Surviving 50 years of brutal military dictatorship, they are alive and well. I asked how they emerged intact, without elongated stories of suffering and rationale for weakness. A pastor smiled: “Dr. Brian, we didn’t put signs on our buildings. When we wanted to build a church, we just built a house and made it larger. We kept our heads down.”

A little history matters in understanding the Myanmar church today.

After a century of British, colonial rule in 1948 (then called) Burma, was given independence. Some saw it doomed from the start, given independence occurred on the wrong day, according to astrological readers. Astrology here is core to what’s done and when it is done. In contrast to Thailand where appeasing spirits rule daily life, in Myanmar, reading the astrological signs matters so much that all kinds of governmental and business decisions will only be made when the Buddhist priest in reading the astrological signs, gives his ok. Even in building bridges!

Between British colonial rule and independence there was a hiatus when the Japanese ruled, a time of a rising of tribal enmities as non-Burmanese ethnic nationalities such as the Karen, Karenni, Chin and Rohingyas sided with the British. Some were not Buddhists and so when they supported the British they were seen as traitors to the nation and its religion, especially the Karen tribe. For years they were targets of persecution by the government, until 2012 when a treaty was signed. Only time will unfold the honor and integrity of this treaty.

Six months before Burma was given independence from the British (1948), General Aung San –who led the struggle against the British — was murdered. (Note, he was father of today’s political and human rights hero Aung San Su Kyi.) After an interlude of communist control along with complex sets of opposition forces, in 1962 a military coup ruled until 2011. It was only then that the military government declared its move to democratization.

For the last half a century successive military regimes — seen by some as one of the most repressive in the world — ruled. Accused time and again of crimes against humanity, torture was common, including forced labor and conscription of child soldiers.

Much like the fall of many dictatorships across North Africa and through the Middle East, the Myanmar military majors were pressured by the world community. Driven by the incredibly courageous defiance of one of its daughters, Aung San Suu Kyi (now a Nobel Peace Laureate) they finally announced that democracy would become the ruling system.

Two years later, what has changed? Some changes are cosmetic. The new constitution requires 40% of elected members be military; 40% be former military and only 20% civilian. Yet surprising many, some former military aren’t voting according to what their military masters want. As well, Suu Kyi in parliament provides a constant reminder of their promise to democratize. I was told that in the past when the Buddhist community wanted a temple built or some government action, they got what they wanted. Today all budgets must come before the house and be approved, including the military’s.

And how is the church in Myanmar fairing? Here are a few observations.

* Their ability to keep a low profile may seem to some a kowtowing to the military. Historians will give us a broader picture, but my sense is that their focus on living out the Gospel in ways that didn’t draw attention from the military was wise, allowing them space in which churches and missions could, if not flourish, at least survive.

* Their church map tends to be rural, dotted with many small Bible colleges, everyone in need of their own school, reminiscent of other countries freed from military rule and dictatorships: as freedom becomes the new norm, cooperating becomes a newly acquired skill among leaders.

* Leadership here is young: the newly elected general secretary of the Myanmar Evangelical Christian Fellowship (MECF), is the Rev. Dr. Morris Liana. (Lily and I celebrated with him and his wife their 25th wedding anniversary.) Well educated and experienced (president of the Union Evangelical Seminary and former National Secretary of the Wesleyan Church of Myanmar) he is recognized among his peers. Emerging with this new phase of freedoms under the new political mandate, able and energetic leadership means everything.

* The Gospel faces different challenges in this Buddhist country from others. In contrast to (what I noted in my earlier Dispatch) Thailand, here Buddhism is more traditional than pervasive. In Thailand, spirit houses are everywhere: in front of hotels, restaurants, homes, places of business Amulets hang from mirrors in taxis, sold everywhere in the open markets, and for what reason? To deal with the spirits. Thais live in constant fear of the spirits, believing they must be addressed so as to be appeased.  In Myanmar, while temples are everywhere, and used by citizens in their religious life, their religion is more cultural than personal, more traditional than operational. As well there is a curious pattern of addressing spirituality. Education dominates life to age 30 with the next twenty years focused on vocation and money. Only at age fifty are spiritual matters taken seriously. This makes evangelism for young people strategic.

* The language of Buddhism is Bali Sanskrit, a rather distant language unknown by most citizens. While it is memorized, it is not understood, so for young people their religion becomes even more detached.

This country known by the film, “Bridge over River Kwai”, is in a new moment of cultural transition. However its recent declaration of democratization should fool no one. The front page picture of Aung San Suu Kyi sitting alongside military generals viewing soldiers and army tanks rolling by may indicate a policy of accommodation in planning for the presidential election of 2015 more than symbolizing a different heart of the military. With an army of 400,000 troops, there remain 140,000 war refugees in Thailand and an unresolved request for a commission of inquiry into possible war crimes.

The church — and here I know primarily the Evangelical (Protestant) — has learned to hold its opinion, keep low its profile and understate its place and role. Its future will require the same diligence, humility and ability to be circumspect in witness and life. A great people, who have known indescribable hardship, live with a government which has been cruel. Yet here is a people with a heart for a loving and life-changing Gospel.

Lily and I left this land with great hope for its future and great trust in its leadership.

If you have opportunity to pray and support work in Myanmar, consider it a privilege and honor. And may generosity mark your giving.

Brian C. Stiller
Global Ambassador, The World Evangelical Alliance
May 2013

Here philanthropists and business men and women met this spring, a group called Market Place Initiative, believing
their gifts of entrepreneurship matter to Christian witness and kingdom deployment.

Linked to a global group of pastors from “mega” churches it is an idea created and led by Elias Dantas, a Brazilian and Fuller
grad, and Pastor Sameh Maurice — made famous when he opened his church as a field hospital to those injured in the Arab Spring at Tahir Square, Cairo Egypt. They bring together pastors to energize their vision for kingdom influence in their world and beyond. Going beyond pastors, it extends to those in business who believe their calling is as kingdom- driven as is that of pastors.

Key to the working of this group is a South African, Graham Power, a civil engineer and building construction magnate. An unlikely candidate to lead a prayer movement. After coming to faith in the late 1990s, in 2001 he launched the Global Day of Prayer at the Newlands Stadium in Cape Town with 45,000 in attendance. In just a decade, this prayer movement encircles the globe, linking prayer groups, encouraging Christians to live within the power of prayer.

A year ago, I was invited along with my colleague Geoff Tunnicliffe (Sec Gen for the World Evangelical Alliance) to sit alongside this group, as spiritual advisors. In the end, we were the ones advised. Inherent in the vision of these business leaders is a biblical understanding that each is called, anointed and equipped by the Spirit to advance kingdom life.

Over 500 years ago, Martin Luther unleashed a reformation of faith, breaking the bondage of human administered-faith with heart-believing faith. The priesthood of every believer became foundational in this new paradigm of understanding.

Graham Power and his colleagues have figured that out and are pressing forward, calling men and women from all sorts of
professions and businesses, from inventors to financiers, from developers to judges. Learning from each other, pooling ideas, and praying in faith, they look for ways in which their skills, knowledge, connections and pools of capital can lift people from poverty, re-craft the environment in renewal and bring into the church a vital and rich understanding of the importance of Christ- centered professional and business leadership.

I’ve too often seen people in business seen as worthy contributors to spiritual enterprises but not as examples of spiritual virtue, for after all, isn’t business done on the fine edge of ethical choices? Graham and his colleagues disagree. There should be no more inclination for those in business to veer from the path of the ethical than one in any other sort of vocation.

However to drive home the point, Graham upped the anti, not letting business leaders or pastors slip under the door of ethical behavior.

To move the idea into gear he assembled an idea under the Unashamedly Ethical campaign which challenges people to fight systematic corruption and pressing governments, businesses and individuals to work at eradicating systemic poverty.

Power notes that to come anywhere close to our promise of reducing poverty by half by 2015, it will cost $210 billion per year. He estimates that the poor lose over $1 trillion through deliberate or direct dishonesty.

For Powers, while living ethically is both biblical and Christ-honoring, it also is practical. It functions to break the binding nature of poverty so people can rise in the quality of life, lifted to see their being in God’s image and set loose to renew their lives, families and societies.

The commitment form of the Unashamedly Ethical campaign is tough, calling on leaders of organizations, corporations, churches and businesses to sign on their behalf. Note what it includes: ”To be entirely truthful in all I say; to be faithful in my family relationships; to do nothing out of selfish ambition or deceit, but to look out for the interests of others; to refuse to elicit, accept or pay any bribes and to report those who do; to be a diligent leader without being harsh, and to pay my staff what is just and fair; to be a peacemaker; to do my work wholeheartedly; to submit myself to just and ethical governing authorities; to remember the poor by investing generously and sacrificially in the broader community; to collaborate with my peers to impact our community and nation.”

No easy exit allowed.

Listening to business professionals and entrepreneurs tell stories of failure and success, describing plans to see their communities and nations changed, I saw an emerging strategy to use the gift of leadership and wealth to lift the poor and unleash the church in its kingdom witness.

An understanding of the priesthood of every believer is alive and well.

Graham Power demonstrates that.
Brian C. Stiller
Global Ambassador,  The World Evangelical Alliance
May, 2013

I’ve heard much about Thailand from missionaries over the years. However in a recent visit one question kept surfacing. Speaking with pastors, educators, mission leaders and on-the-ground spiritual inventors I heard it time after time. I tried to understand the question in context in a land of lush landscape, neighborhoods so remarkably clean and people incredibly respectful and kind. The question is this: after all the people, money and years, why is the Christian mission here so small?

Thailand, one of the South East Asian “Tigers” while looking somewhat like Malaysia and Myanmar (Burma) is as different as Canada is to the USA or Sweden to Germany. Never colonized, in the 19th century it negotiated land for freedom to keep out of the clutches of France and Great Britain, unlike Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia. Today its national personality is to avoid conflict, all the while moving about, keeping face and not losing position.

National pride is palpable. Pictures of the king — currently the longest living king — and queen dot the landscape. Politicians are vilified but dare to offer criticisms of its royalty and the gentle Thai will rise in defense. Royalty is linked to nationalism. It didn’t take but a few minutes in a major museum to hear their unqualified patriotism describing the greatness of their nation, its leaders, history and people. While Christian leaders tend to be modest, when it comes to pride in their nation, the marketing machine whirrs.

Completing the trilogy of national character — along with royalty and nationalism — is Buddhism. A Thai is expected to be Buddhist. To be other is seen as rejecting one’s nationhood, tantamount to denying identity. Not surprising evangelism has to buck the rapids of such a profound synthesis of nation and person.

Powerful and overwhelming is their fixation on Buddhism. More than the presence of temples and the role of temple attendance is to much of life, is their understanding and fear of the spirit world. Everywhere there are spirit houses, small shrines outside of homes, offices, restaurants, places of business and amulets hanging in taxis. Its core reason is to appease the spirits. For the Thai, fear of the many spirits is controlling.

However back to the question asked by many: why is that after over 183 years of evangelical missionary work, an investment of thousands of lives and millions upon millions of dollars, out of a total population of 65 million there are only 370,000 Evangelical Christians: one half of one percent?

I heard many reasons. Among them missionaries viewing Thais as unequal to the task of leadership held on to controls within their foreign mission boards.

In this brief Dispatch rather than analyze the past, my interest is in their current vision and plan. I wanted to hear from them their optimism and hope for discipleship and church growth.

The national plan was in part triggered by polling which showed the Thais people didn’t find the words “Jesus” and “God” objectionable, an assumption many made on why the slowness of Gospel advance. In 2004 the DeMoss Foundation organized the Power for Living campaign which asked the Thais if they found those words offensive. They then invited people to call in to receive a book. Organizers estimated a couple hundred thousand would call. Surprised, some 2.9 million responded.

Rev. Dr. Wiracha Kowae, founder of the Assemblies of God and chairman of the Evangelical Fellowship of Thailand (EFT) identified a key reason for their current optimism. Today, he noted, the Thai church is not run by foreigners. His comments were early defined in 1951 by a Chinese Christian leader (it was called the Three Self Patriotic Movement or TSPM) with three mandates: self governing, self propagating, self funding. While the China cultural revolution under Mao repressed all religions, the Christian church grew in part given its newly found ability to self govern, self propagate and self fund.

Further, as more move from rural to urban; the old ways made rigid by a lack of education and loyalty to their religion is shaken, opening minds to other views and sets of values.

Wirachai also noted when Yongi Cho from South Korea spoke to pastors in the 1980s, they realized how much they were limiting what God could do. He noted Dr. Cho, raised in poverty, built the largest church in the world. This was a wake-up call to pastors who didn’t include parking lots in their building plans because they never thought they would have members with cars.

In addition, important to their growing hope for spiritual renewal is an understanding that without generosity and mission, churches stay moribund, listless without growth. One pastor noted missionaries usually assumed the Thais didn’t have much to give, so they didn’t challenge them. The Gospel was free, they were told. There was no need for them to give materially. Linked to giving is their growing vision for mission: to not just be recipients from other countries but to engage themselves in going.

Within the broader culture the government came to see their need for Christian support. As Muslims grew they increased their demands. Killings in three south provinces by Islamists moved the government to be more supportive of Christians, now not seen as a threat to the nation. While this does not directly contribute to evangelism, for the Christian community to be more positively viewed by a majority Buddhist country, helps frame how Christians and their beliefs are understood and viewed.

Undoubtedly their optimism is rooted in their reliance on indigenous leadership. National churches, colleges, seminaries and mission initiatives are being led by Thais.

Enoch Yattasak Sirikul is an example. A former student communist agitator, almost killed in the 1977 coup, he came to faith and today leads a national movement, linking churches, agencies and missions under a plan to train volunteers to disciple others.

Sirikul and Wolfe in a recent analysis identify two critical factors enabling the Vision 2015 plan. The current prayer movement in Thailand started with the Bless Thailand Prayer Network in 1996. Today networks work together in an annual forty days of prayer and fasting.
They asked in their research, “How do you get almost 80% of the Protestant churches and other ministries to agree on a national plan to reach their country?”

Vision 2015 brought together three main Protestant communities: The Church of Christ Thailand (American Presbyterians and Baptists, Disciples of Christ, and others with 26 schools and eight hospitals); The Evangelical Fellowship of Thailand (122 mission organizations, 43 church associations, and nine institutions); The Thailand Baptist Convention.

The 2004 tsunami helped further unite the Thai Church under “We Love Thailand” assisting tsunami victims.

Thailand is a country to watch. Overshadowed by Buddhism and a culture which assumes being Thai and Buddhist are one and the same, how will this current vision break through barriers which has so bridled the Gospel? What I didn’t hear was how the campaign faces the Thais fear of the world of spirits, a fear so endemic in the entire culture.

After so many years of mission, now in the hands of its own people, we pray for its vision, that the Spirit will destroy strongholds, wielded in faith by men and women who in prayer will not be fooled by cultural missteps but wise in grace and truth.

Led by its own, funded increasingly by its people and expanding by their own efforts is an interesting mission plan, outlined years ago in the most unlikely place, China.

Brian C. Stiller
Global Ambassador – the World Evangelical Alliance

When we dismiss pluralism as nothing more than moral relativism, we make a huge mistake. Failing to understand what it is – a forum for debate, influence and decision making – we forgo its ability to influence and lose opportunities for witness.

Pluralism does not mean a mishmash of beliefs. It is the forum in which ideas are debated and hashed out. In our public forums (media, government, education, etc.) the opportunity is available for a plurality of ideas to compete for influence.

It is an open door to public places, allowing anyone to put forward an idea, a proposal, a policy, a recommendation or countering arguments. So when you hear a preacher or pundit dismissing pluralism as if it is undermines biblical faith and Christian witness, tell them to think again. If we get this wrong and mistake it for an anti-biblical notion rather than a place and opportunity for influence, we cave in, unprepared to engage in a rigorous defense of biblical faith, giving way to other agendas in the public sphere.

Two years ago Mark Burnett and Roma Downey (producers of Survivor, Celebrity Apprentice, The Job, Shark Tank and The Voice) were asked to invest in a film designed to show how the Bible is untrustworthy. Instead they did the opposite. They produced the first docu/drama series of The Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. They used what cultural pluralism offers and entered into public debate, showing the very opposite of what they had been invited to produce.

Too often we assume “pluralism” is moral relativism: all moral questions are relative – to an age, people or society, with no absolutes. While moral relativism dominates our public discourse a pluralistic model of public decision making, gives permission and opportunity to challenge it as the presumptive view.

Pluralism is not about relativism. It is a social agreement, which says, people with differing views have a right to have them heard and explored. Now getting them heard is not easy, but that’s where will, determination and creativity come into play. (And though most often platforms of discourse are dominated by those rejecting the very idea of moral absolutes, that doesn’t mean we are excluded.)

Marriage is a plurality, a community of two, two with views that correspond and those that don’t. Neither is dismissed for holding to their reasons. Each recognizes the validity of the other even if they might disagree with their underlying assumptions. Expand this visual image of what we mean by the plurality of ideas to any forum of public influence and decision making.

So it is within media and its various debates. Take a public issue such as sexuality. Across the medical, religious, legal and political arguments, many voices weigh in. Pluralism, as an accepted social construct of how decisions are made, affirms the right of various views to he heard. And here is the catch. If one assumes they will be rejected and then decides to be silent, that voice is shut down by the very one who has the right to speak. No one said they couldn’t. It was they who decided. In effect silencing themselves.

Pluralism is an opportunity for Christians to speak within that public space. But it only happens when Christians choose to engage. Consider these aspects of pluralism and what it offers for effective engagement.

It is a social instrument that (at least those of us in an open and democratic society) affirms the right of groups, people and organizations to have their say.

On some issues, public and legal views are so one-sided it leaves the impression that a counter view will get demolished, or worse, disallowed. However we either decide to engage or not. We take advantage of the publicly agreed-on model pluralism offers or we don’t.

A few years ago while appearing before the parliamentary justice committee in Ottawa, as I began offering a dissenting view, a MP spoke up: “Dr. Stiller, how can you even go there since this is a pluralistic society?” I diverted from my defense and launched into a mini lecture on pluralism. The trap he had fallen into was assuming pluralism meant that an idea based on a moral absolute was out of place. My point was this: his trying to shut me down made him complicit in tearing down this valuable means of public discourse – pluralism.

In North America – for much of the 20^th Century – Evangelical Christians were silent on one primary count: public sphere matters were seen as outside our concerns. We stayed inside our religious community and let others run the world.

The tide turned. Slam bam, we faced public views and policies that threatened our freedoms. But because we hadn’t been at the table, we had no voice. Pluralism had been offered but since we had not taken up the opportunity, other prevailing views won out.

Imagine a table of debate and decision making, be it for public sentiment, governmental policy, educational plans, environmental initiatives or zoning by laws. Whose voice gets heard? Those at the table. And why are they there? Because it matters to them: they know what they want, have developed the logic of their argument, have been trained to speak in that forum and have taken the trouble to get organized and appear.

Today some countries are attempting to pass anti-conversion laws, making it a criminal offence to either convert or cause another to convert. The argument used is clever. It uses human rights language and argues that a person’s human rights are violated in conversion.

On the global front, Christian communities from Rome to Canterbury to Washington are opposing this on the basis of religious pluralism as a working model. It stands up against the prevailing view, showing an opposing view.

But shoes need to be worn on both feet. In listening to some religious conservatives, their language suggests because they view their country as Christian in its founding, other religions have no right to press their religious views in our backyard. Not only is that unchristian, it creates problems for the witness of the Gospel elsewhere. If within a Muslim-majority country, how can we press for opportunity of ministry not allowed at home?

Pluralism is a superb environment in which Good News evangelism can take place, for personal conversion and influencing society. Making known the Christian story requires presence, meaning, rational and convincing. It also allows for the sharing of the Good News as applicable to the person and wider society. Here Jesus’ metaphors of salt and light apply. The Gospel saves and illumines both the person and his or her world. Sitting at the table where decisions are made – on a whole number of societal fronts – is about being his evangel.

It’s time to forgo our moaning over how unfair the world is to our views and concerns and exercise the opportunities a pluralistic model affords.

To restate an old political proverb, the argument has already been lost when we remain silent.

Brian C. Stiller

Global Ambassador

The World Evangelical Alliance

Photo from: Wikipedia.org – World

Argo’s win of an Oscar as best film borrows from the American deeply held views of exceptionalism and manifest destiny.

In 1979 as the Shaw of Iran fell, protesters took to the streets in Tehran, storming the US embassy, retaliating for the CIA activities. Of the 52 embassy staff taken hostage, six escaped. Without fan fair, Ken Taylor, Canadian Ambassador came to the rescue and protected them from Nov 7, 1979 to January 28, 1980. Hiding the staff inside the Canadian Embassy not only put Taylor and his staff at risk, jeopardizing the Canadian presence in Iran.

Along comes Hollywood and casts its film-making aurora shadowing the facts, insuring the CIA gets the credit. So instead of Taylor and his staff being in the script as those who protected the hostages the CIA ends up as hero, although Ben Affleck, director and main character did acknowledge the Canadian role in his acceptance speech.

Former US President, Jimmy Carter – US president at the time – when asked by Pierce Morgan on CNN his view said, “A great drama.” Then stepping up to set the record straight commented, “90% of the contributions to the ideas and the consummation of the plan was Canadian. And the movie gives almost full credit to the American CIA…But Ben Affleck’s character in the film was…only in Tehran a day and a half. And the main hero, in my opinion, was Ken Taylor, who was the Canadian ambassador who orchestrated the entire process.”

Canadians aren’t surprised. Living alongside the best neighbors a country could have, we have learned to make sense of and put up with two dynamic and powerful American myths: manifest destiny – the US is particularly chosen in the world for greatness, and exceptionalism – “our country is the greatest in the world.”

The braggadocio of our dearly loved friends doesn’t in any way undermine our appreciation of their huge generosity. They are cordial, not just to snow birds from the north who help keep the economies of Florida and Arizona going in the winter, but magnanimous in friendship. Our common, longest unprotected border in the world speaks of their character and will. And we remain their largest trading partner.

However, we have learned how to live alongside, as good neighbors do. Former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau when asked what it was like as a Canadian to live alongside the most powerful country in the world, employed the analogy of the elephant and mouse. Then he added, when sleeping with an elephant, always keep your eyes open, for if you don’t, when he rolls over you are in trouble.
Ken Taylor – understood not only how diplomacy works but how best to get along – in an understated response, when asked about the film’s accuracy: “In reality, Canada was responsible for the six [American embassy staff] and the CIA was a junior partner. But I realize this is a movie and you have to keep the audience on the edge of their seats.”

Bigness has its benefits: the world revolves around your life and world view. Smallness also has its benefits. Bored with one’s back yard, as Canadians, the world becomes our playground.

I suppose that’s why Canadian and Americans are the best neighbors in the world. One compensates for and enriches the other. Strengths and weakness reinforce each other allowing for two friendly and side-by-side neighbors to each make the case that their country is the best in the world.

Brian C. Stiller

Photo credit:

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/2013-oscars/2013-oscar-winners-announced-002529571.html

Ben Affleck in ‘Argo’ (Photo: Warner Bros.)

Gathered in the Basilica of Assisi, mixing with leaders from Christian communions, imams, rabbis, priests, Buddhist monks and priests of many religions, it was obvious only the pope could pull off getting religious leaders of all faiths together.

Then and today, Christians ask me if now is the time for all Christians to reunite, and lay aside questions of the Reformation (16th Century)?

Why not? Surely it would save costs, reduce confusion, simplify much of what Christians do, and more importantly, show the world that we are all one in Christ.

The stepping down of a pope is an extraordinary moment. While the election of a pope gets worldwide notice, it normally follows a pope dying. This one fooled us all. He announced his own leaving. Known for his remarkable scholarship, with a prodigious listing of scholarly works, his previous job was as the former pope’s enforcer of rules and articles of faith. Now he gives up his role and prestige, leaving for the next pope, along with running a global institution, troubling unresolved files of sexual abuse, Vatican bank scandals and Vatileaks.

Even so, might this be a moment when all sides of the Christian church lay aside their differences? More specifically as Protestants, has the reformation– Martin Luther triggered by nailing pages of 95 ideas to a church door in Wittenberg Germany – passed its day?

After all, this pope has made some impressive marks as pontiff. His book Jesus of Nazareth is a strong witness in his strategy to trigger a revival in reading and understanding the Bible. He gave unqualified support to the great Christian creeds which we Protestants recite regularly. He along with Evangelicals has been critical of the secular, radical individualism and narcissism of this contemporary society. He promoted and practiced a strong presence of Christian ideas within the pluralism of ideas and forces. He was unafraid, modeling Christian courage, boldly saying what was often impolitic and out of sync with popular assumptions and mores.

So what keeps Protestants from rejoining “Mother” Rome? In world affiliate numbers, Romans Catholics comprise 1.1 billion, main line Protestants and Orthodox about 550 million and Evangelical Protestants slightly more than 600 million. Combined it would create a world presence of significant magnitude.

The history is long, issues complex, mixed often with ethnic conflicts, such as Ireland. Real estate alone, on both sides, would set it down a bizarre road of twists and turns. Setting aside the how’s of resolving immense organizational matters; core to the rupture of the church triggered by the words of Martin Luther –still a fundamental issue – is an understanding of how one receives God’s forgiveness.

Martin Luther, a monk, priest and teacher, began his dispute with Rome over the selling of indulgences (a full or partial remission of punishment) a money raising scheme to help pay for the costs of building St. Peters Basilica in Rome. Luther protested and over time came to believe Rome’s interpretation and doctrine of salvation was contrary to biblical teaching. For him salvation came by personal faith in Jesus Christ. He reasoned our only authority is the Bible– sola Scripture – not an ecclesiastical organization. Those who followed Luther’s teachings were called “protesters,” thus Protestants; however he referred to them as the “evangelisch” church.

Politics fueled by religious passion led to this historic breaking from the Roman church, fed by scholars, evangelists and leaders such as John Calvin, John Wesley, Menno Simons and John Knox. As Europe pushed out from its northern borders, missions of the emerging Protestant churches sailed the oceans, building missions, medical and educational agencies, all the while enlarging this community of Christian faith, no longer protesting but advancing.

Luther’s central proposition, that one receives salvation through faith, became the defining belief of the many streams which flowed from that 16th Century divide. What keeps the sides from joining has been central to what Pope Benedict XVI has affirmed. Speaking for his church, he has made it clear that while ecumenism would mark his reign, as much as inter religious dialogue would fill his agenda and while collegial groupings and public and private meetings would seek peace and reconciliation, there would be no movement from transubstantiation: the bread and the wine used in the sacrament becomes the literal body and blood of Jesus, and through receiving this one receives forgiveness by the sacrificial death of Jesus of Nazareth. Other churches which too celebrate the Lord’s Supper aren’t considered the same. For the Eucharist, which can only be celebrated by one ordained by Rome, is the means by which one receives forgiveness.

The Reformation broke this link of salvation (often called new birth, or “born again”) from the established church, freeing one to exercise personal faith in Christ, as sufficient for personal and eternal salvation. It is to this heart felt and well defined belief, the two main streams of Christianity continue to flow within different banks.

Not in 500 years have the two sides been so close and friendly. Skirmishes, from time to time, break out, sometimes as turf wars and or over differing views of salvation. Even so the Global Christian Forum made up of The Holy See (Rome), the World Council of Churches and the World Evangelical Alliance work together globally and conducting national forums, realizing the many issues in which they need to stand together.

As much as we are working together, the continuing stand by the Holy See on this issue is so variant to Protestant faith that joining isn’t up for serious discussion.

As we wait for the white smoke to puff its way up the chimney of the Vatican announcing the new pontiff, we will both, continue to announce the good news of the Gospel, but retaining a profound difference in how faith is exercised.

Brian C. Stiller
Global Ambassador, The World Evangelical Alliance

Photo from: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther

Cedars are valuable for their lasting quality. Building material, dock lumber all attest to their ability to resist wood rot. Biblical references to the “cedars of Lebanon” filled building materials required by Nehemiah in rebuilding the walls. Solomon eyed the magnificent and resilient cedars for the Temple in Jerusalem.

Today be it rot from the inside or attack from the out, the Lebanese having survived wars and its many rumours, speak in quiet tones, wondering if listening ears from Syria or its minions — Hezbollah in the south — are plotting nefarious schemes.

Prized as the pearl of the Mediterranean, the choice site for money from oil billions of the Gulf, Beirut until the civil wars of the late 20th Century, was choice for life style, opportunity and political freedom.

Centuries before Christ, as pioneers in coastal trading, their marine culture stimulated trade, bringing it riches and envy. Conquered by Persia (Iran) then Rome, in the first century AD became central to the spread of the Gospel. 7th century Muslim Arabs took over, while a minority Maronites (under the Rome church) hung on. Smack dab in the path of the Crusaders, in time the connection with France shaped her European influence.

Following WWI, as European powers divided up much of the world, Lebanon’s borders were decided on by France. This twist added into the mix of Christians (Maronites) as 50% of the population, an eightfold increase of Sunni Muslim and four time increase of Shi’ite Muslims. In 1926 Christians made up 84% today they are 39%.

They wrote a constitution based on religious powers, a remarkable feat of building a country founded on religious sectarianism: Disaster in the making. Unprecedented and in the end, problematic. France promised to keep Lebanon Christian: political promises with little current reality.

The government was so divided, which remains today: President has to be Christian; Prime Minister always Sunni Muslim although the president can veto legislation. Even though by the early 1960s Muslims outnumbered Christians, the formula still remains.

For decades she has been the punching bag of Syria, The PLO and Israel. Syria used Lebanon to get at Israel, the latest being supplying arms (much from Iran) through to the Hezbollah in the south. Israel retaliated. Tens of thousands Palestinians flooded in after the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Now estimated 300,000 Syrian refugees bulge the camps in the north and along the Beqa’a Valley. Between 1975-1990 civil war raged: 100,000 died. Syria continued its political interventions and military presence.

Finally a new government led by Rafiq Hariri started the rebuilding. February 14, 2005 a massive bomb killed Hariri, fingers pointed directly at Syrian president Assad as assassin.

This historical overview is to put in place the important moment Lebanon faces today. For it is in this world Christian faith seeks its witness and presence. While Evangelicals are not implicated in the political trade-off of Roman Catholic Christians and Sunni Muslims, the precarious environment requires strategic thinking in living between the factions, knowing that at any moment an unexpected move could destabilize the tenuous arrangements of life and liberty.

It was to Lebanon I came, to renew friendships with Lebanese Christian leaders, to hear their concerns of what the Syrian debacle might mean to them and to visit Syrian refugee camps in the Beqa’a Valley just east of Mount Herman, the mountain famous from the Scriptures.

Visiting these camps, east of Beirut, the human tragedy of Syria is overwhelming. Alongside the more than 300,000 refugees (most Syrian although some from Iraq) are now in Lebanon, and all together, some 2 million Syrians displaced in their own country.

The situation in Syria is at a stalemate, while the West offers words, Russia and Iran provide money and munitions and the Chinese continue to back President Assad of Syria.

I had wonderful times with a number of families, and then groups of Syrians as they gathered round once I began to talk, huddling outside their shacks, interested in what was being said. I began by asking how they were getting along, what they needed, then their own views of what was needed back home.

Then I asked if I could pray. You should have seen their faces light up. It was as if I had given then a priceless gift. I told them I was a Christian and would pray in the name of Jesus. Before I began, I reminded them who Jesus is as noted in the Koran, and then in my prayers (and my prayers were not short) I prayed about Jesus and to Jesus. In the prayer, I reminded those listening that he too was a refugee, fleeing with his parents to Egypt. This resonated with them.

At the close of the prayer, I asked the leader in the camp to step into the centre and then put my hands on him for a special blessing. When finished their hand-signs told me how much it meant. One leader, Ibrahim, asked us into his shack for tea, a common sign of hospitality. A dentist from Damascus we sat drinking tea as he began asking about Jesus. The young men I was with from a local and creative ministry called Heart for Lebanon (A good group to help) who love to tell others of the Lord, began with gentleness and care. He took it only as far as appropriate then said he would be back in a few days with a Bible.

I was most interested in knowing who else were helping the refugees. They knew of Heart for Lebanon and World Vision. Then I asked where were their Muslim organizations. One man looked at me, turned his head and spit. “”We’ve seen no one. No one has come here. Only Christians.”

Brian C. Stiller
Global Ambassador, World Evangelical Alliance
February, 2013

What can a church do in the midst of revolution?

I looked through a revealing window unto the remarkable leadership and ministry of the Al-Dubara Evangelical Church in downtown Cairo. It opened its doors to the revolution as the Arab spring blew across Tahrir Square right into the palace of President Mubarak. Over the months CNN and others, trained their cameras onto this city church, a story that surprised the world. The church was turned into a field hospital for the injured, they welcomed young revolutionaries and gave counsel and encouragement. To radical Islamists, the pastor spoke wise and to the bereaved words of comfort.

I sat down with Dr. Sameh Maurice, Cairo pastor and now world-wide in ministry, in a conference centre outside of Cairo, the afternoon before millions gathered following Friday prayers to protest the religious fundamentalism of its Egyptian president Morsi.

BCS

Dr. Maurice, How did you come into pastoral ministry?

As a Christian, my early life was much involved in our church. In 1974, I led our youth group. At the time we were without a minister. I studied medicine, but in 1985 I was challenged to give my life to full time church service. I had finished my master studies as a surgeon and planned for a career in medicine.

At the time we experienced a real spiritual awakening among our young people The university student group became the largest group within the church. We started a drug rehabilitation program. Because in one of our camps we discovered we had 5 drug addicts in our group. We prayed much for them and in time, they completely withdrew, without any withdrawal symptoms. As a result we found ourselves in the middle of the ministry.

One of our members was studying psychiatry, and decided to take this on. In fact God pushed us in to this ministry.

It took 2 years for my wife and I to decide. We eventually felt it was His calling. I finished theological study and in 1993 was ordained. The presbytery was reluctant to ordain me. They held off for three years, because they thought I was charismatic and felt I was too dangerous for the Presbyterian church. The senior pastor played a major role. He was my spiritual father. A great Pastor Menis Abdel Moor wrote 60 books on apologetics. Because of him the church saw its role in teaching people about Christ.

After I came to the church, one and a half years later he became pastor and built the church around a team. Today we have ten preachers and we take our turns in preaching. Many are now famous speakers. The church grew and grew from 1,000 to 7,000 in seven years. Since then have been involved nationally.

BCS

You have a number of parts to the church. We are sitting in a 130 acre conference centre an hour north west of Cairo. How did this come about? What was the vision that moved you beyond doing ministry beyond your church located on the edge of Tahrir Square?

It started when a woman gave us a piece of land and we needed a place to work with drug addicts. We had to do reclamation of the land and build the first centre for drug rehabilitation in the Arab world. Then the idea of a sports centre, recreational centre, a multi conference centre. It was an old dream, but with a piece of land. We bought more land from 60 acres to 130 acres; this centre is sports camps, conferences, prayer centres and training centres. Now build a stadium to hold the big evangelical events, such as as the national prayer conference and evangelistic campaign.

Last year we had 45,000 attend over four days with 30,000 making outward confessions of faith. An evangelistic festival, each day bring people from all over. There are 12 different stages of performance, cinema, play/drama, illusionist, playing of games and sports events. Music teams and singers, famous artists. At the end of the day we come together to the sports centre for an evangelistic meeting which is broadcast all over the Arab speaking world.

BCS

How many would be Muslim?

We don’t know. People buy tickets and come and we don’t know. This is the 6th year and each year we have them. Called “Count it right.” Think about your life; make a good calculation; you may win everything and lose yourself; is it a good winning equation? A very Arabic slogan.

Last year 27,000 attended with 10,000 commitments to Christ. So you can see the growth factor. Held in the autumn time when it is vacation time.

The place has become famous. It is really the only facility for sports camps in the Arab world. We do sports camps for Christians and Muslims.

BCS

What else is part of your church vision?

We have a hospital in downtown Cairo and medical mission teams throughout Egypt.

As well we have “Love Outreach.” we go into slums to distribute, trousers, foods, do activities which people, music and fellowship. That’s why it is called love outreach, with a child sponsorship called Healing Grace with 750 children.

BCS

Your church was put on the map in the revolution in 2011. How did that happen?

One reason was that we were praying for Egypt for 10 years. The year before we had a clear message: “this year something unique would happen which will change the land.” We put up a banner: “What I’m going to do for you is awesome.” So when the revolution came we weren’t shocked.

Because we expected this from God, we weren’t shocked because we were looking for something special to happen that very year made us ready to react properly.

As well we had been very much involved in human rights. We set up an NGO as part of our church ministry to deal with human rights. Plus our geographic location. We are in the square where the revolution happened. We had two options: close the doors and say we aren’t hear or open the doors and say we are here. Every Friday we were invited to go into the square and pray and worship The Lord as Muslims did. We were invited.

BCS

How did you build your relationships with Muslim people and their leaders?

They knew and trusted us as our human rights work linked them to us. As well, the core revolutionary group — young people — one of them as doctor lady, a member of our church. She wasn’t that active at the time and we didn’t know her well. Plus many of our young people were involved in the revolution — they were in the streets. In the first days four from our church. So we found ourselves in the revolution.

Then the church reacted, led by God, to say what should be said, to do what should be done and in the small things we did, we were thanks and praised by anyone. After the resignation of Mubarak, were held the first celebration, we invited the core people of the revolution: media, families of the martyrs, Muslim leaders, to thank them and honor them, to give them gifts. We did it spontaneously, but we believe led by the Spirit. We were the first to do so. So the media publicized this and since then became close friends of the famous names of the revolution. we were the first to bring them together over coffee to discuss their future. And since we weren’t into politics we could get them to cooperate. We did it innocently but what ever we could do we did it. we brought them together to get them to know each other. We did small things.

With the second wave of the revolution which was the fall of 2011. It started against the SCMF. People said you are deceiving the people and became to demonstrate. They attacked the revolution. Earlier they had not, but in the second wave they were very harsh.

This is the time we opened the church as a field hospital. Again the spot light came on us. We did it out of love and patriotic, God made something of it. It was known and appreciated by everyone.

BCS

What did that do to you and your ministry?

I realized we were a voice and became a bridge. A voice to be heard. So we had to be careful what we said. We became like a bridge builder between the Christian and Muslim community. Working and helping each other. All on Christian basis.

We also became a prophetic voice of the church. The church became proud of what we were doing so they expected us to lead them in what to say and do. They trusted our agenda. Even the Orthodox (Coptic).

BCS

How did the Orthodox, the dominant Christian community, feel about you, a small minority becoming the centre of attention?

By the grace of God, what we did, saved the face of Christianity, in front of Christians and Muslims.In the beginning the official Orthodox stand was supporting the government. Mubarak against the revolution. To have someone else supporting the flags of the revolution, saved our face to the Muslim world. Especially after the success of the revolution. Otherwise we would have been discredited. The Orthodox realized that and thanked us. To my surprise I thought they would resent us, but we found favour in their eyes.

Also we were praying for unity among Christians for some many years, so what happened in the revolution alongside a daily television program we ran called School of Christ, helping Christians. It became very popular. A systematic theology, providing a logical presentation of apologetics, helping Christians understand what to believe and how to practise their faith. For the first time Christian were hearing what to believe, how to answer, how to live faith and apply it to every day life. This program plus the revolution gave the church a catalyst for unity among Christians. In major events with Roman Catholic, The Coptic Church, we represented evangelicals. It was a miracle, and since then a new unity has resulted among these three families. Today everywhere I go I’m welcomed by bishops, monks, priests, all kinds of spiritual leaders, asking me to speak, welcoming me in unbelievable ways.

BCS

How has the face of the gospel changed? How did the response to the events of the past two years, how was the witness of Christians changed in Egypt?

We are in a new day. As evangelicals we were the nobody person. For the first time we are seen and heard by the whole community. The church started to be seen by Muslims in a very different way. Muslims used to hate, disrespect and ignore the church. Now many of them respect and defined the church. Because they can now come  between what the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists (Islamists) do. These see the difference. As you read tweets you can see that. “The Muslim Brotherhood is killing us and the church is healing us.” Despised, hated, neglected, some of them, about 30% see us in a different way. There have been  increased number of conversions to Christ in a big way.

BCS

What will this do to the political decision and the writing of the constitution?

The church was invited to be at the committee. By the end they had to withdraw because the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists decide to write the constitution according to their Islamic beliefs, not according the civil way of thinking. So the church had to withdraw with the liberals. We said what you are doing is against personal freedom, dignity and social justice. And these were the three flags of the revolution. The final draft was against these three. I was happy the church left. We said we didn’t withdraw became of our rights. We withdrew because it was against democracy, not because of our rights as Christians.

The new pope, Pope Tawadros II, is wise and spiritual. He is a man of God Unity is on his heart. Very knowledgeable, wise and humble, I was thrilled.

Christians today are acting in a Christian way, demonstrating Christian faith. Now many Christians are involved as individuals and many are very respected. Up to the revolution Christians were not on the political arena. Mubarak succeeded to deal with the people a the representative of Christians. He dealt with the church as a political group. It was a very big mistake. So Christians are in the political arena, not as an institution. The church is protecting the rights of the people, representing the values of the community but not involved in politics. So now we are involved in the right mode. Knowledge.

BCS

So what is the next stage for your ministry? What is it moving you to over the next five years.

This will depend on the situation. There are two possible scenarios.

First Islamists will take over. Freedom will be suppressed, persecution will come. Many Christians in the rural area today are being persecuted. Homes and fields and shop are bing taken from them. In cities because of the population it is not that bad. Islamists take away land and shops by violence and guns and the government is not protecting Christians.

So if the Islamists take over we expect persecution and we expect the economy will collapse, people will starve.

Second scenario, liberals will win, meaning civil views, rejecting theocratic rule, as the Islamists want, and advocating instead democracy and freedom, not associating religion with political dominance.

If this side wins (and we believe they are the majority) the battle, we will have more freedom, economy will improve.

But if the first comes, the church will go underground and be oppressed. If the second then we will be more seen and be able to bring truth and love to the people of Egypt. We are working to prepare ourselves for either scenario.

Brian C. Stiller,

Global Ambassador, World Evangelical Alliance

I’ve been to Israel a number of times, most often leading tour groups. Each time, leaving Bethlehem I would insist our Israeli driver stop by Bethlehem Bible College so I could visit its president, Bishara Awad. I tried to keep myself abreast of the goings on within Israel and the occupied areas of the West Bank and Gaza, the strip on the Mediterranean. But never had I taken time to actually stay with my Palestinian friends. They would periodically visit Tyndale and students loved to hear their story. But I admit, too frequently Yasser Arafat and his cronies angered me by their seeming endless whining and refusal to admit Israel had legitimacy as a state with the right to defend itself. I assumed the Palestinians had had sufficient opportunity to find a deal with Israel, especially when Arafat turned down the Camp David offer.

So, as my friends know, I have and do support the establishing of the State of Israel. Finding a place for Jews in the 20th Century was the right thing to do. As well, God’s covenant with the Jews stands and their place in the eschaton (the days of Christ’s return) is assured. There is no equivocation in my mind of their critical place in the economy and agenda of the Lord.

This winter I decided I needed to go and live there, only for a few days, to see it through the eyes of my Palestinian brethren. Since this role as global ambassador, I’ve learned nothing can compare with walking in the steps of those you wish to understand. There is no substitute for sitting in their homes, listening to their stories, asking questions of their children, driving their streets, sitting in worship services, praying before and after meals. It was in this recent visit that I faced conflicting messages I could no longer ignore.

It came into focus one evening while eating dinner with Salim Munayer overlooking the Shepherd’s Field in Bethlehem. The wonder of the place never ceases to fill me with deep emotion. I never tire of visiting Old and New Testament places. As my eyes wander over the scenery in front of me, I noticed on the crown of the hill a recently built Jewish settlement.

To add to the dynamic of the location and moment, I need to also let you know that behind me was where Boaz had bought a field so he could marry Ruth, a Moabite, daughter in law to Naomi recently widowed. Boaz — whose name means kinsman redeemer — is an Old Testament precursor to Jesus, our Redeemer. An Old Testament story I have preached many times.

But back to my gazing at Bethlehem, hometown of David, king of Israel, the most famous of Jewish kings and in the paternal lineage of Jesus. The location is filled with multiple Bible stories. Here I sat just metres from where Jesus was born. Across the road was the pasture where shepherds heard the announcement for the King. From here they would have scrambled up the slope of the hill to celebrate the newly arrived king. Not any king, but Jesus, Son of God. Yes that very same Jesus who invites all to come to him and be reconciled with his Father. There is no distinction — Jew or Greek, male or female, slave or free.

The romance of the moment was broken as I thought about the kingdom this baby would launch. Contrary to popular views then and now, counterintuitive in the politics of kingship, his was to be defined differently: our lives would be in service not domination; forgiveness not revenge would outline our behaviour; giving not getting would pave the way to blessing. I couldn’t escape the contradiction. I knew instinctively the ways of God stood in sharp contrast to what I was seeing.

2000 years later, I, and many of my fellow Christians, have been lured into thinking uncritically and approving ways of this nation state because our views are shaped by a biblical formula: for Jesus to return the Jews need to be living in the homeland promised to Abraham, secured by Joshua and ruled by kings inducted following Saul.

When the State of Israel was established in 1947 by the United Nations, the intended effect in establishing the state had been earlier outlined in the Balfour Declaration. In part it said, that “. . . the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people [with the understanding that] nothing should be done to prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine . . . .” Land was to be divided for the incoming and resident Jews and for Palestinians, most of whom had lived there for generations.

Now today. The state I support — including reasons supplied by certain biblical interpretations of prophecy of the return of Christ — it turns out, is taking land from residents, many being Christians who trace ownership of land back for years.

As I looked out on the large settlement sitting above Shepherd’s Field, I asked Salim how they got this land to build the many settlements. “Was it bought,” I asked? “No.” “Was there negotiation?” “No.” “Who owned it?” “Christians and Muslims.” “Can you do anything about it?” “No. They are the army.”

I travel to many countries in which Christians face persecution from hostile religions, rebuttals by governments, death by fanatics. I have and continue to advocate for fairness and justice and seek peaceful negotiations so not only are people protected from violence, discrimination and death, but so that Jesus is seen as the Prince of Peace.

Here is the conclusion I came to, one that I found deeply discomfiting.

Please follow my logic and feel with me the intellectual and moral whiplash I experienced that early evening as I attempted to reconcile these following contradictory factors: Jesus was born in this very town as Saviour founding a kingdom to be ruled by love and grace. So then, have I his follower, some 2000 years later, ignored this land grab based on a belief it is essential to the Lord’s return, without regard for what Jesus stood for and what he announced as foundational to his coming rule?

Why have I been so blind? Why did I turn away when my Christian brothers and sisters asked me to see what I refused to see? I confess I think now I know. I have been willing to ignore the moral and ethical violations embedded in this action because I believed that control of this land, as preparation for Jesus’ return, transcends the heart of what Jesus said comprised his kingdom. Ethical and moral action became nothing more than words in the face of perceived promises that control of land, should in the end trump righteousness.

Brian C. Stiller
Global Ambassador, The World Evangelical Alliance
February, 2013

However, could it be that at the core of the national, historical and disruptive issue of aboriginal claims, including the dysfunctional reservation system, and the suicidal tendencies of too many, there is a wounded heart? How might we deal with a dismissive reaction all too instinctive to many watching this situation unfold?

I feel helpless on helping find solutions and wonder how I as one, can make a difference? I have no choice but to rely on federal and provincial legislatures to do as their political masters dictate. Courts are beyond my influence and they will rule as they do. Corporations will keep serving the interest of their shareholders.

But, there is one thing I can do: I can think about how I think. I can ask myself what drives my attitudes and conclusions. I can search for the interior assumptions that frame my reaction and response.

I will leave legislation to legislatures, legal rulings to courts and investment decisions to investors. I will ask though, what feeds my own attitudes. Here is a proposal drawn from that world-known parable – the Good Samaritan.

A lawyer concerned about eternal life was asked what was the great commandment, to which he said: “to love the Lord your God with your all your heart, soul and mind and your neighbor as yourself.” Jesus proceeds to tell a story to answer the question.

The ruling religious clan was under scrutiny in the parable: the priest and Levite. They should have known better but instead passed by, leaving the injured man in the ditch. In their absence, the despised Samaritan showed the way. Samaritans – a mixed race of Jewish and non-Jewish ancestry – were hated by the Hebrews. Years earlier, a mob of Samaritans threw pig bones into the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem Temple: as severe a violation of Hebrew beliefs as one could imagine.

Prompting us to look again before we turn away and shuffle off down the road, the story asks me to think how I might recalibrate my thinking of our wounded neighbors.

Build a friendship with a First Nations person, listen to their story, discover what fuels their concerns and drives their agenda.

Understanding, consider the impact the European wave had on a people quite unprepared to deal with its power. A rethink helps one see the other side: failure of governments and businesses at times mindless and too often heartless. Read the history of their treatment. Familiarize yourself. We lament Americans oblivious to their loss in the War of 1812. How many of us know of the James Bay Treaty (Treaty No. 9) of 1905? I didn’t

To rethink doesn’t ignore errors and tragedies imposed by First Nations people on themselves. Tough love is part of loving. However many reservations are like failed states, broken and unruly. To reject their search for solutions only secures defeat, which ought to matter to us all as their wellbeing resonates into our own

It may lead to a new sense of empathy. While pleas of victimization deafen our hearing, it doesn’t exempt me from making the effort to understand.

It’s time to restart water-cooler conversation. Instinctively we listen to those aligned with our attitudes: conservatives with hard liners; socialists with bleeding hearts. It may be time to walk away from conventional front door viewing and see it through the back door. Seek insight that holds assumptions in abeyance, allowing new perspectives framed by a different worldview.

Progress is being made in a number of aboriginal communities: they’re not standing in line for governments to give more. Effective leadership is sprouting and taking hold of protracted issues, solving them, showing their own people and the rest of Canada their skills, helping us see their own vision. Many First Nations communities demonstrate resilience and creativity, forging wonderful models of progressive plans and life-changing ideas in this competitive world.

Could it be that now is the time to see wounded hearts with understanding hearts?

Brian C. Stiller
Global Ambassador, World Evangelical Alliance