I picked up a book in Hong Kong some years ago on a visit. The artistic design of the cover attracted my attention. I almost wanted to buy it without even reading the title. It is a translated book titled … Continue reading
Alright, let’s talk about that Wednesday night prayer meeting. First of all, I will try very hard to avoid discussing what it should be. Because if I do, some will throw tomatoes at me while others may actually try to stone me. Of course, I’m sure that there are those who will agree with what I will not discuss, but I’m not certain that they will come to my defense. In doing so, it will get them exposed and they will be getting the tomatoes and stones. So, for the intention of protecting the endangered species, this article will not discuss what the prayer meeting should be. Instead, I would like to describe what it has become and the culture that forms around it in the Chinese churches in North America. Furthermore, I will attempt to expound on some of the strange phenomena that have been passing down in our tradition that we have chosen not to talk about them but simply accepted them as norm.
A Cultural Phenomenon
When I attended a small Chinese church some years ago, a visiting pastor who came from the bible belt spoke to me about our prayer meeting. “How many people come to the Sunday service?” He asked. And I told him. “How many people attend the prayer meeting?” The number I told him was about ten percent of the first, which I believe was the same in every other Chinese evangelical church. “They should be the same,” he said that two times to himself quietly. That represents our position of the Wednesday night prayer meeting in the Chinese churches of North America. It is not written in any doctrinal statement of faith among evangelicalism, but I’m sure that there are a lot of die-hard supporters believe that it should.
If you are a traveling preacher like I am, preach on this and I’ll guarantee you’ll be welcomed enthusiastically by the senior pastor and the elders when you stepped off the pulpit. And if you are a lay church leader who wants to get some attention, try advocating to “revive” the prayer meeting. People will think that you are really spiritual, and you’re definitely up for the next elder or deacon candidacy.
In general, we believe that prayer is a significant part of Christian living. It is holy. It is spiritual forming. It is an essential spiritual discipline that every Christian should engage. It is the time when a Christian comes before God to take on spiritual matters. It allows no space for anything else that is mundane or not central to what happens between man and God. Unlike the Sunday worship that people may come for different intentions, prayer is the pure form of spiritualism. Therefore, pastors often refer to the weekly Wednesday night prayer meeting as the source of power and energy for the church. One problem – that weekly prayer meeting can be extremely boring.
It can be “it-makes-you-want-to-throw-up” or simply “just-want-to-shoot-yourself” boring. So what’s the problem? Many great saints have written on prayer through the ages and it is something that is supposed to be wonderful! It is something that Christians supposed to be able to enjoy. The hymn is titled “Sweet Hours of Prayer”. Why would 90% of the congregation think of it as the bitter medicine — something that’s good for you but it just tastes bad. Our unspoken conclusion goes something like this: God cannot be the problem because he’s perfect; so it must be you! You don’t want to come to the weekly prayer meeting because you are not godly enough. It must be that you don’t really like to pursue spiritual matters. You don’t really love God. It follows that “good” Christians would be those who go. In the end, I find it amusing that the Wednesday night prayer meeting has turned into some form of asceticism. In Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code, the villain priest came from a cult that wears a cilice that will induce discomfort or even pain as a sign of repentance or atonement. This device is being utilized within some religious circle as a mean of spiritual discipline. The weekly prayer meeting has become something like that. If you have the discipline of going every week and do not throw up or shoot yourself, then you are deemed a good Christian.
The Rescue Mission
I’ve seen good intentioned pastors tried different tactics to save the prayer meeting. They use “testimonies” for positive reinforcement and guilt for negative. But the more interesting strategies revolve around the “add-on’s”. Many pastors realize that people don’t care about coming out in the middle of the week to pray, so they make the prayer meeting into “Bible-study and Prayer Meeting”. They figure that they can attract more attendants because people like to learn more about the Bible. Other strategies might involve leading the prayer meeting by having large group then small group singing and sharing that last at least an hour, then followed by a fifteen-minute prayer that wraps everything. While all these tactics work to a certain point, the impression of the “bitter medicine” is not changed–they are just giving you some sweets before you swallow it.
My son went to a pre-school that was run by a big pentecostal church. When I dropped him off in the morning I could often see the people in the church office through the large glass windows. Sometimes they would hold early morning prayer meeting before a day’s work. What impressed me was that in spite of the small prayer group of three or four people, they would still have a person playing guitar while they prayed. They would hold hands, close their eyes ,and give praises to God. Yes, I know they do that all the time on Sundays, but I’m talking about a morning prayer meeting in the church office of no more than four people! That got me to thinking about our attitude towards prayer and prayer meetings.
The Sunday Service and the Prayer Meeting
Before jumping into my thoughts on prayer meeting, let me digress a little bit. Think about how we prepare for our Sunday service each week. We have a choir or a praise team. They practice at least once or twice during the week before going on stage. The pastor spends about twelve hours to prepare for his sermon. The worship bulletin is carefully designed and worded. The ushers are trained and scheduled in advance. And that’s not all. Don’t forget the entire sanctuary is built for the purpose of worship! The lighting, the sound system, even the air-conditioning is worked on and prepared to deliver when it’s time for worshiping. When someone steps into the sanctuary, he immediately knows that this is the time and place for worship. He is not here to chit chat or to socialize. He comes to worship. Now, how do we prepare for our prayer meeting? We have a single page of prayer item list typed on an 8 x 11 inch paper. That’s it! So, to those pastors out there who complained that your church members don’t care about the Wednesday night prayer meeting, don’t tell me you think of the prayer meeting as highly as you think of the Sunday worship, because your actions are telling everybody that you don’t. Your church members have been hearing you loud and clear.
Many year ago I was assigned to lead a Wednesday night prayer meeting. Our church belonged to the Southern Baptist Convention and there was a special mission theme that week for the lost people in India. My assignment was to lead a bunch of overseas-born Chinese immigrant from Hong Kong to pray for India. I immediately realized I had a big challenge if I didn’t want this prayer meeting to fall into some kind of cliche. How could I get my church people (and myself) to relate to the needs of someone so distant? The fact was none of us even had an Indian friend! As I always did, I took responsibility of the things I had control but I put in God’s hand things that I had not. I first prayed for God’s guidance and fully trusted in His doing. I went to the prayer room in the middle of the week to set up the chairs and props that I needed. I went around the room laying hand on each chair and prayed for the person who will occupy this particular seat. I prepared music for meditation. I set up a microphone so people could focus better with my voice on speaker. I watched the video sent by Southern Baptist and set it up to the point when I wanted to start and I made note of the point where I wanted to stop. I prayed with the senior pastor for this prayer meeting and he made announcement on the previous Sunday about this special prayer meeting. On the evening of the event, I lit candles around the room and turned off the main light. The CD player was already playing some soft music. When people walked in, they were surprised to see the settings. I greeted each person with a smile and gestured them to take a seat. I only spoke when I had to. Without a single word spoken, everyone was prompted for the reason he or she was here. They were here to pray. No one tried to chit chat. If one did, one would immediately feel awkward to continue. Everyone was waiting silently in reverence.
When the room was almost filled, I began to speak. The words were well thought out, crafted for the purpose of leading them into meditation. My tone was in match with the rhythm of the music. My thoughts was on God and salvation. I asked them to remember the day they met Christ. I asked them to remember the blessings he gave since then. Finally, I asked them to imagine if they had never known Christ, and asked what would become of them? At the point of this question, I stopped the music and I turned off all the light. We sat in complete silence and darkness. With that thought of not knowing Christ still haunting us, I turned on the mission video sent by Southern Baptist. I stopped it at the proper place and we started to pray. I asked our young people to pray for the young people in India. I asked our men to pray for the husbands in that land. I asked our women to pray for their wives. I even asked our pastor to pray for the Hindu priests. The result of that prayer meeting was way beyond what I expected. People prayed earnestly with their heart. We all prayed for the salvation of the people in India. But some confessed their sins of apathy or even a sense of superiority. Some could not even form words but wept out loud. As for myself, the burden of evangelizing to the people of India still dwells in my heart because of that prayer meeting. My point of telling this story is this: God seems to work where our heart is. If we don’t care about something, don’t expect any miracles.
How Now Shall We Pray
The spiritual master, Richard Foster, has a book called Prayer: Finding the heart’s true home. In this book, he has listed twenty-one different kinds of prayer, which he divided them into three main categories. Most of the prayer meetings I have attended revolved around praying simple prayer or intercessory prayer. While these kinds of prayer are perfectly fine, I cannot help thinking that our church tradition has not explored the wider horizon of the discipline of prayer! I am not advocating that we can get a better response from God by praying in a certain way, or that certain praying style is superior to others. But if we truly believe that prayer is important, shouldn’t we be spending some time to study prayer? Most of the time we are going at it with an attitude that we already know well how to do it. It is just a matter of having more piety. I’m suggesting that we may try approaching prayer as a child. Let’s see how others, who are experienced in doing it, can show us. Maybe we’ll learn something new.
With all this talk on preparation and studying prayer, there must be some pastors or church leaders out there screaming “We don’t have enough time for all this!” Fair enough. What about this. Cancel your Wednesday prayer meeting for a year. Block out one hour every Wednesday night and study prayer. In just one year time, you would have spent 52 hours studying the spiritual discipline of prayer, and possibly practiced some of them personally. Then, go back to your church and say, “Okay, let’s try doing this with our prayer meeting.” I’ll bet you that your church members will have a whole new level of respect of that Wednesday night prayer meeting.
Prayers
Moving Inward: Seeking the Transformation We Need
Moving Upward: Seeking the Intimacy We Need
Moving Outward: Seeking the Ministry We Need
I. Worship and Spirituality
The Sunday worship reflects the spirituality of the church. Before I go on, I must define what I mean by “spirituality”. Alister McGrath says this:
For Christianity, spirituality concerns the living out of the encounter with Jesus Christ. The term “Christian spirituality” refers to the way in which the Christian life is understood and the explicitly devotional practices which have been developed to foster and sustain that relationship with Christ. Christian spirituality may be thus understood as the way in which Christian individuals or groups aim to deepen their experience of God, or to “practice the presence of God,” to use a phrase especially associated with Brother Lawrence.
Going by this definition, the Sunday worship reflects how that church understands Christian life and how they should foster their relationship with Jesus Christ or experience with God. An emphasis must be made here that there is no universal Christian spirituality. What one church focuses might differ from what another does. But the common thread is that the Sunday worship tells how that church identifies itself as followers of Christ and what things it holds important. Everything that happens on Sunday morning is the culmination of the Christian life that church aspires – whether it is the study of the Word, mission, service, filled by the Spirit, liturgy, liberation, or social justice. In fact, different traditions bring different insights. Take Catholicism for an example. Their liturgical worship carries deep theological symbolism that represents the Catholic beliefs. Also, the repetition of the same cultic ceremonies serves an important purpose of inheriting the tradition that runs deep in the veins of the church. While the weekly replay of the mass might lack the livelihood of that of a pentecostal worship, the age old consistency brings forth the power of connection with the historical church that stood hundreds of years ago. This sense of preservation of the ancient church is not likely to be found in Protestantism.
Greek Orthodox provides us with a different kind of perspective in worship. Perhaps the most well known element is their use of icons. With full knowledge of the biblical instructions on forbidding the creation of any images of God, the eastern church
argued that Jesus is the image of God. What more is that icons are not the object of worshipping. Instead, they are windows that allow the worshipper to “peek” into the supernatural from his natural world. In other words, the artwork serves as a media that helps the believer to worship whom the icon points toward. Icons are considered to be written rather than painted. Unlike an ordinary artist who seeks to express himself through his artwork, the artist who writes the icon seeks to copy closely to the tradition so that he does not deviate from conveying the biblical truth in his work. And, this is the mysticism that is unique to the Greek Orthodox worship.
II. American Evangelicalism
After briefly seeing the correlation between worship and spirituality of some Christian traditions, it is time to examine our own. The apparent question is “What does American Evangelicalism represent?” The quick answer is that it is a movement that is historically associated with biblical inerrancy and conversion revivalism. Christian historian, Mark Noll, points towards as far back as The First Awakening in the 18th century where the movement first found momentum. Prominent figures like George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards were not only leaders of the movement but history also recognized them as intellectuals who deeply influenced America as a nation, including its gaining independence from Britain in 1774. Theologically speaking, the First Awakening drew its resource from Calvinism. John Calvin, and other reformers (like Luther and Zwingli) in the 16th century gave rise to Protestantism through their study of the scriptures. While Calvin was known as a well established theologian and for writing the Institutes, Luther became a legendary hero from the well-told story of how he discovered salvation by grace when he studied the Book of Romans.
With these historical backgrounds in mind, one should not be surprised that the evangelical worship is mostly featured by its preaching. Accordingly, when the great American intellect Benjamin Franklin went to listen to George Whitefield’s sermon, he would first leave his wallet at home before going. This is because Franklin would end up emptying every last penny he had into the offering bag after Whitefield’s preaching. The same enthusiasm was true for Edwards. It was recorded that when Jonathan Edwards finished preaching and looked up, he would see people gripping the back of the pew in front of them so hard that their knuckles turned white. Church history continued to record great preachers like Spurgeon and Moody. These people not only directed the spirituality of American Evangelicalism, they also set the tone for what worship looked like and for what worshippers expected in a service. It was not about the music. It was about the Word.
III. A Deviation from Our Tradition
Loss of the luster
Coming back to our reality from history, I must point out that this is not what most of us experienced in our local churches. Before the 80s, Sunday worship was nothing close to “pew-gripping” or “leaving the wallet behind before going to church”. It was more like waking up in the middle of dozing off and finding that the service was still not over. (This made it easy to distinguish the good Christians from the bad. The good ones were those who stayed awake.) So, what happened to that evangelical tradition that gripped the heart of men that pushed them to sitting on the edge of their pew? The first and obvious answer is that not all pastors are powerful preachers. The Bible tells us that the Holy Spirit gives different gifts to different people. While some pastors are good at caring, counseling, or administrating, others are good at preaching. But I would like to contend that this is not the major problem. When you listen to the same powerful preacher for over a month, that ‘power’ will started to fade and he will have even a harder time to get your attention six months later if his preaching has only ‘power’ but not enough substance. As a preacher, I would like to argue from personal experience that a sermon which captures the audience attention consists nothing less than substance and the preacher’s passion of that message. And, the deviation from our evangelical tradition results from the loss of both.
Ironically, soon after the First Awakening came a way of thinking that I would call “anti-intellectualism”. The Pietistic Movement started in the seventeenth century advocates that Christianity does not belong to the elite. Spiritual fervor is not about theology but piety. Clergies do not monopolize serving God but laities have as large a role. As with all other movements, the good always comes with the other side. While Pietism ignited the flames of zealous Christians across Europe and North America, it also undermined intellectual disciplines. The 20th century Evangelicals in the United States was one of the legacies of the Pietistic Movement. And its features can be observed directly from the pulpit. Expository preaching was not common in the eighties. Preachers did not give topical preaching either. What they preached was piety. Have faith! Save the soul! Love your God! The problem is: You can only preach piety for so long. You can only pound the podium so many times. Or, you can only raise and lower your tone so often before people realize that you are only preaching piety and not message. Chinese churches in North America were even worse sometimes. Allegorical preaching was prominent, although nobody would admit they preached allegorically. Not only preachers did not exegete the scriptures, they did not exegete the culture or their members’ social context. Therefore Christians were accustomed to listening to irrelevant preachings of slogans week after week. Then came the third wave of the Charismatic Movement.
Influence of the charismatic movement
For our purpose here, I will not discuss the theology of the third wave. I just want to talk about the worship style they brought in. Evangelicalism totally bought it. Charismaticism changed our worship style completely. In fact, they changed our fundamental understanding of worship – they changed its definition! To the young people, worship no longer means the preaching. It is the praising, the lifting of hands, the total immersion of oneself in the music and praying and dancing that lead that person to the experience of spiritual ‘high’ in the close encounter of the “god” kind. In the spiritual sense, I would call it musical contemplation.
We were amazed. No, we were revived – from emotional death, or rigidity. People saw tears, joy, and reverence during worship. In a sense, people saw life in the worship for the first time. They have truly worshipped. All these were attributed to the work of the Holy Spirit. But the very strength of charismatic worship style is also its weakness. The influx of charismaticism has now limited the presence of the Spirit to emotion and spontaneity. That alone should not be a problem, for everything comes with at least two sides – like a fast person would lack patience and the one who plans is not usually spontaneous. What concerns me is that many pastors have since given up their responsibility in leading worship. They contended that they “didn’t know” worship, so they gave the job to musicians. The fact was some pastors felt intimidated while others were plainly impressed by what musicians could do. Judging from the “performance” from the last generation, we could safely conclude that not too many evangelical seminaries emphasized on worship training. My own seminary training provided me with a 2-unit class (out of the 90-unit M. Div. program) led by a professor who held a Master of Divinity. With an honest critique, my professor was innovative. He brought many creative ideas to the class. With all that said, my worship training had the width but seriously lacked the depth. I am not suggesting the class should be taught by a PhD or evening blaming my professor for lack of knowledge. In fact, a PhD led class would likely turn it into an academic exercise which would lack the desperately needed aesthetics. But what I am saying is that not much could be done with only 2 units! More importantly, that class did not lead me into thinking what worship was about, therefore it did not give me the stimulus to further explore the subject on my own. And I suspect the same was true for many pastors who hold an M. Div. But if the pastors “don’t know” worship, the musicians know even less.
IV. Some Reflection Points
The third wave of the charismatic movement brought emotions and feelings back to the worship. Being in touch with our emotions and feeling the presence of God are not bad things. They are actually very good things. But the point is this: They are not the ultimate desired ends of worship. The desired end is to worship God. With that being said, what exactly does that mean? How do we do that? The answer to the what question involves the depth of the worship and the how the width. I have already mentioned the charismatic worship style addresses the emotional and experiential element. There are at least the following elements that we also need to consider:
With all these being said, it would be totally unfair to expect the musicians or even the music pastor to come up with a worship that addresses all the above areas in a balanced fashion. Realistically, we find different factions or denominations of Christianity emphasize on different areas. Some areas of worship may stand out more at a certain period because of the contextual demand. An example would be the recent yearn for liturgy from the post-seekers generation. They feel that the “contemporary” worship is similar to their concerts experience but liturgical services actually fulfill their spiritual expectations.
When I look at how churchgoers seriously look for spiritual experience and how pastors are unequipped in their worship training, I feel this is the time for evangelical seminaries to invest in this academic study.
I have recently come across the name of “Guigo II”. Guigo II was the priory of the Carthusian order who lived in the 12th century. One of his most significant contribution was to formalize the way to read and pray over the scriptures, which he called The Four Rungs of the Ladder. Accordingly, this method was founded by St. Benedict and Pope Gregory I in the 6th century. However, it was not until the 12th century when Guigo II formally described it in a letter he wrote to another monk, Gervase. As I read through the four rungs, I’ve found my practice of prayer resembles much to the methods described by Guigo. Although the time and intensity of the monastic practice back in the 12th century for sure surpass my discipline by much, the general pattern, especially the sequence of events, follows alongside.
My purpose of writing this essay is not to imply that this is the only proper way or a “better” way to pray. Rather, I wish to offer the four rungs as an alternative to quietism, which has regained some popularity in North American evangelical circle – including some Chinese churches. Quietism follows the tradition of Madam Guyon of the 17th century. The practice of this discipline adapts a certain passivity of the mind to enter contemplation. While the discipline bears certain strengths in deepening the practitioner’s encounter with God, the danger belies with those who have inadequate scriptural and theological knowledge that draw boundaries for their contemplative exercise. Because the exercise actually utilizes one’s imagination as the mean to engage with God, an undisciplined practice (one without a theological boundary) may lead the practitioner into all sorts of possible thoughts – some maybe ungodly and some maybe erroneous conclusions mistaken for truths revealed. Besides, scriptural engagement with quietism usually involves a very narrow spectrum of books (usually Psalms and the Gospels). Quietists must remind themselves to constantly broaden their width of spiritual truths through other means.
Another reason that I like the four rungs is the fact that its spiritual focus is closer to that of evangelicalism, which holds the Bible in its centrality. As we shall see later, the content of the prayer and contemplation revolve around the scriptural reading that precedes. Therefore, a boundary is set by the Word of God before one engages with meditation and contemplation. Not only this makes the exercise spiritually safe, it is also formational towards the Word – a process that is truly led by the Spirit. And, the last reason for me to speak of this discipline is one of practical – I do have some first-hand experience.
The Four Rungs
The imagery of the “ladder” is apparently borrowed from Jacob’s dream (Gen 28:10-12), that it “stood on earth and reached into heaven”. The four stages of Guigo’s method are: Reading (lectio) is careful study of Scripture with the soul’s attention.
Meditation (meditatio) is the studious action of the mind to investigate hidden truth, led by one’s own reason.
Prayer (oratio) is the heart’s attending to God, so that evil maybe removed and good maybe obtained.
Contemplation (contemplatio) is the mind suspended – somehow elevated above itself – in God so that it tastes the joys of everlasting sweetness.
The four rungs of the ladder brings the believer to the presence of God from a careful study of the Word to the celebration of God’s presence. One begins from the earthly level of approaching God with one’s mind but ends up ascending to the heavens where one hears the mysteries of spiritual glory from above. In terms of their functions, they can be described as follow: Reading seeks. Meditation finds. Prayer asks. Contemplation tastes. Metaphorically speaking, reading is like putting food in the mouth; meditation chews and breaks it. Prayer attains its flavor; and contemplation is the sweetness that rejoices and refreshes.
What especially appreciative with this form of devotion is that it “allows” the believer to engage himself with the scriptures exegetically. What I mean is that exegetical reading – the proper approach to understanding the Word – is often placed in the shadow of devotion because it is only an exercise “of the mind” but not “of the heart”. In fact, many would insist that reading the Bible daily does not take the place of devotion. The annoying result becomes that one will have to approach the scriptures twice – first as a scholar then as a lover. Instead, the four rungs of the ladder bring the believer from an objective learning of the mind to an intimate encounter with his Lord and Savior. This process is both instructional and formational. Listen to how Guigo describes interdependence of the four rungs: Reading without meditation is sterile. Meditation without reading is prone to error. Prayer without meditation is lukewarm. Meditation without prayer is barren. Prayer with devotion achieves contemplation.
In the reality of the modern day, most believers (pastors included) probably do not have the time to engage with the scriptures at this level on a daily basis. However, this pattern of exercise allows the reader to keep coming back to the same passage that he worked on exegetically – each time with a deeper level of appreciation – from meditation to prayer to contemplation. For those who are interested in this discipline, the following references will provide more information that they might appreciate. http://www.umilta.net/ladder.html
http://www.ldysinger.com/@texts2/1180_guigo-2/02_lad_sel-lec.htm
We pondered. We struggled. We debated over the subject. What is faith? What does it mean to be a disciple of Christ? We took the intensive discipleship class. We studied. We debated. Why are there people sitting in the pew believing that is all they needed to do? Am I good? Are we good? Would the Father look down upon us and say “Behold, my beloved children”? “It’s about your personal relationship with God.” I was told. Ah. It gives me somewhere to start. Twenty years flew by, and it finally hit me. What about him, her, and them? Could it be more than my personal relationship with God? “It’s about the community.” I was told. Ah. It gives me a new direction. We read. We served. We debated some more. I’ve found Christ–first in my quiet room and then in the midst of my group–often disguised among the hurt, the broken, and the sick. People started to flock to me to hear my story. They liked me because I’m really telling their stories. They liked my stories because I asked questions they didn’t dare to ask. What about conversion? Aren’t I saved? Is he saved? Isn’t it enough to be saved? It’s not about me. It’s not about us. Well, it must be about them. But isn’t it about God? You’ll find Him in them. “…the law is paralyzed, and justice never prevails. The wicked hem in the righteous, so that justice is perverted (Habakkuk 1:4).” Where is God’s kingdom? Shouldn’t we be part of it? Shouldn’t we be expanding it? Who would speak out for the poor? Who would speak out for the downcast? Are you doing it? You must be a communist. No, I’m more of a theologian. Oh, then you’re a heretic–social gospel. I do tithe and give to the poor. You’re a saint. But, I do ask questions like “Why are there poor people?” Like I said, you’re a communist. Again, what is faith? What does a disciple look like? Where is my cross? We talked. We prayed. We gave. And we debated some more.
“A small crew of technicians, braving radiation and fire, became the only people remaining at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station…They crawl through labyrinths of equipment in utter darkness pierced only by their flashlights, listening for periodic explosions as hydrogen gas escaping from crippled reactors ignites on contact with air. They breathe through uncomfortable respirators or carry heavy oxygen tanks on their backs. They wear white, full-body jumpsuits with snug-fitting hoods that provide scant protection from the invisible radiation sleeting through their bodies. They are the faceless 50, the unnamed operators who stayed behind. They have volunteered, or been assigned, to pump seawater on dangerously exposed nuclear fuel, already thought to be partly melting and spewing radioactive material, to prevent full meltdowns that could throw thousands of tons of radioactive dust high into the air and imperil millions of their compatriots (New York Times, March 15, 2011).” These 50 faceless Japanese workers portrayed the Christ figure before the world. They bore the cross and walked to their crucifixion. Those who volunteered volunteered their death. Those who were assigned were assigned to their death. It was more than a job to them. Some ascribed their bravery to cultural traits, but I like to think of it as a general revelation from God to show us what faith might look like. It is a loyalty to the allegiance that we have pledged. After all, whoever tries to save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his for the kingdom will find it.
These were in my mind when I heard the news.
(By the time this article is published, the number of workers at the reactors is increased to 180. I do not suppose anyone of these workers will see the cherry blossom next year. God rests their souls.)
Jon Stewart is called a “prophet” at one point. I think he is well worthy of the title. Just hear what he has to say.
