Click here to view the embedded video.

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.

This poem is attributed to Martin Niemöller .

Fremmskrittspartiets Siv Jensen wants to forbid medical aid to refugees and other foreigners without legal documents. Once again she proves what much of her world-view is founded on:the creation of “fear of  the other” and borderline fascism. Shame on you and the 30 prosent of Nowegians who support you!

Martin Rowson in the Gaurdian says it all. The $100m ‘loan’ from the World Bank to Haiti could be paid off like that by a fraction of the banking bonuses paid out on top of enormous salaries. Sickening.

I hope for a happier new year to you all, despite the horror the above reminds us all of. (thanks to Kester Brewin for posting this on his blog)

the history of “Jul”

спални комплекти
The celebration of God becoming human is celebrated in what the English world calls Christmas. Here in Scandinavia we don’t call it Christmas, we call it “Jul”. Jul has originally nothing to do with Christ.

Yule or Yule-tide is a winter festival that was initially celebrated by the historical Germanic peoples as a pagan religious festival, though it was later absorbed into, and equated with, the Christian festival of Christmas.

Christianity transformed and put new meaning into old religion all over the known world. Examples of this is how the church did this is how the word advent is turned into a christian holiday. Augustus introduced the advent of Augustus to celebrate the fact that he was the son of God 17 years before the birth of Jesus. (Read more about it here)

Christianity had a hard time

Here in Scandinavia the church never were able to remove the word Yule or Jul as we say today from what we called the birth of Jesus. Originally it has nothing to do with Christianity.

The festival was originally celebrated from late December to early January on a date determined by the lunar Germanic calendar. The festival was placed on December 25 when the Christian (Julian) calendar was adopted.

Some historians claim that the celebration is connected to the Wild Hunt or was influenced by Saturnalia, the Roman winter festival. The term “Yule” is still used in the Nordic Countries and to a lesser extent in English speaking countries to refer to Christmas. Customs such as the Yule log, Yule goat, Yule boar, Yule singing, and others stem from Yule. In modern times, Yule is observed as a cultural festival and also with religious rites by some Christians and by some Neopagans.

Merry Christ mass

Have a good mass, a mass where Christ is celebrated. Where the fact that God became man is a story we now all can be a part of. Have a blessed Christ mass or a “god Jul” as we say here in Scandinavia.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Yoder is best remembered for his reflections on Christian ethics. Rejecting the assumption that human history is driven by coercive power, Yoder argued that it was rather God — working in, with, and through the nonviolent, non-resistant community of disciples of Jesus — who has been the ultimate force in human affairs. If the Christian church in the past made alliances with political rulers, it was because it had lost confidence in this truth.

He called the arrangement whereby the state and the church each supported the goals of the other Constantinianism, and he regarded it as a dangerous and constant temptation. Yoder argued that Jesus himself rejected this temptation, even to the point of dying a horrible and cruel death. Resurrecting Jesus from the dead was, in this view, God’s way of vindicating Christ’s unwavering obedience.

If I ever become a saint – I will surely be one of ‘darkness’. I will continually be absent from Heaven – to light the light of those in darkness on earth

Mother Theresa

This movie has been out for some time, but I recently saw it and want to recommend it here. I have for some reason been avoiding it, thinking it would be an hurtful experience which good movies often can be. It is powerful, and creates the feelings I am sure the director wanted. This one brings my memories back to “Schindlers list”.The music, the pain, do you remember the little girl depicted in red in Schindlers list? A similar visual instrument is used in this animated documentary. The pictures are beautiful and the voices are real interviews from the real people involved in this story.

This time the roles are changed from the Nazi Germans hunting for jews. The Israeli army are the powerful, and the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon are the week and the hated.

The biggest injustice and evil done in the aftermath of Lebanon 1982 is making the man responsible “Sharon” prime minister of Israel 20 years later.

Put this one on your “to see list”!

Read more about the movie below and the history of Lebanon 1982 below.

In 1982, Ari Folman was a 19-year-old infantry soldier in the Israel Defense Forces. In 2006, he meets with a friend from his army service period, who tells him of the nightmares connected to his experiences from the Lebanon War. Folman is surprised to find that he does not remember a thing from that period. Later that night he has a vision from the night of the Sabra and Shatila massacre, the reality of which he is unable to tell. In his memory, he and his soldier friends are bathing at night by the seaside in Beirut under the light of flares descending over the city. Folman rushes off to meet another friend from his army service, who advises him to discuss it with other people who were in Beirut at the same time in order to understand what happened there and to relive his own memory. Folman converses with friends, a psychologist and the reporter Ron Ben-Yishai who was in Beirut at the time.

While giving a speech at the Phalangist headquarters in East Beirut, Bashir Gemayel was killed by a massive explosive charge. To this day it is unknown who was responsible for the murder, but the assumption is that the assassination was orchestrated by Syrian or Palestinian factions or that they collaborated thereon.
That afternoon, Israeli troops penetrated a region in West Beirut that was mostly populated in those days by Palestinian refugees, and they surrounded the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Towards evening, large Phalangist forces made their way to the area, driven by a profound sense of revenge after the killing of their revered leader. At nightfall, Phalangist forces entered the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps aided by the IDF’s illumination rounds. The declared objective of the Christian forces was to purge the camps of Palestinian combat fighters. However, there were virtually no Palestinian combat fighters left in the refugee camps since they had been evacuated on ships to Tunisia two weeks earlier. For two whole days the sound of gunfire and battles could be heard from the camps but it was only on the third day, September 16th, when panic-stricken women swarmed the Israeli troops outside the camps, that the picture became clear: For three days the Christian forces massacred all refugee camp occupants. Men, women, the elderly and children, were all killed with horrific cruelty. To this day the exact number of victims is unknown but they are estimated at 3000.

News of the massacre shocked the entire world and a spontaneous protest of hundreds of thousands Israelis forced the Israeli government to create an official inquiry committee to investigate the liability of Israeli political and military authorities. Minister of Defense Arik Sharon was found guilty by the committee for not having done enough to stop the horror once he became aware of the massacre. He was dismissed of his duties and prohibited from serving as Minister of Defense for another term. This did not stop him from being appointed Prime Minister of Israel twenty years later.

Me, myself and I

I ended off my previous post in this series with a mild criticism on how the western church often views itself as a group of individuals satisfying ones own individual needs by the product offered and packaged as Church. It is a clear tendency in the western Church that members dissatisfied with the theology, the leader, the child ministry or what ever it can be leaves quite easily. This even if one has been in the church for many years and would seemingly have close friendships and relationships with the larger church body. I would argue that this is a clear example of what happens when the old systems of modernism collide with the postmodern mind.

One reason for this is the foundation the western church rests on. It has often been perceived as a package that is consumed and crafted to meet my individual need, when it doesn’t meet my need, I either need the leader to create a new package for me that meets my need or leave and find a package that meets my individual need somewhere else. Was this what Church was meant to be? Or was it meant to be something else? Something where theology, politics, power or anything else would  draw us towards each other,not alienate us from each other, a place where the differences could flourish and be lived out in a fruitful manner. Where family is more important than individuality, where the organic is more important that keeping up a safe status quo?

The reality of a postmodern world

In the wake of modernity the postmodern world responds in contradictory ways. Fragmentation and polarization on the one hand and syncretism on the other. This condition might seem unhealthy, and while there is much that is not healthy about our postmodern context, there are profound creative and redemptive possibilities in this seemingly contradictory ideas.

The word contradiction and paradox are two words that the modern mind find offensive and even dangerous. Post-moderns living in the aftermath of a world by a desire to control and dominate (very much also in the church) are often delighted by notions that defy this easy categorization.

Our postmodern world is a world of profound fragmentation. After modernity this is understandable. Within modernity a select few held power. Now everything is up for grabs.

Balkanization

One word used to describe this is balkanization. This means to divied one place, one idea, or one group of people from each other for any number of reasons. Life is being balkanized. It is fragmenting. The themes of progress and optimism that unified and under-girded the modern project have largely evaporated, and we have been left adrift in a disjointed world where meaning and value is constantly being contested by people willing to fight for it till there death.

Is it any surprise that new kings of churches are emerging out of the husks of these former structures that are struggling to keep pace and adapt to this strange new world?

In a world of balkanization and atomization we are desperate for space to engage, create, and respond free from the power games that are being played in so many circles around us. In a shrinking globalized world we are desperate to learn what it means to be in relationship to the other- to the alien in our midst (or perhaps we are the alien in the midst) for the purpose of dialogue and engagement.

How can we live in this new reality

We desperately need to discover, recover, learn, and live out the ancient Christian practice of hospitality, which is the postmodern means of evangelism.

We do not need more Christian leaders building church empires at a time when our culture is dismantling other such structure around us. We must deconstruct ourselves in love.

A postmodern context requires leaders who instead of seeking to dominate the environment are willing to become environmentalists- people who create spaces that allow Gods people to have the possibility of an encounter with God and other people. Such an environment allows people to discover a future together  under God instead of reducing them to mere pawns serving some large agenda that comes from outside themselves.

Can Postmodernism save us?

Can postmodernism save us? In many ways I believe it can. It can save us from the institution, it can save us from materialism. It can save us from individualism. It can save us from being arrogant. It can save us from being powerful.

In my next post I will ask a question that deals with syncretism. Does everything go? Is it possible in a christian context to blend many different “whatever it could be”?

Read part 1 here; Postmodernity, should we be afraid?

Read part 2 here ; Modernity, the cost?

This is the actual answering machine answer from this school. It is due to a conflict and a lawsuit against the teachers by the parents.