RIP - Wakanda Forever

 

King #Wakandaforever. 

In today’s paper, Adrian Matejka wrote this about Chadwick Aaron Boseman: “In lead roles, (he) mostly played the outlier: the one with conviction, the one with enough crust and wherewithal to understand that everybody from the high steppers to the low downs is made of antiquity, sunlight and iron.”

Talking about sunlight, Chadwick, 43, who tweeted a photo of him announcing his passing and an earlier diagnosis of colon cancer, has gone viral. It has “more than 6.2 million likes and three million retweets.” 

God rest his good soul. A soul that has given hope and inspired many in their own struggles to overcome their own demons. He will always be a cinematic hero in our mind. 

FYI, Chadwick’s tweet tops the tweets of all time, to relegate Obama’s tweet to second place. Obama’s tweet was in Aug 2017 in the wake of the Charlottesville, Virginia, “car attack in which a man drove his car into a crowd of peaceful protesters who had been protesting against white supremacists.” 

This is Obama’s tweet, quoting the late Nelson Mandela: “No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion.”

I feel that in the wake of so many hate crimes, riots, pillages, shootings, and how divided our world is, the Mandela’s quote is a good reminder for us to think about the hate that has consumed the world. 

Indeed, none of us are born to hate. And if sunlight represents the good in us, iron represents the resolve in us, and antiquity represents the change in us, from our past to the present, then the hope is that we can be our own superhero, the princes (or princesses) of our world, holding the torch with resolve, to change the world from within before we take on the world we see. 

Alas, I like to believe that our birthright has never changed, for we have always been the overcomer of hate, and the embracer of love. 

My sister-in-law had recently given birth to a beautiful baby girl, Joelle, and when I carried her in my arms, what I see in her eyes is the soul to mingle, to discover and to connect. There was complete trust, complete abandonment, on both sides. 

I trust this is the same for anyone who carries her, whether kins or friends, or whether the one who cradles her is from a different race, religion or background. 

I always wonder when did the colour of our skin become the blackness in our heart? Or, for that matter, when did the innocence of our youth give way to the hatred in our soul? 

I think it goes without saying that along the way, Joelle will grow up to witness for herself the world that we live in. She will come in contact with people who love her unconditionally. She will also come to discover that there are people out there who befriends her with conditions. 

The beauty of humanity will soon unravel and Joelle will come to know the raw reality of that Mandela’s quote, where hatred is born from a soul that conscientiously nurtures it.

That is the thing about hate, we need to feed it. We give it life as we give it attention. It responds to how we respond to it. It grows as we grow. At some point, it grows from a child to adolescence, under our watch, and from adolescence to adulthood, under our torch. 

And because the nature of hate is to hate, the world it sees conditions the world we see. It in turns feeds us from its perspective, the lenses of what it sees. 

At some point, it becomes our adviser, our tutor. And we unwittingly allow it to because it promises us tantalising power. For to hate is to turn someone into an object, a target, with us holding the trigger. That power at some point is absolute. 

Indeed, a child embraces the world and all the beauty in it. The first sight most of them see is the face of their parents. Love always takes first priority, first sight, first connection. So in my arms is a newborn that will grow up to be who she wants to be. Her future is secure in the good hands of those who love her, unceasingly. 

Yes, Joelle will know about hate too, that is unavoidable. She will come in contact with people who will judge her by colour, race or religion. But as the late King T’Challa once said to the UN assembly: “"In times of crisis, the wise build bridges while the foolish build barriers."

I thus believe with all my heart that Joelle and many others her generation and beyond will lead the way here to be bridge builders, peacemaker and heart healers. 

For hate narrows everything. Paths cannot be shared. Happiness is only to those at the top. Scarcity abounds. Division like plague multiplies. And the world is constricted. But with love, with hope, with resolve, guided by the sunlight, we can all be cinematic heroes in the minds of other people. The world thus opens up, it becomes boundless, with our imagination as her architect. 

This I believe is the legacy people like Chadwick Aaron Boseman has left behind for all of us, especially for our children.

 

Vigilante Justice on the net - Caltex Driver.

Something good came out of it. 

Facebook user Kelly Yeo did the right thing to raise the matter to Caltex. The pump attendant does not need to bear the balance of $115. Caltex assured the public that they will bear the balance.

It was a good ending for all except the driver of the BMW. 

I don't know whether is it because he drives a BMW or is it a case of the perceived rich-poor divide, but the driver was not spared the public humiliation and harassment. 

What should have ended there and then sadly spilled over to a police report. 

The driver yesterday filed a police report, stating that he was "worried for the safety of his family after netizens identified him online." 

This is what the police said:-

"We have looked into the matter and established that no offence was disclosed. It was a case of miscommunication between the pump attendant and the vehicle owner on the amount of petrol to be pumped at the petrol kiosk in Tampines. We have verified that the vehicle owner was due to trade in his vehicle on the same day, and would not require more than the necessary fuel."

The police advised the parties to settle the matter amicably.

But amicably was not what the netizens were looking for. 

Somehow, they did their own sleuthing around and did it rather well and thorough. They managed to suss out the target, troll his workplace address and position, display his family photo, and even stiff out his personal handphone number. 

No private detective could match the online detective in timing, information and details.And that explains why the BMW driver now fears for his safety and his family's safety. 

He noted with trepidation that "since the Facebook post went viral over the weekend, netizens have plastered (his) personal details online, including his purported name and occupation."

He said: "After reading some of the comments on the Facebook post, I decided to lodge a report as I am afraid that these people will come to my house."

He added that he had received "many nuisance calls, SMSes and WhatsApp messages".

Lesson? Three.

If there is one thing I can "fault" the driver, it may just be his lack of magnanimity (I am just thinking aloud). 

In my view, he should have just paid the $125 and walk away. Live and let live. I know I would (on good days). 

But that's a form of moral imposition on my part. He is not me, and I can't expect that from him. 

He was just about to trade in his car and it was more likely than not that he had told the uncle that he only wanted a refill limited to $10, and not full tank. 

It is thus likely that it was a miscommunication. No one was to be blamed by society's standard of social norm. 

Alas, we may expect a kinder society, but what's more crucial here is an understanding one. 

Personally, I can be a rogue one day, impatient and even crude, depending on my mood, but on another day, I may be exemplary in my thoughts and deeds. No one lives with monastic goodness 24/7, 365, all year round. 

I know myself, and I am far from perfect. Too far. 

This brings me to my three lessons.

1) Justice. 

Sadly, I can't expect much understanding from media justice. When we hide behind technology, performing our panopticon surveillance for self-perceived culprits and crooks, what most are going for is sensation, popularity ("Likes") and controversy. 

Honestly, I don't expect much mercy too. Forget about moderation, think overdrive and overkill. 

The justice meted out by the social media is more blind than the blindness of that lady holding up the scales of justice. 

Think many sledgehammers busting a nut to smithereens, and I hope you get the picture. 

There is also no perimeters to such vigilante justice either. You can't ringfence it, reason with it or control it because it is essentially faceless, restless and tactless. It spreads like virus and leaves no stones unturned. 

Unlike a judge who sits in the court and is accountable to a high enacted standard he or she has to abide by, the media justice is accountable to no one. They are out there and are on the prowl. 

They are "ringfenced" by their anonymity and it is an invisible wall made up of a lot of hot pent-up air. 

And if you happen to be caught in their crosshair for even the slightest transgression, it is not the transgression that is severely punished, it is the transgressor - it is you. 

2) Privacy. 

It is said that privacy is partly a form of self-possession. You are most yourself when no one is watching and listening. 

It is our sacred space for reflection, correction and redemption. Take away our privacy and we are essentially dysfunctional ("not of our own").

We lose our sense of self. We are effectively dispossessed of our true identity. We become what the society (who is watching and listening to us) wants us to be. We are walking fake. 

And in a world of media justice, where the Police's ballad comes glaringly alive (that is "Every breath you take and every move you make, I'll be watching you"), our privacy, our sacred reforming self, is the white elephant in an e-fortress of god's eyes (in the form of spontaneous handphone cameras and trigger-happy internet postings). 

And...finally, 

3) Dignity. 

To be fair, public shaming via the media has led to exposure of acts that deserve to be exposed. And the culprit like molesters, bullies, cheats and fraudsters deserve the comeuppance. 

But it can also go the other way and strip many less deserving, or the misunderstood, of their dignity, privacy and worth. The damage can be lifelong.

While the media honours heroes and shame crooks, it can go overboard by punishing those who happen to be in the wrong place, at the wrong time, with the wrong crowd, and in the wrong mood (which can be anyone of us!).

Unfortunately, it can also lead to hypocrites taking all the credit and the hapless taking all the blame. Recall that media justice with no filter and discernment is more blind?

You see, everyone of us relishes being the self-appointed judge of society, and none of us enjoys being the accused. 

But as much as we love to judge and preserve/project our rightness to others, we also stand guilty of being the accused in the many vulnerable areas of our life. 

That is why I sincerely believe that for a society to be kinder, gentler and compassionate, we first need to understand and be understanding. 

We need to understand that every Internet finger pointed at the target on our private screen is more than one finger pointed right back at us. 

Surely, we do not want to live in "an Orwellian world where tastes, relationships and pinpoint GPS locations are public knowledge to whomever is manning the server," but a world of understanding with the protected right to be forgotten. 

Kindness without understanding is superficial and understanding without kindness is hypocritical. 

And privacy means that our past no longer haunts us in the form of a playback locked in a thumb drive or recorded for posterity in the Cloud. 

Our right to be forgotten in this media age is as important for us to be human as our right to social justice and security. 

So, I return to the BMW driver with a family. I hope he will be left to his own to reflect. I hope that what has happened is soon forgotten. 

For there has to be a secret garden we go to to be alone, unharassed, that is, a quiet spot, so that we may learn to be human, to be self-aware of our vulnerabilities, and to make amends for them without being forced to do so. 

That is, a sacred space we can be ourselves. Cheerz.

A doomed marriage.

Some marriages bloom while others are doomed.

In a recent judgment, HC Judge Choo made this candid observation: "With perfect lens of hindsight it is obvious that this marriage was doomed 16 years ago."

This marriage is the unfortunate union of a doctor and his clinic assistant wife. The facts are quite depressing.

ROM in March 1990. Three children born out of this union with the eldest now 23 yrs old. Everything spiraled down south in 2001, just 11 yrs after ROM.

Here is what's doomed about it. The wife filed for three divorces in 2001 (dismissed in 2005 after a full trial), in 2010 (dismissed subsequently when contested) and in 2015 (which went for another full trial), and came before Judge Choo in an appeal.

Legal technicalities aside, the union was a harvest of woes since 2001. And Judge Choo even waxed lyrical in his judgment comparing it to a parallel event in history: "Three wars were fought the day after Carthage and Rome realized that they could not live together side by side. The Punic Wars as they are known lasted more than a century from 261 BCE."

Here is what the husband alleged transpired between them in a marital Wars of the Roses.

Since 2001, the husband was charged in court on three separate occasions because his wife complained to the CPF that he did not pay her CPF contributions (while working as his nurse), that he sold medicine illegally, and that he bribed two patient to testify for him. However, the husband was also acquitted on all three occasions! Long story short, his wife's complaint did not hold water in court.

But that's not all. The wife also complained to MOH and HSA about some illegally imported medicine from Malaysia. When MOH and HSA raided the clinic, they found nothing. The wife also complained to MOE on various occasions about her husband's bubble tea business and he had to close his bubble tea shop.

She further lodged a police report about her husband forging her signature to cash a cheque, but no action was taken against the husband (as it turned out, it was in fact her own signature). In 2003, the wife also applied for an injunction to freeze his bank account, applied for enforcement of her maintenance, and garnished his bank for failing to pay her costs for a maintenance appeal.

If you think that's the end of the so called Punic Wars between them, think again. Here are further allegations by the husband.

His wife reported to the police about child abuse committed by the husband. But the investigation found no cause. In Jan 2006, the wife "had beaten one of the children so badly the child had to be treated in a hospital, but the husband pleaded with the police not to prosecute the wife."

And in July 2015, she returned home to find the gate locked. Her attempts to force open the gate agitated the family's two Rottweiler dogs "and when one of their children (then aged 7) ran out on hearing the wife's shouting, the dogs attacked the child so severely that the child's ear was bitten off."

Of course, the wife had her side of her story, but the appeal Judge noted that "in brief, the underlying facts were not denied." In fact, the wife appeared to be in denial when she said that the children are not against her. The trial judge however noted that "one of the children was found by the school counselor to be "suicidal and murderous"".

It further reports that "the husband explained that the child in question wanted to return home to kill the mother (the wife)." It is therefore not surprising that all three children testified in favor of their father against their mother.

Yet after all that, the husband asserts that they still slept together, "had dinners and walks together, and had activities with the children together."

In the end, the husband got his divorce, but on the revised ground of the wife's desertion of the family and not on his allegation of her unreasonable behavior (mainly because those alleged events happened decades ago and he, strange as it might be, still attempted reconciliation with her).

Lesson? Make no mistakes, your greatest fortune or misfortune is your spouse. He or she can make a heaven out of hell or a hell out of heaven. And if hell has no fury like a woman scorned, then heaven has no place in a marriage torn.

While the marriage vows reminded us that it is for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part, in reality, at least for some reality, emotional death as manifested in endless bitterness, recriminations and revenge comes early for some hapless couple.

Alas, a marriage can only take so much before the emotional bough breaks and the cradle of marital bliss falls.

Frankly, I have no illusions about marriage. A match may be stitched in heaven during the wedding night, but it can turn into a nightmare after the froth in the champagne glass settles.

Who are we kidding? The divorce rates are rising and some modern marriages are like a canary in the coal mine. All it takes is a whiff of one or two disappointments, expectation falling short or a better alternative looming around to knock the poor songbird off the perch.

Honestly, I do not know of the secret to a long marriage. But I am quite sure about the cause of a short one, and it is in a heart that has no room for anyone else except oneself.

When we see everything only through the prism of self, our world gets smaller, our understanding narrows and our heart waxes cold. Somehow, nothing else matters except how we feel about it. Soon, the measure of all happiness depends on what makes us happy. We become self-referential, self-absorbed.

With the obsession of self comes the destruction of everything else - including a union that is supposedly destined to merge two imperfect lives into one unified whole.

Let me end here. Judge Choo wrote that even the Punic wars ended after the third war. I wish the couple in the above case well. I hope for them peace henceforth. God knows they and their children have gone through a lot. It is indeed time for healing for a union that has sadly gone their separate ways long before this court case. Cheerz.

How much should a Christian hate?

I wonder, how much should a Christian hate? I take my cue from the den of robbers where Jesus overturned tables and denounced peddlers and profiteers of religion. There are also other occasions where Jesus reprimanded the Scribes and Pharisees of his day, reserving the worst names for them like vipers, serpents, wolves in sheep clothing and whitewashed tombs.

Paul in Romans 12:9 even exhorted us to hate what is evil and to cling on to what is good for our love has to be genuine. We must not claim that we love and then go around turning a blind eye to injustice, corruption and abuses. Worse still, to project a form of love in public and then exact unmitigated hate in private especially with those closest to us bearing the full brunt of our raging campaign.

So, hate is not something to be avoided. We as Christian are in fact called to stand up for what is right and make a difference by stepping up to the plate. Having moral courage therefore requires us to call a spade a spade and a wrong a wrong. Most times, we have to tell it as it is and to be firm (even tenacious) about it. Such firmness will inevitably come with some force of anger, a touch of hate. If Jesus is a model for us to follow, we can rest assured that hating what is evil or wrong is not just appropriate but necessary even.

But this is the tricky bit. At the risk of stating the obvious, we are not Jesus - not even by a long shot. We are all flawed. We fall as often as we soar. However, I am not advocating that we stop hating evil (or wrong) or suspend all judgments. That would in my view be a dereliction of our obligation as a Christian.

I am on the contrary suggesting that every subject of our ire - be it a wayward preacher, a corrupt politician or a hypocritical believer - be balanced with an equally intensive, if not more exacting, exercise of self-examination. The log in our eye will always be a reminder of how vulnerable we can be. The heart is above all deceitful and we are called to guard it at all times - especially our own.

So, this brings me to the many posts I have written about megachurch pastors, namely Kong Hee and Joseph Prince – to name a few. Needless to say, I have admittedly not written nice things about them - to put it mildly.

I have called Kong Hee a coward for not standing up to what is right, for not being transparent with his members, and for dragging the church through a costly, exhausting and faith-sapping legal saga. And I don't think I need to mention much about his recently ordained wife which obviously smacks of blatant spousal bias and conflict of interests - putting aside china wine of course.

I have also questioned Joseph Prince's interpretation of scriptures. I feel that his radical grace message undermines God's holy Law while it distorts God's freely-given Grace. Burying the former (law) to raise the latter (grace) only offer one side of the Gospel. I also find his doctrine of the one-time-altar-call repentance another distortion, while his emphasis on the self-appropriation of righteousness risks believers taking Grace for granted. History has shown us quite conclusively that we still continue to sin against a loving Savior after the altar call, but it is what comes after that that true transformation begins, that is, repentance. 

Last but not least, I feel that the megachurch preachers like Joel Osteen, Benny Hinn and Kenneth Copeland turn religion into a self-profiting enterprise preying on the innermost desire of believers for the attention and affection of omnipotence.

But in writing about them the way I did, I kept to dealing with the issue as best as I know how, and not the person. As fallible as they are, I am equally fallible too. We are all flawed and I feel deeply that what joins us all together is never how morally superior we are. If anything, moral superiority is divisive, exclusive and self-glorifying. Self-appropriation of righteousness can equally be misappropriated to conveniently cover a multitude of sins.

Our common ground however is how flawed we are, and how much we need a savior - not how much we can live our life without one. And what holds us together is holy grief/sorrow, enduring repentance. Even if the Holy Spirit does not convict us of sins (so say JP as his bottom-line declaration), we could still grieve Him by our conduct, thoughts and speech. And if we respond in remorse and repentance to it by changing our mind and heart accordingly ("metanoia"), that is conviction enough for me (by the Holy Spirit).

So, I do have issues with Kong Hee,  Joseph Prince and the other megachurch preachers, and at times, I make personal judgments about their leadership and teachings.

But when I do so, I am aware that the log in my own eyes constrains me. It keeps me mindful of my own failings as a husband, son, friend and believer. I need to check myself too. I need a savior as much as they need theirs. I am accountable to God as they are accountable to Him.

And as I return to the question I first posed in this post - "how much should a Christian hate?" - I am reminded again of Paul's words, "to hate what is evil and to cling on to what is good."

Now, I prefer to replace the word "evil" here with "wrong", and apply the same to the tumultuous leadership of Kong Hee and some of the controversial teachings of Joseph Prince and the other megachurch prosperity preachers.

This is of course just my view and I am entitled to them just as many who disagree with me are entitled to theirs. Each of us has our own shored-up reasons for our particular stand or position. And the debate is endless on this.


My point here as I end is this, where should we then draw the line when it comes to hating what is wrong? I think the answer is found in the Pauline admonishment. At all times, our hate should not blind us to what is good. And if your read Romans 12:9, it culminates at verse 21 with this, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” If there is any doubt as to where to draw the line, that last verse should clear all doubts. Good always prevail, that is, it prevails over hate (Romans also talks about love, and I will leave that part to the end of this post).

At my brother-in-law's wake recently, I have spoken to members from City Harvest Church and New Creation Church and I realized that what is good about the churches are the members themselves. Most of them at least - the discerning and sincere members.

They know what they are looking for. They know why they come to church. They know how to pursue the Lover of their souls. They do not seek after men. They seek after God. They do not seek the gift, but the Giver. In fact, I have many friends who are equally discerning in these megachurches.

No doubt they are disappointed with some aspects of the leadership, but the source of their personal redemption and faith is not in the controversial programs and the flamboyant leaders, but it is in the life-transforming encounters with their Savior.

After talking to them, I feel that my hate for what is wrong should never blind me to the good that I cling on to. No church is perfect. No leadership flawless. And no programs foolproof. Leaders wear their pants in the same way that lay members wear them - one leg at a time.

By the fruits, you shall know them and mind you, numbers do not justify the leadership. Ten of thousands of people can be wrong (look at the current democracy in America). Just as the cult of personality is inevitable, we can trust that the discernment of mature church members will keep their eyes focused on their Savior.

By saying "by the fruits", I am talking about each individual life, and you can't just conveniently sweep or lump them all into one category and put a label on them under the category of "blind followers", "cliff-diving lemmings" or "mass delusionals". 

You have to talk to them. Listen to their heart's cry. Draw lessons from their struggles. Respect their reasons even if they differ from yours. Love them as Jesus loves them. Allow yourself to be encouraged and ministered to by the good in their faith and belief. And if there is a common thread that runs through our declaration of faith, it has to be the life of Jesus.

Sure, Jesus had overturned tables and stopped the people from turning His house of prayers into a den of thieves, but at the same time, He went all the way to Calvary and died for the same people who once formed the subject of his ire.

He took upon Himself their condemnation and turned evil or wrong into something redeemable, hopeful, empowering and enduringly good.

So, does this mean that I should stop writing about what I think is wrong about the leadership in the megachurches? No, of course not.

But my takeaway from all this is that I should continue to speak my mind as I have always done so in the past. Yet in doing so, I should also be mindful that love always makes the enduring difference.

It was love that compelled Jesus, not hate. It was love that completed the mission at Calvary, not hate. And it was love that Jesus said "forgive them for they know not what they do", not hate.

Love therefore goes the distance, completes the race and shows us the way. Yes, I should hate what is wrong. But such hate should never blind me to what is good, that is, what is redeemable and what is lovely in the eyes of my Savior. My heart should always be broken by the things that break the heart of God.

In the end, I should always strive to see everyone through the eyes of my Savior at an elevated point of Calvary, and not see them through my own eyes at the foot of the Cross where the only preoccupation is to cast lot over Jesus' seamless, blood-drenched robe. Cheerz.