talking about what Scripture says about women and
start listening to what women hear Scripture saying to them. This discourse
is entirely too male dominated for me!

Finally, I want to recommend Craig S. Keener’s _Paul, Women and Wives:
Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul_ (Hendrickson, 1992) as
an example of the abolitionist hermeneutical principle in Scripture. Keener
discusses all the “problem” passages and, IMHO, is on target. I certainly
would not want to part of a hermeneutical tradition that supported slavery!
On another note, Craig is an example of a devout and dedicated evangelical
who has been mistreated by his fellow evangelicals because of his views on
women in ministry and racial justice. When I “fight” for the marginalized
and oppressed, I think of white men like Craig who are persecuted for
speaking out.

In Christ,
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:04:18 -0400 (EDT)
To: corn1414@mailhost.net, pangks@pl.jaring.my
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Catholics on Mary – Antioch Letter 4.41

Dear Rev. Eng:

At times I have appreciated your “letters” and commentaries. Some of it is
very helpful and some of it is not. Furthermore, I don’t always agree with
everything you say – but, that’s okay, since we obviously believe in the same
Christ and Lord and Savior). But, I’m not sure how I got on your
distribution list. Nor did I give permission to be placed on your
distribution list. So, please tell me more about yourself and your
intentions for distributing your newsletter – and ask for my permission and
that of others first before you send it to me or others.

This message applies to others on the CAC list as well. Before putting all
of us on a distribution list, give each of us a choice in the matter.
Announce your list, give background info, and invite us to subscribe
individually. We’ve learned from our past mistakes of overloading
information to participants. We’ve become a pretty good discussion list.
Let’s continue in that spirit. Thanks.

Tim Tseng

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:06:17 -0400 (EDT)
To: gdot@juno.com, Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action

Brother G:

My take on Fuller’s courage is not so much linked to their stand on
infallibility/inerrancy (I agree with you there). Though Fuller’s decision to
move away from “inerrancy” may have saved it from the harsher Christian
constituents who wield “inerrancy” as a political butcher knife and given it
space to address other controversial issues with commendable grace and tact
(e.g., the charismatic claims, women in ministry, many social justice issues,
engaging in high powered academics, etc.). I have found that often
“inerrantists” tend to be gate-keepers while “infallibists” tend to be seeker
sensitive. Both have strengths and weaknesses, but the latter is better
equipped to handle the current shift into a global post-modern culture and
post-industrial economy. Thus, in this sense, I consider Fuller more
courageous because it is much more willing to “engage” (Star Trekkies,
forgive me) culture and contemporary life than those more cautious about
being “polluted” by it.

I share your concern about Christ’s bride co-habitating with American
corporations. But overcoming idolatry (or using your metaphor, adultery) is
not as easy to do as one might imagine. Even if theological institutions
were able to divest themselves of any corporate sponsorship, their
administrators, faculty, and students still have to wrestle with divesting
themselves of the worst of American culture. I submit that all of us have to
negotiate through a world filled with evil forces (principalities and powers)
in hopes that we can be “signs” of God’s inbreaking Kingdom. The strategy of
separatism and isolation will fail in the long run because the problem is not
only in the “world” out there, but also the “worldliness” within us.

Having said that, this means that the Christian must always be alert and
humble. We must continually confess our weakness and dependence on the Holy
Spirit of God to discern and act wisely in the world. (Indeed, in the CAC
discussions, it seems that what we are groping for – especially in light of
the disagreements on a number of issues – is the gift of discernment. What
belongs to Christ? What does not?). So, if Fuller accepts Weyerhauser money
(shades of DNC acceptance of money from Asians?), it needs to be alert and
ready to return it if news, say, of labor exploitation or anti-Chinese
discrimination is confirmed. But, this is not very likely. So it is up to
discerning and humble brothers like you to call Fuller (and any Christian
group) to accountability in that event. Perfect ethical and courageous
leadership is unattainable. But it can be approximated so long as no one
abdicates their responsibility to call others to accountability (in a civil
manner).

Ack, I spachen too muchen. Cheers to Robin!

In Christ,
Tim

In a message dated 10/16/97 12:03:01 AM, gdot@juno.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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:08:04 -0400 (EDT)
To: wans@monet.bc.edu, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship

Sze-Kar:

I echo your sentiments and concern about anti-intellectualism in Chinese
Christianity and North American culture (the eminent historian, Richard
Hofstader wrote an entire book about American anti-intellectualism). It
seems to me that many of us Chinese Christians will remain hostile towards
_certain_ intellectuals (not hard science Ph.Ds, medical doctors, or
engineers) so long as we cherish our marginal status in society and the
Church (universal). Academicians in the humanities, social sciences, or
theological disciplines have engendered an elitist attitude in the past, so
it is understandable why marginalized peoples feel suspicious of them.

What most people don’t understand is that the academy has changed in the past
thirty years – becoming more inclusive of people of color, of women, and of
so-called “low brow” culture. The democratization and popularization of the
humanities and theological disciplines has meant that this elitism no longer
carries much weight as many younger scholars have entered their respective
fields hoping to find a voice for the marginalized.

Ironically, this effort to include the voices of all people in America has
produced a backlash that would like to keep America as monochromatic and
monolingual as possible. Thus, neo-conservative think-tanks like the
American Enterprise Corp. have maligned these developments as “political
correctness” or “raging relativism.” And many conservative Christians have
jumped on the band wagon. And based on my reading of many of the messages on
the CAC list, many Chinese Christians have also adopted the agenda of the
“backlashing” conservatives. I believe that much of the spewing of
right-wing talk on this list (which I welcome, don’t get me wrong) comes from
“uncritical” acceptance of ideologically conservative Christians (who are
primarily white and male – at least that agenda seems to serve white male
elite interests better than anyone elses). I’ve yet to hear a substantive
argument on this list justifying the identification of core Christian values
with “conservative ideology.”

Another irony: ideologically conservative American Protestants are now trying
to force “political correctness” out of their seminaries – which translates
into fewer opportunities for women and people of color (like most of us on
this list) to find seminary teaching positions. And they are succeeding.
The irony is this: many younger minority Christians [late baby boomers or
baby busters, not necessarily generation X – ugh, I hate these labels!] have
joined in the call to eliminate “liberal political correctness.” Consequence
# 1 Less of their own people will be represented in these seminaries.
Correction: less of the kind of people who really represent the interests of
minority communities will be represented. Consequence # 2: don’t count on
seminaries which have successfully stamped out “political correctness” to
provide for the special concerns and needs of minority Christians.

All these ironies! It all stems from this problem you highlighted, Sze Kar.
We so-called “theological intellectuals” are trench fighters in an arena who
– given proper direction, support and encouragement – will reshape the
configuration of American Protestantism and academia (to a lesser degree) in
the next century. So long as we are seen as ivory tower professors
disconnected from the life of the local church, the enemy will have already
won. Chinese American Christians will remain divided and marginal. It seems
blatantly unfair for our brothers and sisters in the local churches to
privilege their own experiences while kicking a leg out from underneath us.
We are also servants of Christ’s church among Chinese Americans. You know
as well as I do how tricky it is to juggle the many institutional and
academic agendas which are thrust into our hands while we try to provide
voice to Chinese American Christians.

Illustration: I’ve been shopping around for publishers for my book on the
history of Chinese Christianity in North America. While many publishers have
expressed interest, many others ask me whether such a book is “marketable.”
“Too specialized a topic,” I sometimes hear. Lesson learned: mainstream
academics, publishers, religious institutions really care very little about
Chinese American Christians – even though I’ve devoted so much of my energy
trying to get research grants, trying to justify teaching an Asian American
Christianity course which no one is interested in taking, trying to argue
that we’re not simply going to assimilate into the American mainstream (if we
do, there would be no reason to study Chinese Americans as a distinct
religious tradition, would there?), etc., etc. – all to give voice to Chinese
American Christians in the academy, seminaries, Asian American studies, etc.
With voice comes space and resources to strengthen a marginalized Christian
community that few in America really care about.

But, it seems that our greatest impediment is ourselves. Unlike our Korean
brothers and sisters, we choose to remain isolated from those “liberal”
denominations and seminaries and associate with evangelicals who are usually
less than enlightened about or interested in Chinese Americans (though they
seem to love us when we are in China or the Chinese diaspora). Koreans, on
the other hand, have pounded the doors and invited themselves in (witness the
Korean dominated Asian American ministry programs in several mainline
seminaries including Princeton, Garrett-Evangelical, Claremont, Drew). After
all, they, too, are brothers and sisters in Christ and therefore deserve a
seat at the welcome table. Conservative or liberal, Koreans have done well
to get a foot in the door and I applaud them. But we have lashed at each
other (OBC v. ABC, “liberal” v. “conservative,” ordinary people v.
“intellectuals”), bashed our own culture while uncritically adopting the
white evangelical subculture and their “issues,” and argued about issues
irrelevant to our community (why no discussion about the impact of welfare
reform on Chinese immigrants? why no discussion about the rise in anti-Asian
violence?). When will God raise up leaders among us who are looking out for
our people’s _real_ interests?

If this discussion list does anything to address that last question, I will
meet my Creator a happy man. When you and I gathered a group of “academic
types” to start this list, we had hoped to bring together the wonderful
diversity of Chinese and Asian American Christians into dialogue with one
another (’tis true that theological liberals and conservatives rarely speak
to each other – preferring to create and destroy “straw persons” [I believe
in inclusive language use]). We [Chinese seminary professors] also wanted to
share our views and hear others in hopes of strengthening the Chinese church
in North America. I still believe that participants on this list are doing
just that. Anti-intellectualism is both understandable and legitimate (to a
degree), but I hope that we won’t allow it to “censor” certain messages
posted on this list. The time is ripe now for Chinese and other Asian America
n Christians to partner with leaders who are in the trenches of mainstream
Christianity (e.g., denominational leaders, seminary professors and
administrators, etc.) to develop Christ-like leaders for our churches, the
Asian American community, and the wider community.

In Christ,
Tim

In a message dated 10/17/97 1:42:14 PM, wans@monet.bc.edu 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: JWongCDI@aol.com
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 11:28:49 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: CAC mail: more, Women & Ministry

Greetings on a beautiful Monday morning in Chicago. Fall is crisply in the
air, hinting of a winter (which I hear can be pretty challenging for a
Californian). But, for now, I love it.

I apologize for being slow in entering the discussion on women and ministry.
It is often a frustrating topic because we are concerned about authority and
power, about “ruling over” and submitting.

In trying to discern God’s design and purpose in this matter (as we are all
seeking to do) I’ve decided on an approach that seems to work for me. My
primary question is over Responsibility. Who is responsible? or What are the
responsibilities given to this person?

The point of discovering responsibility is that we are then able to (assign)
recognize who has authority or power. I believe God has not handed out
authority willy-nilly, but purposefully, according to His design in creation.

Many of our problems in relationships come about when an individual
assumes/usurps a responsibility that does not belong to him/her. In trying
to carry out the responsibility, he/she discovers that there is no
accompanying authority, and wonders why nobody is willing to listen to
him/her. (eg: an older child acting like a parent over younger siblings)
There is also the practice of assigning a responsibility to an individual,
without providing authority. This also is a way to create chaos.

I find that Scripture passages like Hebrews 13:17, are easily understood when
we approach it from a Responsibility perspective.
“Obey your leaders, and submit {to them}; for they keep watch over your
souls, as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not
with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you.”

Hopefully, this approach will help in our thinking.

Joe Wong
Church Dynamics International

— End —

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:25:31 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: Cornelius
CC: ctesl-l@iclnet.org, CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Verse of the Week – 52

Dear CACers:

Does anyone know who “Cornelius” is and how CAC-members got on his
distribution list? He doesn’t seem to respond to our best effort to get
in touch with him.

Tim is right about cluttering our CAC discussion which has been
constructive and informative. Ours a private discussion on issues
specifically related to Chinese/Asian-American Christian life. It’s not
appropriate to use the CAC-forum as another distribution point if the
post is not directly relevant to our group.

Respectfully,
Sze-kar

— End —

From: Fenggang Yang
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Re: Verse of the Week – 52
To: wans@monet.bc.edu, Cornelius
Cc: ctesl-l@iclnet.org, CAC

I strongly agree with Sze-kar!!! Get my name off your list,
Cornelius. Who are you?

fyang@uh.edu

—–Original Message—–
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: Cornelius
Cc: ctesl-l@iclnet.org ; CAC
Date: Monday, October 20, 1997 4:57 PM
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Verse of the Week – 52

>Does anyone know who “Cornelius” is and how CAC-members got on his
>distribution list? He doesn’t seem to respond to our best effort to
get
>in touch with him.
>
>Tim is right about cluttering our CAC discussion which has been
>constructive and informative. Ours a private discussion on issues
>specifically related to Chinese/Asian-American Christian life. It’s
not
>appropriate to use the CAC-forum as another distribution point if the
>post is not directly relevant to our group.

— End —

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 22:59:32 +0000
From: Grace May
To: Benjamin C Wong
CC: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: CAC: W/M Ministry

Ben,

I want to encourage you and others interested in a more detailed
understanding of my position to read an article I co-authored w/ Hyunhye
Joe (a colleague of mine from Gordon-Conwell) in response to J.I.
Packer’s argument for not ordaining women as elders. Feel free to skim.
But I would hope that you would find a more thoroughly reasoned and more
carefully articulated response there than I can give here. Let me know
if, after reading my article, you still have questions.
See http://www.goldengate.net/mall/cbe/may.htm.

To respond to your e-mail addressed to me dated 10/13/97:

1. How would you understand the meaning of kephale (Eng. “head”)?
Hyunhye and I offer a definition of kephale in our article. In light
of Peter Woo’s 10/15/97 posting, do you believe that Paul had in mind
all women and men or only wives and husbands (or both) in Eph 5 and
I Cor 11? I find I Cor. 11:11-12 one of the most compelling passages
for advocating the interdependency of women and men in Christ (“all
things come from God”) over and above any biological (“man comes through
woman”) or chronological (“woman comes from man”) orderings.

2. I’m delighted to hear that you understand the standard of “one wife”
as expansively as you do. Like you, I firmly believe that the list of
qualities in I Tim. 3 are guidelines for maintaining godly leaders. But
many people cite the reference to “one wife” as an absolute bar against
having women as overseers, because, the argument goes, since a leader
must have a wife this automatically eliminates women from
consideration. In my opinion, that argument is as logical and helpful
as saying that the text is insisting that only single men can be
overseers.

3. Right — we mustn’t prioritize experience over Scripture, but we
must remember that all of our interpretations of Scripture are just
that: “interpretations” and that our understanding by necessity is
mediated through our human experience. So I’m glad when people own the
experiences that have informed their respective views. The information
helps me to understand where people are coming from and weigh the
factors that might have influenced them. E.g. I think Ken Fong
provided us w/ some useful history from his Fuller days. I’m humbled by
the caliber of female students he found at seminary.

5. Gal 3:28 is about our identities in Christ. Many people argue,
however, that this passage on equality should be applied exclusively to
our position in salvation. But didn’t God initiate us into the divine
reign for a purpose? Are we not to live out and embody the ethics of
God’s kingdom — values which are so alien to the world — and make them
a viable, living reality here on earth?

Praying as Christ taught us “Your kingdom come, Your will be done on
earth as it is in heaven,”

Blessings,
Grace

— End —

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 08:59:07 -0500
To: CAC@emwave.net
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: CAC_Mail: patience and courtesy

Dear good friends at CAC:

May I encourage the moderator of our group to
contact Cornelius, to kindly suggest that he needs
to respond to people like Sze Kar and Fenggang
about their request that they be removed from his
list?

May I also encourage all of us to be a bit more patient
with one another? I am not sure that ALL of Cornelius’
messages are irrelevant to our discussion. Perhaps
it is the sheer volume of material he is producing,
which is our concern? (In which case, I have been
guilty for months, though am submitting much less
these days!) Let’s respond to the issue of Cornelius’
VOLUME rather than the CONTENT or VIEWPOINT
(which I don’t think Sze Kar and Fenggang is doing …
I just want to raise a little word of caution here).

In Christ,

Sam Ling
(Greetings, Sze Kar and Fenggang!)

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 20:28:55 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 01:06:17 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:
>Brother G:

> I submit that all of us have to negotiate through a world filled with
evil
> forces (principalities and powers) in hopes that we can be “signs”
> of God’s inbreaking Kingdom. The strategy of separatism and isolation
> will fail in the long run because the problem is not only in the
“world”
> out there, but also the “worldliness” within us.

Dear Tim, CAC:

No rebuttal to your wisdom, Tim, but an opportunity to apply it follows.
I know this issue may appear to be off the track, but I’ll take a chance
that it isn’t, that it could help to achieve even more clarity for your
point. Feel free to expand/refine the issue in terms of Chinese
culture/customs, about which I know too little:

There was an article in the news the other day, maybe you/some other
people saw it, about the ‘medical care’ system in Africa. Allegedly,
about 85% of ~1 billion African population go to witch doctors and
medicine men for traditional cures– a thriving business, too. The World
Health Organization endorsed this form of ‘medicine’–rendered it
‘valid’. It involves pagan ritual, incantations, massage, casting out
‘spirits’, etc. in curing disease. What would be wise Biblical counsel
for our African brethren, sisters who must ‘negotiate’ through that part
of the world today? Should they renounce the witch doctors or not? Also,
is there a real difference (in this context) betw relying on witch
doctors etc. and relying on (medical) technology, as many Americans do,
over against faith in God, i.e. living ‘ in hopes that we can be “signs”
of God’s inbreaking Kingdom’?

Gary

P.S. Robin sends her greetings to you and all the saints 🙂

— End —

From: Rlfong@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 03:11:31 -0400 (EDT)
To: Cac@emwave.net
cc: TSTseng@aol.com, gdot@juno.com
Subject: CAC_Mail: INQUIRY – Customs

Has anyone posted Christian interpretations of Chinese customs, as imported
and practiced here in America. It’d be my guess that there be some
differences between practices here and in Asia; as well as regional
differences between say San Francisco and Texas.

Customs I’m curious about are weddings, funerals, baby births,
i.e. wearing a cheong sam or an embroadered jacket; big banquet party
i.e. doing three bows to the decreased; or paper money; or candy and money
gifts
i.e. doing a red egg and ginger party; drinking chicken wine soup

In the SF Bay Area, the Christian theme seems to be go with the
materialistic culture which in many ways is an affluent expectation of
spending lots of money to impress others. How much do we follow to “honor”
our parents expectations v. doing proper Christian stewardship?

be interested to hear thoughts.

Ronnie Fong
Fremont, CA ( attending another red egg & ginger party on Saturday )

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
Organization: Ambassador Bible Church
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 10:00:03 -0500
Subject: CAC_Mail: Women & Ministry

——- Forwarded Message Follows ——-

From: JWongCDI@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:10:08 -0400 (EDT)
cc: corn1414@mailhost.net
Subject: CAC_Women & Ministry

Warm greetings;

First, I too wish “Cornelius” to remove me from his list. Thanks Sze-kar for
saying it for us.

Now –
I continue to do some thinking and would like to add to my earlier memo on
Women & Ministry. (it may even seem clever)

the key words for this issue may be: Real – Role – Relationships –
Responsibility – Right .

the first concern for us ought to be “What is Real?”
Is our understanding of Men and Women Roles accurate to Reality? that is
True?
Of course our understanding of what is true or real, must conform to God’s
design and purpose in creation. And conforming to God’s (not Man’s) design
and purpose is what I understand as Right. (our understanding is most
reliable when it is discerned from His Word.)

So, in God’s creation, what are the Roles and Relationships which He assigned
to His creatures, humans, in particular?
This understanding must not simply be based upon ability. One young man
told me he wanted his wife to pursue a career because she was good at it. I
thought, however, that Sin is also something we are ABLE to do. The basis for
his (and her) decision must involve her roles and relationships.

Finally, it seems to me that the assigning of role and relationships are tied
to the responsbilities God gives. Has God given responsibilities to the male
different from the female? Has God empowered each gender with physical and
psychological characteristics to fulfill their different responsibilities? I
believe the answers are “Yes.” But these characteristics does not
automatically make us good at carrying out our responsibilities. Neither does
it mean that each is not capable of doing more. Instead the capability is
what allows us to sin, that is to act in a manner that is inconsistent to
God’s design and purpose.

A word about roles. It seems that we humans are usually seeking roles of
power and control. This will lead us to miss entirely the true roles God has designed for us – and Himself. I find that the role God has assigned to Himself is to be a Servant. Let me share the words of a godly woman; ” I am sure that we are made women so that we can model for our men the true servant spirit.”

Anyway, in my own searching, these are guiding concepts which I find valid and employ.

Respectfully,
Joe Wong (at Chicago Chinese Baptist Church)
Church Dynamics International

— End —

Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 17:22:45 +0000
From: Grace May
To: KRMMB@aol.com
CC: CAC@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: New Topic: Asian-American Evangelism that Works???

Ken,
Good question. I don’t know how everyone stays on top of your CAC
mail, let alone everything else people must receive. I’m thinking of
getting a faster modem. Any other suggestions?
Grace

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Asian-American Church Planters
From: jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:15:12 EDT

Hi DJ,
Thanks for your message. Yes, you did send it earlier. However,
I accidentally deleted it upon reading it for the first time and forgot
who actually sent it. I apologize for my mistake and I do appreciate
your persistence.
Yes, I did speak at the B-ball tournament at CCUC. Thanks for
your comments. Being vulnerable has been a character trait I’ve been
working on for years and it hasn’t been easy. I still struggle with that
issue since I have so much “performance/acceptance” baggage in my past.
But by God’s grace He is slowly flushing it out.
Great to hear about your new church plant situation. Tell me
more about it. What is the make up of the core team? What vision does
the core team have? What denomination or church is it affiliated with?
How large is the church plant? How long has it been since the launch
date? What strategy and model will you be implementing and why? Who is
your primary target group? Is it realistic to go multi-ethnic if most
members of the core team are Asian Americans?
My wife and I just got back from the “Church Planters Assessment
Seminar.” It was a grueling weekend but a good one. I learned a lot
about myself; what were my strengths and weaknesses. We are in prayer
waiting for God’s leading.
Love to hear from you… In Christ, Jon

— End —

Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 01:34:34 +0000
From: Grace May
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: CAC mail vol

Tim,
I had to chuckle. You gave a detailed and thoughtful response even to
a query such as mine. Thank you. I’ll try and incorporate suggestion
#1 to avoide duplicate mailings and am open to suggestion #2. The
latter could help me to be a better steward w/ my time.
Grace

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:29:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: CAC_Mail: CFP: Conf. on Social Gospel at Colgate-Rochester
To:

Greetings. I’d like to announce the following call for papers for an
upcoming conference on the Social Gospel. Please send inquiries to Dr.
Christopher Evans at revsroce@frontier.net. Thank you.
– Timothy Tseng

Call for Papers

Conference on the Social Gospel at Colgate Rochester Divinity School
April 24-25, 1998

Sponsored by Colgate Rochester Divinity School and the Edwin Mellen Press

On April 24-25, 1998, an inaugural conference on the social gospel will be
held at Colgate Rochester Divinity School. This two-day event, co-sponsored
by the Divinity School and Edwin Mellen Press, will feature papers and panel
presentations designed to promote a scholarly understanding of the social
gospel tradition. The conference speaker will be Dr. Max L. Stackhouse,
Professor of Ethics at Princeton Theological Seminary.

Paper and panels will be considered on all facets of the social gospel
tradition. Given Colgate Rochester’s historical and theological connection
to the thought of Walter Rauschenbusch, papers dealing with Rauschenbusch’s
legacy are encouraged. Proposals from graduate students will also be
considered. Selected papers from this conference will be published in a
special volume in the Edwin Mellen Press Series, _Texts and Studies in the
Social Gospel_.

Proposals, including a 250-word abstract and one-page vitae, should be
submitted by January 15, 1998 to

Dr. Christopher Evans
Assistant Professor of American Church History
Colgate Rochester Divinity School
1100 South Goodman Street
Rochester, New York 14620
(716) 271-1320
FAX (716) 271-8013
Email: revsroce@frontier.net

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:40:41 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: New Topic: Asian-American Evangelism that Works???

Dear Grace (and CACers):

I hope that my initial statement of concern about being placed on other
distribution lists won’t open up another period of “slashing and burning” on
this list – so please be patient with me and one another. The only concern I
was addressing was the way my email address was apparently placed on someone
else’s distribution without my knowledge or permission.

Now, with regards to the volume on the CAC list – two suggestions:

1. send you messages only to the cac list w/o “cc”ing other persons on the
list. sometimes duplicate messages are sent.
2. we may want to consider a CAC Digest option, i.e., instead of receiving
all the messages separately, they can be automatically condensed into one
longer digest of messages. this usually means that a participant won’t be in
on discussions instanteneously, but most of us don’t respond immediately
anyway (nor is it always wise to do so!).

Most of all, let’s exercise care about what types of messages we post. Some
messages that I’ve posted in the past really were not relevant to the entire
group, so I’ve consciously tried to reduce the volume I’ve been sending.

All the best and God’s “Grace” to you, always! 🙂
Tim

In a message dated 10/22/97 4:20:02 PM, you wrote:

<>

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:51:27 -0400 (EDT)
To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch Doctors (Healers)

Hey, hey, Gary:

Thanks for opening up a new thread!

This issue that you’ve raised will probably be better answered by a
missiologist (like Grace May), but my take on it is that African Christians
will either: (1) renounce all forms of traditional cures that appear contrary
to Christianity, (2) negotiate a somewhat syncretistic/synthetic arrangement
where Christian [modern?] and traditional practices are both employed, or (3)
fully incorporate these traditional practices into their Christianity (i.e.,
Christianize them).

In reality, I think all three dynamics occur more or less simultaneously
(consciously or not). Most African Christians would probably make clear
distinctions between their faith and traditional “superstitions” but choose
to retain some of their traditional mores. I think of all the Chinese herbal
medicines that I’ve taken (and shared some with you, I recall), yet, I don’t
see myself compromising my faith. Indeed, if everything in our Chinese
culture was renounced, what would replace it? IMHO, there’s no such thing as
a “cultureless Christianity” or a Christian culture untouched by human
experiences. Therefore, we need more than trying to find the “purest”
expression of Christian faith is the gift of discernment. – Tim

In a message dated 10/22/97 2:13:10 PM, gdot@juno.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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:03:29 -0400 (EDT)
To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch Doctors (Healers)2

Apologies for not giving credit to Ronnie’s posting about Christian responses
to Chinese customs – which raised a similar question that Gary raised. I’d
like to hear what others think about how we relate to or interpret Chinese
customs.

Nicole Constable wrote a book studying Hakka Christians in Hong Kong and she
concluded that these Chinese Christians maintained a dual-system approach to
their worldview and religion. By “secularizing” Chinese customs (i.e.,
saying that Chinese New Year is not really a religious holiday), Christians
allowed themselves to participate in Chinese festivities. This permitted
them to retain their Christian convictions without being totally alienated
from Chinese society.

Now, I wonder what happens in North America? Any 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:29:04 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Help needed in NYC’s Chinatown

FYI,
Tim Tseng

———- Forwarded message ———-
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:20:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joshua Henry Atkins
To: hksss@columbia.edu
Subject: Medicine – Chinese

Dear friends,

I am writing regarding an opportunity for anyone interested in
medicine/paramedicine and who speaks a substantial amount of
either Cantonese or Mandarin. The Urban Institute of Family Health
is looking for students with medical interest to assist in their
Clinic on the Lower East Side on Tuesday mornings from 8:30 am to
12:00 pm. The clinic is mainly for lower income or homeless persons
and they have recently seen a very large increase in elderly Chinese
patients. They only have 1 doctor who speaks Chinese and she is only
available 1 day per month. Students interested would help with
translation of basic information, participate in seeing patients, and
have the opportunity to get involved in other areas of the clinic
operation.

If interested please call Elisa Wallman at the Urban Institute for
Family Health at (212) 633-0800 (extension 263).

Please pass this note along to anyone who you think might be
interested.

Thanks,

Josh

— End —

From: “Peter Szto”
To: Cac@emwave.net
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 12:33:08 EST5EDT
Subject: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs

While studying for my doctorate I took a course in folklore. The
focus of my research was “Asian America weddings” and the rituals
that are used in a cross-cultural context. My experience as a wedding
photographer provided a rich data source to visually analyze how various rites
and rituals are carried over from Chinese societies into the American
context. Asian American weddings are unique in how they combine
Western rituals and symbols with Chinese ones. The paper I wrote
used semiotic analysis to decode the meaning of such things as the
significance of white and red dresses for the bride, a church
ceremony versus an outdoor one, and the array of rituals such as the
social function of kissing.

I’m glad that Ronnie is also analyzing this dimension of life. My short
conclusion is that cultural awareness is important to understand the
meaning of all rituals, whether Esat or West, particularly as a
Christian. I don’t see the value of a so-called “Christian wedding” if the couple
themselves are not epistemologically self-conscious of the rites they
employ to celebrate marital union.

Peter Szto

— End —

From: gdot@juno.com
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch Doctors (Healers)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 13:48:22 EDT

On Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:51:27 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:
>I think of all the Chinese herbal medicines that I’ve taken (and shared
some with >you, I recall)

The warts disappeared after that. I’d ask, ‘What do you recommend for
grey hair?’ except for the fear of going bald 🙂

Bro. G

— End —

Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 12:19:14 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: patience and courtesy

Samuel Ling wrote:
>
> May I encourage the moderator of our group to
> contact Cornelius, to kindly suggest that he needs
> to respond to people like Sze Kar and Fenggang
> about their request that they be removed from his
> list?
>
> May I also encourage all of us to be a bit more patient
> with one another? I am not sure that ALL of Cornelius’
> messages are irrelevant to our discussion. Perhaps
> it is the sheer volume of material he is producing,
> which is our concern? (In which case, I have been
> guilty for months, though am submitting much less
> these days!) Let’s respond to the issue of Cornelius’
> VOLUME rather than the CONTENT or VIEWPOINT
> (which I don’t think Sze Kar and Fenggang is doing …
> I just want to raise a little word of caution here).

Dear Sam:

Greetings from Boston! The city is not quite the same since your left
in May 🙂

Not quite sure what the last parenthesis means: the ambiguity of the
antecedent to “which” leaves me hanging. In any cae, I was concerned
with NEITHER the volume NOR the viewpoint, BUT the integrity of CAC
itself. Elsewhere I wrote the following and I here quote in full:

“To me, the far more important issue is the integrity of the mailing
list, hence the integrity of the discussion. People who sign up for CAC
should have the confidence that their names are not passed on to any
other list withouth THEIR prior consent–no matter how valid anyone
might think it is or how easy they could delete or filter out
unsolicited mail. It ultimately concerns the credibility of CAC.”

I do understand that it is sometimes difficult to filter out all SPAM
mail on technical grounds, but at least the principle should be upheld.

Thanks for hearing me hout,
Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 15:57:15 -0500
From: Fenggang Yang
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs
To: Peter Szto , Cac@emwave.net

Hi, Peter,

How are things going? How is your dissertation writing?

I didn’t know you did such a study. Could I have a copy of the paper?
It is a very interesting topic to me. I thought weddings of Chinese
American Christians are all very much Westernized/Americanized. But I
can be wrong. How about funerals? I like to read any writings about
North American Chinese Christian rites (wedding, funeral, birth,
etc.). Please forward any title/paper and advise about sources.

Thank you.

Fenggang
—————————————————————
Fenggang Yang, Ph.D. fyang@uh.edu
Department of Sociology http://www.uh.edu/~fyang
University of Houston 713-743-3943 (FAX)
Houston, TX 77204-3474 713-743-3973 (phone)

— End —

Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 17:03:25 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs

Dear Peter:

Your semiotic paper on AA weddings sounds positively intriguing. Any
chance of posting an abstract of it and sending me the full version?

I would agree with the need for “epistemologically self-conscious”
awareness of the symbols involved. But these are also layered with
meaning through continual use, so that the present, lived experiences of
the AA community, not just their once-pristine Christian or Chinese
meanings, must needs play a part, no? I say this because I just got
married last year and I honestly could care less whether a certain part
of the wedding was purely Christian or Chinese, or which part was
cultural and which cultic. I just did what I knew would include all my
relatives (majority nonchristian) as well as all my Christian friends.
Time for me to understand why it was so enjoyable to all who came
(400+), including my wife and me. Your work would help.

Warmly,
Sze-kar

— End —

From: Rlfong@aol.com
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 19:40:15 -0400 (EDT)
To: fyang@uh.edu (fenggangyang), pszto@legacy.calvin.edu (peterszto),
Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs

Dear Fenggang & Peter Szeto

I too would be interested in a copy.

Ronnie Fong
Fremont, CA

<>
In a message dated 97-10-23 17:09:03 EDT, fyang@uh.edu wrote:
To: pszto@legacy.calvin.edu (Peter Szto), Cac@emwave.net
Could I have a copy of the paper? It is a very interesting topic to me. I
thought weddings of Chinese American Christians are all very much
Westernized/Americanized. But I can be wrong. How about funerals? I like
to read any writings about North American Chinese Christian rites (wedding,
funeral, birth,
etc.). Please forward any title/paper and advise about sources.
<>

— End —

From: JLoFEC@aol.com
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 20:32:27 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: CAC mail vol

All –

actually, i think a digest version would be great! hear, here!

john lo

* * * *
John Lo
Pastor of Youth and Young Adults
First Evangelical Church, Glendale, CA
818.240.5633
JLoFEC@aol.com
* * * *

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:38:03 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 17:03:25 -0400 Sze-kar Wan
writes:
>Your semiotic paper on AA weddings sounds positively intriguing. Any
>chance of posting an abstract of it…Time for me to understand why it
was so enjoyable to all who came…Your work would help.

Dear Sze-kar, Peter, and Friends,

The idea of posting this abstract is an excellent one. For me (and
probably for many others) it would be very useful to have (web) access to
the scholarship/sermons/misc writings/grievances/abstracts/wisdom, etc.
of CAC.
E.g Brother Fenggang wrote an in-depth email a few weeks ago which
captivates the imagination and has an enduring quality to it. He and
other Spiritual scholars in our (electronic) midst should have a place to
post their weighty/weightier ideas–primarily for CAC, of course, but not
un-public. Such a place could turn out to be like that ancient church
door where a pudgy German monk named Luther both challenged and changed
the course of history. And among us there may be another Luther–a
Chinese one…And who knows, Sze-kar, it may be you:)

Respectfully and Warmly,

Gary

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 01:10:21 -0400
Subject: CAC_Mail: Press Release – Surgeon General Nominee
From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang)

Dear CACers:

Are there other CACers who hold similar or different views regarding this
issue?

In HIm,
J. Chang
—————————————————————————
SURGEON GENERAL NOMINEE SUPPORTS LEGALIZED INFANTICIDE

FRC OUTRAGED AT SATCHER’S SUPPORT
FOR PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Dr. David Satcher, President Clinton’s
nominee for United States Surgeon General, has told a Senator
in writing that he supports Partial-Birth Abortion to protect
the “health of the mother.” Dr. Satcher departs from thousands
of his colleagues in the medical profession who emphatically
declare that there is no health reason to puncture the skull
of a partially delivered child and vacuum the child’s brains
out.

“Appointing an advocate of infanticide to the bully pulpit on
our country’s health would send an absolutely tragic message
to our nation and to the world,” Family Research Council
President Gary Bauer said Wednesday. “The position of the
‘nation’s doctor’ should NOT be filled by an individual who
acquiesces in a radical agenda that threatens the life and
health of our nation’s mothers and their unborn children. It
would be a great tragedy if the members of the U.S. Senate,
who voted overwhelmingly to ban legalized infanticide, endorse
as Surgeon General of the United States an individual who
legitimizes the gruesome practice of partial-birth abortion,”
Bauer continued.

“President Clinton’s second veto of the partial-birth abortion
ban demonstrates that he is accepting misleading advice from
those who put the politics of abortion over the principles and
values of our nation,” Bauer declared.

“I call upon Dr. Satcher to explain in medical terms, not
political ones, why his views on partial-birth abortion are
contrary to the testimony of doctors around the nation who say
this horrific and barbaric procedure is never medically
necessary.”

American Medical Association President Daniel H. Johnson, Jr.,
M.D., wrote in the New York Times that “the partial delivery
of a living fetus for the purpose of killing it outside the
womb is ethically offensive to most Americans and physicians.”
In May, the AMA, a 297,000-member group of doctors, joined
PHACT (the Physicians’ Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth), a group of
over 700 doctors nationwide — many of them specialists in
neonatology and obstetrics — in saying this procedure is never
medically necessary.

Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop told the American
Medical News in August of 1996, “… in no way can I twist my
mind to see that the late-term abortion as described — you
know, partial birth, and then destruction of the unborn child
before the head is born — is a medical necessity for the
mother. It certainly can’t be a medical necessity for the
baby.”

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 01:49:11 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship

Dear DJ et al.:

My flu is about out of the door and I can once again try to do some
intellectual lifting.

I agree with your exposition of Mark 12.30f to which my original post
also alludes. Loving God requires all our integrated abilities, among
which counts our “mind.” Rom 12.1-2, where Paul pivots his discussion
from “theology” (chs 1-11) to “ethics” (chs 12-15), is another passage
which emphasizes the centrality of our mental faculty under the renewing
influence of the Spirit.

NIV’s “spiritual” in Rom 12.1 is literally “reasonable” (so KJV, NRSV
note, etc.) or “logikos” in Greek (fr which we get “logic”).
“Spiritual” is not wrong but masks a paradoxical point Paul is making
here. The mind is the center of all intellection and thus all ethical
decisions and actions, but it must be transformed by the Spirit. Then
and only then can our life be a “reasonable” offering or worship. Such
worship is “reasonable,” because it will then be issued from a mind
functioning at its best, under the transformative impulsion of the
Spirit. But since the Spirit stands behind this reasonable life or
worship, the latter is by definition “spiritual.”

Clearly Paul is making an assumption common in his days about the
function of the mind. In so doing he endorses the assumption, but only
to an extent. The mind, while central, must be continually transformed
by the Spirit; it must be christianized (my word, not Paul’s), as it
were. But Paul does NOT bracket the mind out of the equation but rather
reinforces its prime of place.

This is my starting point for integrating scholarship and faith.

Respectfully,
Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 03:03:05 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs

G Ottoson wrote:
> … Such a place could turn out to be like that ancient church
> door where a pudgy German monk named Luther

Dear Gary Son of Otto:

Nice to be compared to Luther, tho I know better: I AM rather pudgy, but
my wife tells me I am no monk! And my so-called theses rhyme with
something unmentionable in polite company. 🙂

Seriously, DJ’s archive of posted messages is a great place. Check it
out.

Warmly,
Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 03:41:26 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship

Dear Tim et al.:

> Koreans, on the other hand, have pounded the doors and invited
> themselves in (witness the Korean dominated Asian American ministry
> programs in several mainline seminaries including Princeton, Garrett-
> Evangelical, Claremont, Drew).
>

Bravo for laying it on the line! Your comparison to the Korean
situation is apt. Our Korean brothers and sisters put us to shame.
Everywhere I go–universities in Israel, Leiden, Tuebingen, Heidelberg,
all over England, and definitely ALL over North American–I meet teams
and teams of dedicated Korean students pursuing PhDs in theology. They
are so many that I was constantly called “Koreaner” in German
supermarkets. This does not count the many, many more (5-10 times
more?) students at the masters level. I have no doubt they will alter
the face of theological education worldwide in the coming decades if
they haven’t already.

The vast majority of Korean students are theologically as conservative
as we are. We both have similar strengths and limitations, similar
cultural resources and histories of discrimination. One main
difference, which CAC touched upon before, is that Korean culture does
not stigmatize the ministerial professtion. Another is what Tim
mentions here: Korean theological educators have a strategy that does
not artificially discriminate against the theological stripe of an
institution, be it “liberal” or “evangelical.” The ultiamte goal seems
to be an elevation and eventual development of their own theology,
institutions, traditions, etc. We Chinese Christians have achieved far,
far less in spite of our head start.

I dont’ want to romanticize the Korean situation, but I as an outsider
can certainly sense far greater cohesion and support their theological
students and educators enjoy than I have ever experienced among my own
people. (Well, that’s an understatement.) If there is any envy on my
part, it is this.

Respectfully,
Sze-kar

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 09:48:04 -0400 (EDT)
To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs

Peter:

I’d appreciate a copy of your paper as well. Just a minor point with regards
to your statement (and I’m included in this critique as well) – it makes too
easy a transition between “asian american” and “chinese american.” Asian
American is a “political” construct created by the American government to put
all the diverse groups from Asia and the Pacific Islands into one racial
designation (this has both positive and negative features). Thus, it should
not be confused with “cultural” characteristics usually identified with
specific national groups like Chinese, Korean, Filippino, etc. In other
words, there’s no such thing as an “Asian American” culture since this
category includes all the various immigrant cultures (this, of course, should
be qualified since if churches like Evergreen Baptist should continue to draw
more diverse Asians into its congregation, there is a possibility of the
formation of a distinctive Asian American culture there; also, there are
other instances of a possible Asian American culture emerging if one pays
attention to all the literature, film, and activist groups). So, it would be
helpful to be specific when talking about something that is Chinese (i.e.,
cultural) vs. something that Asian American (more or less political).

Looking forward to reading your paper! – Tim

In a message dated 10/24/97 12:56:09 AM, pszto@legacy.calvin.edu (Peter Szto)
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:00:18 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Info about PAACCE

Dear CACers:

A number of you have requested information about the Pacific Asian American
and Canadian Christian Education project (PAACCE). This 20 year old
ecumenical group (which Sze-Kar and I have been involved with at some time in
our past) provides Christian Education resources for Asian American
congregations dealing with inter-generational concerns, Asian American ways
of interpreting Scripture, experimenting with worship and liturgical
practices which incorporate Asian American culture/history, resources for
wrestling with anti-Asian racial discrimination, etc. PAACCE publishes
newsletters and bibliographies as well. While they service primarily Asian
Americans in mainline denominations (American Baptist, Reformed Church of
America, Episcopalian, United Methodist, PCUSA, United Church of Canada,
etc.), they welcome evangelicals who are open to working within a
theologically and denominationally diverse framework.

The current Executive Director of PAACCE is Prof. Wenh In Ng. She may be
reached at:

Rev Dr Wenh In Ng
Emmanuel College, Victoria University
Toronto School Of Theology
75 Queens’ Park Crescent
Toronto, ONT M5S 1K7
WK: (416) 585-4549
FAX: (416) 585-4516
EMAIL: gawi.ng@utoronto.ca

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: MChowAACF@aol.com
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 12:36:27 -0400 (EDT)
To: wans@monet.bc.edu, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship

Sze-kar,

My understanding is that the difference between the Chinese view of a pastor
and the Korean view of a pastor is quite different and that by having this
view, the Korean son or daughter has the blessings of their parent to be in
full-time ministry. From what I understand, it’s almost like being a doctor.

On the other hand, I haven’t heard too many parents (except for Bill) who
have encouraged their children to consider ministry as a career. Probably
why the difference of the number of Korean American churches and ministries
and their zeal for ministry is that some of the environmental and family
stigmas aren’t a problem like other Asian Americans.

Melanie

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:46:39 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship

Dear Melanie:

Your observation about Korean-Am churches is right, so far as I can see
as an outsider. Too bad we seem to have few Korean voices on CAC; it
would be interesting to have a conversation on this with an insider who
really knows.

In any case, it may be too easy to blame the Chinese culture for
deemphasizing theological education. Folks on this list represent a
formidable contingent in Chinese-American churches–what with the
talent, education, enthusiasm, spiritual maturity, influence, evident in
every message I read. We have the potentials to address problems like
lack of cohesion and support, anti-intellectualism, community change,
and the rest, if we have the will. Let’s pray for that vision.

En Christo,
Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:21:51 -0500
From: Fenggang Yang
Subject: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism
To: cac@emwave.net

Sze-kar, Melanie, and everyone,

I trust that your experiences with Korean Christians and Chinese
Christians, especially in regard to encouraging children enter the
ministry or seminaries, are real. But why is there such a difference
between Chinese Christians and Korean Christians? Why Chinese
Christian parents are reluctant to encourage their children to enter
the ministry? Without finding the real causes, things may not be
changed.

One thing I have been contemplating /speculating is denominationalism.
In the U.S., most Korean Christians are Presbyterians and some
Methodists. A majority of them join or stay in the mainline
denominations of the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United
Methodist Church, although some churches also formed their own Korean
Presbyterian Church denomination. But anyway, the point is: most
Korean Christians belong to a denomination. However, nearly half of
Chinese churches in the U.S. are nondenominational; many Chinese
Christians are anti-denominationalism.

So what, you may ask. Well, this may be one of the reasons why
Chinese Christians are reluctant to enter the ministry, or rather,
Chinese Christian parents are unwilling to let their loved children
get into the ministry. With insitutional support from a denomination,
young people who want to enter the ministry do not need to worry too
much about how to make a living, because the denomination has pension
plans, and would provide support in case of disputes between a pastor
and his congregants. However, in the independent churches, the pastor
often has no long term pension plan, and in case of conflict, he is
often overthrown and driven out. In other words, to be a pastor in a
Chinese church is more costly/difficult than one in a Korean church
that belongs to a denomination. Similarly, Chinese churches often
demand multilingual and multicultural capability of the pastor,
whereas homogeneous Korean churches do not have such necessity.

While denominationalism may be against Christian universalism, but
anti-denominationalism may also mean sectarianism.

Agree? disagree? Again, this is just my speculation, not based on
sound empirical research or biblical interpretation. I can be wrong
and I’m ready to change my opinions.

Fenggang
—————————————————————
Fenggang Yang, Ph.D. fyang@uh.edu
Department of Sociology http://www.uh.edu/~fyang
University of Houston 713-743-3943 (FAX)
Houston, TX 77204-3474 713-743-3973 (phone)

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 16:38:06 -0500
From: Fenggang Yang
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs
To: Peter Szto , Cac@emwave.net

Peter and everyone,

Because several people have shown interest in your paper, I feel a
burden to say this: I want to pay you the cost of reproduction and
mailing, and will definately accredit your work in case I cite, quote,
or otherwise use it. Meanwhile, won’t you enjoy the popularity of
your topic? 🙂 We really should have more folklore studies of
Chinese American Christian practices.

Also, if an electronic copy is convenient, please simply “attach” the
file of the paper to an email to me. That is the simplist to do, I
guess.

Thank you.

Fenggang

— End —

From: Rlfong@aol.com
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
To: fyang@uh.edu, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism

It’d be my limited observation that denominationalism alone is insufficient
as a root causation for the difference in encouraging people to enter the
ministry. While it’d might be true the Korean-American Church is more
affliated with denominationism, it is also my impression ( don’t flame me )
that the Korean American experience is more full of schism and frequent
church splitting resulting in smaller churches than the Chinese American
church; with an even more tuffer pastoral experience.

Is not the difference more atune to the differences in the amount of
immigration from the homecountry to the USA?

Ronnie Fong
Fremont CA who really should be doing work instead of replying to this thread
in the SF Bay Area

In a message dated 97-10-24 17:37:14 EDT, fenggang wrote:

<>

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:32:57 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism

Fenggang’s line of inquiry, focusing on Korean denominationalism versus
Chinese sectarianism, holds a lot of promise. I can verify it, albeit
anecdotally, with my own experience.

In 1982 after I left my home church, an independent local church, I
shopped for a denomination. I had three important criteria (in no
particular order): support (not financial, just general encouragement)
for my scholarly pursuit, one that is strong in Asia (since I was
planning to teach there), and has a Chinese congregation in the Boston
area where I lived. The first two were compIetely lacking in my home
church and were in fact responsible for much of the tension. I ended up
with the Episcopal Church, because it was (still is) strong in the first
2 areas and a new Chinese congregation was opening up in Boston. I have
been a part of that congregation ever since.

My immediate experience in the Episcopal Church was tremendous
institutional support. My scholarly pursuit was never questioned but
simply assumed. I was able almost immediately to gain access to all
sorts of national programs, all of which received me with open arms. I
participated in PAACE (see Tim’s post) as a representative of the Epis
Church; I also visited Chinese and Hong Kong seminaries and attended
Chinese theological conferences under its auspices. It and most every
mainline denomination still look for ways to enhance the Asian presence
which hitherto is predominatnly Korean; the Chinese lag far, far
behind. On the other hand, the result of becoming a mainliner is that
I’ve been virtually cut off from the majority of Chinese churches. It
is a pity, for mainline denominations have a wealth of resources, a
national and international infrastructure, the willingness to be
supportive of Asian and Chinese causes. If only Chinese Christians
weren’t so suspicious of them, there is a great deal we could do.

Fenggang’s observation probably doesn’t ultimately solve the question
why theological education has such low standing in Chinese churches, for
it merely pushes the question back one step: Why do Chinese churches
eschew mainline denominations and Korean churches don’t? That question
will take us way too far afield. But Fenggang has given us a solid
sociological context in which to understand the differences between
Korean and Chinese Christians.

En Christo,
Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:48:53 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism

Rlfong@aol.com wrote:
>
> … the Korean American experience is more full of schism and frequent
> church splitting resulting in smaller churches than the Chinese American
> church; with an even more tuffer pastoral experience.

Sadly, however, schism is a way of the Christian church life. From the
days of Paul’s Corinth to the Church Fathers to the split with the
Eastern Church to the Reformation to the rise of denominations to North
Am Chinese churches, it has been an unbroken string of schisms. Maybe
I’ve become jaded, but I’ve come to accept schism as a way of life. 😦

It seems to me that the real test is how we deal with differences once
we have them. Will an oligarchy deal with them in a hush-hush manner
behind closed doors? Or is there a clearly worked out, time-tested
procedure to adjudicate between the warring parties?

> Is not the difference more atune to the differences in the amount of
> immigration from the homecountry to the USA?

I think there is some truth to this. Does anyone have hard statistics
comparing Korean and Chinese immigration patterns in the last 25 yrs? I
suspect (nothing more than that) there have been more ethnic Chinese
coming into the country than Koreans, but I could be wrong.

Warmly,
Sze-kar (who should be resting instead)

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible?
From: jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:14:59 EDT

I want to throw out a question for all Asian American church plants.

How valid is it to start future “Asian American” churches if there isn’t
an strong identifiable “Asian American” culture in the US?

Dr. Tim Tseng’s comments are insightful and may have ramifications for
future Asian American ministries. He writes: “Asian American” is a
“political” construct created by the American government to put all the
diverse groups from Asia and the Pacific Islands into one racial
designation (this has both positive and negative features). Thus, it
should
not be confused with “cultural” characteristics usually identified with
specific national groups like Chinese, Korean, Filippino, etc. In other
words, there’s no such thing as an “Asian American” culture since this
category includes all the various immigrant cultures (this, of course,
should
be qualified since if churches like Evergreen Baptist should continue to
draw
more diverse Asians into its congregation, there is a possibility of the
formation of a distinctive Asian American culture there; also, there are
other instances of a possible Asian American culture emerging if one pays
attention to all the literature, film, and activist groups)”

Here are my thoughts: There is an identifiable White-Anglo culture.
There is an identifiable Chinese culture. There is an identifiable
Korean culture. What is an “Asian American” culture? “Asian American”
seems to be a sub-culture of two or more dominant cultures.
If that is the case, isn’t it risky to plant an exclusively “Asian
American” church? Is it worth it? Should it be attempted at all,
especially if that church plant has no denominational or mother church
support?

Any feedback? Jon

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Korean, Chinese
From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 03:42:44 EDT

To the pastors in CAC;

The emphasis on Biblical education can start at the churches. The church
I was at used to have a senior (high school) retreat to help prepare them
for college and to especially challenge them to consider Bible college to
be grounded in their faith.

This is not a popular focus since the concern is to get into a career to
earn a living, to become successful and 3 to 4 years in a Bible college
is a waste of time. Are our values conforming to the world?

This is not the churches’ focus because it has not been a concern nor
goal of the churches. Are the Korean churches (not just parents and
friends) giving more values to this?

Ben

PS The first senior class we took on a retreat had seven. Five went to
Bible college.

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Surgeon General
From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 03:42:44 EDT

Hi J. Chang:

I would be very grieved if David Satcher is approved as the surgeon
general.
Thanks for raising the issue.

In Him,
Ben

— End —

Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 09:53:41 -0500
To: acmi-network@xc.org, cac@bccn.org
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: CAC_Mail: Book offer — Essays by Christian PRC’s

BOOK OFFER — NEW BOOK OF
ESSAYS BY CHRISTIAN PRC’S

SOUL SEARCHING has just been published by China Horizon.
This is the first volume in the “Horizon Series.” SOUL SEARCHING
contains ten essays by mainland Chinese intellectuals (PRC’s)
living in the west, on the relationship betwee the Christian faith
and society, art, Chinese culture, and the future development of
Chinese institutions. These are thoughtful pieces which come from
the depths of their minds and souls. I wrote an introductory
chapter tracing the historical context to help the reader understand
the tremendous significance of PRC’s and PRC ministry today.

China Horizon is offering this volume free to any international
student ministry worker or Asian American church leader.
Please request your copy BY (SNAIL)MAIL to:
China Horizon, POBox 40399, Pasadena, CA 91114.
Just give your name, address, and with whom/where you serve. We will
send your copy by return mail.

Keep in mind the costs of production of this book. Donations of
any amount are appreciated, but are NOT required in order to
receive your book. Ask for it by title: SOUL SEARCHING.
(The cost for producing this book is stated on the copyright page
of the book.)

Samuel Ling, General Director
China Horizon
PO Box 40399, Pasadena, CA 91114
Office located at:
1605 E. Elizabeth, Pasadena, CA 91105
(626) 296-7615 FAX (626) 296-7616

— End —

Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 12:41:27 -0500
To: cac@bccn.org
From: Gregory Jao
Subject: CAC_Mail: Koreans, denominationalism, etc.

While denominational affiliations may play a part in the Korean reverence
for the pastorate, I think we need to look at Korean church history as well.
According to Peter Cha, seminary was one of the few options available to
Koreans desiring graduate/professional training during the Japanese
occupation. Most other colleges and graduate schools were closed. As a
result, the best and brightest students ended up going to seminary. In
effect, the pastorate became the only “prestige” career available to
families who valued education. Peter suggests that the Korean reverence and
respect for the pastorate stems (in Korean and among immigrant churches)
from this socio-historical context.

(Incidentally I think this history also explains, in part, why pastors more
thoroughly dominate the life and thought of their churches than many Chinese
pastors do. Ambitious people had to go somewhere. And it may explain the
fuller expression of the “gift of schism” among our Korean cousins. Nearly
every Korean student I’ve met has been through at least one (if not two)
church splits. While schism is part and parcel of our falled church life, I
think the Koreans exerience it more often.)

Anecdotally, we’re finding increasing resistence to the pastorate as a
valued career option for second generation kids on campus. The pastorate
may have been a favored career for older 2d generation folk (i.e., around
the later twenties and above), but I’m not seeing the same excitement
for/among the younger folk. The esteem for the pastorate is dropping–both
among the first generation and the second.

Greg Jao

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 12:02:13 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible?
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Sat, 25 Oct 1997 02:14:59 EDT jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro) writes:
>I want to throw out a question for all Asian American church plants…
>[Dr.Tseng:] “Asian American” is a “political” construct created by the
American >government…
>Any feedback? Jon

Jon, Friends, One crucial point here, feel free to disagree, is that the
government is part of the ‘system’. (Thinking about Jonah once again) At
this point of history our government _per se_ is ‘systematized’. It is
like a poor, barefoot, and pregnant mistress at the beck and call of
corporations.

E.g. When it comes to immigration, the corporate leaders are frantic for
cheap labor here. (This hurts the laborers already in place, who want
full-time jobs w/benefits, etc.) When it comes to showing commensurate
appreciation, i.e. cultural/economic acceptance (forget ‘inclusion’) of
new immigrant labor, corporations (inc their old labor, unions) say to
the gov’t (mistress), in effect, ‘go have an abortion’, don’t bother ‘me
with additional housekeeping matters’. What can she do? She is so far ‘in
bed’ and in debt (by design, I think) that the corporations OWN her.

The key cultural idea in this scenario is that America is a ‘corporation
culture’ because it is ‘corporation’s culture’. ‘Government of, by, and
for (ALL) the people’ is being dismantled.

IMHO, This corp.culture is organized like a big department store where
‘Asian American’ (and for that matter, ‘Swedish American’) is not a
people. AA in particular now is an unreal place, a ‘dept.’ which exists
to enable (white) negotiators to avoid the nomenclature like
‘miscellaneous’ or ‘other workers’; i.e., to avoid the appearance of
(immigrant) worker abuse which, in reality, they are lying about.

Then, when, e.g., the Chinese Prime Minister comes to visit ‘the store’,
to sing, dance, and shop, these corporate leaders can tell him there is a
cool ‘place’ for all Asian ‘people’ here. ‘Wanna see it?’ The prime
minister may say, ‘Well, I’d actually like to shop in the Chinese
department’. ‘OK,then, let’s go there’–and, there, he can buy, e.g. a
beautiful silk tie made (by prisoners?) in China or an Elvis CD–all the
same stuff. He would (and will!) be doing exactly what corporate culture
wants him (and all 1.6 billion Chinese people) to do–on NBC–shop at the
American store…

Except, that what he is also feeling (a contempt, perhaps, which bodes of
major war someday) is the pressure that the whole of China (partic it’s
booming economy) may/will be annexed to (systematically swallowed by)
‘the store’.

Enough on this (speculation? You can decide), but on one other, not
unrelated theme, Sze-kar’s idea that the Reformation is of a piece with
the (Church) history of schism:

Though not a scholar so I could offer a paper to mail or transmit, I
still wonder in public (like you have done, thanks, Brother Jon) whether
the genius of the Reformation lies in the fact that fractured/fragmented
Euro-culture/cultures United.

Isn’t ‘unity’ at the crux of the current issue facing yourselves, Jon,
and your (our:) leaders like Tim, Fenggang, Sze-kar, Grace, Sam, Garrick,
Stephen, et. al…

I wonder if there was a common enemy which Luther and his friends figured
out how (to get people) to see (correctly)?

What an accomplishment, (if) they all ‘saw’ something clearly..and
acted…Yes, the Church split, but that was not the goal–to split…

Years later, when the common enemy was no longer common or in correct
focus, the Reformation churches (re-)splintered back to a new form of the
pre-Reformation condition…

Is this the (current) condition, perhaps, in which Germans hate French,
Swedes mock the Norwegians and English, etc. (while Euro-economy
consolidates/universalizes)..and perhaps in which (denominational)
Koreans fight (anti-denominational) Chinese, vice versa…(while
corporate Amerca instigates, expands)?

Again, this would be the condition in which OUR common enemy is out of
focus.

Perhaps Brother Ben touch on it today when he asked ‘Are our values
conforming to the world?’ I might add this dimension: Are WE presently
departmentalized and further departmentalizing OURSELVES into oblivion?
Can we clearly see that WE (each other) are not the real enemy?

Bro. G

— End —

Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 18:29:03 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: MChowAACF@aol.com
CC: wans@monet.bc.edu, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Faith and Scholarship

my k-a christian friends now tell me that that parental attitude has
changed to be more like the chinese, i.e., “don’t become a pastor. too
many hours, not enough pay.”

ken fong

— End —

Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 18:47:07 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: Fenggang Yang
CC: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Koreans, Chinese, and denominationalism

Fenggang,

I find your theory quite persuasive. I too have observed that our KA
brethren are much more comfy in mainline denom’s and in seminaries of
all stripes. Not so for our CA brethren, who seem to have a penchant
for independence. just validating your theory.

ken fong

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 00:30:21 -0400
Subject: CAC_Mail: Religious Freedom in Public Schools
From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang)

Dear CACers:

FYI. For all concerned students and parents of students:

In Him,
J. Chang
—————————————————————————
RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS:
IS YOUR SCHOOL STILL IN THE DARK?

“It appears that some school officials, teachers and parents
have assumed that religious expression of any type is either
inappropriate, or forbidden altogether, in public schools,”
President Bill Clinton accurately observed in a July 12,
1995 memo to the U.S. Secretary of Education. “As our
courts have reaffirmed, however, nothing in the First
Amendment converts our public schools into religion-free
zones, or requires all religious expression to be left
behind at the schoolhouse door.”

The president’s memo went on to elaborate on religious
freedoms in public schools, as listed below. This directive
was mailed to school districts across the country, yet a
climate of intimidation toward religion still pervades many
public school campuses. Familiarize yourself and your
public school officials with the guidelines to make sure
public schools do not become “religion-free zones”:

Student prayer and religious discussion: Student religious
expression is allowable in school settings to the extent
that other types of expression are permissible. Students
may read their Bibles and pray before meals or tests to the
same extent they may engage in comparable non-disruptive
activities. In informal settings such as hallways and
cafeterias, students may pray together, read their Bibles,
discuss religious issues, and even try to persuade their
peers of their religious beliefs as they would their
political views.

Please see for an expanded summary of the
following topics:

Graduation prayer and baccalaureates:
Official neutrality regarding religious activity:
Teaching about religion:
Student assignments:
Distribution of religious literature:
Religious excusals:
Released time:
Teaching values:
Student dress:
The Equal Access Act:

Schools receiving federal funds must comply with the Equal
Access Act, which allows student religious groups the same
access to public school facilities as is afforded to other
non-curriculum-related student groups.

ACTION: Does your public school respect the rights of
religious students? If not, tell school officials about
these guidelines on religious freedom in public schools.
Family Research Council is interested in the status of
religious freedom in public schools. If someone you know
has experienced religious discrimination in a public school,
please contact Family Research Council by mail, fax, or
e-mail. Please include the designation “RE: Religious
Freedom in Public Schools.”

——— End forwarded message ———-

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 01:30:23 -0400
Subject: CAC_Mail: Ed Facts -From Family Research Council- 10/24/97
From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang)

Dear CACers:

Since the topic of cultural attitudes towards Christian
education/Bible school/college has come up, this may
be especially relevant for parents with school-aged
children. This deals with a very practical aspect of it:
the financial side. Could the Body of Christ/Christian
parents/children benefit from such legislation? Perhaps
eventually, and indirectly, helping to change such attitudinal
barriers by lowering some of the upfront monetary
educational expenses facing Christian parents today?

In Him,
J. Chang
————————————————————–

HOUSE VOTES TO PASS A+ EDUCATION ACCOUNTS

The House voted Oct. 23 (230-198) to pass the A+ Education
Savings Accounts bill. The House defeated a substitute
amendment offered by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) to give $4
billion to school construction instead of the Education
Accounts. The Senate plans to vote on the House bill in the
next week or two. Sen. Paul Coverdell (R-Ga.), sponsor of the
original “Coverdell Amendment” on education accounts, is
working to defeat an anticipated filibuster in opposition to
the bill.

TALKING POINTS:

* Any relative or business could contribute up to $2,500 in
annual contributions per child.
* Accounts would accrue tax-free interest, so the first
dollars are already taxed.
* Money could be used for ANY school — public, private,
parochial or home school.
* The Congressional Joint Tax Committee estimates that 75
percent of the accounts will be used for public school
children.
* The bill expands the allowable use of education savings
accounts, or education IRAs, beyond college provisions that
were signed into law by President Clinton.
* Money could be used for virtually any education-related
expense, whether it be tutoring fees, school uniform costs,
or children with special needs.

ACTION: Please contact these SENATE targets: *Joseph Biden
(D-Del.), Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), John Chafee (R-R.I.), Susan
Collins (R-Maine), *Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), James Jeffords
(R-Vt.), *Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Paul
Sarbanes (D-Md.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). * indicates a
previous vote in support of the Coverdell Education Accounts.
Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

SCHOLARSHIPS TO “H.E.L.P.” LOW-INCOME STUDENTS

Representatives Jim Talent (R-Mo.), J.C. Watts (R-Okla.),
Floyd Flake (D-N.Y.), and Frank Riggs (R-Calif.) introduced
legislation titled the H.E.L.P. Scholarship Act geared toward
Helping Empower Low-Income Parents. This legislation provides
for scholarships for students whose families are at or below
185 percent of the poverty rate. The funds could be used to
cover the cost of tuition at any public, private, or religious
school located in an impoverished neighborhood. This provision
would be implemented by allowing the use of existing federal
funds in Title VI to provide for the scholarships. The House
anticipates a floor vote during the week of Oct. 27.

— End —

To: jtc10@juno.com
Cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Press Release – Surgeon General Nominee
From: drwong1@juno.com (Richard L Wong)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:42:28 EST

While I share your concerns about Dr. Satcher’s views, I’m also a little
concerned about the views of another individual going through the Senate
confirmation process, i.e. Bill Lann Lee, President Clinton’s nominee to
serve as the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. While some
Asian-Americans support his nomination, others have spoken out in
opposition. I guess the Asian-American community isn’t as unified as the
outside world makes it out to be!

Richard Wong
Arlington, VA

On Fri, 24 Oct 1997 01:10:21 -0400 jtc10@juno.com (J Chang) writes:
>Are there other CACers who hold similar or different views regarding
>this issue?

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
Organization: Ambassador Bible Church
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:38:10 -0500
Subject: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible?

——- Forwarded Message Follows ——-
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 01:01:10 -0500
From: Peter Huang
To: Jonathan c Ro
Cc: CAC

i want to address some of the issues that Jonathan mentioned in his last
email about Asian American culture. My name is Peter Huang and I’m on
staff at Evergreen Baptist Church as the Ministry Associate of Small Groups
Ministries. I have been a web “lurker” (someone who reads but not comments –
I heard this term from Jeanette Yip via Ken Fong) of CAC for quite some time –
since it’s beginning, I believe. Anyway, I haven’t kept up with the past 50
or so messages so if I’ve missed some discussion from recent exchanges, please
do excuse me.

The question at hand is whether an Asian American culture exists. I
believe it does, although it may be difficult to quantify it for now.
Whether or not it can be defined independently of Chinese, Philippino,
Korean, Japanese or Vietnamese American culture, I can’t say for sure right
now. But one thing I do know for sure – as Asians become more acculturated –
inherently due to being here for many generations, there is a loss of original
ethnic culture and the acquisition of the mainstream culture. Many 3rd or 4th
generation Asians at our church do not speak any or much Chinese or Japanese.
But this does not also mean that they are apple-pie Americans either. There
is an identity that they assume as being part of a larger identity of looking
like other Asians and perhaps sharing some residual Confucian and other Asian
values. Part of what they share is also a common heritage of being different,
being discriminated against, being somewhat marginal, being unable to
completely assimilate as hard as they might try. I’m sure there’s more. Even
as I am having difficulty articulating what an Asian American culture looks
like, I know for sure that with demographic trends, there is and WILL be an
Asian American culture distinct from other ethnic-Asian-specific cultures.
Perhaps it is also more apparent in Southern Cal. Other people wanna jump in
and help me identify some specifics?

With certain Asian ethnicities whose numbers are continuing to grow due to
immigration, there will always be the first generation to uphold the Chinese
or Korean or Philippino or Asian Indian culture. However, even within these
groups, the new generations are growing up or have grown up with other Asian
Americans. Their perception of being Asian and being Asian American is very
different from the first generation who still have memories and understandings
of being the majority culture and having loyalties towards their traditions.
Being Asian American may mean something very different to the 2nd, 3rd, and
4th generations. In our post-modern college environment, Asian American
college students are finding Asian Americans from other ethnicities to be
their best friends, future spouses, fraternity brothers, sorority sisters,
etc. Although I am still trying to articulate what exactly this culture is,
the gist of it is that there is a culture that is a blend of whatever the
participants bring to contribute. Perhaps, this is why it’s difficult to
describe it. Evergreen happens to be primarily Japanese and Chinese American;
but we are also seeing our Asian Americanness change as new people have
contributed to who we are. I am sure that if Evergreen had been Chinese and
Philippino American, our Asian American culture would look different too.

Asian American culture is/will be reflected in who our children will be
(or already are). Asian Americans have a high incidence of marrying other
Asian Americans (other ethnicity). What then will be the culture of the
children of interethnic (vs. interracial) marriages? Some would say that they
have the best of both worlds. But is that really true? Yes to a certain
extent. But with the difficulty already of each person maintaining the
culture that they bring into a marriage, it is even more difficult for the
children to maintain the best of both worlds. The likelihood of the parents
as well as the children maintaining both cultures is low. The easier thing to
do may be to synthesize their own culture with people who are like them –
other Asian Americans who are dealing with similar issues.

One last note: recently a bunch of us went to see the movie “My America –
Honk if You Love Buddha,” a documentary on the lives of Asian Americans
produced by Rene Tashima-Pena (a great film – probably on its way to PBS –
keep your eye out for it). I was particularly fascinated by the
producer/narrator’s concluding words – that what she ultimately realized in
her attempt to discover her identity as an Asian American by traveling
throughout America to find stories of Asian Americans, was that she had
realized that she in fact had grown up not in America but in Asian America.
Quite fascinating, I thought. What do you think?

P.S. What is the Anglo-American culture?

— End —

From: MChowAACF@aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:02:36 -0500 (EST)
To: djchuang@cheerful.com, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible?

Thanks Peter…for those of you who don’t know…Peter and I have been
working together a lot at Evergreen…Peter is the staffer and I’m the lay
person responsible for small group and discipleship ministries at Evergreen,
though I’m in full-time ministry (well, 3/4 time being a new mom and all) in
the parachurch arena in campus ministry.

Anyways, as there continues to be more interAsian marriages among the latter
generations of Asians in America, there will be the product of those
marriages, those like me (3/4 Chinese, 1/4 Japanese American) that for lack
of having to continually identify my Asian ethnicity, I found it easier,
especially for my age grouping to call myself an Asian American. Believe it
or not , being at Evergreen, is the first time in my life that I have one
less step to explain (or defend – yes there has been some negativism toward
my mixed ancestry in past – but praise God I have overcome my frustration)
regarding my identity.

Being a new mom, I haven’t seen a movie in a theater so I look forward to
your recommendation…but yes, that does ring true that there is for Asian
Americans a shelteredness to our identity mixing with others…a step in the
forward direction for racial reconciliation within the Asian arena, and then
the next step to the other cultures?

Melanie Mar Chow

— End —

Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:06:40 -0800
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: MChowAACF@aol.com
CC: djchuang@cheerful.com, owner-cac@emwave.net, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American Church Planting Possible?

Just as the Chinese, Pilipino, Japanese and Korean sugar cane laborers
in old Hawaii learned to appreciate one another’s lunches–and thereby
invented the now legendary “plate lunch” or “mixed plate”–I believe
there is tremendous potential for the Spirit to create a ‘new plate
lunch’ these days, esp. as more of our more progressive mixed AsiAm
churches move towards Multi-ethnicity. Of course, depending on the
actual makeup of the congregation and surrounding communities plus the
geographical location, each ‘plate lunch’ will have a distinctive flavor
and mix.

Evergreen-LA, for example, with its unusual mix of Chinese, Japanese,
Korean, Vietnamese, Pilipino, Polynesian, Portugese, Indonesian, Thai,
Burmese, Mexican, Anglo, East Indian, African American and biracial will
potentially produce a very unique plate lunch. however, we’re just
beginning to appreciate that this ‘plate lunch’ will not come together
all on its own. It will need wise and representative guidance. We may
form a multicultural council to oversee this emergence. In an
increasingly balkanized society, we believe that the church more than
ever before needs to be a demonstration of the unifying power of Jesus.
Interestingly enough, many of the Americanized AsiAms that we’ve
‘targeted’ for many years are apparently drawn to this kind of
movement. So for those who feel that this evolutionary step means
abandoning the evangelization of AAAs, I say “not necessarily; might be
just the opposite.” ’nuff said.

time for bed.

ken fong
sr. pastor
Evergreen Bapt. of LA
Rosemead, CA

— End —

Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:13:19 -0800
From: ohbrudder
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: WORD AND WORKS

Ken Fong wrote:
> but when confronted with unmistakable brethren who had
> that gift, I felt compelled to alter my theology rather than write off
> these brethren as not truly Christian bc their power source wasn’t the
> Spirit.

appears to be a humble person with a teachable spirit . . .
God can use more of such character.

bill leong

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 11:15:45 -0500 (EST)
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: Press Release – Surgeon General Nominee

Richard:

Could you elaborate on your point here re: Bill Lann Lee? I’ve not followed
this story very closely, but in general, I’ve had positive feelings about
Lee’s appointment. Since the Reagan “revolution” started the current
“retreat” from Civil Rights (the burden of proof in demonstrating racial or
other forms of discrimination has shifted away from corporations and
institutions – i.e., plaintiffs now have to shoulder most of it; furthermore,
disparate impact no longer holds sway – which means that plaintiffs now have
to prove that an institution “intended” to discriminate – easier said than
done), it has become more and more difficult to protect those discriminated
against. So, one with Lee’s background and training may help all who are
discriminated against.

If you are concerned about his views regarding gays/lesbians, abortion, etc.
(which I confess ignorance), then elaborate on that.

I’ve appreciated receiving Family Research Council materials, but I want to
hear more reasons why these perspectives are Christian or biblical. Why are
those who are political conservatives on this list so quiet about sharing
their reasons for supporting such positions?

Incidently, I watched a “Firing Line” debate on Friday in which William
Buckley skewered Gary Bauer on the China trade question. I’m no fan of
Buckley, but what this debate demonstrated was how some conservatives are so
eager to get into a “witch-hunt” with regards to China. Suddenly, China was
portrayed as an enemy to American values and a real threat to American
virtue. And, brothers and sisters, if we stand with those who are willing to
demonize China (even if we dislike China’s human rights violations and
persecution of Christians), we may unlease (if we haven’t already) a
witch-hunt against Asian Americans. [I wonder what that new Richard Gere
movie is all about?]

Tim

In a message dated 10/27/97 1:57:58 AM, drwong1@juno.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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Asian American church planting possible? The wrong question.
From: jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 19:17:18 EST

Thanks Peter, Ken, Melanie for your contributions.
I apologize for posing a question that went in a direction that I
hadn’t intended on going. I also agree with you that an Asian American
culture or “subculture” does exists and it is definitely growing,
especially in Cal. In fact, I would also consider myself “Asian
American.” I’m half Korean, half Chinese. I was born in America and
raised in Taiwan as a missionary kid. My father is a Korean (Born in
Korea, educated in the US). My mother is an ABC (5th generation from
Hawaii). The term “Chinese/Korean American” is too long for me. So I’d
rather be called “Asian American.” I guess I was intrigued by Dr. Tseng’s
statement about how the term ‘Asian American’ was created. He said the
term “was a ‘political’ construct created by the American government to
put all the diverse groups from Asia and the Pacific Islands into one
racial.”
I also applaud the efforts of Evergreen and other churches who
are actively reaching unchurched Asian Americans. I think more churches
like them are needed. The question I’m more interested in is how are we
going to plant these churches so that they will prevail.
What I’m asking more specifically is this: how realistic it is to
start future AA church plants without denominational or a mother church
support if the target group is not a dominant culture such as American,
Korean, Chinese, but a “sub-culture” of several dominant cultures?
And even more importantly, how then should these churches be
started?
Would it be better to start with AAs and move toward multi-cultural or to
start with a multi-cultural church reflecting its diverse community? Or
maybe both are needed.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of either way? What kind of
unchurched AAs would be more attracted to an AA church? What kind of AAs
would be more attracted to a community church?

Your feedback…

Jon

— End —

Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:23:18 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Women and Ministry

Dear CACers:

I wrote a long discussion on 1 Cor 11.2-16 (10K); here is a synopsis of
my arguments. Write me if you are interested in the long version.

Assumption: The Bible is not like a computer manual. It’s not enough to
say the Bible is the word of God; we must also ask IN WHAT SENSE?

(a) The issue confronting Paul here is proper attires…. Whatever we
think of the meaning of “head” in this passage, we must realize that it
is used to buttress a cultural practice which we no longer hold and
which is NOT essential to AA spirituality. But I wholeheartedly embrace
Paul’s underlying concern in this passage, which is not to misuse our
freedom so as to cause others to stumble. One should consider giving up
inappropriate dress if it scandalizes others. At work is Paul’s
body-principle (1 Cor 12-14).

(b) 11.3-10: Paul does seem to establish a hierarchy:
God-Christ-husband-wife. No matter what one thinks of _kephale_, Paul
is very clear that God is the head of Christ, Christ is head of
Adam/man, man/husband is the head of woman/wife (v. 3)….

(c) 11.11-12: As soon he has established this hierarchy, however, Paul
immediately follows with an important qualifier in vv. 11-12. The
gender-hierarchy is based on creation. But “in the Lord” (=“in
Christ”), “neither is man without woman nor is woman without man” (v.
11)…. What this amounts to is a massive exception… or, better, a
new situation made possible “in the Lord.”

(d) Points (b) and (c) together give us a rather confused Paul. Quite
prepared to uphold the new gender-egalitarianism found in the Lord, Paul
is nevertheless aware of the problems it creates. Freedom in the Lord
evidently had caused the Corinthian women to flout the Corinthian
headdress customs (whatever they be), and the results of reversing what
to the Corinthians were gender-specific attires challenged Paul’s
cultural sensibilities. I propose that Paul answers the challenge in
kind–using tools available to him from culture, specifically the Jewish
culture and popular Stoicism. All the while, however, such cultural
argumentation is NEVER intended to replace gender-egalitarianism.

(e) The Stoic argument: The argument from “nature” in vv. 14-15… comes
from popular Stoicism and is one most of us do not buy…. One can
legitimately reject Paul’s actual argument here–even as one embraces
his underlying concern.

(f) The Jewish argument: The whole argument from Jewish scripture in
vv. 4-10 is also a cultural argument. It is parallel in structure to
the Stoic argument. It is also called “tradition” in v. 2. (discussion
of lexical data follows.)

(g) Conclusion: Paul struggles between upholding gender-egalitarianism
and maintaining gender distinction. As a product of 1st-cent
patri-archalism Paul uses the commonly held assumption that man is the
head of the woman to settle a question of clothing custom. As soon as
he does, however, he runs up against gender-egalitarianism which defines
our new existence as a body in the Lord. At the end, he thinks that
equality in status should not blur the distinction between men and
women. My own appropriation? Though endorsr Paul’s concern with gender
distinction, I also question the arguments he uses to advance his point.

I don’t want to trigger another round of unsubscription. More on my
continual exploration later if there’s still interest.

Respectfully en Christo,
Sze-kar

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 19:58:09 -0500
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: China Trade Debate
From: jtc10@juno.com (J Chang)

Dear Tim:

I appreciate your well-articulated views on many of the issues you touch
upon.
God has certainly gifted you with the ability to write well.

I also had the opportunity to watch the “Firing Line” debates regarding
trade with China. Before I listened to the program, I didn’t have strong
views
either way. However, after hearing the arguments on both sides, I came
away leaning towards the position of restricting trade with China.

Some of the arguments I heard for maintaining trade with China:

1) Help to keep the channels of communication open through diplomatic
exchange,
dialogue, trade, student exchanges, scientific cooperation, etc. and
thereby help China to see the positives of democracy, religious freedom,
etc.

2) China is improving its human rights record, allowing for people in
some
villages the freedom to vote.

3) China is THE major economic superpower in the region. Any US trade
restrictions simply won’t work. China will just continue its trade with
other
countries.

4) We can’t isolate China in this modern era; other countries are not
following the footsteps of the US & fill in the vacuum.

5) Why restrict China’s trade only; why not also other countries with
similar
human rights abuses like Saudi Arabia/Sudan? And if not these other
countries
then we shouldn’t limit China’s trade.

6) Having a unilateral US trade restriction will only hurt the US
economic interests
and not China.

7) China has a long history of many thousands of years; any attempts to
improve
or change China will take time; we must be patient.

8) Any US trade restrictions will only be symbolic in nature and will
not be of much
substantive significance.

9) We are demonizing China on a “witch-hunt” and Asian-Americans may
suffer further
discrimination. [reason given via email]

Some of the counter-arguments I heard in favor of limiting trade:

1) We’ve already been regularly granting China MFN trade status and
continuing
all types of trading, diplomatic exchanges, etc. with little or no
improvement in
human rights abuses.

2) Human rights abuses have worsened since the 1989 Tianmen massacre.
Student democracy protesters have either been executed, jailed, or
exiled. The
People’s Liberation Army (PLA) runs slave labor camps which exports its
products
to the US. Christian pastors and believers are being persecuted for
their religious
faith, going to jail, being executed/tortured, losing work/community
privileges, etc.
Women who are pregnant with more than one child are forced to undergo
abortions
and/or sterilizations. A 1996 State Dept. report on religious
persecution documented
flagrant human rights abuses by the Chinese government, naming China as
among
one of the worse in the world.

3) We cannot elevate money above freedom, commerce above human rights,
or
the rule of trade above the law of justice. There must be a linkage of
human rights
progress with trade privileges. America was built on the foundation of
religious
values and freedoms.

4) US receives about 30% of China’s exports, not an insignificant
amount. Other
countries may fill in part or all of the trade vacuum but the symbolism
is just as
substantive. The US must exert its international leadership where it
can, even if
no follows in the short or long run. US trade with South Africa was
previously
restricted over the issue of apartheid. Trade with Cuba is being
restricted.

5) The US should be consistent in applying its trade restrictions across
the board.
Saudi Arabia and Sudan should be subject to the same limitations if
necessary.

6) It has been 8 years since the Tiananmen killings. The present policy
of
gentle persuasion & gradual engagement has not helped at all. In fact,
it has
gotten worse. Imagine being a pastor jailed because of one’s faith,
imagine
being a woman forced to have an abortion, how patient would one be in
praying
for the Chinese government to change its ways?

7) Holding the perspective of advocating trade restrictions with China
should not be
interpreted as an attempt to “demonize” China in a “witch-hunt.” One can
have a deep
love for China, her culture, and her people and still be in favor of
limiting China’s trade
with the US. Regarding the point about how this might overflow into more
discrimination
against Asian-Americans: the Chinese in China are enduring a much more
severe
situation and do not have freedom to publicly voice political dissent.
At least in the US,
there are more opportunities & more advocates to speak out and fight
against such
discrimination/”persecution.”

This is not an exhaustive list of the arguments on both sides. However.
when the debates
ended, I felt the trade limitation side gave more compelling arguments in
its favor. Perhaps
you or others can add more to points I may have missed. Did anybody else
get a chance to
watch the debate? Please join the discourse even if you haven’t.

In Him,
J. Chang

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 02:31:14 -0500 (EST)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: China Trade Debate

Hi J. Chang:

Thank you for detailing the Firing Line debate! I didn’t have the time to
describe all the issues as well as you did.

I want to also clarify what I meant when I said that Buckley “skewered” Bauer
– it was at that point in the debate when Buckley asked Bauer why he did not
apply the same criteria to Saudi Arabia. Bauer paused, realizing that
pragmatic issues and American national “interests,” in this case, superceded
his call for human rights. To be consistent, he would have to call for
restriction of trade with or removal of Most Favored Nation status from Saudi
Arabia as well. IMHO, this begged the question – why pick on China at this
point?

Three other observations about the debate:

1. I was not clear what Bauer’s team was advocating (perhaps I missed it):
cessation of all trade with China (i.e., removal of MFN status) or limitating
trade strategically. The proposal Buckley laid on the table was in favor of
continuation of trade with China, but it was clear that the “realists” on his
side (including Kissinger, Sen. Trent Lott, and a CEO from Netscape) were
willing to engage in targeted trade restrictions so long as the policy of
engagement was pursued.

2. I disliked Ariana Huffington’s attacks on Kissinger’s motives (i.e.,
Kissinger had investments in China which would be affected by interruptions
of trade). While what she said was probably true, the shrill “witch-hunting”
ad hominems, IMHO, was out of order.

3. Clearly the debate was framed within a politically conservative context.
Former Gov. Jerry Brown should never have accepted the invitation to
participate in the debate since it was clear that Buckley only invited him to
trash him. Nor did Brown pursue his case with any real substance.

My own assessment of the matter: Don’t use the “trump card” so quickly,
i.e., don’t threaten China with the removal of MFN status so publically or so
soon. There are other ways to “skin a cat” – take advantage of President
Jiang’s visit, talk about these matters less publically, use targeted trade
restriction strategies. So long as we do not give China an excuse to accuse
Americans and American Christians of hypocrisy and hegemonic motives,
opportunities for change will continue. The American record in China and our
own internal problems have not escaped the eyes of the Chinese leaders. So
if we seek to call China to accountability before the entire world, we can
only do it in league with other nations.

Related to this is my reservations about American Christians speaking up at
this time against religious persecution worldwide – not so much because I
deny their existence, but because American Christians so easily forget their
history of cultural imperialism and collaboration with colonialists. Thus,
all our protests in support of our persecuted brothers and sisters in other
nations must, I repeat, must begin with CONFESSION of our guilt and sin in
the past and present. It always helps to take the log out of our own eyes
before we take the log out of our brothers, sisters, or neighbors’.

Thanks, again. And like you, I hope to hear from others, too.

Tim Tseng

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:03:19 -0500 (EST)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Asian American church planting possible? The wrong question.

Hi Jon!

Thanks for clarification! I also do not want to give the impression that the
more politicized origins of the term “Asian American” meant that we should
ignore Asian American churches or the emerging Asian American cultures.

I think your “intrigue” begs the question about whether something that is a
“political construct” is real or not – am I correct? If so, then I would say
that constructs, whether social or political, may not refer to social
reality, but they impact social reality significantly. E.g., while there
really is no biological basis for racial differences, the social impact of
racism has real life and death ramifications. So, even though the term
“Asian Pacific American” is ascriptive (i.e., imposed upon us), it has a real
impact on the way we are perceived and treated.

The question then is one of strategy: Should we “Asian Americans” (who are
involuntarily affected by the label) overcome the stereotypes and
discrimination by virtue of individual heroism (pulling ourselves up by the bo
otstraps) or by organizing as an Asian American constituency, power block,
etc.? Should ethnic groups within the “asian american” umbrella pursue their
own interests or work in coalition with other Asian ethnic groups? Asian
Americans from different ethnic Asian backgrounds and pan-Asian churches like
Evergreen will likely lead the way in addressing these questions.

All the best,
Tim

In a message dated 10/27/97 10:41:03 PM, jro6@juno.com (Jonathan c Ro) 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:08:57 -0500 (EST)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT

Dear CACers:
FYI, Tim

========= BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT ===========

The Japanese Canadian Christian Churches Historical Project is pleased to
announce the publication of the book _The Ministry to the Hopelessly
Hopeless_.

_The Ministry to the Hopelessly Hopeless: Japanese Canadian Evacuees and
Churches During World War II_

This text draws on archival sources across the country, focusing on the
critical nature of the support that churches provided. The churches promoted
assimilation as its anti-racism strategy. It supported the gathering of
church workers to empower the people, and it followed the evacuees east of
the Rockies when the “ghost towns” were closed.

The title is drawn from a study of the evacuated Japanese Canadians in 1944
by the Rev. K. Shimizu. The “Preface” is written by Dr. May Komiyama
Vancouver, B.C. An invocation for Canada by a high school student in the
Tashme Relocation Centre was written by Mr. Victor Kadonaga Hamilton, Ont. A
reflective Postscript is by Miss Grace Tucker Richmond, B.C.

The Rev. Dr. Roland M. Kawano is the editor of all the archival research
material along with contributions from fellow clergy The Rev. Harold Aihara,
The Rev. Shinji Kawano, and Pastor Stan Yokota. The cover design is by Mr.
Peter Ito.

_The Ministry to the Hopelessly Hopeless_ is available for $17.50 each plus
$3.50 for postage/handling ($1.50 for each additional book). Please make
checks payable to JCCCHP. Send request and check to:

Pastor Stan Yokota
50 Regency Square
Scarborough, Ontario M1E 1N4
Canada
(416) 265-3386

Reserve your copy today!

Also, look for these forthcoming titles:

_The Rev. Francis Wm. Cassillis-Kennedy: Elder to the Japanese Canadians_ and
_A History of Japanese Congregations in the United Church of Canada_.

The JCCCHP is supported by:
The Toronto Japanese Christian Interchurch Council
The National Japanese United Church Conference
The United Church Division of Mission in Canada
The Japanese Canadian Evangelical Christian Society
The Anglican Province of British Columbia
The Anglican Foundation
The Canadian Japanese Redress Foundation

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:19:40 -0500 (EST)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Religious Freedom in Public Schools

Dear J. Chang:

Equal access for all religious groups in public schools is one of the few
issues where I agree with the FRC. However, having heard a number of
Christians talk about doing away with the wall of separation between church
and state, it makes me wonder whether FRC should be proactive in speaking
against Christians who use the “take America back” language. In particular,
my Sunday School class has been viewing Ravi Zaccharias’s video series
“Deliver Us from Evil” where it appears that Zaccharias is promoting a
“conquest” model of Christian evangelism. – Tim

In a message dated 10/25/97 11:19:09 PM, jtc10@juno.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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:37:09 -0500 (EST)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Ed Facts -From Family Research Council- 10/24/97

My chief difficulty with this proposed policy is its inability to address the
tremendous educational needs in our nation’s poorest communities. While it
may be attractive for middle-class families like mine to have school-choice,
it will continue the process of pulling resources out of poor communities by
privatizing education. The H.E.L.P. scholarships will not be enough to
address the needs of our poorest. (Actually, it’s more like crumbs for the
unworthy) Even if 75 % is claimed to go into public education (which, of
course, won’t be distributed fairly), the legislation opens doors to social
irresponsibility. Rangel’s proposal to rebuild schools is, IMHO, a better
way to use our tax money.

Some questions: Why does FRC press for this type of legislation if they
really care for the many poor Christians in our inner cities? Why does FRC
promote a policy which will further undermine our public schools? In the
end, who will benefit from this legislation?

In a message dated 10/25/97 11:42:40 PM, jtc10@juno.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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 03:47:49 -0500 (EST)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Women and Ministry

Sze Kar:

I’d be interested in the long version of your study of I Cor. 11:2-16. I
hope anyone who unsubscribes will at least have a look at it first! 🙂

Judith Gundry-Volf and Miroslav Volf (of Fuller) wrote a critical review of
Boyarin’s _A Radical Jew_ (which I referred to some time ago) in the summer
issue of _Books and Culture_. You might find that review interesting since
they are defending Paul from Boyarin’s charge of dissolving distinctives
along gender lines. Your synopsis of I Cor. 11 sounds similar to a part of
the Volf’s arguments. I’ll see if I can down load that review if you (or
anyone) is interested in it.

BTW, nice review of Bays’ book on _Christianity in China_ – though I would
have been a little more critical of certains aspects of the book.

Have a nice one!
Tim

In a message dated 10/27/97 6:49:03 PM, wans@monet.bc.edu 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 02:26:11 -0800
From: ohbrudder
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Asian-American Evangelism that Works???

Ken Tom . . .
a little late for your Oct 25th seminar but what I received from the
Lord,
I’ll pass on to you . . .very much experientially based but biblically
sound.

a couple of PRINCIPLES:
1. There is NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT PROGRAM OR STRATEGY FOR ALL
CHURCHES.
What works for one church does not necessarily work for another. If
your
theology allows you, seek the Lord for a specific program for your
church.
I believe we must partner with the Lord . . . so we should do what He
has
planned for that occasion and listen for specific instructions and
follow
the Spirit’s lead.
What He tells you to do is not always “logical.” He himself did not use
the
same technique in his healing ministry, for example. If his spit and
mud
could heal all blind men, he could have packaged it and mass
distributed.

2. THE “TOOLS” HE GAVE YOUR CHURCH OFTEN COINCIDE WITH HIS STRATEGY.
Sometimes I had a group with a lot of talented musicians and singers,
so we had a few music ministries touring the country. Another group was
young (college and high school) with limited musical talents but a love
for children. We did numerous Kids Klubs. These and others produced
hundreds of souls for the kingdom.

[One of my most memorable and blessed occurrence. One of my “tough”
girls played a mean guitar but also happened to know “sign language”
for the deaf. We happen to find or God gave us a small shy deaf girl in
one of our tour stops. For a week, often with tears, we watched as a
special relationship developed between Danette and the small deaf girl
as Danette shared the gospel stories with the girl. “Tough” Danette
changed
and softened up, and the shy deaf girl got saved and came out of her
shell.
You had to be there. And they are still friends and in contact though
3000 miles and 7 years removed.]

A STRATEGY THAT WORKed . . .
During many summers, in various cities, for Sunday School and Kids
Klubs,
we looked up Chinese surnames in the White Pages, and obtained
addresses.

Divided the names among the teams of two and sent them out. They took
flyers and balloons and visited the homes, inviting any children in
resident and inquire about any other kids nearby to attend our event.
We usually get a hundred kids in a single day of canvassing.

We use our own vehicles to pick the kids and take them home. We give
them such a good time, the kids come back Sunday . . . and Sunday
after Sunday. Then its up to the local church to followup.

Rapport with the kids, leads to relationship with the family . . .
older siblings and parents. Those with ministries to the older
members of the family are given leads to extend invitations to
church services or cell groups and other events.
Win the 1st generation thru the second generation.

bill leong

— End —

From: SKYLeung@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 07:54:16 -0500 (EST)
To: CAC@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: China Trade Debate

Dear CACers,

Yes, Many arguments pro and con. Must pray that our “engagement” is wise and
Godly. Ironic that we try to work these necessary agreements in the backdrop
of a Market tailspin which in large part was triggered by the market
happenings in S.E. Asia (even before East Asia). Some of us mused that it
was just desserts for those “Asians” over there which have gotten so
materialistic/individualistic, which to a degree is almost personified by
the markets. But, then, how far can you point the finger? Who’s king when
it comes to individualism, self-reliance, and performance-driven appraisals?

This is a global economy, and it takes as much, if not more gamesmanship,
these days than even during the Cold War. Comments on the implications of
global linkage on missions work, tentmaking ministries, and those that would
embark upon them?

One sad note concerns the “greed” in American Business that has led to a
total disregard for holding the hard line on totalitarian regimes just
because of the potential market they represent. Can’t say much about the
next guy’s values or when your own isn’t much to write about. Many of the
communist and islamic countries will never receive more than token rhetoric
from us now because they are our buyers, suppliers, or partners in business.
And, do we really know what values drive our decisions anymore? Anyone read
in Time about our fascination with all things Buddhist? I guess we’re taking
our cue from the Pacific Rim in more ways than one. Just some things to
think about. (I’m really late for work!=)

In the Redeemer,
Stephen Leung
Alexandria, VA

****
Don’t follow the crowd unless it’s following Jesus
-bumper sticker

— End —

From: “Peter Szto”
To: Cac@emwave.net
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 13:05:47 EST5EDT
Subject: CAC_Mail: rites, rituals & customs

Dear friends,
I’m in the throes of doing academic advising. My apologies for not
replying any sooner.

Thank you for all the interest in my paper. I didn’t think so many
people really wanted a copy of it. I guess weddings and how we do
them is a real area of curiosity. It’d be nice to collaborate with
others on expanding my initial ideas, and even photographs.

Over the weekend I dug up my copy in my files and would
like to freshen it up before forwarding it to you all. It was
written in 1993. I will have it ready before Thanksgiving.

Again, thanx for your patience.

Peter

— End —

From: dwliu@law.harvard.edu
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 97 14:49:00 -0500
Subject: CAC_Mail: Request for info about Hong Kong
To: cac@emwave.net

Greetings!

I am writing my third-year law school paper in conjunction with a
seminar on the future of Hong Kong and was hoping to focus on the issue
of Christianity. I was wondering if folks familiar with the issues
could suggest research questions relevant to the Christian community in
China. I’ve considered looking at PRC control over Christian churches
and organizations in the HKSAR — especially in light of many Christian
groups’ participation in the democratic movement and their ties
internationally — and the PRC’s reaction to the efforts of Hong Kong
missions organizations and international organizations using Hong as a
base to work within China proper. My goal is to nail down a definite
topic in the next week or two, and I would appreciate all thoughts on
this matter. (From the academics out there, I’d also like some advice
on how broad a topic it would be reasonable to pursue in what will
probably be a 55-60 page paper.) Instead of cluttering up the list,
please email me directly at dwliu@law.harvard.edu.

Many thanks!

ybiC,
David Liu

ps: Though I’ve thus far also just been a web “lurker,” I’ve enjoyed
many of the recent postings. Perhaps one day I will actually catch up
on reading all of them! 🙂

— End —

To: “CAC”
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 06:28:14 -0700
From: “GE Liang”
Subject: CAC_Mail: AA culture: dynamic with a constant theme

CACers,

For your consideration:

The following well-articulated post on the soc.culture.asian.american newsgroup was
provided in response to a question i posed to the newsgroup just over a month ago.

Respectfully,
G.E.

Subject: Re: Asian Culture; Asian American Culture: Is there One?
From: Walter Lee
Date: 1997/09/28
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american

Yes. There is An Asian American Culture… but it is polyglot and
multicultural experience –

Read the back of each coin and it will read…E Pluribus Unum.
It means “From the Many comes just the One.”

and so we are just that many that has become just one.

Sharon Muramaru wrote:
>
> xformed@mailexcite.com wrote:
>
> : So many postings and discussions here and elsewhere assume there’s a :
> : single Asian Culture out there. Is that so? I’ve heard that Asian
> : American studies on some of our college campuses also strive to define some

> : nebulous, generic, AA culture. Are they successful? …

AA culture is not nebulous nor is it generic. It is concrete and specific.
*It is a rainbow of different contributing sub-cultures. Each has its own story
to tell – my advise is to focus on one sub-culture at a time (it’s easier).
*It has its own history – it has a different perspective than your
generic USA History. Like Native North American Indian History,
a story not very often told. A road not always taken.
*It is a eastern-western culture of adaptations… very different from the
normal strictly european cultures. A drummer doing two beats simultanously!
😛
*It is a story of a dynamic culture that is undergoing greater change
than other contemporary cultures. But being dynamic doesnot mean that
it is nebulous. There is a theme running constantly through
AA culture: survival, family, education, and community.
*It is a well document and there is alot of source material available.

> : I am trying to assemble a piece on the diffuiculty of specifying a unique
> : culture. I assert (perhaps mistakenly) that it’s a futile effort….

The trip of a thousand miles, is started by one footstep.-old chinese proverb

>
> Perhaps you should take an Asian American studies course, then make a
> judgement on whether or not your efforts are futile. You will be made
> more
> aware and sensitive to the many Asian American sub-cultures in the U.S.
>

Univ. of Calif. has a AA studies course.
Univ. of MD has a AA studies course (elective- not available ever year)

Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.com

— End —

Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 12:42:32 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: China Trades

Dear Tim, J. Chang, Stephen, et al.:

I have a cynical take on the current debate on China trades.

I get exasperated every time I hear mainland Chinese rail against
American decadence. After spending a month in this country, some of
these critics know enough to use arguments developed out of the civil
rights movt and Andrew Hacker’s writings on race relation to conclude
that the US is a racist country. These observations are sent back home
and the Chinese press picks them up as “evidence” of American weakness.
Same for such issues as the deficit (the American economy is in big
trouble), inner city poverty (evil of captialism), AIDS (spiritual
pollution), etc.

Now, I happen to agree with the substance of these criticisms; I even
make them myself. Trouble is, these criticisms are part of a dialogue;
they retain their original, intended meaning only as part of a
language-game (a la Wittgenstein) established by its interlocutors.
Once they are lifted out of context, they mean different things and
serve different purposes. In this case, self-criticism become
propagandistic tool.

A parallel phenomenon is taking place in the US debate on China trades.
Wei Jingsheng, Wang Dan, Fang Lizhi, Liu Binyan, Harry Wu, and the
Tiananmen students of 1989 have given us a glimpse of the internal
struggles within China. Not many of us would question their sincerity
or the substance of their critiques. Trouble is, do we think the
American press is really doing justice to the Chinese debate? Have
Hollywood, Richard Gere, Bratt Pitt, etc. earned the moral right to
speak so indignantly about the sufferings of the Tibetans? Do we really
think the presidents of AFL-CIO and other labor unions are concerned
about the “injustice” of prison labor? Do we really trust Washington
politicians, of both parties, to be concerned with morality? Do we
really think American foreign policy is driven by human rights? In all
these cases, self-interest rules, and the order of the day is
Realpolitik. I am not saying I endorse it, but that’s the game.

This is why we should cut through the ethical rhetorics when we are
talking about trades with China. I personally would rather not divorce
politics from morality (I am Confucian after all). But given the fact
that they are not and have never been wedded together in the American
political culture, it would be naive to simply buy into the current
rhetorics without also rasing the question of American interests.

When I was in China this summer, what struck me most was not political
repression (which I took as a given) but how capitalistic the whole
culture was. China did not take over Hong Kong; Hong Kong captialism
has taken over China. Hong Kong has become THE paradigm for the rest of
the country. Shanghai looked and felt like the Hong Kong of the 60s and
was closing in fast. What concerned taxidrivers, shopkeepers, waiters
and waitresses, even university professors, ie ones I talked with first
hand, was not political freedom (again, that’s simply assumed) but
corruption, inflation, disparity between rich and poor, pollution, job
security, high rent, the next pay check, unemployed workers from the
countryside. Prostitution was rampant in Shanghai: I was propositioned
three times within 15 minutes of arriving the Bund in late evening! In
sum, while no one would refuse political freedom, everyone had more
urgent matters to worry about. If ever the US would cut off trades with
China, the vast majority of the people would (a) never believe the
human-rights motive (nor would I); and (b) blame it on American
imperialism.

What do I think about US-China trades? I endorse it–but for purely
pragmatic reasons. There is no way in high heaven American companies
are going to stop doing business with Chinese companies (which by the
way are increasingly privatized), not when hundreds of billions of
dollars is at stake. Can you imagine Bill Gates not jumping at the
chance of making MS potentially twice or three times as big? Or Boeing,
IBM, GM, etc.? Clinton or whoever’s in charge would be impeached and
lynched before that happens.

Sze-kar

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 12:15:53 -0700
Subject: CAC_Mail: Notice: CACI Annual Meetings
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

“The Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry will hold its 32nd
annual meeting from 10 a.m. to 1:30 p.m Friday [tomorrow] at the Adam’s
Mark Hotel, 1550 Court Place in Denver. The keynote speaker will be C.
Edward McVaney of Denver software developer JD Edwards & Co., speaking
on:

_Growth and Grace: A New Corporate Culture_

…Tickets are available…$450 per corporate table of 10 in advance.
For reservations and information call…303-866-9653.”

(Source: Denver Post, 10/29/97)

==========

Comments:

1.

Someone is making a ticket or two to this gala available. I’ll go and
behave myself, Lord willing; and, try to acquire a copy of the keynote
speech to post somewhere, maybe with Bro. DJ.

If you’re in the area, hollar electronically, or call 303 781 7196, and
I’ll take you with and put you up.

2.

Brethren and Sisters, Please realize that my last post to Jon was written
while I was Rockin’ out in the middle of the Blizzard 🙂 One salient
point about it. The idea ~ that “AA is not a ‘people’ ” refers to how
the ‘corporate culture’ views and treats AA. Certainly AAs can see this,
too, and take a place as ‘cogs’ if they want to, but, is this what is
best (most desirable)?

To me what you and we are as people and as ‘a people’ is due ONLY to the
Grace of our God experienced each day. WE (in the Pauline ‘inclusive’
sense) are (a) chosen People in God’s holy eyes no matter what anyone
else thinks, says, or does. And, if in the end, this is all that really
matters, what about it now–i.e. perhaps in terms of our ONLY-ness (not
lonliness) ?

Much Love to you all today, in Christ, the Lord,

Bro. G

— End —

From: gdot@juno.com
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: cultures and sub-cultures
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:13:25 EST

On Thu, 30 Oct 1997 17:42:52 -0500 (EST) JWongCDI@aol.com writes:
>Let me see if I can put this right:
>
>There is a lot being written about culture. However, what is meant by
>culture? and what then is a sub-culture? How do cultures differ from
>one
>another and then how do we discover a sub-culture?

Brother Joseph, What happened to ‘counter-culture’?

e.g. here’s a cool ‘counter-cultural’ concept:

Psalm 27:4 – “One thing I ask of the LORD, this is what I seek: that I
may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, to gaze upon
the beauty of the LORD and to seek him in his temple.”

Too individualistic? Perhaps, but if the “I’s” can be legitmately changed
to “we’s”, then what?

Consider:

Matt. 26:61 – … “This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of
God and rebuild it in three days…'”

I Cor. 3: 16 – “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and
that God’s Spirit lives in you?”

Bro. G

— End —

From: JWongCDI@aol.com
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 17:42:52 -0500 (EST)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: cultures and sub-cultures

Let me see if I can put this right:

There is a lot being written about culture. However, what is meant by
culture? and what then is a sub-culture? How do cultures differ from one
another and then how do we discover a sub-culture?

In refering to sub-cultures, are we saying any more than “All people are
different, even from one another within the same ethnic and culture!”? Is
there such a reality as “Miss America?” Can any individual represent a whole
ethnic culture? No, only that there are many shared similarities.

I would like to propose that culture is defined by two comprehensive
categories: Values and Methodology/Ways. These represents the beliefs of
what is GOOD and what are the RIGHT ways to achieve good. These beliefs
drives (motivates) the people of that culture. Thus, “The good and the ways
of a people” is the definiton for “culture.” Is this an OVER simplification?
I’D WELCOME ANY EXPANSION OF THIS DEFINITION.

When we identify a small group of people shifting in their values and/or ways
of doing things, I think, is when we propose the discovery of a sub-culture.
Or what else do we recognize as distinguishing cultural characteristics?

Now, a personal word: I believe there is also a “Kingdom Culture,” not in
existence in our world, but defined for us in Scriptures -and- the culture we
are to be transforming our churches into, whether Chinese, American or
Asian-American. The Gospel is not interested in creating Chinese churches,
American churches, Black churches, nor World churchs -but- a Christian
church. Ethnic churches and ministries are useful tools for reaching people
of a particular culture,.. in order to transform them from their own
culture’s delusions.

It seems then, that a pre-occupation with establishing our particular ethnic
culture is a mis-direction of our heart’s concerns. Let’s not conform, but,
by renewing our minds, transform our values and the ways we do things. Why
should I be obsessed with thinking, being like an Asian-American? Why should
I be seeking to encourage others into being more happy with their particular
ethnic culture? IMHO, being a faithful Christian must become meaningful and
identifyable as differing, culturally, from all other cultures.

Of course, I am writing from the heart of a Minister of the Gospel of Jesus
Christ. And I am aware of many other vocations and concerns.

Joseph @ Chicago Chinese Bapist.
Church Dynamics International

— End —

From: GAPang@aol.com
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 01:54:26 -0500 (EST)
To: TSTseng@aol.com
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Witch-hunting…

In a message dated 97-10-27 17:23:41 EST, TSTseng@AOL.COM writes:

<>

I am not for the “demonization” of anyone, however if China’s human rights
record is bad, then it is bad. If we are “witch-hunted” for stating the
truth so be it. As a Christian, I personally will endure persecution (if in
fact witch-hunting is persecution), if that’s what it takes to stand up that
which is un-just. (Having said that, there is a lot going on here in our
country that I’m not so proud of either).

Just a thought.

Garrick Pang
Pastor
Wellspring Christian Church
Bellevue, Washington

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 02:13:37 -0500 (EST)
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Witch-hunting…

Garrick:

No essential disagreement on my part. China’s human rights record is not
good, neither is everything about American the Kingdom of God on earth. But
demonization and witch-hunting go beyond stating the truth. In fact, they
distort the truth, do they not? They often are promoted without dialogue
with or due process for the accused. Is this not persecution?

Which reminds me…Christians are not only persecuted, but also persecute.
Christian history is certainly littered with the blood of martyrs; it is
also filled with the guilt of the persecutors. On the whole, I hope that
more souls have been saved because of the example of the martyrs than lost
because of the examples of the persecutors. Perhaps history will reveal
whether the zeal of those who engage in today’s “culture wars” will wind up
advancing or regressing God’s kingdom.

Tim

In a message dated 10/31/97 12:55:12 AM, GAPang 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 03:28:03 -0500
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Boyarin

Dear Tim:

As you know, I’ve been asked to contribute a chapter to a book edited by
Sugirtharajah and Segovia, _Interpreting beyond the Border_. I’ve
decided to entitle my chapter (for now) “Diaspora Identity and
Universalism: An Asian-American Reading of Galatians.”

It will take Daniel Boyarin’s definition of “diaspora identity” as
starting point but will also critique his reading of Paul and Galatians
in general. But my real interests are to figure out (1) to what extent
our double cultural identities help us understand Paul’s own dbl ids;
(2) to what extent the dialect betw cultural particularity (emphasis on
difference) and universalism (emphasis on sameness) can be documented in
Galatians; and (3) To what extent Gal 3.28 is a paradigm for AA
Christianity.

I am excited about the project. I am also anxious to hear from anyone
who could contribute to my thinking. This, I hope, will help
systematize my thinking on positive biblical warrant for AA
theology–which I still owe you and all CACers. 🙂

Would you send me Volf & Volf’s review of Daniel’s book to me?

Warmly,
Sze-kar

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:10:10 -0700
From: “GE Liang”
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Women and Ministry

In light of Reformation Day, upon us tomorrow, i’ve posted another fictional story/dialog
entitled “All Saints Day.” However, the topic of discussion is really Women and
Ministry. You may find the story at http://www.cyberjunkie.com/all_saints, or at its full
address: http://www.geocities.com/athens/parthenon/5229/saints.html. This one’s
longer than the last one since there were more facets of this subject to touch.
Enjoy! ; ]

G.E.

P.S. Thanks for review of the first draft go to some of the folks at the BIBLE@virginia.edu
listserve, in which the following “numerical” commentary was found:

I don’t know if you have seen this or not

Q: How many internet mail list subscribers does it take to change
a light bulb?

A: 1,392:

1 to change the light bulb and to post to the mail list that the
light bulb has been changed…

14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how
the light bulb could have been changed differently,

4 to complain that they were happy with the old one,

7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs,

27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing
light bulbs,

53 to flame the spell checkers,

156 to write to the list administrator complaining about the light
bulb discussion and its inappropriateness to this mail list,

41 to correct spelling in the spelling/grammar flames,

109 to post that this list is not about light bulbs and to please
take this email exchange to alt.lite.bulb,

203 to demand that cross posting to alt.grammar, alt.spelling and
alt.punctuation about changing light bulbs be stopped,

111 to defend the posting to this list saying that we all use light
bulbs and therefore the posts **are** relevant to this mail list,

306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where
to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best
for this technique, and what brands are faulty,

27 to post URLs where one can see examples of different light bulbs,

14 to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly, and to post
corrected URLs,

12 to flame the AOL users for violating netiqutte and blame them for
starting this whole thing,

3 to post about links they found from the URLs that “are relevant
to this list, which makes light bulbs relevant to this list,”

45 posts about weather or not AOL should even be allowed to exist,

* 33 to concatenate all posts to date, then quote them including all
headers and footers, and then add “Me Too,”

12 to post to the list that they are unsubscribing because they
cannot handle the light bulb controversey,

19 to quote the “Me Too’s” to say, “Me Three,”

4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ,

1 to propose new alt.change.lite.bulb newsgroup,

47 to say this is just what alt.physic.cold_fusion was meant for,
leave it here, and

100 votes for alt.lite.bulb.

43 to post TEST to the list to just see if they are on it.

The Revd Stuart D Rogerson
http://www.cnetwork.co.uk

Christian Network

Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.com

— End —

Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 17:00:53 -0800
To: cac@emwave.net
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: CAC_Mail: Trade with China

TRADE WITH CHINA —
A PLEA FOR A REASONED APPROACH

1. SIGNIFICANCE OF ISSUE

Trade with China (with MFN status) is the very heart of
the US-China relationship put into motion by Nixon and Carter.
Without it, and we really don’t have much of a relationship.

2. OUR PRIMARY MOTIVATION

As Christians, our primary concerns are (a) the welfare of
the Church of Christ in China, (b) the ability of the Church in
China to be salt and light in mainland Chinese society, and (c)
continued opportunities for overseas Christians to be salt and
light in China.

China really needs Christians (indigenous as well as foreign) to exemplify
high moral standards in society. Christians are China’s last great
hope!

3. CHINA’S PERCEPTIONS

When Christians in the west engage in confrontational politics
concerning China, China is listening. China concludes that (a)
American Christians (or America as a nation) are subverse and
hostile to China, and worse, (b) American Christians are aiding
the Church inside mainland China to be subversive. This really
hurts the safety and welfare of the Body of Christ in China.

4. HAVE WE CONSULTED THE CHURCH IN CHINA?

The fact is, persecuted Christians in China are NOT voicing
their request that American Christians speak on their behalf
to use sanctions against China on the basis of religious persecution!!!

Christian leaders who urge the US government to use sanctions
have, by and large, NOT consulted church leaders inside China
(or among overseas Chinese church leaders) as to their real
preference.

5. WHICH AGENDA: AMERICAN OR KINGDOM AGENDA?

There is a real difference between promoting the agenda of the
Kingdom of God agenda and promoting the American agenda
(of a particular political party, and of a particular stripe within
that party).

Our primary concern is NOT the nuclear arms threat, or the trade
imbalance, although these are legitimate concerns. The problem is,
Christian leaders are misleading when they use PERSECUTION
as the alleged basis for confrontational politics, if their REAL
and PRIMARY motive is the threat to US military and economic
interests. We are confusing issues, and we are confusing our
audience.

We must not use persecution and kingdom agenda items as a cover
up to promote American economic and military agenda items,
however legitimate the latter may be.

6. EFFECTIVE MEANS TO ADDRESS PERSECUTION

Christians who are pleading for a more reasoned approach,
avoiding confrontational politics, are suggesting that there are
many other effective means to address the issue of religious
persecution. On the top of the list would be:

US government leaders should visit China (100 members of Congress
have done so since Jan. 1, 1997), and in the context of engagement
(investments, professional service and other humanitarian
service projects etc.), bring to the attention of their counterparts
in China (that is, members of the National People’s Congress in
China) the concerns of the Congressman/woman’s constituency
back home, about persecution. Members of Congress should do
this without media exposure, one-on-one, and all the while expressing
our intention to make contributions to China’s development.

Where Christians have been sentenced inside China, Christians from
overseas can write the Religious Affairs Bureau to express their views.
This is an effective means to let the Chinese government know our
concerns.

7. OUR LONG TERM GOAL

Our goal should not stop at stopping persecution. For the sake
of argument, even if the Communist Party closes up shop tomorrow,
there would still be the long term needs of nation buiding. If we
are just going to applaud an congratulate ourselvesw for the
collapse of Commnism in China, that’s one thing. But if we are
serious about being servants of Christ, and salt and light in China,
then we must keep a long term perspective.

8. NO DENIAL — ACTUAL ACTION NEEDED (AND FUNDS)

We do NOT deny that religious persecution is occuring. We do NOT
deny that China has a one-party dictatorship (which no longer believes
in Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideology).

Christians who are advocating a reasoned approach are ACTUALLY
helping individual persecuted Christians! We are ACTUALLY seeking
help for Christians who are able to leave China, to seek Bible and
theological training to prepare for future ministry in China.

If we do confrontational politics re. China, are we ready and available
with funds to help specific individual persecuted Christians from
China? I hear precious little efforts in this regard among those leaders
who are so outspoken about what can About persecution. Perhaps they need
to be
educated and informed aCTUALLY be done
about persecuted Christians.

9. FOR THE MAJORITY — PRAY, JUST PRAY

When we pray for the persecuted church, perhaps we should JUST
pray, and not use it as a pretext to write our Congressmen/women?
And when we DO write our members of Congress, we need to
encourage them to take a positive, one-on-one/people-to-people,
encouraging posture toward China.

— End —

Advertisements

women in ministry

To: MChowAACF@aol.com
From: Samuel Ling
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Hist. Bkgd. of Stature of Chinese Pastors
Cc: cac@bccn.org

The Chinese church has certainly under-deployed
women, ordained or non-ordained. This was not
always the case. My father’s father’s mother was
a “Bible woman” in the Anglican Church in
Ningpo, China. Women have been systematically
trained and deployed for ministry in China. But
the women’s role in the church issue has been
shipped from America to Chinese circles in recent
years, and the rest is history.
80% of clergy in housechurches in China are
women.
Let’s keep talking…and opening doors.

At 09:16 PM 9/22/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Again I find myself with thoughts to consider…As a campus minister, what
>about those times I find myself needing to encourage my female students who
>want to be obedient with their lives in the Chinese American church? They go
>and become successful missionaries? Is that their only option? Again, food
>for thought and a need to have the Chinese American church be supportive to
>all people in the church.

— End —

Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 00:30:54 -0700
From: ohbrudder
To: Dennis Low
CC: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: my ten cent

Thank you Dennis for your kind words. And I believe I’ve met
Joe a long, long time ago . . . He with his gang at FACE has
done much to raise awareness of the ABC plight.

I’ve heard your Home of Christ churches are doing well and thus
I’m sure have much to share with other ABC pastors. Seminaries ought to
include “success” stories like yours–and send future ministers to
shadow you.

These pastors I’ve forementioned are worth meeting if you get a chance.
I don’t know if you’ve worked with OBC pastors and how they’ve helped
you, but I think many are unsung “heroes” of ABC ministries.

There was one specific thing they all did for me. They all intercepted
criticisms from the Chinese side and protected me. They supported me,
built me up, and smooth things out behind the scene. Most of this I
found out later. If I had actually received some of the barbs thrown at
me at that time, I might have been very discouraged or disheartened.
They knew this and protected me. Bless them.

And God’s continual grace to you,

bill leong

— End —

To: “ohbrudder”
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 06:18:13 -0700
From: “GE Liang”
Cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: my ten cent

“Brudder,”

You wrote:

>I am injecting my ten cent worth . . . a week after DJ
>signed me up for this CAC. I haven’t decided whether to thank him yet.

Your verdict may still be out, but we’ll thank DJ for bringing you fresh on board
the CAC! I’ll also put in two minas, leptas or whatever…

You pointed out:
>AN IMPORTANT KEY TO A SUCCESSFUL ABC ministry in an OBC church: an OBC
>pastor who is secure and aware of the ABC “creature.”

As I was drawn to read your first message again, it dawned on me that those OBC pastors
who aren’t as secure, or aware of the ABC “creature” that lurks in the ranks of their
children, youth and young adults, could benefit from the wisdom of the “outstanding
OBC” pastors that you have encountered.

Are you in the position to invite some of them to share their insights in publications
and journals commonly read by OBC pastors and leaders? These leaders will much more
likely look to articles written in their mediums and language(s) of choice than to
something like the CAC for ideas. Samuel Ling has written and continues to write.
Perhaps some of your mentioned mentors and co-laborers would also be instrumental
and well-received.

Just a thought! It might help some of us…

You also suggested:
>A BIT ABOUT CULTURE. I think dissecting culture as it relates to ABC
>ministry effectiveness is majoring in a minor.

You are quite right about it being a minor. But, for the reasons Greg, Sze-kar,
and, to a degree, even Joseph C. Wong pointed out there is utility and, perhaps,
necessity in becoming at least aware of the differences.

Dissecting makes the CAC discussion “fuller!” Without such discussions, CAC might
lose some of its uniqueness. Anyway, I think culture and cultural differences can
surface not only in ecclesiology, but also in missiology, (Biblical) anthropology,
soteriology, and even eschatology. (Because one or both of them have written on
these topics, I look forward to Fong and Hokema’s overdue treatise on Christianity
and culture.) Hey, some major in the minors to make dime!

One last spin (for the CAC in general). Being aware of CD’s is not just about solving
problems. Our “Christology” as manifested in our lives, love, and lips is where
we should be and strive to be. It is what draws seekers as Bill emphasizes. However,
this is not likely to be where the people of our “ripened” fields are. Grasping
the “delta” between where they are at (the descriptive) and where they should be
and can be (the normative/heuristic) aids evangelism, discipleship and the our role
in God’s work of on-going sanctification. How we incorporate our understanding of
CD’s should then be the making of disciples and not just the reengineering of church
architecture – “rearrangement of deck chairs.”

Well, I let my two leptas become even more verbose than your ten cents! =)


Guo En Liang
Washington, DC
|
The one who carves the Buddha never worships it.
– Chinese proverb
|
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him. Male and
female created he them.
– Genesis 1:27

Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.com

— End —

Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:42:59 -0500
From: OHBRUDDER
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: my ten cent

OHBRUDDER wrote:
>
> GE Liang wrote:
> > You pointed out:
> > >AN IMPORTANT KEY TO A SUCCESSFUL ABC ministry in an OBC church: an OBC
> > >pastor who is secure and aware of the ABC “creature.”
>
> I cannot overemphasize or overstate their importance to winning the ABCs
> of the first two generations (1.5s and 2nd) who have OBC parents. I
> mentioned that the OBC pastors I worked with protected me. As a young
> brash ABC, I stepped on many sensitive OBC toes. Even as an older ABC,
> there is no way to foresee what thin-skins you might run into. But they
> had love that always hope, always protect . . .they had love that covers
> a multitude of sins. Christology in action over culture. And they all
> encouraged their OBC congregation to come to me individually with
> problems regarding their ABC kid. They build me up in front of the OBC
> congregation and even invite me to speak time to time. How can any ABC
> minister crash and not be successful?
>
> > Are you in the position to invite some of them to share their insights in publications
> > and journals commonly read by OBC pastors and leaders?
> >
>
> Yes. You can imagine how busy all pastors are . . . so its low
> probability that they’ll take initiative to approach a publication and
> offer to write. But I think you make a very good suggestion. I’d be glad
> to invite them if there is a definite proposal.
>
> > One last spin (for the CAC in general). Being aware of CD’s is not just about solving
> > problems. Our “Christology” as manifested in our lives, love, and lips is where
>
> Felix Liu is the senior pastor of Evangelical Formosan
> Church(es)—probably the fastest growing Chinese church in America (A
> culture thing: Not all Taiwanese want the Chinese label) the last 10-20
> years. They keep dividing and multiplying. Felix is one of the most
> humble ministers I know. When I was on staff there was a former
> Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Southern Baptist, and ABC, me. Trust me, it
> takes a very special leader to get this motley group to work well
> together. Among many lessons Felix taught me, here is one that
> illustrates, I think, a “Christology” secret of successful ABC ministry:
> It doesn’t matter what the conflict or misunderstanding or problem was,
> in fact I vaguely remember the details. (Over 15 years ago) But Felix on
> a couple of these occasions reminded me to pray, look to the Word, and
> ask what Christ would do. No cultural explanations. No finger-pointing
> as to who is right or wrong. Looking back . . . I understand something
> powerful: “I no longer live, but Christ lives in me . . .” and that
> “Christ in me is the hope of glory.” Christ in me is hope of
> effectiveness as an ABC minister.
>
> Bill Leong

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 23:25:07 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Fwd: AAASCommunity: Postdoctoral and Visiting Scholar Fellowship in Asian Ameri

CACers:
FYI, Tim
———————
Forwarded message:
From: dtn@ucla.edu (Don Nakanish)
Sender: owner-aaascommunity@uclink4.berkeley.edu
To: aaascommunity@uclink.berkeley.edu (AAASPOS), assnaas-socal@uci.edu
Date: 97-09-27 16:11:25 EDT

For immediate release

1998-99 POSTDOCTORAL AND VISITING SCHOLAR FELLOWSHIP IN ASIAN AMERICAN
STUDIES AND ETHNIC STUDIES AT UCLA

The UCLA Asian American Studies Center will offer a fellowship in 1998-99
to a postdoctoral scholar in support of research on Asian Americans. The
fellowship ranges from $23,000 to $28,000 per year plus health benefits and
up to $3,000 in research support. The fellowship can be awarded for less
than a year in which case the stipend is adjusted to the length of the
award, and can be used to supplement sabbatical salaries. The acceptance of
the fellowship carries with it the commitment to make a contribution to the
research activities of the Center, along with the teaching of one course
and a presentation in the Center’s faculty colloquium series. Deadline for
application and supporting documents is December 31, 1997. For an
application form or more information, please contact:

Dr. Enrique DeLa Cruz, Assistant Director
UCLA Asian American Studies Center
3230 Campbell Hall
P.O. Box 951546
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1546
310.825.2974 (phone)
310.206.9844 (fax)
tulisan@ucla.edu (e-mail)

The UCLA Asian American Studies Center’s new, redesigned web page is
located at http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/aasc.

Postdoctoral fellowships in African American Studies, American Indian
Studies, and Chicano Studies are also available through the UCLA Center for
African American Studies (310.206.8267), American Indian Studies Center
(310.825.7315), and Chicano Studies Research Center (310.825.2363). For
more general information, please contact the UCLA Institute of American
Cultures (310.206.2557), or look at its web page at
http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/iacweb/iachome.htm.

Don Nakanishi
Director and Professor
UCLA Asian American Studies Center
3230 Campbell Hall
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1546
phone: 310.825.2974
fax: 310.206.9844
e-mail: dtn@ucla.edu
web site for Center: http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/aasc

================================================================
* AAASCommunity, the Discussion & News list of the
* Email Network of the Association for Asian American Studies
—————————————————————
* Coordinator:
================================================================

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 23:27:14 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Fwd: H-ETHNIC Digest – 27 Sep 1997 to 28 Sep 1997

CACer:

FYI, Tim Tseng
———————
Forwarded message:
From: LISTSERV@MSU.EDU (Automatic digest processor)
Sender: H-ETHNIC@MSU.EDU (H-NET List on Ethnic History)
To: H-ETHNIC@MSU.EDU (Recipients of H-ETHNIC digests)
Date: 97-09-29 00:21:55 EDT

There is one message totalling 52 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

1. FUND: Postdoc/Visiting Scholar /Asian American Studies and Ethnic
Studies,
UCLA (due 12/31/97)

———————————————————————-

Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 22:57:50 -0500
From: “Josef J. Barton”
Subject: FUND: Postdoc/Visiting Scholar /Asian American Studies and Ethnic
Studies, UCLA (due 12/31/97)

1998-99 POSTDOCTORAL AND VISITING SCHOLAR FELLOWSHIP IN ASIAN AMERICAN
STUDIES AND ETHNIC STUDIES AT UCLA

The UCLA Asian American Studies Center will offer a fellowship in 1998-99
to a postdoctoral scholar in support of research on Asian Americans. The
fellowship ranges from $23,000 to $28,000 per year plus health benefits and
up to $3,000 in research support. The fellowship can be awarded for less
than a year in which case the stipend is adjusted to the length of the
award, and can be used to supplement sabbatical salaries. The acceptance of
the fellowship carries with it the commitment to make a contribution to the
research activities of the Center, along with the teaching of one course
and a presentation in the Center’s faculty colloquium series. Deadline for
application and supporting documents is December 31, 1997. For an
application form or more information, please contact:

Dr. Enrique DeLa Cruz, Assistant Director
UCLA Asian American Studies Center
3230 Campbell Hall
P.O. Box 951546
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1546
310.825.2974 (phone)
310.206.9844 (fax)
tulisan@ucla.edu (e-mail)

The UCLA Asian American Studies Center’s new, redesigned web page is
located at http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/aasc.

Postdoctoral fellowships in African American Studies, American Indian
Studies, and Chicano Studies are also available through the UCLA Center for
African American Studies (310.206.8267), American Indian Studies Center
(310.825.7315), and Chicano Studies Research Center (310.825.2363). For
more general information, please contact the UCLA Institute of American
Cultures (310.206.2557), or look at its web page at
http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/iacweb/iachome.htm.

Don Nakanishi
Director and Professor
UCLA Asian American Studies Center
3230 Campbell Hall
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1546
phone: 310.825.2974
fax: 310.206.9844
e-mail: dtn@ucla.edu
web site for Center: http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/aasc

——————————

End of H-ETHNIC Digest – 27 Sep 1997 to 28 Sep 1997
***************************************************

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 23:30:37 -0400 (EDT)
To: kenfong@earthlink.net
cc: cac@bccn.org
Subject: CAC_Mail: Leadership

Ken:

I’m also pleased that the CAC list is growing in all these dimensions and I’m
very thankful that you are “in the mix.” I also hope that those of us
academic, seminary professor, politically-minded folks have done a good job
of presenting our passion for the Lord through our deep love for Chinese and
Asian American Christianity! The gift of scholarship, IMHO, must never be
used for the sake of the academic guild or personal career advancement alone.
God has entrusted us – not so much with the gift of scholarship – but with
positions within seminary institutions as bases for strengthening and
encouraging Asian American Churches, pastors, and lay leaders. And if our
scholarship contributes towards that end (which I pray my work will), than
all the better.

I agree with you that “Leadership” is a (if not “the”) critical issue for
Asian American Christians today and I hope that we’ll continue to discuss
this matter. This is one of the reasons why I accepted the presidency of the
Asian American Baptist Caucus. Using the American Baptist Churches as an
example, I want to argue that mentoring for future leadership works best
within the context of a support “structure” (by structure, I mean leadership,
resources, and programs organized to develop leaders, plant churches, support
existing congregations, and advocate for Asian Americans within the
denomination). Like many independent or other denominationally affiliated
Asian American congregations, we have no adequate structure beyond the local
congregation to address the crisis of leadership. But, American Baptist
Asians (and a few other denominations, I imagine) have the potential to
develop a support structure for this very purpose. What we need now are
established and well-respected pastors like yourself to give energy to the
effort. Some of the things that the caucus may do in the next couple of
years will definitely require strong and committed leaders: (1) raising an
endowed seminarian scholarship fund to send Asian Americans to American
Baptist related or approved seminaries; (2) developing pastoral and
theological programs through our Am. Baptist. seminaries and churches that
address the specific needs and concerns of our Asian American congregations;
(3) organizing regional caucus councils led by local pastors and lay leaders
for the purpose of nurturing, supporting, and recruiting strong, godly, and
faithful leaders for our existing and future congregations.

But I see some obstacles:
(1) Finding an “Asian American” voice among 2d-5th generation. To what
degree are we really listening to the Asian Americans we are ministering to?
Are we merely imposing an evangelical or liberal gospel that comes from a
context unrelated (and sometimes oppressive) to Asian Americans’ social,
political, economic, and spiritual circumstances? In other words, how
relevant are issues like racism, gay rights/agenda, feminism, economic
injustice, environmentalism, family values, etc. to our communities? How do
we properly discern the weightier issues? This is more important to me than
gnashing our teeths over ABC/OBC type of issues as important as they are.
(2) A false universalism (or, as I mentioned many months ago, the modern
gnosticism). By this I mean the tendency for many to dismiss our earthly
particularities such as our ethnic, racial, gender, or denominational
traditions. I hear repeatedly, “I’m a Christian first, a Baptist second (or
not at all)” or “the Bible must take primacy (and judge) tradition (or
culture).” But this logic – as truthful as they are in the abstract – cannot
work and is dangerous. It assumes that we can leave our earthly and
enfleshed realities right now. Not even Jesus, who had the option of
remaining above it all, chose to do so (Phil. 2). It also assumes that we
can approach our faith and Scripture untouched by our cultural and historical
experiences. It also undermines any efforts to organize as Asian American
Christians or as a denominational tradition.
(3) Congregational tunnel vision. I believe that we live in a society that
values individualism so strongly that many no longer can see beyond
themselves. While I’ll never give up congregational autonomy, I also resist
total independence and separatism. “Self-navigating” congregations and
ministers are usually blessings to denominations like the American Baptists,
but can also be unable or unwilling to work through theological, ethnic,
racial, political, gender diversity in order to realize Christ’s prayer for
unity.

Asian American Baptists need to overcome these obstacles in order for us to
create a support structure for our future leaders (which is why, on a
different level, I appreciate Louis Lee’s efforts to organize Chinese
Christians, despite my reservations about PK). But I am very hopeful. We
have a number of quality leaders with great potential to guide not only the
80-100 Asian American Baptist congregations in our denomination, but also to
make a positive impact on the entire denomination (so long as we don’t get
sidetracked by and divided over issues that have little relevance to Asian
Americans). So, yes, Ken, I really feel that there is a crying need for
Asian American Christian leadership (pastoral and otherwise) committed to the
biblical mandate to transform lives, church, and society for Christ’s
kingdom.

Tim

In a message dated 9/27/97 2:03:25 AM, kenfong@earthlink.net 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

To: cac@bccn.org, CAC@emwave.net
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 15:09:31 -0500
Subject: CAC_Mail: Promise Keepers Stand in the Gap
From: drwong1@juno.com (Richard Wong)

If any of you are planning to come to Washington for the Promise Keeper’s
Stand in the Gap rally on the Mall this Saturday, our church has offered
the use of its parking lot for anyone attending the event. Let’s try to
meet before the event at the church and head down together. So far,
we’re going to try to maintain the following schedule

9:00 a.m. Meet at the CCCGWDC parking lot at 7716 Piney Branch Road
(between University Blvd. and Georgia Avenue, or more precisely, between
Sligo Avenue and Philadephia Ave/East-West Highway) in Silver Spring,
MD.
(Church directions available via http://www.mapblast.com or
http://www.mapquest.com).
9:30 am Walk/Shuttle 1/2 mile to Takoma Park Metro Station (Metro’s Red
Line)
(Metro information available at http://www.wmata.com)
10:30 Exit at Farragut North Metro Station (also Red Line), meet our
pastor’s African-American church contacts
11:00 Arrive at the Mall
12:00 Stand in the Gap begins
(Event schedule is posted at
http://www.promisekeepers.org/manual/sitg/program.htm)
6:00 pm SITG Closes

After the event, we’re planning to join with other Asian PKers for
dinner at Tony Cheng’s Restaurant at 619 H Street (across the street from
the Gallery Place/Chinatown Metro station). The Metro is likely to be
extremely crowded after the event, with an estimated 750,000 guys all
trying to leave all at the same time, so we can either spend hours
standing outside a station, or we can sit down and break bread with other
Asian-American Stand in the Gap attendees.

We’ve worked out a deal with Tony Cheng’s so that dinner will only cost
$10.00 per person, including tax and tip. They’ll give us the second
floor, so that we won’t be disturbed by the usual restaurant noise.
After dinner, we can then ride the Metro to our respective destinations
(Gallery Place provides direct access to the Red, Yellow, and Green
Lines, and access to the Blue and Orange lines are one stop away at Metro
Center).

If you have any questions or need directions, feel free to call me at
(202) 366-1936 (work) or (703) 685-8653 (home). My e-mail address is
posted below.

Hope to see you there!

Richard L. Wong
Chinese Christian Church of Greater Washington, DC
drwong1@juno.com

— End —

From: Zeke3377@aol.com
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 18:35:58 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: CAC_Mail: OUTREACH CONCERT featuring J U N K O at Garden Grove’s Wintersburg Church

WINTERSBURG PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
13711 Fairview Avenue
Garden Grove, CA

IN CONCERT – “JUNKO”
Outreach Ministries of Wintersburg Presbyterian Church
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, September 23, 1997

Contact: Fred Tanizaki (714) 740-9405
John Wei (714) 491-7080
Ted Nakamura (310) 816-2966

Garden Grove¾On November 1, 1997, Wintersburg Presbyterian Church will
start their series of outreach concerts with the unique Asian Pacific
American Christian ministry and talents of JUNKO. This series of outreach
concerts at Wintersburg Presbyterian Church is designed to address the
needs of the 90 to 95% of Asian Pacific Americans that are unchurched that
exists on today’s school campuses in the Southern California area.

Wintersburg’s first concert features the unique Asian Pacific American
ministry of JUNKO. Her busy ministry has blessed people throughout Japan,
Australia, Hawaii and the U.S. Mainland these past few years. “Live In
Harmony,” the title track off JUNKO’s latest CD, was on their Top 30 list
for 8 weeks at Hawaii’s premier Christian radio Station and was included in
the compilation album “Praising Him Island Style.” – which won the Best
Religious Album of the Year at the 20th annual Na Hoku Hanohano Awards.
(the equivalent of the Grammy’s of Hawaii) In addition, she was a Grand
Prize winner at GMA’s Video Critique Competition, participated in the
latest Marantha! Praise album produced by Stan Endicott and had a cover
interview of “Today’s Christian Woman” magazine. JUNKO states that “Her
true homeland is in heaven, where she will spend time With Christ forever
in the ultimate “Land of the Rising Sun.”“

Opening that night’s concert will be a “Surprise Group” from Wintersburg
Presbyterian Church’s high school youth group. They promise to bring to
bring down the house with their energy, music, message, answers to
questions adults normally don’t ask and their vision from a high school
point of view.

These outreach concerts, starting with the November 1, 1997 concert
featuring “Junko,” will start at 7:30 P.M. and the doors of the church will
open at 7:00 P.M. This event will take place at Wintersburg Presbyterian
Church, which is located at 13711 Fairview Avenue, which is just off the
Garden Grove (22) Freeway. The admission price to these outreach concerts
is free.

Please feel free to gather more information on the event, Wintersburg
Presbyterian Church and Junko, check out their respective web sites located
at http://www.wintersburg.org or http://www.junko.com

For further information on the event or how to participate in these
outreach concerts, please contact the following people: Fred Tanizaki:
(714) 740-9405/zeke3377@aol.com, John Wei (714)
491-7080/jwei422935@aol.com or Ted Nakamura (310) 816-2966/TedN@vdr.com.

— End —

Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 09:33:14 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: TSTseng@aol.com
CC: cac@bccn.org
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Leadership

Tim:

thanks for the kudos. As usual, I find your comments right on target.
I too see how easy it is for us to (a) pretend that culture doesn’t
matter [if anyone really thinks it doesn’t, that all we have to do is
present the culturally-clean gospel, sit down and talk with any active
missionary!]; (b) that our individual churches quite often, either
because we’re nondenom. and independent or because we come from a
tradition of autonomy, are isolated and at times self-serving and even
narcissistic. I have struggled with this second point for years,
grateful to the Lord for the fruit He has given Evergreen over the 18
years I’ve been here, but conscious of our somewhat disengaged posture
with larger issues in our immediate surroundings. Here’s where I
believe many of our struggling mainline churches in particular, if
renewed by God, can provide some good models, what I’m calling
prototypes of 21st century churches. Kerygmatic (proclaiming the gospel
for personal salvation), Diaconiac (serving the needs of the powerless
and the poor), Prophetic (speaking out against injustices and extending
the boundaries of God’s rule) and Koinoniac (building a loving community
of believers). In the past 20 years or so, we in the mainline tradition
have tended to major in the second and third while downplaying the first
and the last. As NT churches, I believe we must dare to display all
four dimensions.

EBCLA, these past two decades, has defied the deathspiral trend of
mainline denom’s, primarily because we switched our emphasis to the
first and the fourth dimensions (and yes, certainly by God’s providence
and grace.) But I’ve been sensing a real restlessness among a growing
number of Christian people for our churches to be a four dimensional
models, not two. And yes, it is taking just as much Spirit-led
leadership to take a typical evangelical church and see it expand the
missing 2 dimensions as it would to expand a more ‘liberal’ mainline
church’s dimensions.

And all this while keeping in mind the ongoing challenge of doing
ministry, being the church, in a rapidly changing pluralistic,
postmodern setting. And managing to keep your job!

ken fong

— End —

Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:06:50 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: Samuel Ling
CC: MChowAACF@aol.com, cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Hist. Bkgd. of Stature of Chinese Pastors

imho: God has been and is raising up female colleagues to help bring in
the harvest.

more personally: when I was teaching at FTS, many times, the most
outstanding students who seemed to be ripe with potential for harvest
work were women. This made sense to me. Any AsiAm woman who enrolled
in an MDiv program at an evangelical seminary would know going in that
most doors in Asian churches would be closed to her upon graduation.
Thus, those women who go forward, with the strong call of the Lord still
ringing in their ears, are already a highly motivated, very focused
bunch. On the other hand, many (not all) of my male students seemed
less focused and passionate about their calls. Maybe it was because by
virtue of their gender they had all been given the keys to the kingdom
of the Asian church. Maybe they knew, in their heart of hearts, that
they didn’t have to be outstanding simply because the system is set up
to promote them because of their gender. They didn’t have to be “good”
because they were guys. Oftentimes I wanted to grab them by their
shoulders and shake the complacency out of them so that they would
strive to offer their utmost for His highest. Then again, having seen
what has just happened to Robt. Schuller, I’m glad I never did that!!!
😉

ken fong

— End —

From: ArtZech46@aol.com
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 04:09:47 -0400 (EDT)
To: kenfong@earthlink.net
cc: cac@emwave.net, ArtZech46@aol.com
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Re: Leadership

Dear Ken & Tim,
I would like to add my unscholarly opinions to the issue of leadership for
Asian Americans.

1) I have observed a lack of participation of Asians in the wider church
body. Being new to No. Cal I have seen few involved in some of the Christian
community. For example, we have a city wide prayer meeting with about 60
pastors for Santa Clara County. Out of those 50-60 people who meet once a
month to pray for the city & community, only a few Asians show up regularly.
I am one of the few, along with Steve that show up. Why the lack of
participation? One reason may be because we Asians don’t feel connection or
ownership of the community? Are we too tied into our own ethnic grouping?

2) Most leaders have difficulty keeping up with their own ministries and
leadership in the church, let alone to be involved in the greater community.
By the time you cover your regular responsibilities, family, devotional
life, etc., who has time for larger issues? I see that as the plight of the
majority. But I think there are enough of us out there that see the need for
leadership to make it a priority, at least I want to.

3) I agree that we need help with leadership in our community across
denominational lines. It is great that you have a denomination to draw upon
for resources. Unfortunately many other Chinese Am pastors like myself are
in independent churches. There is no larger resource to draw upon or to
offer resources in leadership. (Maybe there is, but I’m not aware of it.)
FACE has tried to offer leadership in promoting ABC ministries but not
focusing on “leadership” issues.

4) It is great that you have been able to mentor people at Evergreen, but
what about the other 95% of Asian Am leaders? They need it, but maybe they
don’t even know they need it? I have seen some guys with 10 years experience
repeated every 2 years.

5) IMHO there is a crisis of leadership in the church as a whole. The
seminaries are producing theological thinkers and preachers, but not leaders.
That is a whole different ball game. When I graduated from Fuller in 1986
there was only one or two courses on leadership, and that was offered by
Bobby Clinton in the School of World Missions. But the class was not
required. I am still learning how to lead.

6) I’m afraid that some of us will never get to first base in leadership.
There is a constant struggle in the Chinese church in defining leadership
and who sets the pace. In my calling to work in a bi-lingual bi-cultural
church I will be #3 or #4 or lower in influence. I am the only ABC on a
ministerial & elder board of 8 others. Not that I do not know how to lead,
but that any innovative ideas, etc., will be bogged down. So, one must learn
how to lead from the back of the pack, and how to influence others, and
become very, very patient. Extremely patient!

Thankfully the church gives me a large amount of autonomy in the English and
Youth ministry I oversee. But others may not have the same freedom I do. I
hope others out there will learn to lead by the person they are, not by a
position. I am gradually learning but it has taken over 10 years to learn by
experience.

I hope this makes sense to you all. My final comment is a question &
challenge.
Will we have to wait for seminaries to take leadership, a denomination, or
what?
Is there someone or a group of Asian American Leaders who can speak for our
community and offer hope & direction to our plight? (Maybe there is and I’m
out of the loop.) Maybe you will develop something out of your So. Cal Asian
American PK conference? (But we don’t want to exclude the women on this
issue.)

I would appreciate any enlightenment or rebuttle upon my comments.

For the Kingdom,
Arthur Lum
Chinese Church in Christ, San Jose
(Silicon Valley)

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Cc: corrdpt@fotf.org
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 23:37:18 -0400
Subject: CAC_Mail: Focus on the Family Statements
From: jtc10@juno.com (John Chang)

Dear CACers:

On Sept. 11th, there was a CAC post of a press release issued by
Mr. Gil Alexander-Moegerle regarding his book about Dr. James
Dobson & Focus on the Family. In fairness to Dr. Dobson & FOTF,
I am now forwarding official statements emailed to me from FOTF in
response to Mr. Alexander-Moegerle’s allegations & book.

In Him,
JTC
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks (JTC) for your email.

We believe the attached statements are responsive to your questions;
hopefully they will clarify the issues of concern to you.

If you have further questions, please feel free to contact us again.

Cory West
Focus on the Family

—————————————-

STATEMENT OF THE FOCUS ON THE FAMILY BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Dated: March 21, 1997

The Board of Directors of Focus on the Family has become aware of Gil
Alexander-Moegerle’s book entitled JAMES DOBSON’S WAR ON
AMERICA. We regret sincerely that a former employee and member of
this Board of Directors has chosen to make outlandish and
unsubstantiated claims about Focus on the Family and its President,
James C. Dobson, Ph.D.

As a Board of Directors, we take very seriously our responsibility to set
policy and direct the course of a ministry which God has so evidently
blessed. In our capacity as Directors, we exercise direction and control
over the financial policies of the ministry, its accounting and tax
reporting
policies, and the manner in which its funds are expended. The financial
statements of the ministry are audited annually by outside, independent
certified public accountants for the specific purpose of assuring us, the
Board of Directors, as well as the general public, of the integrity and
accuracy of the financial records of the ministry. Never once in the
history of this ministry have its auditors questioned the integrity of
its
financial reporting and accounting practices.

We are particularly troubled by the allegations made by Mr.
Alexander-Moegerle that our President, Dr. Dobson, is somehow free
from accountability to this Board of Directors. That is simply untrue.
Dr.
Dobson regularly reports to this Board, at every Board meeting, and
frequently in between, on the financial transactions of the ministry, its
programs and its activities; often, he even reports on his own, personal
writing activities conducted outside the ministry, a matter over which we
have no jurisdiction. With the blessing and the approval of this Board,
Dr.
Dobson does not receive compensation from Focus on the Family, nor
has he ever accepted even one dollar from the ministry.

As a Board of Directors, we are particularly offended by Mr.
Alexander-Moegerle’s assertion that ministry funds have been improperly
used for the personal benefit of individuals, including
Alexander-Moegerle’s former wife. As Mr. Alexander-Moegerle knows,
having served as a Vice President of this organization, and having
participated in the very adoption of the policy, since 1981 Focus on the
Family has followed the practice of making available up to three percent
(3%) of its annual revenue for benevolence purposes to aid those who
are incapable of helping themselves. We are astonished that Mr.
Alexander-Moegerle has so twisted the facts as to place a sinister cast
on good-faith efforts by this ministry to aid his former wife at a time
when he would not do so.

We know of no instance in which the funds of this ministry have been
directed to individuals or organizations for improper purposes. Annually
the audited financial statements of the ministry are presented to us for
review and approval. In each case, we, as a Board, have approved and
ratified those statements.

Another distortion in Mr. Alexander-Moegerle’s book reflects his gross
misrepresentation of his role in the early days of Focus on the Family.
He was _not_ a co-founder, as he asserts. Nor does he have any
current information about the ministry. He resigned April 30, 1987, and
he has had no contact with this organization since. Thus, his claim to
be
an “insider” who is privy to ministry particulars and Dr. Dobson’s
relationships with the staff is patently untrue. Indeed, the entire book
is a
compilation of distortion, extrapolation and falsehoods.

In summary, we are aware of threats by Mr. Alexander-Moegerle in the
past that he would “bring James Dobson down.” We are united in our
opinion that Mr. Alexander-Moegerle’s book is nothing more than his
misguided attempt to carry out his threat. This book represents an
irresponsible attack on a ministry which has so evidently been blessed
by the Lord and slander of a man who has selflessly dedicated himself
for 20 years to the healing of the American family and the advancement
of the Kingdom of God.

As a Board of Directors, we stand squarely behind Dr. Dobson and this
ministry and reaffirm our commitment to its goals and purposes.

(Signed By)
Bobb Biehl, M.A.
Lee Eaton
Ted Engstrom, L.H.D.
Patrick P. Caruana, M.S.
Shirley D. Dobson
Donald P. Hodel
Kay Coles James
Elsa D. Prince
Michael Roberts, D.D.S.
Adrian Pierce Rogers, Th.M.
Tony Wauterlek
—————————————–

GIL MOEGERLE AND CAROLYN ALEXANDER’S RESIGNATION LETTER
TO FOCUS ON THE FAMILY (submitted by Gil Moegerle and Carolyn
Alexander to Focus on the Family on April 27, 1987; the following is a
copy of the text)

Gil Moegerle
Carolyn Alexander
April 27, 1987

Dr. James Dobson
FOCUS ON THE FAMILY

Dear Jim,

This letter will serve as our written notice of resignation from the
staff of
Focus on the Family.

We do so in light of recent events:

On April 13th, when we informed Shirley and you that we had become
involved in a very meaningful relationship and planned to marry, we
appreciated your response of excitement regarding what we have found
in each other, as well as the normalcy in family life Malisa, Lanise and
Todd will now experience.

But you also expressed concern that the marriage might be the object of
rumors and gossip, coming so quickly after the divorce. We deeply
appreciated your support of the fact that there is absolutely no
connection between the divorce and the new relationship.

We were surprised to hear that this experience, which we believe is
providential, may signal the possibility of great risk to Focus on the
Family. But we respect your judgement and have grown to understand
your perspective.

Because of the atmosphere created by the Jim Bakker scandal, you
indicated that the situation should be reviewed by the cabinet and the
Board of Directors.

On April 17th, the Board took the position that a serious possibility of
misunderstanding existed within the evangelical community as a result of
our marriage plans and asked if we would leave our very visible roles in
this ministry to protect against that possibility.

This letter is a formal acknowledgement that we are willing to do so, and
understand the situation. We hereby resign effective immediately, with
great appreciation for the privilege of serving the Lord at Focus on the
Family.

Gil Moegerle
Carolyn Alexander

P.S. We desire to attend all three film premier staff chapels in order
to
share first hand the response of our friends and colleagues as they
view the finished products of our months of work.
—————————————-

LETTER TO FOCUS ON THE FAMILY FROM MR. PAUL D. NELSON,
PRESIDENT OF THE EVANGELICAL COUNCIL FOR FINANCIAL
ACCOUNTABILITY (sent to Focus on the Family on March 12, 1997; the
following is a copy of the text)

Evangelical Council For Financial Accountability
March 12, 1997

Mr. Paul Hetrick
Focus on the Family
8605 Explorer Drive
Colorado Springs, CO 80920

Dear Paul,

I have just completed reading a copy of Gil-Alexander-Moegerle’s book
_James Dobson’s War on America_. Needless to say, I am appalled at
what Gil has written. I believe his book is proof-positive that
rationalization has no upper limits, especially when it has ten years to
fester.

I find it curious that as one who worked nearly as long as Gil did with
James Dobson and Focus on the Family (and in fact served for two
years as Gil’s administrative supervisor) many of the stories in the book
that are recognizable to me appear only as grotesque caricatures of
what I recall. For example, I found it interesting to learn that Gil was
a
co-founder of Focus on the Family.

Gil has tried airing his grievance against James Dobson and Focus on the
Family in many venues. He routinely used a methodology that attempted
to gain support for his position until it became clear that the one being
solicited did not accept his position. At that point, the individual or
organization became his enemy and the target of criticism. I watched
this at close range over a period of years as Gil waged a ferocious, but
ineffective, public relations campaign against the ministry.

Gil took his case to civil court and lost and then blamed the system. He
wrote letters to the media all around the country to no avail. He tried
publishers but no one would accept his material as rational. He took his
case to James Dobson’s peers in ministry but none of them could
understand his reasoning. He filed complaints with members of
Congress, with the internal Revenue Service, with numerous watchdog
agencies, demanding that they all conduct an investigation. None of them
took him seriously. He attempted to coerce employees and former
employees of Focus, seeking out many whom he thought would be
enemies of the ministry. But none of them would join him. This book
reveals that he has taken a final step by turning his guns on his own
faith and heritage, apparently concluding that everyone in “Christiandom”
is either controlled by or fearful of James Dobson. What an absurdity!

In his desperation to find someone who would take his case, Gil
apparently has found a sympathetic ear from age-old adversaries of the
evangelical community. They have used him as a classic betrayer to
attack someone whose values they despise. It’s as though Gil has sold
out everything for revenge.

In my opinion, the book promises much in the way of “expose” but does
not deliver. Repeated buildups toward anticipated punch lines dissipate
in 10 to 15 year-old stories. I found myself asking over and over, “Who
cares?” Gil is a highly talented dreamer and actor who remains bitter
that failures in his personal life and relationships prevented him from
rising in prominence with his former colleague. I am very sorry for him
and saddened by his book. From one who was close to both him and
James Dobson, I can say with certainty that this man has taken far more
from Focus on the Family than he ever gave to it.

Sincerely,

Paul D. Nelson
President

——— End forwarded message ———-

— End —

Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 01:36:26 -0700
From: ohbrudder
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: more 10 cent worth

I’m sort of an old and opinionated ABC. I thought I’d add another 10
cent worth . . . I’m up to 20 cents now.

WOMEN IN MINISTRY. My daughter loves the Lord and wants to serve Him
thru her career. Minored in youth ministry at Azusa Pacific. She taught
at a Christian school. She worked at Door of Hope, a ministry to help
homeless families get back on their feet. But she quit all those jobs
and became unemployed for over 6 months and sought the Lord for guidance
and help; her own decision. Then Rock the Nations, a youth crusade
ministry, hired her a couple of months ago to be on staff, discipling
youth among other ministries. She is loving it! An ABC among whites, so
she sort of sticks out. But she is confident she is where God wants her
and where He puts her is for her highest good and His glory. What more
can any believer want, man or woman?

MARLENE. Could this be an encouragement to you and your girls? Thru the
years from high school thru college, she always found some way to serve
in the church. Played drums or guitar in worship and led worship
sometimes. Taught classes. Discipling many girls, one on one. Crisscross
the country with various music ministries and youth ministries,
including tours to Belize, Central America. Her reputation preceded her
and someone at RTN knew her and had worked with her in the past and
recommended her. I’m proud of her. . . her faith and faithfulness led
her.

Bill Leong

— End —

From: gdot@juno.com
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: more 10 cent worth
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:44:48 EDT

Bill, thx. A poem about ‘Him’ for the ladies. G

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

A Pregnant Truth

Job 38:29: “From whose womb comes the ice?”

Steadily, a glacier forming,
tiny toes of salty sea
fingerlets of frozen crystals
winter in the womb of He

farther North than solar weather,
dwelling place of stellar air,
founder of the word forever,
power of the polar bear,

silent as the sound of silence
calling from the icy tomb,
solid men in cold defiance
melt down at the Arctic womb

c.1996 go

On Mon, 06 Oct 1997 01:36:26 -0700 ohbrudder
writes:
>I’m sort of an old and opinionated ABC. I thought I’d add another 10
>cent worth . . . I’m up to 20 cents now.
>
>WOMEN IN MINISTRY. My daughter loves the Lord and wants to serve Him
>…
>MARLENE. Could this be an encouragement to you and your girls?

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 11:41:38 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Fwd: A/PI Catholics?

CACers:

Anyone on this list can help Rachel? Thanks. – Tim
———————
Forwarded message:
From: rab60@columbia.edu (Rachel A. R. Bundan)
To: aaasposts@uclink4.Berkeley.EDU, AARCSPOSTS@socrates.berkeley.edu
Date: 97-10-06 01:45:17 EDT

(with apologies for multiple postings)

I’m a Catholic Fil-Am doctoral student in Ethics at Union Theological
Seminary in NYC.

I ran across an account of the births of both the Black Catholic
Theological Symposium (BCTS) and the Academy of Catholic Hispanic
Theologians in the U.S. (ACHTUS). This led me to wonder whether there are
any other Asian/Pacific American Catholics out there anywhere in the realm
of theological education or (more broadly) religious studies who would be
interested in being partners in dialogue, especially re: how you engage
both questions of race/ethnicity/culture AND of Catholicism in your
academic and/or ministerial work, if at all. I don’t suppose there are a
huge # of folks out there who fit the description, so it might not be
practical to organize as a group at present– although it would be a
pleasant surprise to be proven wrong on this count! I just thought this
might be a worthwhile connection to make. Whatever energy + insight any of
you can provide would be deeply appreciated.

ANOTHER REQUEST ALTOGETHER: I’m working on a project re: Filipino Catholic
immigration to the U.S. Literature specifically on this is limited at
best, so I am looking for library/archival resources, subjects (especially
post-1965 wave, 1st-generation) to interview for oral histories,
communities/parishes to check out, + other relevant contacts. East Coast
leads or suggestions (whether north or south) would obviously be easier for
me to pursue immediately, but I suspect the “better” (+ more plentiful)
stuff is out west, so I will gladly consider anyone + anything anywhere.
Again, whatever you can offer would be welcome.

Please reply to me directly rather than through the list. [To message
recipients who are neither A/PI nor Catholic OR who have access to other
lists: feel free to circulate this note to anyone whom you think might be
interested or suitable.] Thanks.

……………………………………
Rachel A. R. Bundang
Constructive Theologies, Praxis, & Ethics
Union Theological Seminary
rbundang@alumni.princeton.edu
……………………………………

— End —

From: SKYLeung@aol.com
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 23:53:23 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Forgiveness and Reconciliation

[What would you have said?]

Dear CACers,

Yep, I was there… I was one of those poor lemmings drawn into the mass
hysteria and religious mob experience. Ever smelled skepticism? Sensed it
all day today. But, I shared all day and I’m here to say (for the record) I
was enthralled with what God did on the Mall! Yep, I was there at The
Assembly!

I could go on at length about the impact and the strength… but, I suppose
there are those that would grow weary. So, I’ll limit the ‘trons and not
banter on about what made me the most teary…

Ah, in what might fellow CACers be interested?

Well, there was “wreckonciliation!”

Jack Hayford, as he introduced the segment, in front of the masses confessed
to his previous, subconscious, desire to wash his hands after shaking the
hands of blacks. Then there were the whites being led into confession of
their prejudice, arrogance, and injustices. There were all the other major
ethnic groups led in their confessions of bitterness, resentment, and
reciprocating prejudice. Dr. Bruce Fong led the short prayer for Asians,
confessing to pride in culture and aloofness from the problems of race. It
wasn’t long and comprehensive. But like the others, it was offered in a very
appropriate and contrite spirit. I believe the most heartfelt and emotive
prayers were those of the American Indian pastor and the Messianic Jewish
pastor – expressing the pain of their peoples; yet without a vindicative or
accusatory attitude. I was glad God has raised leaders like these; I knew
deep down we were moving beyond “pep rally” or even another outdoor worship
service.

What would you have said if you were in Bruce Fong’s position? Notice, he
omitted any mention of exploitation, cheap labor, internment camps,
exclusionary laws, or the animosity that other minorities have displayed
towards Asians. Other speakers, such as Dr. Raleigh Washington, have brought
it up on other occassions. Dr. Fong is a thinker, so I don’t think it was a
matter of oversight on his part? How would you have led the prayer? What
would you have communicated?

I missed some of the final rhetoric. There were several distractions. One
was Carlos Dominguez. He hailed from Salem, OR. He obviously sought me out
because I was Asian. He asked me my nationality, and I told him I was
Chinese. That didn’t phase him too much – he still wanted to ask me for
forgiveness!

His story (which he managed to get out after a bit of uncontrolled sobbing):
his mother was placed in a concentration camp by the Japenese during WWII.
She is still very bitter towards Japanese. He grew up thinking it was her
problem; not his. But, he acknowledged to me that he’s come to realize some
of the resentment has rubbed off and he does have hard feelings against
Asians from time to time. Because of this he was seeking forgiveness from me
( a complete stranger).

My mind raced. I didn’t know what would be the appropriate thing to say as
he was sharing. “Hey, I’m not Japanese!” “You’ve never seen me before – so
you couldn’t have borne me ill will in the past…” “Can a representative
really ask for or grant forgiveness on behalf of an entire people group?”
“I’m no priest!” “Well, he’s a Christian and… God’s already forgiven
him.” “1 John 1:9 – it’s taken care of, right!?” “Wait, John 20:23 & Matt.
18:18; do I have an responsibility to loose and forgive?” All these thoughts
raced through my mind. He searched my face for a sign of forgiveness. “God
forgives you, ” I managed. I knew that to be true. But I knew it wasn’t
exactly what he had hoped to hear me say. Still I didn’t know if it was my
place to say. But, then, all of a sudden, it didn’t matter. God showed me I
had to confess to this brother. So I shared about how I had from time to
time harbored a condescending attitude towards Latinos. I related how, in
particular, I ocassionally thought of my brother’s Hispanic girlfriend as
somehow “beneath” him. Wow! Where did that come from? Yet it was quite
liberating and I really sensed I had said enough to Carlos. This wasn’t just
praying with a brother of another color! This was breaking down walls – my
own; not just someone else’s! I have to admit, I didn’t expect this kind of
thing to happen going into The Assembly – I was suprised by repentance…
What would you have said? Would you have forgiven on behalf of all Asians?
On behalf of the Japanese?

The Metro ride out of DC took 45 minutes – standing room only. But, it went
quickly. We met many more men from around the country. Asked how we’d stay
fired up and execute the action points, we gave stock answers at first – mens
groups, service at the shelters, etc. But, then we had to come forth and
admit little hope on our part for successfully encouraging our 1st Gen.
pastors to meet with other pastors throughout the city on a regular basis to
pray, plan and strategize over what could be done for our city. (Hey, didn’t
Brother Ken just say something along these lines?) We also expressed little
hope that our church would break out of our “denominational”/ “evangelical”
arrogance and embrace any of the “unity with diversity,” bridging of
sectarianism, ideas espoused at The Assembly. Our brothers from SC parted
ways with us promising to pray for us, e-mail us, and understanding a little
bit more about the predicament we second generation types face. We were
thankful for the chance to chat on the trip back. But, we didn’t know if we
had said enough, too much, or too little? What would you have said?

Enough for now! With those who write and express interest, I’ll share about
the charred Bible found at the site of the one reported accident involving
folks headed down for The Assembly. Believe me, you won’t read about it in
the Washington Post.

Laus Deo,
Stephen Leung
Alexandria, VA
CCCVA – Falls Church

— End —

From: SKYLeung@aol.com
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 00:02:26 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Correction

Oops, my mistake. I see that it’s Brother Arthur and not Brother Ken that
should be attributed with the recent remarks about few Asians appearing at
city-wide pastoral meetings. My apologies for the switch-up.

BTW, I hope those of you who are pastors aren’t offended by my use of the
title “Brother” for everyone. Around the Southern Baptist circles in which I
grew up, the term is actually an esteemed title given to the Pastor as well.

In the Redeemer,
Stephen Leung

— End —

From: Rlfong@aol.com
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 02:50:27 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Humor

way too serious lately. here’s a joke or two.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grandpa and granddaugher were sitting talking when she
asked, “Did God make you, Grandpa?”

“Yes, God made me,” the grandfather answered.

A few minutes later, the little girl asked him, “Did God make
me too?”

“Yes, He did,” the older man answered.

For a few minutes, the little girl seemed to be studying her
grandpa, as well as her own reflection in the mirror, while her
grandfather wondered what was running through her mind.

At last she spoke up. “You know, Grandpa,” she said, “God’s
doing a lot better job lately.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~
Every year, just before Easter, the Chief Rabbi in Rome goes
to the Vatican and presents an ancient, and by now quite
tattered envelope to the Pope.

The Pope inspects the envelope, shakes his head, and hands
it back to the Chief Rabbi, who then departs. This has been
going on for nearly two thousand years.

One year recently, it happened that there was a new Pope
and a new Chief Rabbi. When the Chief Rabbi presented the
ancient envelope to the Pope, as he had been instructed to do
by his predecessor, the Pope looked it over and handed it
back as he had been told to, in turn, by his predecessor…but
then the Pope said, “This is an unusual ritual. I don’t
understand it. What is in this envelope?”

“Damned if I know,” answered the Chief Rabbi. “I’m new here
myself. But, hey, let’s open it and find out.”

“Good idea,” said the Pope.

So together, they slowly and carefully opened the envelope.
And do you know what they found?

The caterer’s bill for the Last Supper!
~~~~~~~~~

— End —

From: JWongCDI@aol.com
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 15:58:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: ohbrudder@prodigy.net
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: up to 20 cents now

Ohbrudder wrote…
“WOMEN IN MINISTRY. My daughter loves the Lord and wants to serve Him thru
her career… But she is confident she is where God wants her and where He
puts her is for her highest good and His glory. What more can any believer
want, man or woman?”

I often wonder when I read or hear this kind of testimony, is it OK? Does
the questions only occur to me?

Is what have been said or written, REAL? Is the description given by those
closest to the experience really real? Of course, who can challenge a
personal testimony? But does the person’s description of their own
experiences automatically accurately real? Or does it matter? As long as
the person is happy with their own description,…

Another thought may be that who can challenge another’s personal walk with
their Lord? or Should it be done?

I wonder whether our commitment to individualism has created a loss of
dependency on a group or expected accountability by a group.

This memo is one of those, “fools rush in where…” I’m not sure I’m ready
for the results from this 10 cents input.

Joe

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 19:15:28 -0500
Subject: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

— forwarded message —

Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 18:34
From: Grace May

Greetings!
I’ve been listening eagerly to the honest and encouraging exchange
we’ve been having as we grapple with Scriptures, an array of complex
social issues and our location in the church and the world as
Asian-Americans. Thx Tim & Sze-kar for paving the way and Marlene and
Bill for spurring me to enter the discussion on Women in Ministry at
this time.

Introduction
My name is Grace May. I am a second-generation Chinese American, who
grew up in New York City. The daughter of a devout Christian mother, I
came to know the Lord at a young age. Praying and reading the
Scriptures were familiar experiences at home as was attending church on
Sundays. In the main, I have participated in three Chinese churches:
The Chinese Gospel Church, the Oversea Chinese Mission and the the
Chinese Bible Church of Greater Boston — the first two churches
situated in the heart of Chinatown and the the third in suburbia.
During my college years I attended a predominantly white church, the
Evangelical Free Church of West Haven.
It was in my Junior year at college that I began wrestling with the
issue of women’s leadership in the church. Sensing a call in my life,
I attended Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary where I continued to
study “the woman’s issue,” researching and exegeting the difficult
issues surrounding the topic while enjoying the support of mentors and
peers. I graduated with an M.Div, did some parachurch work and am now
serving at the Roxbury Presbyterian Church, a predominantly black church
in Boston, while trying to write my dissertation on Watchman Nee and the
breaking of bread. I occasionally also give talks on Women and the
Bible for InterVarsity and at Chinese church conferences.

Women & Men in Ministry
I cannot encourage sisters and brothers more to exercise their gifts
in God’s service. In the Garden, God created us each in the divine
image and commanded us both to serve as stewards of creation (Gen.
1:27,28). Prejudice, abuse and inequality are not by God’s design but
a direct result of the fall. Christ, however, came to set us free from
the curse and its dread consequences. Thus, as members of the Body of
Christ, we can take the lead in mutual respect and mutual submission.
We can create new models of relating to one another in the family, in
the church and in society.
Brothers, we need you to take more risks to open up the places of
privilege and power in the church and in other venues that have
traditionally been reserved for men. (I feel blessed to know brothers
in CAC who publically voice their support of their sisters.)
Sisters, we need you to fulfill the calling that God has given you and
to use your God-given gifts. (None of the gift lists in Scripture are
gender-specific, see Rom. 12:6-8, I Cor. 12:7-11, Eph 4:11-12). You
have inherited the legacy of a great host of witnesses: Women who
discipled you and influenced your growth as a Christian; Bible women,
evangelists and pastors in Chinese (as well as American) church history
who have dared to go against the cultural grain to obey God.; and of
course, the great women of faith recorded in Scripture: Miriam, Rahab,
Ruth, Deborah, Hannah, Esther, Huldah, Anna, Elizabeth, Mary, Phillip’s
four daughters, Priscilla, Phoebe.

Still Interested?
If you’re interested in hearing more about how I see Scriptures
supporting women in leadership, please read an article I co-authored
with Hyunhye Joe “Setting the Record Straight: a Response to J.I.
Packer’s Position on Women’s Ordination” (Spring 1997) or “Who’s Who?
Biblical Modles of Women in Leadership, Pt. 1 & 2” (Spring & Summer,
1993) in Priscilla Papers, a journal of Christians for Biblical
Equality.
(Ask for a copy via http://www.goldengate.net/mall/cbe/may.htm or
cbe@minn.net)


*

— End —

From: ArtZech46@aol.com
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 02:11:10 -0400 (EDT)
To: SKYLeung@aol.com
cc: ArtZech46@aol.com, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Forgiveness and Reconciliation

Dear Stephen,
Thanks for your personal report on the Promise Keepers. I believe that God
had a plan in having that Hispanic brother seek you out. I think the
difficult thing for us Asians to admit, (including myself) are the
predjudices we have held ourselves.

For myself, growing up in an all white neighborhood as one of the only Asians
I felt I was the minority and the one being discriminated against. I was
even picked on for being Chinese.

I think the trap we fall into is that we see ourselves as the victims. We
feel that others have treated us Chinese/Asians unfairly in America. Sure,
we could have a laundry list of wrongs. The Exclusion Acts, slave labor
treatment in building the transamerica railroad, internment camps, etc. The
list is never ending.

But I feel that we need to deal with the sin in our own hearts. I feel one
the the sins we Chinese have is that of pride and self sufficiency. For
myself I admit that Chinese often look down at other minorities. After all
the media calls us the “model minority.” This in my humble opinion is a
distorted image we have bought into.

I think too often we look at the speck in other’s eyes without examining our
own logs. Just for my own exercise let me list what I feel are some of the
things we need to examine. I wish I had heard what Bruce Fong had said.
(Maybe someone could send us the words of his prayer.)

1) Pride: Thinking that we are better and smarter than others. (I once
heard a Chinese pastor say in a sermon that genetically Chinese were smarter
than other people)
2) Materialism: Pursuing money as a God.
3) Passivisim: Non involvement in issues that concern the community. Not
taking the responsibility to vote or register. (An obligation in my book for
any Christian citizen)
4) Failure to Pray for America. Chinese come to reap material benefits from
America but don’t pray for the welfare of the nation. They don’t see the
problems in the society as their responsibility.
5) Poor testimony for Christ. Chinese churches causing division by
splitting the body of Christ.
6) Idolatry. Chinese bring idols & their gods into this country. Even
build temples. (This is not against religious freedom but we need to
recognize the spiritual warfare that occurs with worshipping other gods,
etc.)

Why do I mention these as a 3rd generation ABC? Hey, didn’t Nehemiah ask for
forgiveness for his own people’s sins although he was in Babylon? I think
it’s called identificational repentance. If we are part of the immigrant
church, which I am by calling, I must take some responsibility for my
brothers and sisters in Christ in the church. I cannot say that this is the
problem of the OBC only. I am part of an OBC church. It is my/our problem.

I do not think we can honor God by continually pointing fingers at a group of
people and say “You are the reason the church is experiencing problems, Fix
it.” Doesn’t Christian love and commitment compel me to be part of the
solution. Some may say that trying to help the Chinese church in North
America is an uphill struggle. To me the motivation must be love. I love
the Chinese church enough to be a part of making it whole. I know I can’t do
it on my own. Some may call it impossible. But I call it the ministry of
reconcilliation.

Your comments or contrary opinions are welcomed.

For the Kingdom,
Rev. Arthur Lum
Chinese Church in Christ
San Jose, CA (Silicon Valley)

P.S. Stephen, please send me the story about the burnt Bible

— End —

Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 00:40:12 -0700
From: ohbrudder
To: JWongCDI@aol.com
CC: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: up to 20 cents now

JWongCDI@aol.com wrote:
>
> I often wonder when I read or hear this kind of testimony, is it OK?
>
> Is what have been said or written, REAL? Is the description given by those closest to the experience really real?
>
> I wonder whether our commitment to individualism has created a loss of
> dependency on a group or expected accountability by a group.
>
> This memo is one of those, “fools rush in where…” I’m not sure I’m ready for the results from this 10 cents input.

What a cynical response to my daughter’s testimony!
And Joe called her a “fool” to boot! As a father, I am
stepping forward to defend my daughter’s honor. If
it was me who was insulted, I might have just
considered the source and let it pass.

The Lord would have me defend my daughter like
this: “Father, forgive him for he knew not what
he did.” Michelle would “Amen” that. Besides,
if I was Joe, I would consider what Jesus said
about someone who called someone a “fool.” Mt.5.22.

I happen to know that Michelle did not rush into
anything and she was far from being individualistic
in her search for God’s will.. For the sake of brevity,
in my previous 10 cent contribution,
I did not detail everything she did nor her rationale
in the final decision she finally made. She “tested
the spirit” of what she received from the Lord.
She waited upon God in prayer and fasting, sought
the council of her discipler, ministers, Christian
friends for both direction and confirmation of the
job she finally took at Rock the Nations.

I’m very proud of Michelle! All she did was take
Jesus at His word, “Ask and it shall be given to you;
seek and you shall find, knock and the door will be
opened to you.” If she is a fool for trusting the word
of Christ, then she is, and please count me a fool also.

And may I add the Lord use foolishness to confound
the wise; its His modus operandi.

I’ll address the cynical part in another posting.

bill leong

— End —

Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 17:53:47 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

Dear Grace:

Welcome! I was wondering when you would surface:-) I hope your
participation would encourage other sisters to take a more active part
in this forum which unfortunately has been dominated by vociferous males
like me.

Thanks for your words and your article. The latter I downloaded last
night and had a quick glance of. Will respond to it when I can read it
mroe carefully. It looks sophisticated and involved, and I would urge
everyone to take seriously the issues raised there. It’s tough to be an
Evangelical feminist these days, for you seem to be fighting battles on
all fronts.

Peace and grace,
Sze-kar

PS: No pun intended; I’m just a diehard Paulinist.

— End —

Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 19:50:15 -0700
To: cac@emwave.net
From: Tom Steers
Sender: owner-cac@emwave.net

To Art Lum re:

“Maybe you will develop something out of your So. Cal Asian
American PK conference? ”

Art, F.Y.I., the SoCal Asian American men’s conference that is starting to
be planned for next year is not going to be a PK event. It will be
sponsored by churches and parachurch organizations, of which one may be the
PKs. We are choosing to operate independently from PK because the Lord
might lead us to also do a woman’s conference at a later date, or a
conference for pastors.

Also, regarding your comments about mentoring via Evergreen and ” but
what about the other 95% of Asian Am leaders?” You will be encouraged to
know that last March 25th, 70 SoCal Asian American Pastors and Parachurch
leaders got together for 4 hours at the San Gabriel Presbyterian Church for
sharing what God was doing in their ministry, for prayer, and for hearing
an excellent message from Pastor Dr. Ken Fong. He gave his
“bass-salmon-cod” message that he mentioned on the CAC network on 2/7/97.
This type of mentoring was dynamite because the leaders were not only
descendents from the older Chinese and Japanese immigrant groups, but there
were Filipinos, Koreans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Indian, Laotian, + Thai.
All of these leaders were ministering in English, not the language of their
origin. They all needed to hear from the experience of Evergreen…and
thanks to Ken for making himself available to share it in a helpful way.
There was much interest in having another meeting like this so we’ll put
one together for next March….there is a hunger down here to relate and
get input. Maybe you could come down for the day and join us? You were
candid in sharing about leadership development in an OBC church setting.
Thanks for the transperancy. He gives grace to the humble. And, I pray
the Lord will develop your leadership in a wonderful and powerful way, even
though the environment is not autonomous.

Tom Steers
L.A.

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 00:48:59 -0400 (EDT)
To: Clarence.Cheuk@wheaton.edu
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Resources for Asian American materials

Clarence:

Please forgive me for forgetting to send you the address where you can order
or rent Asian American film or videos two or three weeks ago. I’ve also
added the addresses of some book stores that specialize in Asian American
materials and posted it on the CAC list for our subscribers’ information.
Also, for a more thorough list of Asian American Christian resources, you
may want to check with PAACCE (Pacific Asian American and Canadian Christian
Education project). Let me know and I’ll see if I can connect you with
PAACCE. Next week, I’ll have a bibliography of published works on Asian
American studies available, so if anyone would like to see it, please e-mail
me privately. Thanks. – Tim

NAATA CrossCurrent Media
(Asian Pacific American Film, Video and Audio Collection)
346 Ninth Street, 2d/floor
San Francisco, CA 94103
(415) 552-9550
FAX (415) 863-7428

Books, etc.:

Eastwind Books & Arts, Inc.
633 Vallejo Street
San Francisco, CA 94133
(415) 772-5899
FAX (415) 772-5885

AACP, Inc.
234 Main Street
P.O. Box 1587
San Mateo, CA 94401
(800) 874-2242
(415) 343-9408
FAX (415) 343-5711

Shen’s Books and Supplies
821 South First Ave.
Arcadia, CA 91006
(800) 456-6660
(818) 445-6940

Some of this information may be dated, so if anyone has up-to-date info (or
additional resources), please post on the CAC list. Thanks.

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 01:42:03 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action

CACers:

There was a NY Times article today (Oct 8) which reported on a study which
showed that beneficiaries of affirmative action in college or grad. school
did just as well as those who entered on basis of “merit” alone afterwards.
If you’d like a copy (and cannot access the NY Times), let me know and I’ll
send it to you. – 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:36:04 +0000
From: Grace May
To: wans@monet.bc.edu
CC: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: CAC: Women & Men

Dear Sze-kar,
Thx for the encouragement. I hardly find you vociferous. On the
contrary, I have enjoyed your support immensely and esp. found your
piece on Gal. 3:28 helpful. Paul’s plea for inclusivity, I believe,
gets at the heart of the gospel. I look forward to your comments,
understandably from a Pauline perspective.
Blessings,
Grace
— End —

From: gdot@juno.com
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: CAC: Women & Men
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 12:51:34 EDT

Grace:

Here’s a vociferous question for you: who is Pauline?

🙂

Bro. G

On Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:36:04 +0000 Grace May writes:
>Dear Sze-kar,
>…I look forward to your comments, understandably from a Pauline
perspective.

— End —

From: ArtZech46@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 12:41:11 -0400 (EDT)
To: destiny@hooked.net
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Leadership

Dear Tom,
Thanks for the information. Like I said, I’m probably out of the loop. I
was ministering in So. Cal until January of 1996. Looks like I moved just
as things began to pick up.

Things are less developed here in No. Cal. We have a handful of Asian Am
churches in the Bay area. Maybe not more than about 12? (Purely English
speaking Asian churches with no other language group.) We did have an Asian
Summit back in March with Louis Lee helping to coordinate that. But I think
our development is about 10 years behind that in So. Cal.

Any suggestions on what we could do up here? Please let me know when you
will be meeting in March. Maybe we can send a No. Cal delegation or
something. Maybe Ken can offer some suggestions. Our resources and energy
are less developed here.

For the Kingdom,
Arthur Lum

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: God raising women to bring in the harvest
From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong)
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 17:03:24 EDT

In regard to Ken Fong’s reasoning about God raising women to bring in the
harvest.: 10/3/97

The point I seem to understand is that God must be raising women for
leadership in the ministry since it is very practical and wise and
BECAUSE these women are very qualified and often more qualified than men
to carry out the ministry. Would it be just as true that God must be
raising women to become head of their marriages because they are well
motivated and qualified to become the head, and many are becoming better
heads than man? Should the husband then, who is much less capable,
submit to his wife?

I believe that the expediency of the situation, which often is very
emotionally charged, does not become the determinator that this must be
God’s desire or that it is the principle to work by.. Rather we should
remain within the boundaries of the principle to find the solution.

Just a thot in response to Tim’s letter to Ken on 10/1 about leadership.
Perhaps the problem is much greater than the lack of good and godly
leadership for the Asian-Amer. churches. Greater in this sense. What
if the few good and godly leadership we are training and mentoring are
not being trained to meet and therefore does not meet the standards of I
Tim. 3? And also, what if many of those we view as good and godly
leaders does not meet the standards of I Tim. 3? Then the problem is
lacking good and godly leaders according to I Tim. 3 in the Asian-Amer.
churches..
The need would be the goal of leadership training (not just scholarship)
as well as the need for training.

Ben Wong

— End —

From: HarryWLew@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:40:34 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action

Dear CACers,

This in response to yet another of Tim’s pro-affirmative action posts:

You should know that the woman who did the so-called study is not without her
critics. The story first appeared a month or so ago, and since then there
have been several articles that criticized the study for bias (finding what
she set out to look for, ignoring relevant data that would contradict her
conclusion, etc.) and the smallness of her sampling. I’m not surprised that
the liberal New York Times would rehash the story in a favorable light.

A more significant story, largely ignored by the media is the fact that
Asian-Americans (not whites) have been the big winners in the elimination of
affirmative action through Proposition 209.

Talk to Chinese-American students from schools like the University of
Michigan, Oberlin College, and Northwestern University as I have, and you
will find very few who do not know of an African-American or Hispanic high
school classmate with lower G.P.A. and S.A.T. test scores who was able to get
into Stanford or an Ivy League school such as Harvard or Yale.

That’s why the large majority of Chinese-Americans are against affirmative
action. It is not fair nor is it in our best interest.

Yours in Christ,
Harry Lew

P.S. Sensible African-Americans like Shelby Steele have eloquently argued
that affirmation action does not in the long run benefit African-Americans
either. By focusing on the elimination of affirmative action, the proponents
of quotas ignore the deeper issue of why African-Americans cannot adequately
compete with whites and Asian-Americans to get into college and grad school
in the first place.

— End —

Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 19:30:19 -0700
From: ohbrudder
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: up to 20 cents now

ohbrudder wrote:
>
> JWongCDI@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Is what have been said or written, REAL? Is the description given by those
> > closest to the experience really real? Of course, who can challenge a
> > personal testimony? But does the person’s description of their own
> > experiences automatically accurately real? Or does it matter? As long as
> > the person is happy with their own description,…
> >
>
JOE’S CYNICISM. When a young Christian gives a
testimony of how he got saved, is he to be believed?
Shall we ask him, is it real? Shall we question his
experience? Tell him it was just emotions and his
imagination. Make him doubt his salvation? Make
him stumble? Better get that millstone ready!
It is a good thing we are saved through our own
faith and not others.

My personal greatest satifaction and “paycheck”
in my ministry have been the countless testimonies,
cards and letters thanking me for introducing
them to Christ. And Christ not only as savior but
friend. They enter a live relationship of faith
and love with one who is “real”, and God does “real”
things for them and answers their prayers with
“real” answers.

MICHELLE’S EXPERIENCE and testimony is merely
an extension of her salvation experience and testimony.
It was through her faith she received Christ and
it was through her faith she received her job/ministry.
Both by God’s grace as well and Michelle is a
witness of His grace. And we are to be witnesses of
God’s grace in us, are we not? Are we all not to
be witnesses of the Christ story in all of us?

One more response to the cynics, skeptics, doubters.
Like the blind guy Jesus healed said,”I don’t know
about your theological mumble-jumble. I was blind
but now I see.” BLV (Bill Leong Version)

I have another take on Joe’s cynicism which I’ll
post in the future.

— End —

From: HarryWLew@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 22:48:05 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@bccn.org
Subject: CAC_Mail: Why Chinese American students hate affirmative action

Dear CACers,

The short article below is another example of why Chinese American college
students by and large are against affirmative action. It’s from the September
29, 1997 issue of THE NEW REPUBLIC, page 8.

Yours in Christ,
Harry Lew

“FIRST IN THEIR CLASS: We thought affirmative action had long since reached
its reductio ad absurdum. Apparently not. The University of Illinois at
Chicago, it turns out, has given minority students preferences not only in
the admissions process, but in course selection as well. Nearly 4,000
minority students last spring were allowed to enroll early, effectively
taking seats from other classmates.

“The policy was crafted two decades ago to help disabled students and
athletes with scheduling conflicts, but it gradually devolved into a
boondoggle. According to THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, anywhere from 70 to 93 percent
of minority students (African Americans, Native Americans and Hispanics
[[note–NOT Asian Americans because they don’t constitute an
“underrepresented minority” in the academy–HL]]) once qualified for the
preference.

“Now, facing both a federal class-action lawsuit and negative press,
Chancellor David Broski says the policy will return to its original mission
of helping disabled students and overburdened athletes. Yet university
students seeking preferences may not have much to worry about. The guidelines
still include a category for those “differentially qualified” students who
were admitted under less stringent standards. Any takers?”

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:00:55 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: JAPANESE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE

CACers:

Anyone interested in presenting a paper at the following event? – Tim

THE JAPANESE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE. Willamette University, Salem, Oregon,
September 17-19, 1998. The program committee for The Japanese American
Experience, an interdisciplinary conference coordinated with the exhibit
“A More Perfect Union: Japanese Americans and the United States
Constitution,” invites proposals for individual papers, poster exhibits,
and full panels on all aspects of the Japanese American experience, the
wartime internment and related legal issues. Faculty, independent
scholars, and students are all encouraged to apply. Special panels for
undergraduate presentations will be organized. Please submit one page
proposal with cv, and a cover letter for proposed panels to Jennifer
Jopp, History Department, Willamette University, 900 State St., Salem,
Oregon 97301, by January 5, 1998.

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 21:45:55 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

Dear CAC,

On an absolutely serious note, What is the relationship between higher
education and Christian leadership? Of ‘affirmative action’ Harry Lew
comments, below: ‘It is not fair nor is it in our best interest’. Since
‘affirmative action’ AND its alternative have to do with obtaining
(more, higher) education, not necessarily with developing Christian
leadership, THEY may not be in anybody’s ‘best interest’.

(Note: Ben Wong, 10/9, part 2 relates to this issue.)

G

On Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:40:34 -0400 (EDT) HarryWLew@aol.com writes:
>Dear CACers,
>
>This in response to yet another of Tim’s pro-affirmative action posts…
>
>That’s why the large majority of Chinese-Americans are against
affirmative
> action. It is not fair nor is it in our best interest.

— End —

From: SKYLeung@aol.com
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 00:24:53 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Forgiveness and Reconciliation

[What would you have said?]

Dear CACers,

Yep, I was there… I was one of those poor lemmings drawn into the mass
hysteria and religious mob experience. Ever smelled skepticism? Sensed it
all day today. But, I shared all day and I’m here to say (for the record) I
was enthralled with what God did on the Mall! Yep, I was there at The
Assembly!

I could go on at length about the impact and the strength… but, I suppose
there are those that would grow weary. So, I’ll limit the ‘trons and not
banter on about what made me the most teary…

Ah, in what might fellow CACers be interested?

Well, there was “wreckonciliation!”

Jack Hayford, as he introduced the segment, in front of the masses confessed
to his previous, subconscious, desire to wash his hands after shaking the
hands of blacks. Then there were the whites being led into confession of
their prejudice, arrogance, and injustices. There were all the other major
ethnic groups led in their confessions of bitterness, resentment, and
reciprocating prejudice. Dr. Bruce Fong led the short prayer for Asians,
confessing to pride in culture and aloofness from the problems of race. It
wasn’t long and comprehensive. But like the others, it was offered in a very
appropriate and contrite spirit. I believe the most heartfelt and emotive
prayers were those of the American Indian pastor and the Messianic Jewish
pastor – expressing the pain of their peoples; yet without a vindicative or
accusatory attitude. I was glad God has raised leaders like these; I knew
deep down we were moving beyond “pep rally” or even another outdoor worship
service.

What would you have said if you were in Bruce Fong’s position? Notice, he
omitted any mention of exploitation, cheap labor, internment camps,
exclusionary laws, or the animosity that other minorities have displayed
towards Asians. Other speakers, such as Dr. Raleigh Washington, have brought
it up on other occassions. Dr. Fong is a thinker, so I don’t think it was a
matter of oversight on his part? How would you have led the prayer? What
would you have communicated?

I missed some of the final rhetoric. There were several distractions. One
was Carlos Dominguez. He hailed from Salem, OR. He obviously sought me out
because I was Asian. He asked me my nationality, and I told him I was
Chinese. That didn’t phase him too much – he still wanted to ask me for
forgiveness!

His story (which he managed to get out after a bit of uncontrolled sobbing):
his mother was placed in a concentration camp by the Japenese during WWII.
She is still very bitter towards Japanese. He grew up thinking it was her
problem; not his. But, he acknowledged to me that he’s come to realize some
of the resentment has rubbed off and he does have hard feelings against
Asians from time to time. Because of this he was seeking forgiveness from me
( a complete stranger).

My mind raced. I didn’t know what would be the appropriate thing to say as
he was sharing. “Hey, I’m not Japanese!” “You’ve never seen me before – so
you couldn’t have borne me ill will in the past…” “Can a representative
really ask for or grant forgiveness on behalf of an entire people group?”
“I’m no priest!” “Well, he’s a Christian and… God’s already forgiven
him.” “1 John 1:9 – it’s taken care of, right!?” “Wait, John 20:23 & Matt.
18:18; do I have an responsibility to loose and forgive?” All these thoughts
raced through my mind. He searched my face for a sign of forgiveness. “God
forgives you, ” I managed. I knew that to be true. But I knew it wasn’t
exactly what he had hoped to hear me say. Still I didn’t know if it was my
place to say. But, then, all of a sudden, it didn’t matter. God showed me I
had to confess to this brother. So I shared about how I had from time to
time harbored a condescending attitude towards Latinos. I related how, in
particular, I ocassionally thought of my brother’s Hispanic girlfriend as
somehow “beneath” him. Wow! Where did that come from? Yet it was quite
liberating and I really sensed I had said enough to Carlos. This wasn’t just
praying with a brother of another color! This was breaking down walls – my
own; not just someone else’s! I have to admit, I didn’t expect this kind of
thing to happen going into The Assembly – I was suprised by repentance…
What would you have said? Would you have forgiven on behalf of all Asians?
On behalf of the Japanese?

The Metro ride out of DC took 45 minutes – standing room only. But, it went
quickly. We met many more men from around the country. Asked how we’d stay
fired up and execute the action points, we gave stock answers at first – mens
groups, service at the shelters, etc. But, then we had to come forth and
admit little hope on our part for successfully encouraging our 1st Gen.
pastors to meet with other pastors throughout the city on a regular basis to
pray, plan and strategize over what could be done for our city. (Hey, didn’t
Brother Ken just say something along these lines?) We also expressed little
hope that our church would break out of our “denominational”/ “evangelical”
arrogance and embrace any of the “unity with diversity,” bridging of
sectarianism, ideas espoused at The Assembly. Our brothers from SC parted
ways with us promising to pray for us, e-mail us, and understanding a little
bit more about the predicament we second generation types face. We were
thankful for the chance to chat on the trip back. But, we didn’t know if we
had said enough, too much, or too little? What would you have said?

Enough for now! With those who write and express interest, I’ll share about
the charred Bible found at the site of the one reported accident involving
folks headed down for The Assembly. Believe me, you won’t read about it in
the Washington Post.

Laus Deo,
Stephen Leung
Alexandria, VA
CCCVA – Falls Church

— End —

From: SKYLeung@aol.com
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 00:53:52 -0400 (EDT)
To: gdot@juno.com
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Pauline

Brother G, Pauline is a hurricane presently wrecking havoc in Mexico!=)
[Maybe the smiley is inappropriate…]

Brother Sze-kar, “Grace and peace” is also used by Peter. Does that make it
Petrine too? John uses it in the salutation 2 John. Someone has recently
told me that the expanded greatings of the NT are very significant and that
the order of the graces is also noteworthy: grace/mercy, peace, and love.

Apologies to all, I think I left my last posting in the outgoing box and it
just went out accidentally when I activated another “flash session.” AOLers
know what I’m talking about.

Up too late,
Stephen Leung

— End —

Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 23:06:18 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: DJ Chuang
CC: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

Hey, Grace, great to hear from you and what you’re doing these days.
I’m back on the board with IV and getting more involved with our local
LA chapters. In fact, with Jonathan Wu on our staff and two of the
worship leaders from Urbana ministering in music with us, our growing
commitment to urban missions, and multi-Asian/multi-ethnicity, AND
visible female spiritual leaders/preachers, we’re gradually becoming a
church that the typical IV alum can commit to!

Appreciated your comments very much on women in ministry. Here’s the
way I see it in a nutshell: Prior the Fall/Curse, there wasn’t any
emphasis on ‘headship’ or ‘ruling over,’ etc. Because of the Cross, we
are given the opportunity to come out from the shadow of the Curse and
experience ‘re-creation’. With so much talk about the effects of the
Curse on the relationship between men and women, I’m more interested in
stressing that we live by the Cross, which ushers us all back into
healthier relationships that don’t have to fall back on things like
hierarchy in order to have order. Living by God’s grace, we can and
must learn to live in peace with each other.

I’ll be in Boston on the weekend of the 17th for the IFES 50th Jubilee.
Gonna be there?

ken fong
sr. pastor
Evergreen Bapt. Church of LA
Rosemead, CA

— End —

From: “Ray Downen”
Organization: Mission Outreach (Joplin)
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 07:00:06 +0000
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

Ken Fong, and other interested Christians —
Do your comments below imply that the apostle Paul was
living in the past when he exhorted Christians to recognize a
distinction between women and men, with the men to be leaders
and the women NOT leaders? Is it an unhealthy “hierarchy” for
church leaders to be men who are “husbands of one wife, etc.”?
In recent years, we’ve tried out the experiment of putting
our wives and daughters in combat units of the U.S. military. Do
you feel this is a forward step? Is it working pretty well?
Then you’ll no doubt approve of sending women evangelists into
danger areas where murder and rape are common. Some gentlemen think
it wiser to try to “protect” the “weaker” sex. Many women prefer to
pretend that they are men in everything but physical structure. They
are not.

> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 23:06:18 -0700
> From: Ken Fong
> Appreciated your comments very much on women in ministry. Here’s the
> way I see it in a nutshell: Prior the Fall/Curse, there wasn’t any
> emphasis on ‘headship’ or ‘ruling over,’ etc. Because of the Cross, we
> are given the opportunity to come out from the shadow of the Curse and
> experience ‘re-creation’. With so much talk about the effects of the
> Curse on the relationship between men and women, I’m more interested in
> stressing that we live by the Cross, which ushers us all back into
> healthier relationships that don’t have to fall back on things like
> hierarchy in order to have order. Living by God’s grace, we can and
> must learn to live in peace with each other.

from Ray Downen respectfully on this day of the Lord.
417/782-0814 2228 Porter Joplin Mission Outreach.
Mail address is P O Box 1065 Joplin MO 64802-1065.
Internet home page addr = http://www.ipa.net/~outreach

— End —

Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:56:00 +0000
From: Grace May
To: gdot@juno.com
CC: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: CAC: Women & Men

Bro G:
“Pauline” is simply an adjectival form of Paul often used to refer to
the epistles penned by the apostle.
GYM
— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 15:28:14 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Fwd: AAASCommunity: AAASPosts: Address of conference

Dear CACers:

Those of you in the Boston area might find this conference interesting! –
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————
Forwarded message:
From: iiu@iname.com
Sender: owner-aaascommunity@uclink4.berkeley.edu
To: aaasposts@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Date: 97-10-10 12:17:43 EDT

==================================================================
* This is email from the News & Announcements list (AAASPosts) of
* the Email Network of the Association for Asian American Studies.
—————————————————————–
* 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 .
==================================================================
Note: Held at Harvard University, Cambridge

The Committee on Ethnic Studies presents:

A Public Symposium

The Future of Ethnic Studies: New Directions in Curriculum, Research,
and Theory

October 24 (Friday), 3:30-6 P.M., Boylston Hall Auditorium, Harvard
Yard, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Open to the Public, All Welcome

Guest Speakers:

Jack Tschen, Director, Asian-American Studies, NYU
Mantia Diawawa, Chair, Africana Studies, NYU
Juan Flores, Director, Center for Puerto Rican Studies, Hunter College
Dilip Gaonkar, Co-Director, Afro-American Studies, Northwestern
University
Benjamin Lee, Co-Director, Center for Transcultural Studies, Chicago

Respondents from Harvard faculty:

Anthony Appiah, Professor, Afro-American Studies and Philosophy
Leo Ou-fan Lee, Chair, Committee on Ethnic Studies
J. Lorand Matory, Assistant Professor, Anthropology
Werner Sollors, Professor, Afro-American Studies and English;
Co-Director, Longfellow Institute
Doris Sommers, Professor, Romance Languages
Xiao-huang Yin, Visiting Associate Professor, History
================================================================
* AAASCommunity, the Discussion & News list of the
* Email Network of the Association for Asian American Studies
—————————————————————
* Coordinator:
================================================================

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:41:03 -0400 (EDT)
To: HarryWLew@aol.com
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action

Dear Harry (and CACers)
In a message dated 10/10/97 3:21:38 AM, you wrote:

<>

I’m not sure we’re looking at the same study. The so-called liberal New York
Times article I referred to was discussing an article for JAMA conducted by
two male doctors. BTW, I take issue with your assessment of the NY Times.
It prints op-ed pieces by conservatives as well as liberals. Only those
considered too radical to either extremes are left out. In general, the NY
Times is a bit “conservative” (I doubt that these labels really tap into
anything approximating theological or social reality).

<>

I agree with you on this point. It’s true that when it comes to issues like
Affirm. Action in higher education, Asian Americans are usually not
considered “under-represented.” In the arena of higher education, Asian
Americans do quite well. This can be attributed to culture, though I’m
inclined to believe that immigration policy and other social factors
contribute more to Asian American educational “success” (brain-drain and
“Hong”-couver, Canada are good examples).

However, upon graduation, the story is different. Asian Americans usually
are paid less than whites for the same work.

<>

It’s tempting to personalize such situations – especially since so much of it
is anecdotal. What I find interesting is how nothing is said about white
admissions. What happens when a white student with a lower or equal GPA or
SAT score, but greater extra-curricula participation is admitted instead of a
Chinese student without the extra-curricula “merits” (e.g., sports, president
of the student body, glee club president)? There were/are many cases where
Chinese-Americans are passed over because they were not considered
“well-rounded” enough. Dana Tagaki’s study of the Asian American protest
against quotas at select universities in the 1980s showed how admissions
policies often shifted when Asians were placed in competition with whites (to
be fair, they were often in competition with whites with connections – e.g.,
parents are Harvard alumni). “Merit” alone did not (and I suspect, does not)
always work in favor of Asian Americans, especially if we are we are put in
direct competition with whites.

So rather than assuming that meritocracy is fair and then comparing ourselves
with Blacks or Hispanics, it may be helpful to ask whether meritocracy really
works for us as well, particularly when we are matched up against white men.
No offense to my white brethren who are not direct recipients of white elite
privilege (indeed, they should identify with people of color, too), but as I
see the American social reality, it amounts to “old boys’ club for us [i.e.,
white male elites], meritocracy for everyone else.”

<>

By defending affirmative action, I am not suggesting that it is the best
solution. But the alternative (meritocracy and the free market) is also not
fair and not in our best interest. I’m not sure that the “large majority” of
Chinese-Americans are opposed to affirm. action, but it would help if we all
learned more about the history of race relations (would you be interested in
David Yoo and my piece on race relations for the upcoming Sojourners
curriculum?). Asian Americans may not need it as much as other racial
minorities (though I’m not so sure about this), but short of embracing the
world as it is, I can think of few ideas that address institutional racism as
well.

<

>

Why is Shelby Steele considered “sensible” and “eloquent”? What background
and expertise does he have to make broad sweeping generalizations about what
is best for African Americans? How deeply connected is he with the pain and
pathos of the African American communities? Finally, what would YOU say is
the “deeper issue” of why African-Americans cannot compete with whites and
Asian Americans? Do you think they have a cultural pathology (as Sowell
asserts)? Is there a genetic connection between race and intelligence?

Perhaps the sickness is in the marketplace culture we all inhabit – after
all, what promotes greed, sex, and violence more than global capitalism and
its unabashed promotion of consumerism and selfishness?

On a “deeper level” my advocacy of affirmative action is a mere concession to
the pragmatics of survival in the sick world we live in today. All the
competition for grades, jobs, wealth, and glory promoted by society
contradicts Christian values of community, trust, and compassion. So even if
the playing field is made more level by affirmative action, I have questions
about the playing field itself and the rules of the game. What do you think?

Thanks for giving some more substance to the debate, Harry.

In Christ,
who is God’s affirmative action for the world,
Tim Tseng

————————————————————
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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:24:22 -0400
From: djchuang@ix.netcom.com
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Persecution in China

=== forwarded message on persecution in China ===
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 11:57:32 EDT
From: gdot@juno.com

Originally from: Justin Long
Originally dated: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 13:25:07 -0700 (PDT)

FLASH: PETER XU SENTENCED TO LOGAI CAMP
FOR IMMEDIATE GLOBAL PUBLIC DISSEMINATION
____________________________________________________________

Contact:
Justin Long, Associate Editor, World Christian Encyclopedia
Managing Editor, Eternity’s Edge Web Site
Tel (804) 355-1646, fax (804) 355-2016
Email
JustinLong@xc.org, Web http://www.frontiermissions.org

It has been learned from family members that on September 25th a court
in Zhengzhou sentenced Peter Xu (Xu Yongze) to reform through labor
(at a laogai camp) for disturbing the public peace. The length of the
sentence is unclear at this point. No family members were advised
about the sentencing (or the trial which presumably preceded it). It
is not clear whether Peter was provided with a lawyer at any point in
the process, since no one was able to see him. It is possible that
Peter Xu will be permitted to appeal the sentence. Four others
arrested at the same time as Xu were to be sentenced
separately today or tomorrow, according to Xu’s family members.

This case is pivotal because Peter Xu is the leader of one of the
largest house church movements in China, commonly known as the Full
Scope Church or the Born Again Movement. The government of China has
attempted to label him a cult leader–the equivalent of arresting an
evangelist of the stature of Billy Graham and attempting to make him
out to be a David Koresh-type figure. If successful this could set a
precedent for the way the Chinese government will deal with the
unofficial house church leadership.

Family members have asked first of all for prayer and secondly
that concern be expressed to Chinese officials through appropriate
channels. This should not be done in a manner that could be construed
as trying to pressure the Chinese government, as this could close the
door to effective communication in the future. International attention
is extremely appropriate. It is necessary that China see Xu’s case as
not simply an issue for the United States, but for Christians around
the world. Accordingly, at this time we make the following
recommendations for Christians worldwide:

1. Pray for Peter Xu, especially for the possibility of appeal. Pray
also for his family members. We particularly urge special prayer
events on behalf of Peter Xu and the house church movement in China as
part of the ongoing season of prayer for the persecuted church in the
United States, and the International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted
Church being held on November 16.

2. Human rights organizations and NGOs, particularly those in
nations other than the United States, are urged to inform the
Chinese government of their concern on this issue. Again political
pressure of any sort is not recommended–simply a notification of
concern, a request for information on the case, and the assertion that
this sentencing is unjust.

3. Let others know about the case of Peter Xu and invite them to
join in prayer. Become a mobilizer within your sphere of influence
(family, friends, church members) for the persecuted church in
general.

4. Quash any and all rumors with correct information. If you have a
question about any piece of news you see on the Internet, please feel
free to forward it to me (email to JustinLong@xc.org) and I will have
it reviewed for accuracy.

5. Don’t jump hastily to any overt public action other than prayer and
a general expression of concern. However, keep watching this and other
Internet channels for further information.

________________________________________________________________
Justin D. Long Never retreat. Never surrender.
Global Evangelization Movement Never, ever, cut a deal with a
dragon.
(804) 355-1646, Fax 355-2016 Email JustinLong@xc.org

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:20:43 -0400 (EDT)
To: gdot@juno.com
cc: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action

G:

Good point!

Beyond the practice of affirmative action in higher ed., you got me thinking
about all our previous conversation about PK and how late they were at
acknowledging Asian Americans. Could one say that, albeit late, PK’s recent
inclusion of AA leadership is a form of affirmative action? If so, then that
would impact the future of Christian leadership, wouldn’t it?

Also, remember Ken Fong’s poignant remarks about how Fuller’s search
committee could not identify a qualified Asian American faculty? What if
that committee had decided to take a chance on a less established Asian
American professor? Certainly that prof. would be less qualified than other
white male professors (the fact is the pool of established applicants are
higher among white males). If a junior Asian American was selected, all the
anti-affirmative action activists would cry foul, wouldn’t they?

But if no institution takes a chance on a less established Asian American
prof., then where will future Asian American seminary profs. come from?
Where will programs and scholarship that gives Asian American seminarians
better preparation and support come from?

Give the mainline seminaries some credit (not too much, but some) for hiring
less established Asian American profs. in the past. Some are now better
established and are reshaping seminary education and the theological
disciplines in ways that will help future Asian American Christians in
ministry. But seminaries that do not use “racial affirmative action” in
faculty hires will probably never become very racially diverse or inclusive
of Asian Americans in the foreseeable future.

The same can be said of the denominations some of us are part of. Unless a
denomination proactively invites Asian Americans to participate in its
mission, few Asian Americans will be represented. On the other hand, Asian
Americans can also demand to be part of the life of a denomination – but then
risk being labeled one of those “whining” groups. In either case,
affirmative action or something similar which demands racial recognition is
the only way to develop Asian American Christian leaders within these
settings.

Finally, what about the many independent churches? These congregations are
often disconnected from any structured organizations that leadership
development can only reach a certain level. Should any of these independent
congregations get tied into a broader group such as PK, the Christian
Coalition, a congregation-based community organizing network, or city
councils, then there would be opportunities for further leadership
development. But, even then, a case must be presented for greater Asian
American representation. And again, we are back to the need for something
like affirmative action, which takes our race into account if we are to ever
find a place at the table.

Then again, why bother to “integrate”?

Tim

In a message dated 10/10/97 9:18:58 AM, gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson) 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:26:54 -0400 (EDT)
To: outreach@ipa.net
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

Ray:

A very intriguing response, indeed. Chivalry is not dead, apparently.

I’m not a Pauline or Petrine scholar, but I play one in seminary [though
rarely] 🙂 Anyway, I wonder whether you see Paul’s writings as both
historical (i.e., responding to culture and social changes in his world) AND
inspired by God? I do. Consequently, I think it is important to look at his
writings not as legalistic prescriptions, but living responses to both the
Holy Spirit and Paul’s cultural context.

Thus, I wonder why Paul was so open to women in leadership (was there such a
thing as ordination in the New Testament?) in Acts, Romans, Galatians, and,
to some degree, Philippians – but then makes those few anti-women remarks in
Ephesians, I Corinthians, and the Timothy’s. Could it be because the early
Christian movement started off radically egalitarian, then was accused of
subverting Greco-Roman family values? Was Paul worried that this radical
redefinition of “family” by the early believers would jeopardize their surviva
l? After all, why would Paul insert the “hierarchical” Roman family codes in
Eph. and Colossians if the church assumed them to be true all along?
Furthermore, in his anti-women statements, was he really endorsing
Greco-Roman cultural values which considered women “incomplete men” (I quote
from Galen)?

Also, your concern about androgeny (i.e., the dissolution of sexual or gender
differentiation) is not really the issue for “biblical egalitarians” like
myself. Difference can be (ought to be) affirmed without imposing hierarchy
or headship language. Few feminists today would want to be men, just
equality. So I disagree with your implication that Scripture endorses the
formulae: equality = androgeny or that hierarchy (headship) =
differentiation. Surely, you would not use this argument with regards to
racial differences!

Re: sending women into dangerous combat zones. Wow! This reminded me of the
criticism that single women received when they sought to be missionaries to
China or America’s Chinatowns in the 19th century. Check your missionary
history (Jane Hunter, The Gospel of Gentility or Peggy Pascoe, Relations of
Rescue). If not for these courageous women, the gospel may never have
reached the Chinese! Few male missionaries were as effective as these women
in China or Chinatown. Had these women accommodated entirely to Victorian
cultural expectations, many of us on this list would not be so passionately
contending for the Faith! (For that matter, had Chinese Bible women not step
outside the boundaries of 19th Century Chinese gender system, Christianity
may have utterly failed in China).

In a message dated 10/10/97 7:17:15 AM, you 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

To: gymsung@bu.edu
Cc: cac@emwave.net
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:55:04 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: CAC: Women & Men
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

Dear Grace:

I like your reply–very gracious:) Have you heard of Suzette Haden Elgin?
Somebody told me about her books on ‘the gentle art of verbal self
defense’. Sounds like you may have read–or mastered–her teaching along
with Paul’s. I guess I really don’t know about this, Do you think of Paul
as a ‘gentle’ as a communicator?

Bro. G

On Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:56:00 +0000 Grace May writes:
>Bro G:
> “Pauline” is simply an adjectival form of Paul often used to
>refer to
>the epistles penned by the apostle.

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:56:54 -0400 (EDT)
To: ben_mel@juno.com
cc: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: God raising women to bring in the harvest

Hi Ben:

I didn’t interpret Ken’s posting about women in leadership as one of
pragmatism or expediency. Rather, I thought he (and Grace in her article for
the Priscilla papers) established a guiding principle for how Holy Scripture
is to be interpreted by citing Genesis 1-2. So, while I think your point
about elevating Asian American leadership to the standards of I Tim 3 is a
valid concern, how that passage will be interpreted (and more importantly,
how that interpretation will impact the practice of ministry or the life of a
congregation) in light of one’s operating hermeneutic is just as important.
Many evangelicals believe that the abolitionist principle (see Craig Keener’s
works) [or what others call the Prophetic Protestant principle] undergirds a
proper interpretation of Holy Scripture. This principle disavows
hierarchical, repressive, legalistic ways of looking at Scripture in favor of
a more communitarian and egalitarian vision of the Kingdom of God. Even more
evangelicals embrace the Southern strategy – a hermeneutic originally
designed to justify slavery – but now used with a vengeance to advocate more
rigid and hierarchical interpretations and actions. The Southern strategy is
quite understandable because in our post-modern era of confusion and
fragmentation, many are tempted to return to hierarchy in order to impose
some sense of order to a society that seems to be spinning out of control.
But, I believe that this is a mistaken strategy. More often it leads to
witch hunts and repressive regimes rather than genuine religious freedom and
social responsibility.

Granted, these two “hermeneutical principles” are simplistic heuristic
devices, but they help me understand how our different sub-cultures influence
the way we interpret God’s Word. It also helps to be consciously aware of
how our social location or culture influences our interpretation of the Bible
and Christian action in the world.

So, if we are to train good and godly leadership, it seems that we’ll have to
encourage them to wrestle with these hermeneutical issues at the same time
that they wrestle with the Scriptural standards you rightly call leaders to
attain. – Tim

In a message dated 10/9/97 4:15:52 PM, ben_mel@juno.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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:02:30 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:41:03 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:
>Dear Harry (and CACers)…
> ..I see the American social reality, it amounts to “old boys” club for
us
>[i.e., white male elites], meritocracy for everyone else..

FYI, two references which provide astonishing background support for
Tim’s point here, esp for the separation between the “[super-]elite” and
“everyone else.” IMO it is irrelevant to our super-elites whether
‘affirmative action’ or ‘meritocracy’ functions as long as THEIR system
of commerce and power functions and prevails over us (globally).

1. _The Rich and the Super Rich_, A Study in the Power of Money Today.
Ferdinand Lundberg, Lyle Stuart, Inc. New York. 1968. (No ISBN #). ~800
pages inc appendices and notes.

This book documents how the few who own America keep it, have kept their
wealth and their power through intricate private corporations and
tax-exempt foundations and trusts. Even though this book is 30 years
old, it accurately depicts the roots of reality today with respect to the
on-going, evolving organization/structure/transfer/policy of American
power/wealth.

2. _Thy Will Be Done_ , The Conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller
and Evangelism in the Age of Oil. Gerard Colby, Charlotte Dennette.
Harper Collins. 1995. ISBN 0-06-016764-5. ~925 pages inc. appendices and
notes.

This book documents the role of Cam Townsend and Wycliffe Bible
Translators in (naive?) service of the interests of Standard Oil Corp.
partic in S. America–not a pretty picture. If you value basic God-given
humanity–beware. Read this and weep:(

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 01:05:11 -0400 (EDT)
To: ohbrudder@prodigy.net
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Re: up to 20 cents now

Bill:

I’m sure Joe can defend himself, but I didn’t get the impression that he was
putting down your daughter or calling her a “fool.” I understood his original
message to be a question about two things:

1. The validity of personal testimonies or individual religious experiences.
2. Whether these testimonies or experiences may lead to an excessive
individualism – one that is not accountable to a community.

If I’m correct, I think these are legitimate questions to be addressed.

I honestly believe that you may have misread Joe’s comments or intentions.

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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: RevCow@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 03:47:49 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Reality vs. Virtuality

Hello!

My name’s Ted, and I’m the pastor of Harvest San Gabriel Valley (southern
CA). Hsgv was founded Easter ’97 by the Evangelical Formosan Church of
LA. I can share more in a following post regarding this new ministry.

CAC discussions of late have been quite enjoyable. It’s a nice change to
have discussions actually relate to Chinese American Church issues.

Having been under Bill Leong’s spiritual care for several years in the
late 70’s-early 80’s, an acquaintance of Michelle Leong’s during that
same period, her pastor for several years in the early-mid ’90’s, and
more recently her friend, I wanted to vouch for Michelle. She is a
highly gifted believer with many ministry skills, and is deeply committed
to giving her life to the cause of Christ and His Gospel. I find it
awkward that a testimony shared by a seasoned pastor that should be a
reason for 1) giving God glory and 2) women in ministry encouragement,
instead there is doubt and cynicism.

So in the spirit of Matthew 18:16, I’m confirming the facts shared by
Bill regarding Michelle’s life. Since the relevant posts were public, so
is this verification. If you’re a literalist, you might want to ask
another person or two for confirmation. 🙂 Art, want to make up the
other half/third of the “by the mouth of two or three witnesses”?

Keep up the Kingdom work,
Ted

Rev. Ted Kau
Harvest San Gabriel Valley

If you have the Spirit without the Word, you blow up.
If you have the Word without the Spirit, you dry up.
If you have both the Word and the Spirit, you grow up.
–Don Lyon

— End —

From: RevCow@aol.com
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:06:34 -0400 (EDT)
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Free PK Poster

Hi everyone,

The organization for whom I work, the Family Research Council, is
offering a FREE 18X24 inch aerial poster of the 1997 Promise Keeper
gathering (call 1-800-225-4008). Please pass the news, and be sure to
request one. Thanks!

–Gracie Hsu

************
I apologize if you’ve received a duplicate of this already.

Ted

Rev. Ted Kau
Harvest San Gabriel Valley

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation
be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a
conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift of
God?”
–Thomas Jefferson, 1781

— End —

To: TSTseng@aol.com
Cc: Cac@emwave.net
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 03:00:39 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

Tim:

Lot’s to think about; thanks for your response(s)/questions today
(10/10). Others may add more thoughts as we move along…

For now, though, looking at the last question raised, below, do you have
in mind the idea of ‘inclusion’ which Grace mentioned to Sze-kar the
other day (that email is not on this machine or I’d quote it); i.e.
global racial ‘inclusion’ rooted in Gal. 3:28? I mean, if we compare the
word ‘inclusion’ and the word ‘integration’ as bases for (global!)
community, then, for one thing, your question takes on a very radical
implication. Perhaps, Who needs ‘integration’ if ‘inclusion’ is real?

Just wondering:)

G

On Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:20:43 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:
>Then again, why bother to “integrate”?

— End —

Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 09:33:13 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: TSTseng@aol.com
CC: outreach@ipa.net, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

Ray…

Dr. Tseng has send it far better than I could. His thoughts and words
express most of mine in response to your queries. Thanks, Tim!

ken fong

— End —

Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 09:38:07 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: TSTseng@aol.com
CC: ohbrudder@prodigy.net, cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Re: up to 20 cents now

I, too, think you, Bill, misread Joe’s comments, esp. the one about
calling your daughter a “fool.” If you reread his quote, I believe you
will see that he was making reference to HIMSELF as being a “foolish”
enough to express his opinion regarding your daughter’s testimony. I
understand your fatherly impulse to protect your daughter’s honor. I
admired that.

ken fong.

— End —

Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 14:09:24 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: A technical note

Dear Stephen:

Not that I’ve done any systematic work on NT greetings (like everything
else in bib studies, there is an enormous literature on the topic), but
here are some superficial observations.

Since Paul is the earliest letter writer, Petrine and Johannine
greetings are most likely derivative. 2 Pet 3.15-16 is clear evidence
that the Petrine and Pauline sectors of early Christianity reconciled
after the terrible fallout at Antioch (Gal 3.11-14); the 1 Peter (1.2)
greeting is therefore most likely modelled after Paul’s. Strictly
speaking, 2 Jn 3 is not a greeting: the tense is future (thus
eschatological not now) and it is in the 1st person plural (not 2d
person).

The earliest Pauline greeting is probably 1 Thess 1.1, which is
mistranslated, I think, in the NIV. It ought to be, literally, “Grace
to you and peace!” not “Grace and peace to you.” The NASB, bc of its
literalism, has it right. The difference is that peace, the Hebrew
shalom which Israelis still use to greet each other with, is not to be
granted in the same way grace is, at least not acc to Paul. While
shalom is a standard greeting, the addition of “grace” is a Pauline
innovation to refer to special gift from God through the Spirit. Thus,
when Paul wanted to stress that God has given him a special commission
as well (thus putting him on a par with Peter, John, and James; Gal
2.1-10), he used “grace” (v. 9).

Likewise, a spiritual gift (“charisma”) is the result of grace
(“charis”), acc 1 Cor 12. To combat Corinthian factionalism, Paul
wanted to distinguish sharply what comes from human beings (i.e., what
comes natural) from what comes from the Spirit. By this logic, the
underlying power for such spiritual tasks as preaching, teaching,
performing miracles, speaking in tongues, etc. comes from the Spirit.
We human beings have no ground to boast, bc as soon as the Spriit
withdraws from us, so also the power or the charisma.

This is why we must NOT confuse gift or grace with talent or anything we
inherit naturally as human beings. The former is given to us strictly
acc to the freedom of the Spirit; we can no more coax the Spirit to
grant it to us than we can make God conform to our theology. The latter
we acquire when we were formed: our gender, intelligence, social and
economic background, education, ethnicity, culture, parents, experience,
community, etc. Not all of which are good, most are neutral, some can
be downright evil (an extreme example: a genetic predilection for
pedophilia), and none can be called “gift” in the Pauline sense.

Paul later added an additional phrase, “from our Father and Lord…,” to
the short formula ofs 1 Thess 1.1 without any apparent change of
meaning.

Respectfully,
Sze-kar

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: A recent subscriber:
From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong)
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 22:56:20 EDT

Oct. 11, ’97

Hi:

The grace and peace of God and of our Lord Jesus Christ be abounding to
you.

I am a recent subscriber to CAC. Here is a brief description to identify
with my name.

My name is Benjamin Wong. Call me Ben. My e-mail is Ben_mel@juno.com.
I am an ABC. At present I am the English pastor at the Chinese Community
Church of San Francisco. I entered the ministry in 1961 (long time ago).

The Lord God led me into two very different type of churches (not the
extent of churches). The first one was of tremendous joy. I was
involved in starting a brand new church (almost 20 yrs.). This was of
such blessings in learning and growing in understanding of God’s ways and
thots and in seeing a church take shape and mature. It was also a great
blessing to have so much freedom in doing and leading as the Bible
indicated. The second one (about 6 yrs.) was an established church that
was primarily OBC. Although there were cultural problems, the most
debilitating problems were the non-Biblical “traditions” that were
already established. Yes, the cultural problems are also a great
obstacle.

One other thing. I have had a concern that greatly influenced my serving
the Lord and my teaching. Not unique but it explains some of my
comments. In entering into His ministry I knew my responsibility was to
speak for God, whether in preaching or teaching. While still in seminary
I questioned whether I knew that what I was saying was of God or of
myself. I did not want to say this is of God when it was actually of me.
I am not the inventor of truth. I am not God. I am not infallible in
truth. The people of God must not see me as their source of truth.
Through the years I only dare say it is of God if I believed I truly
understood that was what the Bible said; otherwise I would acknowledge
that it was only my opinion. My opinions can be and are often wrong.
But in a clear understanding of the Bible it cannot be wrong, even if it
offends my reasonings, my experiences, my feelings, or the reasonings ,
experiences, feellings of others; be they the majority, the scholarly,
and/or the professionals. The offense will cause me to challenge my
reasonings as well as all conflicting opinions.

That’s it for now. I am delighted to have learned of CAC.

Ben

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 01:56:37 -0400 (EDT)
To: gdot@juno.com
cc: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action

G:

I think you hit it on the head – though I didn’t mean it quite the way you
expressed it. The key question is what does it mean for a Christian
institution to “really” include different people? Will “inclusion” be done
on the terms of those who dominate an institution? (e.g., a Chinese speaking
congregation demanding that everything it does be done in Chinese, a
predominantly white institution defining what constitutes “merit” despite the
fact that other groups may have a different understanding, etc.) Or will
“inclusion” mean that the institution will learn how to negotiate the terms
expressed by the various interested parties. For example, when our
fabulously talented (no sarcasm, I am sincere about this) AA leaders are
invited by PK, are they expected to conform completely to the expectations of
the PK brass or will they have an opportunity to direct recognition,
attention, and resources towards AA concerns? False inclusion will be very
happy to have these AA brethren be part of photo shoots, tell their
testimonies, or make PK look good, but will not give these same AA brethren
serious recognition of their concerns (tokenism). True inclusion will make a
place at the table where the AA leaders can build their own constituency up,
have resources to do so, and some degree of freedom to contextualize these
resources to more adequately relate to the AA constituency (empowerment).
This scenario applies to every situation where AAs and other racial
minorities are invited into a “mainstream” organization, including
denominations.

In sum, if an institution is serious about inclusion, it will somehow
encourage empowerment rather than tokenism. But that institution must also
be prepared to be transformed so that the concerns of those who are not in
dominant positions will also be discussed and addressed seriously. Once an
institution has done this and has developed a relationship of trust with its
varied constituencies, then it may be fair to say that real inclusion has
occurred. Then, one wouldn’t worry about the integration question.

But do you think this will happen? For example, do you think PK will ever
invite those clearly identified as politically liberal to shape it’s
organization’s future? Clearly, the Family Research Council has played a
major role in underwriting the recent DC event – would they (the FRC) allow
PK to invite Christians for Biblical Equality or Marion Wrights Edelman
(sp?)? I’m not saying that PK is wrong for connecting with FRC even though I
disagree with most of FRC’s proposals. But if PK presents itself as truly
inclusive of all professed evangelical Christians, then shouldn’t “liberal”
evangelicals like myself be included? If FRC won’t permit PK to include
those of different political ideologies (I may be wrong about this), that’s
fine. FRC may well be PK’s strongest constituency. But then shouldn’t PK
openly identify itself as a politically conservative evangelical men’s
movement. (but we all know that’s not how the game is played – mainline
denominations have not been all that honest either, for they tend to exclude
the most conservative Christians, too)

In the same way, seminaries (liberal or conservative) which do not “truly”
include racial minorities should openly call themselves _______ “white”
theological seminary. Our Chinese congregations are honest enough to call
themselves what they are. But honesty is too difficult to make a public
virtue in America.

So, Gary, what alternatives do you think there are if we are to nurture the
biblical “inclusion” found in Galatians in our institutions? I think your
union organizing background may be key. – Tim

In a message dated 10/11/97 4:14:11 AM, gdot@juno.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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 02:07:42 -0400 (EDT)
To: kenfong@earthlink.net
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

Ken:

Sorry to disagree with you, friend – I could never say anything better than
you can. 🙂

Thanks! and blessings upon your ministry and your loved ones! – Tim

In a message dated 10/11/97 11:42:25 AM, kenfong@earthlink.net 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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 19:47:18 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Sun, 12 Oct 1997 01:56:37 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:
>G:
>..honesty is too difficult to make a public virtue in America…

Tim:

I agree and (continuing in the Spirit with thoughts Supplied) you
wonderful Chinese people “also were included in Christ when you heard the
word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were
marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit
guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s
possession–to the praise of his glory.”

Sze-kar and Grace (I’ll try to type this accurately–I wish I could blame
it on an amanuensis:) Are these NIV verses, Eph. 1, translated
correctly? The wording ‘included in Christ’ is the only theological usage
of it that I know of. Do you know of any others? Expound if you’d like
to.

“Fabulous” ones: I agree with Tim about you and that fabulous saints are
experiencing ‘exclusion’ (dis-integration?). My guess is that it is
because ‘inclusion’ in the sense of Eph. 1 is not a present reality for
many (other) Christians 😦

How is this possible?

It appears to me that those who are really ‘included’ acc to Paul, are
those who’ve stopped lying now, i.e. accepted ‘the word of truth’, which
is ‘salvation’. These are those who (actively) believe Jesus, therefore
they are ‘included in Christ’.

On this basis many Chinese people, some of whom I’ve been reading
religiously:) on CAC net, are in some sort of MOST favored status! Having
believed in Jesus, His Holy Spirit ‘marks’ you with ‘a seal’.
‘Included’, i.e. ‘sealed’, you are then ‘possessed’.

May I ask politely, What does this mean to you? Do you tend to ‘include’
others as you should? In my case, you do! Even those who may disagree
with me exhibit acceptance. Though Swedish-Am. , I feel ‘included in
Christ’ and loved by CAC. Thank you!

>..Gary, what alternatives do you think there are if we are to nurture
the
> biblical “inclusion” found in Galatians in our institutions?

hmm…Tim, here’s an initial (humorous) thought re: ‘our institutions’:
If you and Sze-kar would like to start an institution for ‘possessed’
people, I’ll agree to be your first student 🙂 If you guys get out of
hand, though, may I lead a strike? 🙂

All on this for now.

Praising God today,

Your Bro. G

P.S. Tim, also for Ken Fong: What is the role of Weyerhauser Corp. in
the management of Fuller Seminary? I heard that their family which is
Fuller’s main contributor owns ~15% of the land (not just timberland) in
the Northwest. Is this true? Do they (properly) employ Chinese people in
their businesses? There might be an interesting correlation (of some
sort) between (their) Seminary and business management. G

— End —

From: JWongCDI@aol.com
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:45:41 -0400 (EDT)
To: RevCow@aol.com
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Reality vs. Virtuality

Hi Ted;

Thank you for your response, and I apologize to you also for being a bit
obtuse in my writing.
Thank you, Ken. You’re evaluation is much more accurate.

If I may, I’ll include excerpts of my response to Bill. And, oooops, I
didn’t know you were writing about your daughter, Bill. I, too, am a pastor
and proud of my daughter.
Joseph Wong
>>> <<<

Date: Fri, Oct 10, 1997 1:32 PM EDT
From: JWongCDI
Subj: Much more than 20 cents
To: ohbrudder@prodigy.net

Hi Bill;

Thank you for responding to my inquiry, which is from a pastoral concern that
our faith be based on what is real. I do not attack nor do inquisitions on
young Christians, but do challenge their thinking, believing that they are
ready to learn and eager to know what is true in Christ.

I knew when I wrote that the brevity is capable of brewing misunderstanding,
knowing the natural patterns… Cynicism is not what I was writing from, but
I acknowledge, can be interpreted as such. Neither was I writing to the one
who gave testimony.

Instead, I was writing to those charged with guiding Christians, asking for a
deeper evaluation of how well we are doing. I remember, as a young
Christian, many times when I shared my testimony or observations, I was
hoping that a more mature believer would help me evaluate the accuracy or
validity of what I said. "Should I say it again? Should I teach others that
it's reliable?" I did not believe that I had it all right. But, you know
what? I rarely got any input. I didn't know whether to interprete the
silence as "You're right on!" or "Oh no, did he say that?"

I'm concerned that there are Christians who spoke as I did, but no one chose
to interact with, to guide them. Instead, they are simply "branded" (maybe
ostracized by the "orthodox") or "praised." I suspect that the young
believer would appreciate a caring person who would provide wise evaluation
of what was shared, to refine, to make more accurate. I believe Apollos
appreciated those who helped him. I guess for most believers, being an "eye"
witness is all they need to do. However, I'm concern about raising leaders
who will feed and disciple.

In the vocabulary of your "paycheck," I receive considerable satisfaction
also, from those who have been guided toward a renewed mind, who have the
confidence to guide other believers toward a greater faith.

I hope this enlarged sharing of my perspective is useful. Again, thanks,
Bill for the inter-action.

Joe

— End —

Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:07:02 -0700
From: OHBRUDDER
To: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: the REAL ISSUE

I re-read Joe’s comments several times to confirm what I initially
thought
to be a cynical retort upon first reading . . . I found at best that
from his theological-view
he did not believe God would provide a job for Michelle in that manner.
God would not
and did not in his world do those kinds of things: answer a girl’s
prayer and desire for a
job or career in ministry. (Perhaps WOMEN DO NOT BELONG IN MINISTRY? And
God wouldn’t violate His Word this way, according to his theology?)
. . . Therefore, we the reader should doubt the reality or validity of
that testimony
for God does not behave that way,. If he or anyone DID believe this is
normative of God,
there would be NO REASON to question the “reality.” (Pastor or not) And
that if Joe or
any of us believe God would behave this way, we are “fools” rushing in .
. . where angels fear to tread, but a “fool” (implied) had previous
treaded there. . .implying Michelle was a “fool.”

Personally, I don’t think Joe would intentionally imply Michelle is a
fool–
but my direct reading, without knowing Joe, tells me he did call her a
fool,
directly or indirectly, because she and her testimony and others with
that
type of testimony was the subject of his comments. One has to take
big leaps of imagination and know Joe personally to draw any other
conclusion.

THE REAL ISSUE. . .is how we relate to God. I’m not putting forth a
right way and a wrong way to relate to God. I am assuming that we are
all born-again, redeemed by Christ. I am making a general observation
that there is a difference in the way we relate to God, and it is
theological and it is personal.

ONE WAY is . . .the way many of my brothers in Christ relate to God
academically. Their knowledge of God is primarily through their
understanding of Scripture. To know His Word more is to know God more.
What God will do, or not do, is entirely in the Word–at least as far as
their understanding. They relate to God in a more scholarly,
intellectual, didactic way. God is alive and active, but in a more
removed, distant way . . . orchestrating His sovereign plan in silence
and methodically. Let the Word do His speaking.

This is my observation and because it is not me, I can’t identify with
them completely and may even be slightly off base. . . but I am in the
ball park. I think it is from this perspective that Joe made his
comments. I think this is also why there is a vigorous debate about
WOMAN IN MINISTRY. I think this is why discussions about LEADERSHIP and
CULTURE and other ABC ministry concerns run in loops—the “language”
(or presuppositions) is different and the house is thus divided against
itself . . . no unity; and the discussions bear forth little action and
what action called for is for more cultural study and seminars and more
discussions.

ANOTHER WAY is . . .the way I relate to God . . . personally. My
knowledge of God is through the Word as well, but I really got to know
Him intimately through my personal experiences: in worship, in my
suffering, hearing His voice, obedience, working with and by His Spirit
with His gifts, visions, talking to Him casually as a friend. I’ve cried
a lot in His presence, and I’ve sat silent in puzzlement. To know Christ
in me more is to know God more. I believe that the more I die to
myself, the more Christ shows up through me; I do not merely behave more
ethically and morally like Christ, but just like Christ, I’ll speak what
the Father tells me and do what the Father does. I will feel His passion
and compassion as I sense His heart; I might get very emotional in those
times and often may get stirred to do His work. I will expect and see
miracles, and healings because that was the way Jesus did things in the
NT and He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. If He wants to
work thru me, I pray I don’t get in the way . . . like limiting Him with
my faith. Christ in me the hope of glory; Christ in me, in each of us,
the hope of the ABC’s plight.

I know many scholars, theologians, and sincere believers do not believe
God speaks to individuals today, only through the Holy Bible. And I
agree that for them God will not speak to them directly. When Jesus said
to the blind men, “According to your faith will it be done to you” it
cutS both way; for if they did not believe, they were not going to get
heal. I am NOT putting anyone down for their faith; this is how they
relate to God and it is wonderful they have a relationship with God
however way they relate to Him.

But my experience runs a different course and I relate to God more
personally. And I ALWAYS relate what I am hearing and experiencing with
Scripture. . . I throw it out if I find contradiction with Scripture. .
. and often there is a check in my spirit, my “peace” is disturbed when
I discern it is not of God. I have to be careful about what I say in
public, anyway, because I could get labeled weird, or a “fool.” I would
immediately lose credibility with the “scholars.” I believe this is what
really happened with Joe’s remarks (perhaps well-meaning).

In the words of Oswald Chambers in “My Utmost for His Highest,”
“Never start to say, “Well, I wonder if he really did speak to me?” Be
reckless immediately–totally unrestrained and willing to risk
everything–by casting your all upon him. You will only be able to
recognize his voice more clearly thru recklessness–being willing to
risk your all.”

I have a simplistic solution for the ABC plight. Watch and listen for
God’s move among the ABCs and meanwhile prepare ourselves to bring in
the harvest. I believe He loves ABCs more than we do and if it looks
like we are losing our generation, He has His own timetable and maybe He
sees that we are not yet prepared and ready enough to receive the
harvest . . . He is the Lord of the harvest.

bill leong

— End —

Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 21:46:19 +0000
From: Grace May
To: Benjamin C Wong
CC: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: A recent subscriber:

Welcome aboard Ben!
A brief response —
No, personally I do not believe that expediency alone justifies having
women in ministry. However, the Great Commission is strong warrant for
recruiting men and women for ministry. The Scriptures as a whole support
and mandate that we give sisters the same opportunities to answer their
God-given callings as we would their brothers. I have already
mentioned: the preponderence of female leaders in the Bible and the
criteria of gifts (not gender) that the NT clearly sets forth for
ministry in the church. I would also add the passage in Acts 2, where
the Spirit inaugurates the church by raising up women and men to
prophecy, an event in itself that fulfills the OT prophecy by Joel.
As per 1 Tim 3 on the qualities of biblical leadership, would your
reading of v.2 (“husband of one wife”) permit single men to oversee a
church?
Grace

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:49:44 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the REAL ISSUE
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:07:02 -0700 OHBRUDDER
writes:
>I re-read Joe’s comments several times to confirm what I initially
>thought… Joe [believes] we are “fools”
>bill leong

Bill, I have been thinking, what if Joe made these remarks to me. How
could I accept it? Perhaps I could in terms of an ancient idea I read:

“He who wishes to philosophize..without danger to his soul, must first
become thoroughly foolish in Christ.”

“Just as a person does not use the evil of passion well unless he is a
married man, so no person philosophizes well unless he is a fool, that
is, a Christian.”

(From Martin Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation, Philosophical Theses #29
#30)

I think the “foolishness” of Luther compares favorably to that of O.
Chambers. Luther is a little more humorous, though. His “foolishness” has
been very helpful to me over the years especially in both creating and
resolving disputes 🙂

Bro. G

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: Women-men in ministry
From: ben_mel@juno.com (Benjamin C Wong)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 03:38:58 EDT

Hi Grace:
10/13/97

Thanks for the welcome.

I am looking to have my thots and concepts challenged and my
understanding expanded. At times I probably will be frustrated but trust
the Lord will keep me from ranting and being offensive.

In response to your thots.
I believe that God has commanded all Christians to be faithfully serving
in His ministry; male and female. Much of the Scriptures you referred to
would confirm this. The interesting passage would be on the female
prophets; in that it seems to suggest that there are women “elders” in
the church. But a prophet is not necessarily an elder.

I understand the Bible to teach that man is to be the head of the woman.
This was God’s design in creation and not only in God’s wise judgment
(curse) because of their fall. Paul’s instruction for women to have
their head covered and for man to have their head uncovered during
worship, argued for man’s headship from creation; “For man does not
originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created
for the woman’s sake but woman for the man’s sake.” ( I Cor. 11:8-9).
Earlier he had indicated that this headship is quite permanent when he
said, “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man,
and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” (I
Cor. 11:3).

We must reject experiences, expediency, and pragmatic needs when they
contradict Scriptures.

Concerning I Tim. 3:2: Yes, I do not see any problem with a single man
overseeing a church, if he meets the other qualifications. We must
understand these qualifications not in an absolute sense but in an
“above reproach” sense. Consider this with the other qualifications;
prudent, not pugnacious, gentle, etc.

The “husband of one wife” is not that he should be a husband, (cf. Paul’s
exhortation to celibacy) but that if he is a husband, he has only one
wife. So also, if he happens to be a father, he must be “keeping his
children under control with all dignity”. But the qualification is not
that he must be a father.

An observation about Gal. 3:28. The context of the passage is over the
foolishness of adding works (works of the Law) to salvation. Salvation
and the benefits of salvation is by faith. One does not have a better
salvation because one is a Jew nor does one have an inferior salvation
because one is a Gentile. Our salvation are the same, we are all one in
Christ. Paul acknowledges the significant differences between Jews and
Gentiles, slaves and free, male and female but affirms that those
differences does not affect our salvations. Would you say that this is
really a verse of excluding rather than including them into our
salvation?

We are not male-believers nor female believers. We are not
Jewish-believers nor Gentile-believers. No, we are Abraham’s offsprings
(:29), that is “those who are of faith” (:7).

Ben

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:59:28 -0500
Subject: CAC_Mail: INFO about CAC

FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions about CAC

Updated: 14 Oct 97

Note: please post to , not ; the server will
automatically forward messages for a limited time. Thanks! Postings by
non-subscribers (like “spam”) is now blocked.

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

Q: How do you post a message to the CAC forum?

A: Send an email message to “cac@emwave.net” [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 “majordomo@emwave.net” 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 “majordomo@emwave.net” and on the first line of
the message body, write “subscribe cac” [without quotes]. 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
_new_ 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 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: 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 180 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 Christ.

*Q: Is there a moderator for CAC?

A: DJ Chuang is the list manager; there is not a
moderator for the ongoing discussions.

* * new email

— End —

From: TSTseng@aol.com
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 01:09:39 -0400 (EDT)
To: Cac@emwave.net
cc: gdot@juno.com
Subject: Re: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action

Bro. G:

In a message dated 10/12/97 8:50:50 PM, gdot@juno.com wrote:

<>

If you enroll, you won’t be permitted to strike until after you pay your
tuition. Afterwards, I may join you. 🙂

<

>

Now, now, Gary. Leave poor Fuller alone. They already have to worry about
being labeled “liberals” (which means that their faithfulness to the Faith is
questioned in some circles). The fact that the Weyerhauser family is still
so supportive of Fuller, despite the seminary’s courageous stand on some
“controversial” issues, offers some hope, don’t you think? Other seminaries
have been know to be “wimps” in the face of the changing political winds.

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, ext. 260
FAX: (716) 271-8013
Email: tstseng@aol.com
————————————————————

— End —

From: SKYLeung@aol.com
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 08:13:13 -0400 (EDT)
To: wans@monet.bc.edu
cc: cac@emwave.net
Subject: CAC_Mail: 20 cents, issues, and the experiential

Brother Sze-kar,

Thank you for your timely and thorough response. I’m thankful for such ready
scholarship that would address a musing I tossed in after midnight…

I’m wondering, however, if your systematic work dealing with revelation might
shed any light on the recent discussion about testimonies. I might presume
that Brother Joseph’s original, primary intent was not to call Brother Bill’s
daughter a fool. Rather he was asking if the individual, subjective, sharing
of what God has done is always valid and beneficial.

Granted that testimonies are often “individualistic.” But, intuitively, I
think that doesn’t make it automatically wrong, despite the large amounts of
individualism in our congregations. There are many instances in which our
response to God has to be as an individual, e.g. receiving Christ as Lord and
Savior.

Withholding testimony may also mean our failure to give God glory for what He
has done in our lives. It can also mean keeping back encouragement and
edification from our fellow believers. Validity is not automatic. Neither is
utility and necessity. But, what vibrant Bible study or fellowship does not
incorporate some periodic sharing of testimonials?

Brother Ben’s approach to delineating what God is saying versus his own
opinion seems to be a good way of checking the validity of our empirical
understanding as well. Do you have other suggestions?

One movement among Korean churches (both here and in Korea) that is reported
to have phenomenal growth at the moment is something called Mark’s Upper Room
ministry. Any CACers heard of it? Heard any information on them? They’ve
approached our Chinese church with a “vision” and want to mobilize us. We’re
hesitant and still evaluating. Nonetheless, their growth is largely
explained by an integration of Biblical understanding, experiencing God, and
enjoying “positively” answered prayers. The last two elements obviously
takes a believer out of the realm of mere intellectual acknowledgement of
what the written Word proclaims.

I heartily agree with the “signature” on one of Brother Ted’s recent postings
– about blowing up, drying up, or growing up. What do you think?

Very respectfully,
Stephen Leung
Alexandria, VA

— End —

Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 11:26:07 -0500
From: OHBRUDDER
To: G Ottoson
CC: CAC
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the REAL ISSUE

Sorry, Bro. G,
i don’t understand; my simple skull of mush could not follow your point.

bill

G Ottoson wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:07:02 -0700 OHBRUDDER
> writes:
> >I re-read Joe’s comments several times to confirm what I initially
> >thought… Joe [believes] we are “fools”
> >bill leong
>
> Bill, I have been thinking, what if Joe made these remarks to me. How
> could I accept it? Perhaps I could in terms of an ancient idea I read:
>
> “He who wishes to philosophize..without danger to his soul, must first
> become thoroughly foolish in Christ.”

— End —

Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 12:09:23 -0500
From: OHBRUDDER
To: Jarrad Techico
CC: CAC , JWongCDI@aol.com
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the REAL ISSUE

Hi j.t.,

No alibi. No excuses. My flesh probably showed. You should have read my
“real”
feelings after Joe’s remarks. I asked the Lord, how shall I defend my
daughter’s honor? I’m hurt and offended and I should not express what I
really want to say. I usually take the first thoughts I receive after I
ask
Him a question, “forgive him for he knows not what he did.” So that’s
what I wrote. In subsequent postings, I had no harsh or negative
feelings
toward Joe . . .especially after the many comforting words from many of
the CAC brothers. AND . . .my stocks were doing so well and I had just
closed
options on Applied Material for an 80% gain! I was pretty happy! Please
trust me on this, I was not deliberately harsh if that is what you
thought.

I met Joe, I think, thru Jim Ziervogel of Institute for Chinese Studies,
eons ago, when Jim visited him and I happened to tag along. Since then,
I know of Joe only by reputations . . .one of which is he is usually at
the forefront of the ABC cause. Praise God for Joe and his faithfulness!

Thank you j.t. for your input, to once more remind me He has put His
treasure into “earthen vessels” and once more I call upon His grace.

By the way, I lived 5 years in the shadows of your beautiful Oracle
buildings
in Redwood Shores . . . and nice work out facilities!

bill leong

Jarrad Techico wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> I missed most of the thread that has been going on this particular topic. (My
> fault… and I’ll try to catch up) But I happened to open your reply and must
> say I was kind of surprised at the harshness, your response seemed to portray.
> Not to disagree with what you stated because I believe in the same things,
> but I must point out that while reading this letter I couldn’t help but think
> that maybe your response seemed a little over zealous and because of that a
> certain validity is lossed… i.e., you may say that Christ is in you, but how
> is that exemplified? And more importantly does your response minister to Joe
> or other fellow brothers and help him/them bring him/them closer to God?
>
> If I seemed harsh as well, please comment. For all practical purposes it was
> really with the intent on spurring one another on toward good deeds. On the
> flip side it is also good to know there are soldiers out there for the Lord.
> 🙂
>
> Chat soon,
>
> j.t.

— End —

To: “Benjamin C Wong”
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:34:20 -0700
From: “GE Liang”
Cc: “CAC”
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Women-men in ministry

Ben,

I believe your observation about the context of Gal. 3:28 to be accurate. The three-part
treatise offered by Sze-Kar Wan in August also addressed the matter of identity WRT
this passage (somewhere in the middle of http://www.aamdomain.com/cac/archive/aug97.txt).

I suppose the question with which we keep wrestling is whether the egalitarianism
of privilege in Christ stated in this passage truly represents grounds for egalitarianism
of function in the church.

Has anyone considered Ronald Y. K. Fung’s Galatians commentary in the New International
Commentary on the NT published by Eerdmans (http://www.dovebook.com/nicnt.htm)?
(Dr. Fung is currently a resident scholar at CGST in Hong Kong, and is probably fairly
conservative.)

Ecclesiastical equality would be a fairly straigthtforward conclusion were there
not challenges from Cor. 14:33-36 and 1 Tim 2:11-15 which allude to events and relationships
in Gen. 2 (prior to the fall), and elude simple dismisal as culturally or societally-specific
prescriptions.

G.E.

The one who carves the Buddha never worships it.
– Chinese proverb

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him. Male and
female created he them.
– Genesis 1:27

Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.com

— End —

To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:18:13 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: the REAL ISSUE
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 11:26:07 -0500 OHBRUDDER
writes:
>Sorry, Bro. G,
>i don’t understand; my simple skull of mush could not follow your
>point. bill

Bill, I’m no ‘Oswald Chambers’ either 🙂 G

— End —

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 02:24:47 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: Personal Experiences as a Scholar

It never ceases to amaze me that we Asians highly value intelligence in
everything–in medicine, business, science, academic–everything, that
is, except our Christian faith. When it comes to our faith, the less we
think the more spiritual we are. Something does not compute.

Dear Bill:

In view of my personal experiences as a result of pursuing
scholarship–being treated as a pariah at best and a “false brother” at
worst–dear Bill, your uncompromising distinction between “personal
experiences” and “scholarly, intellectual, didactic [way of knowing
God]” pains me so. Looking back to the last decade and a half, I still
wonder what I have done wrong to deserve being forced out of my home
church, ridiculed by name in front of 150 strangers, disinvited as
conference speaker at last minute–of being a persona non grata among
dear brothers and sisters–except for wanting to be absolutely faithful
to the gospel with unswerving intellectual honesty. (Though I wouldn’t
excuse myself for a good dosage of tactlessness some, not I, prefer to
call “youthful enthusiasm.”) It would be in appropriate to tell long
tales of tears, heartaches, despairing hours of prayers, broken
relationships, fears, loneliness, self-doubts, discouragement. But
these personal experiences of walking with God in dogged persistence
deeply inform who I am as a scholar.

Dear Bill, I know you didn’t mean it this way, but your remark cuts like
a hot jab to my soul.

Those of us interested in scholarship should have the freedom to choose
it without having to apologize constantly for it. We have a calling
from God to which we must be faithful. We have spiritual experiences
that work hand in hand with our commitment to clear thinking.
Happy–no, ecstatic (in original sense of word)–were the times, few as
they unfortunately were, when my scholarship and spirituality
converged. But often they exist side by side reinforcing, engendering,
challenging, critiquing, nourishing each other. We pray, we experience,
we worship, we laugh, we get silly, we cry, we tell bad jokes, we
preach, we listen, we ask for forgiveness, we get angry, we grow, we
fail, we complain, we reconcile, we delight in fellowship, we despise
loneliness, we love, we marry. We just happen to be called to serve God
using scholarly tools, just as my dear minister brothers and sisters use
their pastoral tools to serve their churches. Please don’t make us
justify our calls, please grant us the same trust you grant anyone
called to the ministry, and please give us the same spiritual room to
grow as you would any mortal struggling to live in Christ’s mercy.

Truth is, I was very moved by your testimony of your daughter Michelle.
Whether Joe’s comments are cynical, I am in no position to judge. But I
for one do not think it’s possible to distinguish between
experience-based and principle-based decisions. The supposed difference
between the so-called “inductive” and “deductive” thinking approaches
zero in practice. For not even mathematicians ever think from the top
down without some examples, and no experience is devoid of a higher
level of abstraction. I happen to think that if we had more anecdotes
(if you don’t like them) or empirical cases (if you like them) of
women’s experience like your Michelle’s, they might force us to look at
Scripture with a fresh eye. Is there any doubt that as a result of the
19th-century emancipation, we now look at biblical passages on slavery
with a new understanding? Experience does inform scholarship.

I really don’t think our current discussion useless simply bc we “bear
forth little action.” This is precisely the argument my non-Christian
Chinese friends use on me, bc they think ministers and Christian workers
are idealistic and impractical: they talk a good game every Sunday but
are otherwise unproductive. They make no contribution to society,
improves nobody’s life, and makes no money to boot. I of course
disagree. Living a life committed to the gospel is action enough.
Understanding God and his will for the church and the world is not
problem-solving; being a Christian is not like being an engineer. The
Old Testament talks about taking delight in the torah and about studying
God’s word for His (not our) pleasure. These ideas are operative still
in Orthodox Judaism. We by contrast seem to want to accomplish so much,
never learning to delight in understanding except for some utilitarian
purpose, never relaxed enough to be playful with God’s creativity for
fear of misappropriation.

Respectfully,
Sze-kar

— End —

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 02:45:02 -0400
From: Sze-kar Wan
To: CAC
Subject: Re: Fwd: CAC_Mail: 20 cents, issues, and the experiential

Dear Stephen:

I can’t claim expertise in this matter–not when one of my colleagues is
a recognized authority on Pentacostalism, both as a scholar and as a
practitioner. Whatever we experience God and his work through the
Spriit on earth must somehow square with the authority of the received
tradition. I like your complementarial view of experience, tho the
devil is in the detail: what “somehow” means is the real crux.

I fear I can’t answer your call, Stephen, not tonight anyway.

Sze-kar

— End —

From: “Peter Y. Woo”
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Women’s ministry.
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:01:22 -0700 (PDT)

Hello,
As an OBC coming to US since 1963, may I share some of my
view on women in ministry.
(1) “Women is a weaker vessel”(I Pet. 3:7) does not mean she is more
prone to doctrinal errors. Hence the argument that they must submit to
men in the churches because they are more prone to wrong interpretation
of the Word, is moot.
(2) “Christ is head of the church, just as a man is the head
of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” Does it mean a husband is the
head of the wife in a family? Yes. Does it mean that all women in a
church must submit to all the men? Of course not. The Bible verse speaks
of “man” and “woman” in singular. It talks of husband and wife relationship,
not the relationship of all men to all women. Should the husband-wife
model be a model for men-women relationship at church?
There is no such teaching from the Word. I have two arguments
against it:
(a) What about a spiritually mature woman and her young 19 year
old son both at the same church? Should the mother be forbidden to
teach a Sunday School class for college students where her son is?
Should she submit herself to her son in matters of ministry just because
he is a “grown up” man? Amazingly not a few churchmen, Chinese and American,
insists on exactly such conclusions from their reading of such Bible
verses as I Cor.11:3 and I Cor.14:34. They conveniently ignore I Pet.5:5,
“Those of you who are younger should submit to those that are older.”
If this is not the “corban” of Phariseeism, what else is? I think both
OBC and ABCs should feel repelled at such teachings that are against
traditional cultural values of respect for those with white hairs. Respect
implies submission and deference. Too bad!
(b) God does not seem to mind women preaching, praying,
leading, in churches in China, where often women are more than 70 percent
of the congregations. If God is blessing their leadership with
obvious power of the Spirit, with miracles and martyrdom, why do
some still regard as unclean that which God has sanctified? Show me
a church that God is withholding His blessing because they allowed
women to lead, preach, and shepherd, and I can show you 100 more where
God blessed because they do. If God is moving in that direction, let
us re-examine and revise our hermeneutics and confess the blindness
that have made us the Pharisees and Judaisers of today, hindering
the Spirit’s showers of blessing and revival.
I think headship means leadership that does not demand
quiet absolute submission. Look at the relationship between God
and Christ. Christ honored God. The church should honor Christ.
A wife should honor her husband. There is no teaching that women
in a church congregation must honor the men in that church.
(3) The severe rebuke by Paul in I Cor. 14:36 is primarily
targetted to the men of the church, not the women, because the word
“only” is masculine, not feminine. This proves that I Cor. 14:34,35
are not Paul’s opinion, but Paul’s quote of the opinions of the men
of Corinth. “They must, as the Law says, be in submission.” You search
the Old Testament, and there is no such teaching. So this is not
Paul’s teaching. It is his quote of the wrong teaching at church.
(4) Paul never taught that sin enters the world through Eve.
Never, never. He rather taught that sin came through one man, and that
is Adam. God in Gen. 3 had more severe curse on Adam than on Eve.
Why? because he committed a greater sin. What is his greater sin?
Whatever it is, we have to discover it.
(5) I Tim 2 Paul did say “I do not allow a woman to teach and
preach to a man … For Adam was first formed, then Eve…” Does Eve
being formed later than Adam means Eve must obey Adam? No. Otherwise
Adam should obey cows because God created cows before
creating Adam. I think Paul wants women be quiet, give the men a chance
to learn first, because men are statistically less verbose and slower at
speech. Paul is saying,”Women, give the brothers a chance to learn,
think, before you open up for discussions.”
He said “I do not allow”. It definitely means he does not feel
comfortable to say “God does not allow…” It is a tentative wise
arrangement Paul set up for the churches of his time, where women have
much less education and other opportunities than men. Paul did not
disallow women from teaching men. He did not allow a wife to teach
and preach at her husband. How do I know this? From context. He
quoted Adam and Eve, the first husband and wife.

Sincerely,
Peter Y. Woo,
a simple man teaching
Math at Biola Univ.

— End —

From: “DJ Chuang”
To: cac@emwave.net
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:03:28 -0500
Subject: CAC_Mail: Re: Women’s ministry

——- Forwarded Message Follows ——-
From: Fenggang Yang
To: “Peter Y. Woo” , cac@emwave.net

reading this by Peter Woo,

> (a) What about a spiritually mature woman and her young 19 year
>old son both at the same church? Should the mother be forbidden to
>teach a Sunday School class for college students where her son is?
>Should she submit herself to her son in matters of ministry just because
>he is a “grown up” man? Amazingly not a few churchmen, Chinese and
American,
>insists on exactly such conclusions from their reading of such Bible
>verses as I Cor.11:3 and I Cor.14:34. They conveniently ignore I Pet.5:5,
>”Those of you who are younger should submit to those that are older.”
>If this is not the “corban” of Phariseeism, what else is? I think both
>OBC and ABCs should feel repelled at such teachings that are against
>traditional cultural values of respect for those with white hairs. Respect
>implies submission and deference. Too bad!

reminds me of this ethical principle of Confucianism installed by a
Confucian official in the Han Dynasty:

“A woman should submit to her father at home, to her husband in a
marriage, and to her son when widowed.” This principle is called
“three submissions.”

Today, more than ever, I’m startled by the radical “compatibility”
between conservative Christianity and Confucianism.

Fenggang
—————————————————————
Fenggang Yang, Ph.D. fyang@uh.edu
Department of Sociology http://www.uh.edu/~fyang
University of Houston 713-743-3943 (FAX)
Houston, TX 77204-3474 713-743-3973 (phone)

— End —

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:48:23 -0500
From: OHBRUDDER
To: CAC
Subject: CAC_Mail: WOMEN & MINISTRY

Hi Grace May,

I’ve dodged the woman in ministry issue “bullet” nearly all our
ministry
life. Never faced it because it never came up or it was never an issue.
But there was this incident that my wife and I found funny . . . well,
it was funnier to me than her.

We use to have 7am prayer meetings on Saturday mornings at EFC in LA.
A street person (carried a backpack, had stories of fresh veggie in
the market’s trash bin, etc.) attended several . . .he just appeared
one day, heard us from the street and walked in and sat. One time after
after a meeting, he spoke to Mary, Bill’s wife, told her she should
not teach nor pray aloud (lead prayer) and that she was not a good
wife because my shoes (Bill’s shoes) was NOT shined!

Funny?

bill leong

— End —

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 15:05:04 -0700
From: Ken Fong
Organization: Evergreen Baptist Church
To: “Peter Y. Woo”
CC: cac@emwave.net
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: Re: Women’s ministry.

thanks for sharing your insights with us, Peter. I truly gained much
from reading them. I’m with you. As one of my favorite theologians and
former professors is found of saying, “The WORK of God sometimes must
interpret the WORD of God.” The Pharisees were quick to point to the
Word of God when criticizing Jesus, but Jesus would often point to what
had just occurred (WORK of God) and ask them “Is this the work of
Beelzebub or a sign that the kingdom of God has come in me?” Yes, we’re
not Jesus. But if what is happening appears to be the fruit of the
kingdom, we must rethink our view of a passage of Scripture if our
interpretation causes us to mislabel ‘good fruit’ as bad. This is how
the Lord changed my opinion of charismatic tongue-speaking. In theory
it was easy for me to point to Scripture and say that that gift no
longer exists, but when confronted with unmistakable brethren who had
that gift, I felt compelled to alter my theology rather than write off
these brethren as not truly Christian bc their power source wasn’t the
Spirit.

ken fong

— End —

To: Cac@emwave.net
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 22:59:15 -0600
Subject: Re: CAC_Mail: NY Times article on Affirm. Action
From: gdot@juno.com (G Ottoson)

On Tue, 14 Oct 1997 01:09:39 -0400 (EDT) TSTseng@aol.com writes:
>Bro. G:
>
> The fact that the Weyerhauser family is still so supportive of Fuller,
despite the >seminary’s courageous stand on some “controversial” issues,
offers some hope, >don’t you think?

Dear Tim:

Not really, not yet.

It kinda depends on what (seminary) people stand for or against…e.g.
IMO, Whether Scripture is infallible or innerent (the Fuller do or die
‘controversy’ I recall) is irrelevant esp if nobody openly lives by it.

For example, throwing another (Weyerhauser) log on the CAC fire, The NT
makes it clear that the Church is the bride of Christ. What does this
mean?

Is it fair to say that we (comprised of males and females who are
‘neither male nor female’), are the woman who is engaged to, if not
married to Jesus Christ?

To think, then, that she, co-habiting corporate seminaries while
educating her own leaders, is entangled in an economic affair with an
American corporation?

Could she say (to Jesus eventually) It was for money? For comfort? I was
lonely? The seminary was your idea? They were your trees?

What could he say?

Right now I ‘hope’ we never have to here it, my Brother.

G

— End —