I am a member of a computer user group and this post originally appeared there.
One of the members was complaining about computer monitors still using DIP or "dots per inch" and the metric ruler on the word processor using 1/2, 1/4 and 1/8 measurements.
Just to play the devil's advocate here a minute.
Libraries, and book binders do divide up centimeters into 1/8's so that is the reason for centimeters appearing in eights on your word processor. 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 are easier terms for most people to work with and make more sense than pure decimals unless you need a great deal of precision.
BTW I live in China so don't confuse me with an American. I am however, a committed Francophobe and would hate the metric system simply because it comes from evil, decadent, France. However, there are other reasons not to like it as well.
Most of this information comes from an article in a science magazine (Discover, Scientific American, or something like that) several years ago that talked about the metric system and how unscientific and unrealistic the metric system is. Other parts of it are my own observations
Some examples of problems with the metric system:
The most common recommendation of the metric system boils down to statements like "It is easier to use a decimal system and that it is a finer scale. (The second of these does not apply to centigrade). That is true but over played. If you get past the 12 inches in a foot rather than 10 based system there is no significant difference in the ease of use. The 12 comes from ancient Rome so blame the Romans. In some ways the metric system is harder to use because the measurement units are confusing because they are in a dead language. People must learn that it goes millimeter, centimeter, meter, kilometer, decameter. All the words end in "meter" and many people don't know why a millimeter is one 1000th of a meter and not 1000 meters. The reason is actually Latin grammar. Thus the names of units in the metric system are only more logical if know Latin. Otherwise they are, just like the old English (Inches predate the Empire so the term Imperial is incorrect)arbitrary names and both are confusing because of Latin (12 inches in a foot and Mili, centa, Etc.)
What is a meter? How do you find one?
A meter Has at times been defined as:
1. A percentage of the distance between two French cites.
2. The length of a certain bar of platinum in a vault in France
3. Currently, A meter is defined as a single wavelength of orange light emitted by some element charged to a certain polarity in a vacuum at zero degrees centigrade or some such. Yeah, real common and easily to get measurement.
If you lost a meter stick and if you go through all the definitions of a meter you might be really tempted to conclude that the best definition of a meter is still 39.25 inches. The fact is that a meter is an arbitrary number just like a foot or yard. But unlike a foot or yard it is not an arbitrary number based upon any easily observable distance.
By contrast a mile 1/24000 of the Earth's diameter at the equator. Thus a mile works out to a 6 second delay in sunrise time at the equator and could in theory be figured with two cheap digital watches.
An inch is about the distance from the middle of the first joint to the end of a man's thumb. This is, contrary to what you may have learned in university, the origin of the term "Rule of thumb."
A foot is still about the average length of a average man's foot in a pair of pointed toed boots.
A meter is also too long for many measurements and the sub units do not conform to any easy to reproducible distance.
As a meter is too long a liter is too small.
A gallon is actually based upon the size of a bucket. Buckets developed under trial and error (scientific method) and a gallon bucket is the largest size that can be comfortable carried in one hand. There is no equivalent measure in the metric system.
A teaspoon is a small bite table spoon is a large bite
An ounce is fluid mouthful cup is eight such mouthfulls Pints, quarts and gallons all fit together in that they represent normal units used by normal people.
In the end the only real reason to use the metric system is a finer scale. It isn't any more scientific or logical than any other system. The names are not easier to learn and it does not conform to the real world but imposes itself upon the world.
Don't even get me started about horse Power versus Newtons.
So in the end the only real advantage of the metric system is that it is based on 10's and is thus easier to move between units. In other words, it works better on a calculator. That is fine and good if you are doing calculus. Otherwise it is simply a pain.
Fairenheight vs Centigrade
Fairenheight is nearly twice as fine a scale as centigrade. The 32 degree freezing and 212 degree boiling is a bit wired but is actually not too bad. After all, it doesn't matter which two numbers you memorize as the freezing and boiling point of water because you still have to remember two numbers. But if you want to advocate changing the starting the point of the Fairenheight scale to zero as freezing point the we could simply subtract 32 from each side and you end up with freezing a zero and boiling at 180.
This incidently shows how much finer a scale fairenheight is than Celsius. It is in fact, almost twice as fine a measurement. Once again we end up in everyday life. One degree of fairenheight is actually the smallest amount of difference that a person can detect a change in temperature. But because it is a finer scale it works better for all sorts of every day things like baking and Argonaut. The rest of this argument makes itself. Centigrade is an inferior system in every way except the freezing/boiling point of water.
I'll wait until another time to deal with pounds versus grams.
No flames please
Monday, June 06, 2005
Monday, May 30, 2005
A Lingering Death
I've been thinking about the purpose of dying.
Why am I so morbid?
I was talking to my wife this past week. We were talking about her mother's condition trying to decide if we should file a complaint with the HKHA about the bed-sores, the surly staff, the negligence and other problems we have encountered with this situation. This is a problematic question because not only would the complaint take a fairly large amount of time to file and pursue but because the Hong Kong government is good about letting you file a complaint, or have a protest march but then doing nothing to alleviate the grievance. Thus, is it worth filing a complaint about something when there is basically no chance that the system will change? It took nearly 25% of the population marching in the street two years ago to get the government to reconsider an ill-advised measure dealing with the freedom of speech. To put this into perspective imagine what would happen if sixty-million people marched to the steps of the Whitehouse. This would be considered a near revolution. Yet that is the only level of action that will cause the HK government to change. What good is one letter from a school librarian's wife?
As worthy as that topic might be of a post on this blog it is not my purpose today. My purpose is instead to think about the purpose of a lingering death. I don't know how many times I have heard people hope out loud that they do not experience a lingering death. Indeed, it seems almost a truism to say that people should die "with dignity" and without "suffering". I have, through experiencing the lingering death of my mother-in-law, come to the conclusion that her slow drawn out death serves two very real purposes. I am almost, not quite; ready to say that those who wish for a quick, painless death are both misguided and selfish.
The first purpose served by taking a long time to die was revealed to me by something my wife said. On Saturday when, with tears in her eyes she told me, "You know, I just wish she would die." I can understand the sentiment. Both my wife and her mother have had a difficult row to hoe with this final illness. My mother-in-law is obviously exhausted physically and emotionally. The bedsores, the strokes and the cancer have all taken their toll on her. My wife and her sister must spend hours each day at the hospital and it is a strain to see their mother slowly starve to death because she cannot eat. Providing the additional care that the hospital cannot or will not provide in addition to their other jobs is a very difficult position to be in.
But, I realized when my wife made the statement above that the grieving process is already well underway for her. That is a good thing. Indeed, she has already accepted that her mother will soon die. Thus, the lingering illness has helped both my wife and her sister accept the fact that their mother is about to die and allowed them see that there are things worse than death. Indeed, I am not sure that my mother-in-law is not now in a state somewhere between life and death. The release they will experience at the death of their mother will allow them to move on faster. I saw this when my paternal grandfather died after a long illness. I am seeing it again here.
I do not know of anything sadder than the people who refuse to let a loved one die. Most of us have met or heard of those people who still have their dead child's bedroom ready up stairs; or the widow who sets a place at the table for her husband dead these twenty years. My father has a 1941 Ford that he purchased from the daughter of a man killed in WWII. It was a new car when he enlisted in the Marines on December 8, 1941. The man's widow kept the car in the garage as a memorial to him until she died. She washed the car, waxed it and did what she could to keep it in good condition for the husband who would never return. When my father purchased the car it still smelled like a new car. The invoice sticker was still on the right rear window. The widow never drove it. She never remarried. She never got over her husband's death. How tragic.
Because their mother has been in the hospital for nearly three months Kim and her sister have already begun cleaning out their mother's apartment. This appears to me to be a precursor to letting their mother go and it is a good thing.
Thus, the first purpose in my mother-in-law's lingering death is actually three purposes. One it gives the family a chance to grieve and recover before having to deal with the actual death. Two, it helps them to accept the impending death and prepare for it emotionally. Three, it will help them to let go of her memory.
My wife and her sister will be able to get on with their lives after their mother dies. There will be no pinning "I wish she'd lived another three years" or "If only she could have lived to see her granddaughters get married" when my mother-in-law dies. The grieving has already been done. There will be no promises made that are still unfulfilled. That is a good thing. It is a hard thing to say.
The second purpose to a lingering death is more abstract. When I look at the amount of work that Kim and Ling have put into caring for their mother I am amazed at their love for her.
It is easy to clean a baby's bottom when they need a diaper change because babies are cute and they smile at you. They are also small and light enough to roll over with one hand. You receive pleasure from the act of cleaning a baby.
After at least six and probably eight or nine strokes it is an open question as to how much of my mother-in-law is still there. The best that my mother-in-law gives you is a vacant stare with a drooling mouth. How hard is it to love someone who cannot respond? This is the point where love and duty meet. It is a point that is often as sharpe and as capable of cutting as any sword. It defines the meaning of love into actual acts of caring. As far as I know this is only point in time where the depth of love between parents and children is tested to this depth or this clearly. How difficult it is to care this completely! How many of us would fob the job off onto a hospital staff and simply complain? How many of us would simply fail?
This point often reveals much more about us than we are comfortable letting others see. But the essence is this. To watch a loved one die a slow lingering death and to aid that person, to love that person through that process makes those of us who live better people.
I don't know if I am quite ready to wish a painful, lingering death upon myself. But I do see that such travails can serve purpose that is both beautiful and even holy.
Until next time
Fai Mao
The Blogger who is not obsessed with death
Why am I so morbid?
I was talking to my wife this past week. We were talking about her mother's condition trying to decide if we should file a complaint with the HKHA about the bed-sores, the surly staff, the negligence and other problems we have encountered with this situation. This is a problematic question because not only would the complaint take a fairly large amount of time to file and pursue but because the Hong Kong government is good about letting you file a complaint, or have a protest march but then doing nothing to alleviate the grievance. Thus, is it worth filing a complaint about something when there is basically no chance that the system will change? It took nearly 25% of the population marching in the street two years ago to get the government to reconsider an ill-advised measure dealing with the freedom of speech. To put this into perspective imagine what would happen if sixty-million people marched to the steps of the Whitehouse. This would be considered a near revolution. Yet that is the only level of action that will cause the HK government to change. What good is one letter from a school librarian's wife?
As worthy as that topic might be of a post on this blog it is not my purpose today. My purpose is instead to think about the purpose of a lingering death. I don't know how many times I have heard people hope out loud that they do not experience a lingering death. Indeed, it seems almost a truism to say that people should die "with dignity" and without "suffering". I have, through experiencing the lingering death of my mother-in-law, come to the conclusion that her slow drawn out death serves two very real purposes. I am almost, not quite; ready to say that those who wish for a quick, painless death are both misguided and selfish.
The first purpose served by taking a long time to die was revealed to me by something my wife said. On Saturday when, with tears in her eyes she told me, "You know, I just wish she would die." I can understand the sentiment. Both my wife and her mother have had a difficult row to hoe with this final illness. My mother-in-law is obviously exhausted physically and emotionally. The bedsores, the strokes and the cancer have all taken their toll on her. My wife and her sister must spend hours each day at the hospital and it is a strain to see their mother slowly starve to death because she cannot eat. Providing the additional care that the hospital cannot or will not provide in addition to their other jobs is a very difficult position to be in.
But, I realized when my wife made the statement above that the grieving process is already well underway for her. That is a good thing. Indeed, she has already accepted that her mother will soon die. Thus, the lingering illness has helped both my wife and her sister accept the fact that their mother is about to die and allowed them see that there are things worse than death. Indeed, I am not sure that my mother-in-law is not now in a state somewhere between life and death. The release they will experience at the death of their mother will allow them to move on faster. I saw this when my paternal grandfather died after a long illness. I am seeing it again here.
I do not know of anything sadder than the people who refuse to let a loved one die. Most of us have met or heard of those people who still have their dead child's bedroom ready up stairs; or the widow who sets a place at the table for her husband dead these twenty years. My father has a 1941 Ford that he purchased from the daughter of a man killed in WWII. It was a new car when he enlisted in the Marines on December 8, 1941. The man's widow kept the car in the garage as a memorial to him until she died. She washed the car, waxed it and did what she could to keep it in good condition for the husband who would never return. When my father purchased the car it still smelled like a new car. The invoice sticker was still on the right rear window. The widow never drove it. She never remarried. She never got over her husband's death. How tragic.
Because their mother has been in the hospital for nearly three months Kim and her sister have already begun cleaning out their mother's apartment. This appears to me to be a precursor to letting their mother go and it is a good thing.
Thus, the first purpose in my mother-in-law's lingering death is actually three purposes. One it gives the family a chance to grieve and recover before having to deal with the actual death. Two, it helps them to accept the impending death and prepare for it emotionally. Three, it will help them to let go of her memory.
My wife and her sister will be able to get on with their lives after their mother dies. There will be no pinning "I wish she'd lived another three years" or "If only she could have lived to see her granddaughters get married" when my mother-in-law dies. The grieving has already been done. There will be no promises made that are still unfulfilled. That is a good thing. It is a hard thing to say.
The second purpose to a lingering death is more abstract. When I look at the amount of work that Kim and Ling have put into caring for their mother I am amazed at their love for her.
It is easy to clean a baby's bottom when they need a diaper change because babies are cute and they smile at you. They are also small and light enough to roll over with one hand. You receive pleasure from the act of cleaning a baby.
After at least six and probably eight or nine strokes it is an open question as to how much of my mother-in-law is still there. The best that my mother-in-law gives you is a vacant stare with a drooling mouth. How hard is it to love someone who cannot respond? This is the point where love and duty meet. It is a point that is often as sharpe and as capable of cutting as any sword. It defines the meaning of love into actual acts of caring. As far as I know this is only point in time where the depth of love between parents and children is tested to this depth or this clearly. How difficult it is to care this completely! How many of us would fob the job off onto a hospital staff and simply complain? How many of us would simply fail?
This point often reveals much more about us than we are comfortable letting others see. But the essence is this. To watch a loved one die a slow lingering death and to aid that person, to love that person through that process makes those of us who live better people.
I don't know if I am quite ready to wish a painful, lingering death upon myself. But I do see that such travails can serve purpose that is both beautiful and even holy.
Until next time
Fai Mao
The Blogger who is not obsessed with death
Friday, May 13, 2005
Less Life and more Death in a Hong Kong Hospital
I retract my apology to the HKHA.
The treatment of my mother in law has regressed to worse than I have seen. Because of the strokes she can no longer chew. Tuesday night when we arrived at the hospital the staff had already fed her dinner. "Fed:" is a poor term in this case. She cannot chew or swallow. They simply shoveled food into her mouth and left. When we arrived she had so much in her mouth that she looked like a squirrel carrying nuts into a hidding place for winter. My wife had to physically clean her mother's mouth out by digging out all they had packed in. The old woman could have easily choked to death and while she is suffering from cancer and strokes and death could very easily seen as a release to die because you choked on hospital food is a rather horrible death.
Once again Terri Shivio's husband would love this place.
The treatment of my mother in law has regressed to worse than I have seen. Because of the strokes she can no longer chew. Tuesday night when we arrived at the hospital the staff had already fed her dinner. "Fed:" is a poor term in this case. She cannot chew or swallow. They simply shoveled food into her mouth and left. When we arrived she had so much in her mouth that she looked like a squirrel carrying nuts into a hidding place for winter. My wife had to physically clean her mother's mouth out by digging out all they had packed in. The old woman could have easily choked to death and while she is suffering from cancer and strokes and death could very easily seen as a release to die because you choked on hospital food is a rather horrible death.
Once again Terri Shivio's husband would love this place.
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
The Ride of a Lifetime
Have you ever wondered why we like the things we like? Is it merely association with those things or is there some type of genetic predisposition for certain hobbies? I confess, that in my more logical moments I am tempted to think that things like hobbies are in the same class as whiskey, an acquired taste.
However, I only think that when I am not riding my bicycle. When I am on one of my bikes. I know deep down in my heart of hearts that I was born a bicyclist. I could not have acquired the taste for cycling because nobody in my family but me is a cyclist. Therefore, being a bicyclist must be in the genetic code. I must have some latent genetic attribute because since my first bike (A bright red one from Sears that I got for Christmas in 1966) my favorite thing to do has always been to ride a bike.
Bicycling is a strange hobby. I know of no other sport or hobby that elicits such devotion. Not only are cyclist devoted to the sport but also to the actual equipment of the sport. It seems to me that tennis players play the racket that gives them the best shots. Runners are loyal to a shoe maker only so long as those shoes fit. Golfers are always looking for a better club regardless of brand. I have a friend whose husband is an ex-world class badminton player. He couldn't care less about what company made his equipment so long as it was good stuff. Cyclist, by comparison are often very loyal to brands and companies
I've never seen a runner, tennis player or golfer with the name of a club manufacturer tattooed on their body. They may enjoy the sport but they are not loyal to the equipment they use in the way that cyclist are. How many tennis players have custom built rackets? Maybe Leighton Hewitt or Andrea Agassi but not your normal Joe Ballwhacker. In cycling it is not uncommon to see even middle aged riders with the word "Campagnolo" tattooed somewhere prominent. There are literally thousands of custom, built to order bicycle frames made every year. Are there any companies that make custom basketballs? Here are two that make custom bicycle Frames: Here & Here
Do runners, tennis players or golfers have a web site comparable to the Campy only web site? I don't think so.
I have traveled all over the world. Wherever I go I look for bicycle shops. But you know what, I'm not the only one. When I worked in a bicycle shop in the 1980's it used to happen several times a year. Some tourist or business traveler would just stop by to look around. Do tennis players look for tennis shops in London, Phukett or Beijing just to go in and say "hi" to the shop employees? Not as far as I know. Yet bicyclist love to do this. The highlight of my vacations is always finding a bike shop to purchase a tube or cable that I might not even need and could certainly get near my home. I do this because when I am around bicyclist, wherever they are, whoever they are, I am around people who, even if I don't like them are like souls. People who understand what it means to be a cyclist. In a strange way, they are family.
Cycling also changes your perception of the world around you in such a fundamental way that it is difficult, if not impossible to explain it to non-cyclist. You experience the world differently on a bicycle than you do in an automobile or even on foot. Part of this is having to dodge traffic and see your family, neighbors and friends as potential murderers in their cars as they intentionally or inadvertently try to run you down. However, these changes go beyond this simple aspect of self-preservation.
There is a sensation of speed of grace of elegance that is inherent in riding a bicycle that simply is not found in almost any other activity with the possible exception of sailing. When you are a cyclist you see the world through a different gestalt. You see the world not so much as a place but as art and art through which you move as a living sculpture. I think it is a good way to see the world.
There are simply not words to explain the pleasure of cresting the last hill on an afternoon ride and coasting the last 1/2 mile home. If you have never smelt the fragrance after a summer shower while riding along a county road then I pity you. The sense of accomplishment you get when you finish your first 100 mile ride is incomparable. The simple joy at moving faster than you can run under your own power is a pleasure that is surely the most intense on earth.
If you haven't ridden a bicycle lately or even since childhood then I would encourage you to get a bike and rediscover the joy of cycling. You won't be disappointed. You might also find that you were born to be a cyclist.
Until Next Time
Fai Mao
The bicyclist blogger
However, I only think that when I am not riding my bicycle. When I am on one of my bikes. I know deep down in my heart of hearts that I was born a bicyclist. I could not have acquired the taste for cycling because nobody in my family but me is a cyclist. Therefore, being a bicyclist must be in the genetic code. I must have some latent genetic attribute because since my first bike (A bright red one from Sears that I got for Christmas in 1966) my favorite thing to do has always been to ride a bike.
Bicycling is a strange hobby. I know of no other sport or hobby that elicits such devotion. Not only are cyclist devoted to the sport but also to the actual equipment of the sport. It seems to me that tennis players play the racket that gives them the best shots. Runners are loyal to a shoe maker only so long as those shoes fit. Golfers are always looking for a better club regardless of brand. I have a friend whose husband is an ex-world class badminton player. He couldn't care less about what company made his equipment so long as it was good stuff. Cyclist, by comparison are often very loyal to brands and companies
I've never seen a runner, tennis player or golfer with the name of a club manufacturer tattooed on their body. They may enjoy the sport but they are not loyal to the equipment they use in the way that cyclist are. How many tennis players have custom built rackets? Maybe Leighton Hewitt or Andrea Agassi but not your normal Joe Ballwhacker. In cycling it is not uncommon to see even middle aged riders with the word "Campagnolo" tattooed somewhere prominent. There are literally thousands of custom, built to order bicycle frames made every year. Are there any companies that make custom basketballs? Here are two that make custom bicycle Frames: Here & Here
Do runners, tennis players or golfers have a web site comparable to the Campy only web site? I don't think so.
I have traveled all over the world. Wherever I go I look for bicycle shops. But you know what, I'm not the only one. When I worked in a bicycle shop in the 1980's it used to happen several times a year. Some tourist or business traveler would just stop by to look around. Do tennis players look for tennis shops in London, Phukett or Beijing just to go in and say "hi" to the shop employees? Not as far as I know. Yet bicyclist love to do this. The highlight of my vacations is always finding a bike shop to purchase a tube or cable that I might not even need and could certainly get near my home. I do this because when I am around bicyclist, wherever they are, whoever they are, I am around people who, even if I don't like them are like souls. People who understand what it means to be a cyclist. In a strange way, they are family.
Cycling also changes your perception of the world around you in such a fundamental way that it is difficult, if not impossible to explain it to non-cyclist. You experience the world differently on a bicycle than you do in an automobile or even on foot. Part of this is having to dodge traffic and see your family, neighbors and friends as potential murderers in their cars as they intentionally or inadvertently try to run you down. However, these changes go beyond this simple aspect of self-preservation.
There is a sensation of speed of grace of elegance that is inherent in riding a bicycle that simply is not found in almost any other activity with the possible exception of sailing. When you are a cyclist you see the world through a different gestalt. You see the world not so much as a place but as art and art through which you move as a living sculpture. I think it is a good way to see the world.
There are simply not words to explain the pleasure of cresting the last hill on an afternoon ride and coasting the last 1/2 mile home. If you have never smelt the fragrance after a summer shower while riding along a county road then I pity you. The sense of accomplishment you get when you finish your first 100 mile ride is incomparable. The simple joy at moving faster than you can run under your own power is a pleasure that is surely the most intense on earth.
If you haven't ridden a bicycle lately or even since childhood then I would encourage you to get a bike and rediscover the joy of cycling. You won't be disappointed. You might also find that you were born to be a cyclist.
Until Next Time
Fai Mao
The bicyclist blogger
Monday, May 02, 2005
Welcome Shambles.net
My blog has been listed on the Shambles.net Librarian blog list. Yes, I am a librarian though my post have little to do with libraries as a general rule. However, they were looking for librarian blogs in Asia and I certainly am that.
Actually, I'm not sure what this blog is about. I seem to write about a lot of things and most of them are topical rather than thematic. If someone at Shambles or anyone else for that matter, finds this blog then I ask that you look at the intial post in the archives titled "Why Me"
Fai Mao
The Librarian Blogger
Actually, I'm not sure what this blog is about. I seem to write about a lot of things and most of them are topical rather than thematic. If someone at Shambles or anyone else for that matter, finds this blog then I ask that you look at the intial post in the archives titled "Why Me"
Fai Mao
The Librarian Blogger
Apologies Required
Why am I always so surpised when people pay attention?
It seems that the HKHA reads my blog. At least it looks that way. Since shortly after posting "Life and Death in a Hong Kong Hospital" the treatment of my mother-in-law has improved. I still wouldn't call the treatment good but it is better if still surly. I thank those responisble for the improvement.
They have since found that a large part of her problem is actually caused by a series of strokes that we did not know that she had had. I do not think that she is long for this world.
It seems that the HKHA reads my blog. At least it looks that way. Since shortly after posting "Life and Death in a Hong Kong Hospital" the treatment of my mother-in-law has improved. I still wouldn't call the treatment good but it is better if still surly. I thank those responisble for the improvement.
They have since found that a large part of her problem is actually caused by a series of strokes that we did not know that she had had. I do not think that she is long for this world.
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Life and Death in a Hong Kong Hospital
I can sometimes be called grumpy but I don't normally think of myself as threatening. Indeed, most of the time I am a rather genial, if slightly paunchy middle-aged guy. There are times, however, I wish I were more intimidating and one of those times was last night. But, before I tell you why this is so I must give you some background
My mother-in-law is dying a slow and lingering death from liver cancer, compounded by a series of strokes.
She can no longer move her left arm.
She can no longer feed herself.
She hasn't been out of bed in two months.
She is incontinence and on a catheter.
She wears a diaper.
She is loosing weight at an alarming rate.
It is physically taxing for her to speak.
She cannot even roll over by herself.
She has had a chronic ear infection for several years and is deaf in one ear.
She has cataracts.
My mother- in-law has open bed sores. Yet as far as I can tell the hospital does little if anything to treat them. They cannot or will not change my mother-in-law into a water mattress to alleviate the bed sores.
Despite the FACT that she cannot eat without help they have not placed her on an IV for even fluids, much less glucose. How hard would that be?
They never talk to her that I can see.
They don't help feed her.
They only change her when absolutely necessary and then they do not clean her well.
She has been in the Caritas hospice in the So Uk area of Hong Kong for just over two months. The hospitals in Hong Kong, even those like Caritas that are partially funded with non-governmental money are abysmal places. The staff, with some exceptions is uniformly rude and calloused to the point being un-professional.
I hope that when this life draws to a close for me I don't have to be confined in one of them. This whole experience has left a very bad taste in my mouth. A simple truth has intruded itself upon my consciousness. Socialized medicine is an evil. It is dehumanizing to the patient and the patent's family. The best that can be said is that it is a cruel joke. When the government controls the whole system there is effectively no higher authority to appeal to for justice.
Now the hospital wants us to put her into a nursing home because she has used up her allotted time in the hospice. So, in a socialized medical system it isn't about need it is about rationing. Don't you dare take longer than 21 days to die you evil free-loader you! I don't think they have a set amount of time that one can be in this hospice but they have a greater need than they have space. Because of that they try to limit the entry to the most severe cases. This principle breaks down when all the cases are severe.
Think of the description given above. Should the staff ask that a patient in that condition be moved to a nursing home? My wife has been asked several times, "When are you going to find a nursing home for your mother?" It has gotten to the point where she avoids the nurses because she knows what they are going to ask her.
Pardon my misconception. I thought that a hospital hospice for terminal cancer patients was an appropriate place for an old woman with a few weeks to live to go to die of liver cancer; especially since she needs constant supervision. Am I wrong about this?
They have suggested that we hire a Filipino maid, rent or buy a hospital bed and keep my mother-in-law at home. Would you as either the patient or family like that option? This is despite the fact that we do not have the room for either the mother-in-law or the maid in our apartment. Is a teenage maid from Manila a suitable health care worker? I understand that they have a waiting list. I do not think that simply shuffling people who need help out of the hospital to homes where they are cared for by domestic servants is an adequate answer to that problem.
I am not asking that they giver her care like a 5 star luxury spa-hospital. I do wish that they provided adequate care. I don't think that most patients in most Hong Kong Hospitals get adequate care if the situation is indicative of the whole system. Indeed, Caritas is doing a better job than the government hospitals such as Yan Chai or Princess Margret.
The promise of socialized medicine, espoused by well meaning politicians was adequate treatment for all. This is a promise that they have not kept. I could, quite honestly understand this if the whole medical establishment in Hong Kong were not run by the government. I cannot understand it when there is a socialized system in place. The government needs to either do the right thing or get out of the health care industry.
I am speaking of this because my wife had a late meeting and I went to the hospital last night (April 25) to feed this sick, feeble and dying old woman. While it is a good thing to do, the problem is that we HAVE to do it. If one of us doesn't go she doesn't get to eat. That is a different thing than saying I don't want to do it. There are just nights we cannot do it and, in truth, it shouldn't be our job anyway because the hospice should not be a self-serve hotel room but a medical facility. But, if we don't go then the hospital staff will let her dinner sit there until it gets cold and then maybe try to shovel a few bites into her mouth, if they have time, before they remove the tray.
She is dying of cancer but the way the hospital treats her you'd think we wanted her starved to death. Terry Shivio's husband would love this place.
On second thought, maybe a teenager from Manila could do a better job.
The feeding is hard for me because I cannot talk to her. She speaks only a somewhat obscure form of Chinese which I do not so there could be no conversation. I have nerve damage down one arm so feeding her requires using fine motor skills in my left hand which is difficult for me. Nevertheless, I went and spent three hours with her and fed her and brushed her hair and gave water to drink. She is my wife's mother; how could I refuse?
When I left the hospital I was angry. I simply feel that the level of care is so incredibly bad. I wish I were more intimidating. Perhaps then I could confront the system here. To do that I'd need Li Kai-Shing's money or Hu Jing-Tao's political clout; not much else really counts in Hong Kong. I have neither.
Perhaps instead, I'll just find somebody in the hospital authority that makes a bazillion dollar a month income doing essentially nothing except finding ways to avoid a well deserved pay cut or early retirement and punch his/her lights out. (For those not used to Americanism; to punch someones lights out is to beat them until they are unconscious) But then that would make me as evil as the people in the hospital authority that are more concerned about their huge salaries than actually running hospitals. So I guess I won't do that either.
Until next time
Fai Mao
The non intimidating blogger
My mother-in-law is dying a slow and lingering death from liver cancer, compounded by a series of strokes.
She can no longer move her left arm.
She can no longer feed herself.
She hasn't been out of bed in two months.
She is incontinence and on a catheter.
She wears a diaper.
She is loosing weight at an alarming rate.
It is physically taxing for her to speak.
She cannot even roll over by herself.
She has had a chronic ear infection for several years and is deaf in one ear.
She has cataracts.
My mother- in-law has open bed sores. Yet as far as I can tell the hospital does little if anything to treat them. They cannot or will not change my mother-in-law into a water mattress to alleviate the bed sores.
Despite the FACT that she cannot eat without help they have not placed her on an IV for even fluids, much less glucose. How hard would that be?
They never talk to her that I can see.
They don't help feed her.
They only change her when absolutely necessary and then they do not clean her well.
She has been in the Caritas hospice in the So Uk area of Hong Kong for just over two months. The hospitals in Hong Kong, even those like Caritas that are partially funded with non-governmental money are abysmal places. The staff, with some exceptions is uniformly rude and calloused to the point being un-professional.
I hope that when this life draws to a close for me I don't have to be confined in one of them. This whole experience has left a very bad taste in my mouth. A simple truth has intruded itself upon my consciousness. Socialized medicine is an evil. It is dehumanizing to the patient and the patent's family. The best that can be said is that it is a cruel joke. When the government controls the whole system there is effectively no higher authority to appeal to for justice.
Now the hospital wants us to put her into a nursing home because she has used up her allotted time in the hospice. So, in a socialized medical system it isn't about need it is about rationing. Don't you dare take longer than 21 days to die you evil free-loader you! I don't think they have a set amount of time that one can be in this hospice but they have a greater need than they have space. Because of that they try to limit the entry to the most severe cases. This principle breaks down when all the cases are severe.
Think of the description given above. Should the staff ask that a patient in that condition be moved to a nursing home? My wife has been asked several times, "When are you going to find a nursing home for your mother?" It has gotten to the point where she avoids the nurses because she knows what they are going to ask her.
Pardon my misconception. I thought that a hospital hospice for terminal cancer patients was an appropriate place for an old woman with a few weeks to live to go to die of liver cancer; especially since she needs constant supervision. Am I wrong about this?
They have suggested that we hire a Filipino maid, rent or buy a hospital bed and keep my mother-in-law at home. Would you as either the patient or family like that option? This is despite the fact that we do not have the room for either the mother-in-law or the maid in our apartment. Is a teenage maid from Manila a suitable health care worker? I understand that they have a waiting list. I do not think that simply shuffling people who need help out of the hospital to homes where they are cared for by domestic servants is an adequate answer to that problem.
I am not asking that they giver her care like a 5 star luxury spa-hospital. I do wish that they provided adequate care. I don't think that most patients in most Hong Kong Hospitals get adequate care if the situation is indicative of the whole system. Indeed, Caritas is doing a better job than the government hospitals such as Yan Chai or Princess Margret.
The promise of socialized medicine, espoused by well meaning politicians was adequate treatment for all. This is a promise that they have not kept. I could, quite honestly understand this if the whole medical establishment in Hong Kong were not run by the government. I cannot understand it when there is a socialized system in place. The government needs to either do the right thing or get out of the health care industry.
I am speaking of this because my wife had a late meeting and I went to the hospital last night (April 25) to feed this sick, feeble and dying old woman. While it is a good thing to do, the problem is that we HAVE to do it. If one of us doesn't go she doesn't get to eat. That is a different thing than saying I don't want to do it. There are just nights we cannot do it and, in truth, it shouldn't be our job anyway because the hospice should not be a self-serve hotel room but a medical facility. But, if we don't go then the hospital staff will let her dinner sit there until it gets cold and then maybe try to shovel a few bites into her mouth, if they have time, before they remove the tray.
She is dying of cancer but the way the hospital treats her you'd think we wanted her starved to death. Terry Shivio's husband would love this place.
On second thought, maybe a teenager from Manila could do a better job.
The feeding is hard for me because I cannot talk to her. She speaks only a somewhat obscure form of Chinese which I do not so there could be no conversation. I have nerve damage down one arm so feeding her requires using fine motor skills in my left hand which is difficult for me. Nevertheless, I went and spent three hours with her and fed her and brushed her hair and gave water to drink. She is my wife's mother; how could I refuse?
When I left the hospital I was angry. I simply feel that the level of care is so incredibly bad. I wish I were more intimidating. Perhaps then I could confront the system here. To do that I'd need Li Kai-Shing's money or Hu Jing-Tao's political clout; not much else really counts in Hong Kong. I have neither.
Perhaps instead, I'll just find somebody in the hospital authority that makes a bazillion dollar a month income doing essentially nothing except finding ways to avoid a well deserved pay cut or early retirement and punch his/her lights out. (For those not used to Americanism; to punch someones lights out is to beat them until they are unconscious) But then that would make me as evil as the people in the hospital authority that are more concerned about their huge salaries than actually running hospitals. So I guess I won't do that either.
Until next time
Fai Mao
The non intimidating blogger
Monday, April 18, 2005
Death and ......
Friday was the deadline for filing US Federal income taxes.
If you live overseas then you have until June 15 to complete the forms.
I find it absolutely repugnant that I must fill out tax forms for a nation that I do not live in and have not set foot in for nearly 10 years. The overseas income allowance is a joke. The complaint that the wealthy would use this as a way to avoid income tax is overstated as most of the people who live overseas are not wealthy. Indeed, a large percentage of them are missionaries and I've never seen a rich missionary. Don't get me wrong, I believe that people should support their government. I pay the income tax I owe in Hong Kong. However, I live in Hong Kong. I derive very little if any benefit from being a US citizen. Indeed, in some countries in Asia, rightly or wrongly, I pay higher visa entry fees and am a target of terrorist kidnappers simply because I carry an American passport.
The US needs to change this law. As awful as this sounds the US Congress needs to look at Canada. This is perhaps the only area where the sniffling, whinning, limp-wristed, socialist pig, cowardly beavers have a better law than the US. (Can you tell I don't much like Canada?)
The Canadian law works something like this:
If you are a Canadian citizen who lives outside of Canada and
you have no property in Canada, or a bank account, drivers license or Canadian ID other than a passport, or a residence in Canada and you spend at least 335 days outside of Canada then you do not owe Canadian income tax. Period, end of issue.
There are probably some tweaks I would give this with regard to IRA's and things but if Mr. Bush wants to reform the US tax code I suggest he start with this law.
Your over taxed blogger
Fai-Mao
If you live overseas then you have until June 15 to complete the forms.
I find it absolutely repugnant that I must fill out tax forms for a nation that I do not live in and have not set foot in for nearly 10 years. The overseas income allowance is a joke. The complaint that the wealthy would use this as a way to avoid income tax is overstated as most of the people who live overseas are not wealthy. Indeed, a large percentage of them are missionaries and I've never seen a rich missionary. Don't get me wrong, I believe that people should support their government. I pay the income tax I owe in Hong Kong. However, I live in Hong Kong. I derive very little if any benefit from being a US citizen. Indeed, in some countries in Asia, rightly or wrongly, I pay higher visa entry fees and am a target of terrorist kidnappers simply because I carry an American passport.
The US needs to change this law. As awful as this sounds the US Congress needs to look at Canada. This is perhaps the only area where the sniffling, whinning, limp-wristed, socialist pig, cowardly beavers have a better law than the US. (Can you tell I don't much like Canada?)
The Canadian law works something like this:
If you are a Canadian citizen who lives outside of Canada and
you have no property in Canada, or a bank account, drivers license or Canadian ID other than a passport, or a residence in Canada and you spend at least 335 days outside of Canada then you do not owe Canadian income tax. Period, end of issue.
There are probably some tweaks I would give this with regard to IRA's and things but if Mr. Bush wants to reform the US tax code I suggest he start with this law.
Your over taxed blogger
Fai-Mao
Thursday, February 24, 2005
Bitch and Moan
Why am I so slow? Perhaps because I'm lazy or perhaps I just don't care. Or, perhaps I take the time to think issues through a little longer. That's it. I am simply more mature. At least that is the answer that strokes my ego the best.
There has been quite a bit said about the lack of journalistic qualifications of bloggers; especially in regard to the issue of statements made by Eason Jordan and the episode with Dan Rather and Texas National Guard records (TNG). Now that I've thought about these issues and milled them over and had time to formulate a response most of the articles that were plastered on the internet in weeks past have disappeared. Luckily, there is one that I could find that perfectly illustrates what I want to say. (here) Indeed, it precedes the current controversies by nearly two years and thus shows that the issue has been around for longer than Eason Jordon's problems.
I, in my lassitude would have let this issue slide if it were not for the fact that I've heard and read journalist and even journalism-students in universities bitch and moan about this in many ways for many years. Not against bloggers as a rule but against anyone who challenges the importance of the journalist role in the world. The gist of the argument is always the same "I'm a trained professional, don't try this at home."
I actually had a fairly long entry written about this issue filled with linked sources and lots of pithy comments. But the more I wrote the less I liked the essay. It is really hard to call someone or some group of people names, even if the names are true and deserved, without sounding like a jerk yourself. So in the end I'll just say that I have found most of the journalist I have met, with two notable exceptions to be entirely too full of themselves and to have completely erroneous perception of their value to society.
The problem with mainstream journalism in my opinion is simply that the reporters are too arrogant. Arrogance is problem because it blinds you to your faults. There have been studies done that show that People who perceive themselves as competent in their jobs are often time the ones that their peers judge to be the least competent. At least it appears to me that one of the worst ways that a Journalist can exhibit arrogance is to let facts and truth become subservient to some other, generally thought of as a "greater," cause.
When your cause becomes the truth and the facts are subservient to the cause the journalist is no longer journalist but propagandist. It is just that simple.
It is arrogant to think that you are better able to be impartial and divine the truth from error more correctly in all areas than others with more training in specific fields.
It is not arrogant to think your politics are better than mine but it is arrogant to hide your politics in a fake news story to convince me of your position and then think I'm stupid enough to believe you. In this case it is not only arrogant but unethical as well.
Journalist have no corner on the truth. They don't always know better. They are not always better at seeing the facts or truth. That is why people go to a medical doctor when they are sick and not to a journalist working for a medical newspaper.
Likewise I would expect a lawyer to write more cogent analysis of legal matters than a court reporter.
Thus, when bloggers who are printers point out errors in CBS memos they should be commended by journalist not browbeaten. A true professional knows how to say "I was wrong" an arrogant ass says "How dare you question me?".
This is why the best journalist I read are almost invariably sports reporters. Many of them really understand the games they cover. Also, sports is probably an area where fundamental disagreements are not life or death situations. I don't know that I can say the same about someone who covers the city beat.
This was Eason Jordan's real problem in claiming that the military was targeting journalist for execution. If he has proof of this then print it. If not he should not have said even off the record. This was Dan Rather's problem with the TNG memos. If he was duped by a huckster then he should admit as much and offered apologies to President Bush and moved on in ways that would have preserved his credibility.
Both men had lost track of what is importance and were trying to use their position to influence the world rather letting the facts make the story. I would think that the first rule of reporting is to speak to the facts not what you believe but cannot prove. Neither man did this.
That's all I really have say about Eason Jordan and Dan Rather. I don't know that I've said anything at all but I feel better about myself for saying it.
Until next time Fai-Mao the mature and civilized blogger
There has been quite a bit said about the lack of journalistic qualifications of bloggers; especially in regard to the issue of statements made by Eason Jordan and the episode with Dan Rather and Texas National Guard records (TNG). Now that I've thought about these issues and milled them over and had time to formulate a response most of the articles that were plastered on the internet in weeks past have disappeared. Luckily, there is one that I could find that perfectly illustrates what I want to say. (here) Indeed, it precedes the current controversies by nearly two years and thus shows that the issue has been around for longer than Eason Jordon's problems.
I, in my lassitude would have let this issue slide if it were not for the fact that I've heard and read journalist and even journalism-students in universities bitch and moan about this in many ways for many years. Not against bloggers as a rule but against anyone who challenges the importance of the journalist role in the world. The gist of the argument is always the same "I'm a trained professional, don't try this at home."
I actually had a fairly long entry written about this issue filled with linked sources and lots of pithy comments. But the more I wrote the less I liked the essay. It is really hard to call someone or some group of people names, even if the names are true and deserved, without sounding like a jerk yourself. So in the end I'll just say that I have found most of the journalist I have met, with two notable exceptions to be entirely too full of themselves and to have completely erroneous perception of their value to society.
The problem with mainstream journalism in my opinion is simply that the reporters are too arrogant. Arrogance is problem because it blinds you to your faults. There have been studies done that show that People who perceive themselves as competent in their jobs are often time the ones that their peers judge to be the least competent. At least it appears to me that one of the worst ways that a Journalist can exhibit arrogance is to let facts and truth become subservient to some other, generally thought of as a "greater," cause.
When your cause becomes the truth and the facts are subservient to the cause the journalist is no longer journalist but propagandist. It is just that simple.
It is arrogant to think that you are better able to be impartial and divine the truth from error more correctly in all areas than others with more training in specific fields.
It is not arrogant to think your politics are better than mine but it is arrogant to hide your politics in a fake news story to convince me of your position and then think I'm stupid enough to believe you. In this case it is not only arrogant but unethical as well.
Journalist have no corner on the truth. They don't always know better. They are not always better at seeing the facts or truth. That is why people go to a medical doctor when they are sick and not to a journalist working for a medical newspaper.
Likewise I would expect a lawyer to write more cogent analysis of legal matters than a court reporter.
Thus, when bloggers who are printers point out errors in CBS memos they should be commended by journalist not browbeaten. A true professional knows how to say "I was wrong" an arrogant ass says "How dare you question me?".
This is why the best journalist I read are almost invariably sports reporters. Many of them really understand the games they cover. Also, sports is probably an area where fundamental disagreements are not life or death situations. I don't know that I can say the same about someone who covers the city beat.
This was Eason Jordan's real problem in claiming that the military was targeting journalist for execution. If he has proof of this then print it. If not he should not have said even off the record. This was Dan Rather's problem with the TNG memos. If he was duped by a huckster then he should admit as much and offered apologies to President Bush and moved on in ways that would have preserved his credibility.
Both men had lost track of what is importance and were trying to use their position to influence the world rather letting the facts make the story. I would think that the first rule of reporting is to speak to the facts not what you believe but cannot prove. Neither man did this.
That's all I really have say about Eason Jordan and Dan Rather. I don't know that I've said anything at all but I feel better about myself for saying it.
Until next time Fai-Mao the mature and civilized blogger
Thursday, February 17, 2005
Batteries
I have five watches. I only have two arms. Why am I so obsessed with time?
It is almost a law in Hong Kong that every citizen must have a gaudy watch. So, I have an Adidas sports watch that has lots of gold and brushed stainless steel. It isn't Rolex gaudy but it'll do. I also have a cheap digital watch that I bought to jog and hike with. It only cost me HKD $20.00 which is less than USD $3.00. I also have a really strange watch that is a tourist thing that clips onto a belt. I keep it on soft pack that functions like a brief case. There is also the cheap pocket watch that came in a delux edition video game. Lastly, I have beautiful old Swiss pocket watch that I inherited from my grandfather. It used to be gold plated but the gold has been rubed off. He bought it in 1932 and used it everyday for many years. It has a weak spring and needs to be wound every 15 minutes so it stays in a drawer until I find a jeweler who can fix it. I bring this up because all but one of my watches, the Swiss one uses a battery. Now I cannot by most measures be called an environmentialist. However, batteries in watches bother me. It seems to be a law of the universe that the one day every three-years that I actually need a watch the battery will be dead. Three of my four battery powered watches are, at this moment, dead.
This mean that I am seriously considering purchasing a self-winding watch.
Yes, it would be expensive. But, I have the money.
Yes, they are gaudy. But, have you seen any of the nicer battery powered watches lately. They aren't exactly understated.
I know that a battery powered watch is less accurate. But, three minutes a month is not that big a deal to me. Besides If I'm running that close to being late I should have left earlier.
I guess what I'm really complaining about here is the propensity to change or "upgrade" technology simply because it is new. Does a battery powered watch actually offer any improvement over a mechanical clock? Well not really, at least none that I can think of and battery powered watches have one huge drawback. The battery will eventually die. If you wear a self winding watch everyday it will never stop provided you wear it everyday and walk around a little.
I have a friend that has an expensive digital watch that allows him to store phone numbers and that has a calculator pad. I don't see that as a convinience. It is troublesome and it doesn't save him any work. By giving him a way to organize random contacts it helps to ensure that he has to contact them. He can't simply forget them. I believe that most people are already too busy.
This get even worse with a cellular phone. I think I am the only person in Hong Kong to not have a cell phone. I simply refuse to carry one. My time is my time and don't want people calling to ask what I'm doing with it. But, cell phones are another rant for another day
It is almost a law in Hong Kong that every citizen must have a gaudy watch. So, I have an Adidas sports watch that has lots of gold and brushed stainless steel. It isn't Rolex gaudy but it'll do. I also have a cheap digital watch that I bought to jog and hike with. It only cost me HKD $20.00 which is less than USD $3.00. I also have a really strange watch that is a tourist thing that clips onto a belt. I keep it on soft pack that functions like a brief case. There is also the cheap pocket watch that came in a delux edition video game. Lastly, I have beautiful old Swiss pocket watch that I inherited from my grandfather. It used to be gold plated but the gold has been rubed off. He bought it in 1932 and used it everyday for many years. It has a weak spring and needs to be wound every 15 minutes so it stays in a drawer until I find a jeweler who can fix it. I bring this up because all but one of my watches, the Swiss one uses a battery. Now I cannot by most measures be called an environmentialist. However, batteries in watches bother me. It seems to be a law of the universe that the one day every three-years that I actually need a watch the battery will be dead. Three of my four battery powered watches are, at this moment, dead.
This mean that I am seriously considering purchasing a self-winding watch.
Yes, it would be expensive. But, I have the money.
Yes, they are gaudy. But, have you seen any of the nicer battery powered watches lately. They aren't exactly understated.
I know that a battery powered watch is less accurate. But, three minutes a month is not that big a deal to me. Besides If I'm running that close to being late I should have left earlier.
I guess what I'm really complaining about here is the propensity to change or "upgrade" technology simply because it is new. Does a battery powered watch actually offer any improvement over a mechanical clock? Well not really, at least none that I can think of and battery powered watches have one huge drawback. The battery will eventually die. If you wear a self winding watch everyday it will never stop provided you wear it everyday and walk around a little.
I have a friend that has an expensive digital watch that allows him to store phone numbers and that has a calculator pad. I don't see that as a convinience. It is troublesome and it doesn't save him any work. By giving him a way to organize random contacts it helps to ensure that he has to contact them. He can't simply forget them. I believe that most people are already too busy.
This get even worse with a cellular phone. I think I am the only person in Hong Kong to not have a cell phone. I simply refuse to carry one. My time is my time and don't want people calling to ask what I'm doing with it. But, cell phones are another rant for another day
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Hong Kong 12 Days of Christmas
Why is it that every Christmas carol is set in a cold place? Why did nobody ever write carols for tropical places?
Here is my lame attempt at a re-write of a favorite Christmas carol from not only a tropical but Hong Kong perspective
Hong Kong 12 Days
On the first day of Christmas my true love gave to me
A pirated CD
On the second day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the third day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Three cake shop vouchers,
Two soy sauce chickens and a Pirated CD
On the fourth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Four cell-phones calling,
Three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the fifth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Five golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD!
On the sixth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Six taxis honking
Five Golden rings
Four cell-phones calling, Three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD!
On the seventh day of Christmas my True love gave to me
Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping,
six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the Eight Day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Eight ferries crossing
Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the ninth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Nine Realtors lying
Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the tenth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Ten ledge-co members
Nine Realtors lying, Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the eleventh day of Christmas my true love gave to me.
Eleven buses parking
Ten ledge-co members, Nine Realtors lying, Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the twelfth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
A 12 square foot flat
Eleven buses parking Ten Ledge-co members, Nine Realtors lying, Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
Until Next Time
Fai Mao
The Christmas Caroling Blogger
Here is my lame attempt at a re-write of a favorite Christmas carol from not only a tropical but Hong Kong perspective
Hong Kong 12 Days
On the first day of Christmas my true love gave to me
A pirated CD
On the second day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the third day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Three cake shop vouchers,
Two soy sauce chickens and a Pirated CD
On the fourth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Four cell-phones calling,
Three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the fifth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Five golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD!
On the sixth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Six taxis honking
Five Golden rings
Four cell-phones calling, Three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD!
On the seventh day of Christmas my True love gave to me
Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping,
six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the Eight Day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Eight ferries crossing
Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the ninth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Nine Realtors lying
Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the tenth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
Ten ledge-co members
Nine Realtors lying, Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the eleventh day of Christmas my true love gave to me.
Eleven buses parking
Ten ledge-co members, Nine Realtors lying, Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
On the twelfth day of Christmas my true love gave to me
A 12 square foot flat
Eleven buses parking Ten Ledge-co members, Nine Realtors lying, Eight ferries crossing, Seven (Filipino) maids a shopping, six Taxis honking
Five Golden Rings
Four cell-phones calling, three cake shop vouchers, two soy sauce chickens and a pirated CD
Until Next Time
Fai Mao
The Christmas Caroling Blogger
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
All Emo, all the time
I have really bad eyesight. My right eye is 1300/20 and my left eye is about 1100/20.
That means that things like glasses and contacts are important to me.
I also have, if the dermatologist can be believed, really dry skin from spending too much time under the Texas sun without sunscreen when I was younger, less wise and better looking. To keep my face from cracking open and looking like I have leprosy I use a lot of skin lotion. That means that I maintain a minimum of hair on my face and normally have my head shaved.
Because of the dry skin I tend to shave only every other day. That means I commonly look a bit scruffy even with a Van Dyke beard to soften the scruffiness.
I generally wear a hat. Most commonly what is sometimes called a "gimmie cap" which is like a baseball cap. My favorite is a tan one that advertises the University of New Orleans Privateers. I need the cap because it helps with glare and to keep my head from getting sunburned because of my shaved head.
These two conditions (dry skin and bad eyes) and one sartorial proclivity (wearing of caps) of my being came together recently in an odd way when I purchased a new pair of glasses. I am now, according to my teen-aged daughter who certainly ought to know about these things, a radical fashion plate; an advertisement for the latest and hippest non-saggy panted male fashion. I am, it seems, quite by accident I might add, "Emo."
Emo is a cross between punk and nerd. If you don't understand how you get the word "Emo" by crossing punk and nerd join the club. However, the glasses I bought have rectangular lenses and are a plastic frame. I like plastic frames because if you have a high prescription the lenses stay in better and they are more comfortable. I like rectangular lenses because they seem to cover my field of vision better. Besides, if I put a pair of wire frame glasses down on the table they disappear. If I drop plastic framed glasses I can find them because they are bigger and I can see them on the floor.
None of these reasons for buying these glasses sound to me to be even remotely punky or nerdy but, there you are. I guess I have become punky and nerdy by accident. Which is strange because I thought both of those lifestyle were the result of life premeditated choices rather than accidential living. I've been wrong before.
Until next time,
Fai Mao
The Emo Blogger
Friday, November 19, 2004
Exodus 2:23 - 25
Originally a devotion for teachers at the school where I work.
This is one of my favorite passages in the Old Testament. This may seem strange at first but I see a lot in this passage. I find the concepts of prayer, and GodÂ’s response to my prayer to be so clearly detailed that I found this passage to be one I can meditate on for weeks. In this meditation I am going to talk about my prayers of sinfulness, my prayers of genuine need and GodÂ’s response to my prayers. I am also going to think about GodÂ’s response to nations and the effect our prayers have upon nations as well as individuals in those nations.
“The Israelites groaned in their slavery and cried out, and their cry for help because of their slavery went up to God.” Exodus 2:23
The first thing that is noticeable here is that there is the universal appeal for justice from oppression in this passage. I am not a slave but I do groan about my everyday life. Sometimes I have a good reason for this like when my feet hurt because of torn ligaments or when I am late for work because of traffic at 6:15am in morning. How often am I oppressed by pain or circumstances beyond my control? Other times, however; I grumble and complain because I am a sinful human who way down deep thinks the world should recognize my genius and not require anything else of me than to live in wealth and luxury.
This may in fact be closer to the truth about the Hebrews situation. Historians tell us that the people who built the cities and monuments of ancient Egypt were better fed, better-housed and received better health care than the population at large. While it may very well be true that the Egyptian master’s abused the Hebrew’s it is also true that most ancient civilizations routinely abused ALL of their citizens. A group of foreign nationals living in an ancient empire would have been particularly attractive target. Anyway, I am not sure that the vast majority of ancient people’s were not really slaves. I am not sure that the word “freedom” had very much meaning in the ancient world. Even the episode involving the midwives and killing the male babies is not so extreme by ancient standards. In fact, if judged by the Assyrians or the Hittites the Egyptians were behaving in a positively enlightened manner.
All of this is beside the point. It is clear that the Ancient Egyptians perverted the sense of justice inherent in all humans; as such their state was corrupt. The issue is not whether the Israelites were better or worse off than their contemporaries in Ancient Egypt. The issue is that the Israelites felt abandoned, betrayed, set upon and perceived that God was their only hope for deliverance.
Would it have been better if the Israelites had realized this earlier? Yes! Should they have been constantly petitioning God throughout the 400 years they were in Egypt? You bet! Did they? We do not know if they prayed for deliverance before this time or not. Apparently they did not. But is not this how we often behave? Am I not guilty of waiting until I have tied my life in a knot so tight that only God can untie it before I ask God for help?
How much groaning could I forgo if I simply placed my everyday in GodÂ’s hands? What is really great here is not that the Israelites are better or worse than I am but that God never tires waiting for me to cry out to him. When I finally come to God He is never to busy, miffed, angry, far away, tired or weak to help. Oh, that I would cry out to God more often in earnest faith. Not just when I am in trouble. It is a measure of my innate sinfulness that I find it hard to trust in God during the good or easy times.
“God heard their groaning and God remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob. So God looked on the Israelites and God was concerned about them.” Exodus 2: 24 - 25
There are four phrases here that really stand out.
1. “God heard” What a comfort that God hears! I do not read Hebrew but it is apparent here that the word used in this passage means that in hearing God was more than simply being aware of a noise somewhere as I am aware of the barking dog down the street. It seems that the way the word is used it means that God really listened to the prayers of the Israelites. He took time to find out what they had to say. He did not simply become aware that the Israelites were praying. God paid attention to them.
How wonderful that God pays attention to us. How wonderful that God is interested in what we have to say. How wonderful, in whatever way, that God hears us. That he wants to hear from us. The obvious question then is do I want to hear from Him? Do I want God to really listen to what I have to say? What do my prayers sound like in GodÂ’ ears? Am I comfortable with my prayers in either quality or quantity?
2. “God remembered” How wonderful that God remembers us. He remembers his promises to us. He remembers what he promised to do for us. More than that God remembers the prayers our parents, grandparents and even great, great, great grand parents made for us. In this case we have no evidence that the prayers of Abraham, Isaac or Jacob for their children were meant to be carried so many generations into the future God applied those prayers here more than four hundred years later. God remembered the faith and prayers of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the past for their children and applied those prayers to their captive descendants, twenty- five generations later, the Israelites.
A better way to phrase this might be to say that God never forgets either His promises to us or, just as importantly, the prayers of previous generations of faithful saints on our behalf. This fact should give us quite a pause. God never forgets our prayers! He remembers what we ask for and we can see that he will protect, rescue and be concerned about the children of our childrenÂ’s children and even their children. We can know that God will remember our prayers and not make them wasted breath. This is true even if we never live to see those prayers answered. How far into the future will God carry our prayers and how many generations will our prayers today redeem? How will God answer my prayers for my nation today in the future?
3. “God looked” God gives us His attention. He not only listened he looked. He saw, observed watched. God looks at us! He looks at us both as a corporate or national sense and as individuals. More than that, God looked not only at the Israelites but also at the Egyptians!
Nations are important to God. Look at the Old Testament prophets. How much of what they said was directed at nations, peoples and kingdoms rather than individuals? God was/is evidently interested in the welfare of not only ancient Israel but also every nation. Our culture, our civilization, our national identities are important to God. The Israelites were being abused as a nation by the authority and under color of the nation in which they lived. An oppressive and authoritarian government was systematically destroying the Israelites cultural identity and denying them the right to live peacefully in the land that had been legally given to them. God was concerned about these things, both the destruction of Israel and illegal action of the nation. God took action to not only save the Israelites but to chastise the Egyptians and reminded both nations that He is the final king and judge on Earth!
If God was concerned about these things at that time it is safe to say that He still is today. Too often we forget that our government, our culture, our national identity is something given to us by God to institute His law on Earth. This is not an insignificant thing. When nations or peoples refuse to enforce the laws of God even at even the most basic level then God has, or so the Bible tells us, judged them and replaced them. It may be that God is patient. It may be that He does not want to judge. It is true that there are limits beyond which His patience and limits cannot be stretched.
Leaders who do not maintain honest, just and responsible administrations sit under the wrath of God. I do not find it a simple coincidence that the two basic areas that God demonstrated His power against the Egyptians were their religion (The plagues) and their military (drowned in the Red Sea) Egypt was a Theocracy. Pharaoh was worshiped as a god. The state supported an official religion. Each of the plagues was directed against a specific Egyptian god and the drowning of the army was no different. The drowning of Pharaoh and his army in the Red Sea was the final condemnation of not only a false religion but also of a corrupt government that had failed to up hold justice and fairness and law.
God looked at the Pharaoh and measured him by his own standard, found him wanting and refused to let him cross the sea as a righteous man as Egyptian religions said he must do after death. If you know anything about ancient Egyptian religion you see what happened here. Pharaoh was shown to be a false god. He did not meet even the requirements for salvation prescribed by even his own false religion. The Israelites crossed the Red Sea because God found them righteous. Pharaoh drowned because of his sin. Hallelujah! Is it not wonderful that while more patient than we God will judge the unrighteous nations and individuals of Earth! God demands that we live righteous lives and that our governments uphold his laws. When nations do not up hold the justice of God on Earth we have the right to petition God for justice and God will, in His time give us justice! Amen!
4. “God was concerned” Obviously, I have dealt with this at length already. God was and is concerned about many aspects of our life. However, I believe that sometimes we need to restate the obvious. God is concerned about us. He was concerned enough to send Moses. He was concerned enough to part the Red Sea. He was concerned enough to destroy the Egyptian army and expose the Egyptian religion as fraudulent. He was concerned enough to provide the Israelites with water, manna, and quail. He was concerned about the situation on Earth and did something about it. Because God is concerned I do not have to be! Years ago I heard a sermon by a man named Buddy Cave. He was the pastor of a small church that my family attended. He made a statement that I have remembered all these years. In a sermon on prayer he said: “If you are concerned about something it is big enough to give it to God in Prayer. God is concerned with all our needs. And, if you are concerned about then God is concerned about it. And, if God is concerned about then you don’t need to be concerned about it. Because if God is concerned about your problems you have all the help you need.” Amen! How wonderful to know that God is concerned with my needs. What comfort is found in knowing that God is concerned that I live in a nation that executes justice on Earth! What a tremendous thing to realize that the concern of God means that God will take action on those concerns.
What a great passage.
Until Next Time
Your Biblical Interpreting blogger
Fai-Mao
This is one of my favorite passages in the Old Testament. This may seem strange at first but I see a lot in this passage. I find the concepts of prayer, and GodÂ’s response to my prayer to be so clearly detailed that I found this passage to be one I can meditate on for weeks. In this meditation I am going to talk about my prayers of sinfulness, my prayers of genuine need and GodÂ’s response to my prayers. I am also going to think about GodÂ’s response to nations and the effect our prayers have upon nations as well as individuals in those nations.
“The Israelites groaned in their slavery and cried out, and their cry for help because of their slavery went up to God.” Exodus 2:23
The first thing that is noticeable here is that there is the universal appeal for justice from oppression in this passage. I am not a slave but I do groan about my everyday life. Sometimes I have a good reason for this like when my feet hurt because of torn ligaments or when I am late for work because of traffic at 6:15am in morning. How often am I oppressed by pain or circumstances beyond my control? Other times, however; I grumble and complain because I am a sinful human who way down deep thinks the world should recognize my genius and not require anything else of me than to live in wealth and luxury.
This may in fact be closer to the truth about the Hebrews situation. Historians tell us that the people who built the cities and monuments of ancient Egypt were better fed, better-housed and received better health care than the population at large. While it may very well be true that the Egyptian master’s abused the Hebrew’s it is also true that most ancient civilizations routinely abused ALL of their citizens. A group of foreign nationals living in an ancient empire would have been particularly attractive target. Anyway, I am not sure that the vast majority of ancient people’s were not really slaves. I am not sure that the word “freedom” had very much meaning in the ancient world. Even the episode involving the midwives and killing the male babies is not so extreme by ancient standards. In fact, if judged by the Assyrians or the Hittites the Egyptians were behaving in a positively enlightened manner.
All of this is beside the point. It is clear that the Ancient Egyptians perverted the sense of justice inherent in all humans; as such their state was corrupt. The issue is not whether the Israelites were better or worse off than their contemporaries in Ancient Egypt. The issue is that the Israelites felt abandoned, betrayed, set upon and perceived that God was their only hope for deliverance.
Would it have been better if the Israelites had realized this earlier? Yes! Should they have been constantly petitioning God throughout the 400 years they were in Egypt? You bet! Did they? We do not know if they prayed for deliverance before this time or not. Apparently they did not. But is not this how we often behave? Am I not guilty of waiting until I have tied my life in a knot so tight that only God can untie it before I ask God for help?
How much groaning could I forgo if I simply placed my everyday in GodÂ’s hands? What is really great here is not that the Israelites are better or worse than I am but that God never tires waiting for me to cry out to him. When I finally come to God He is never to busy, miffed, angry, far away, tired or weak to help. Oh, that I would cry out to God more often in earnest faith. Not just when I am in trouble. It is a measure of my innate sinfulness that I find it hard to trust in God during the good or easy times.
“God heard their groaning and God remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob. So God looked on the Israelites and God was concerned about them.” Exodus 2: 24 - 25
There are four phrases here that really stand out.
1. “God heard” What a comfort that God hears! I do not read Hebrew but it is apparent here that the word used in this passage means that in hearing God was more than simply being aware of a noise somewhere as I am aware of the barking dog down the street. It seems that the way the word is used it means that God really listened to the prayers of the Israelites. He took time to find out what they had to say. He did not simply become aware that the Israelites were praying. God paid attention to them.
How wonderful that God pays attention to us. How wonderful that God is interested in what we have to say. How wonderful, in whatever way, that God hears us. That he wants to hear from us. The obvious question then is do I want to hear from Him? Do I want God to really listen to what I have to say? What do my prayers sound like in GodÂ’ ears? Am I comfortable with my prayers in either quality or quantity?
2. “God remembered” How wonderful that God remembers us. He remembers his promises to us. He remembers what he promised to do for us. More than that God remembers the prayers our parents, grandparents and even great, great, great grand parents made for us. In this case we have no evidence that the prayers of Abraham, Isaac or Jacob for their children were meant to be carried so many generations into the future God applied those prayers here more than four hundred years later. God remembered the faith and prayers of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the past for their children and applied those prayers to their captive descendants, twenty- five generations later, the Israelites.
A better way to phrase this might be to say that God never forgets either His promises to us or, just as importantly, the prayers of previous generations of faithful saints on our behalf. This fact should give us quite a pause. God never forgets our prayers! He remembers what we ask for and we can see that he will protect, rescue and be concerned about the children of our childrenÂ’s children and even their children. We can know that God will remember our prayers and not make them wasted breath. This is true even if we never live to see those prayers answered. How far into the future will God carry our prayers and how many generations will our prayers today redeem? How will God answer my prayers for my nation today in the future?
3. “God looked” God gives us His attention. He not only listened he looked. He saw, observed watched. God looks at us! He looks at us both as a corporate or national sense and as individuals. More than that, God looked not only at the Israelites but also at the Egyptians!
Nations are important to God. Look at the Old Testament prophets. How much of what they said was directed at nations, peoples and kingdoms rather than individuals? God was/is evidently interested in the welfare of not only ancient Israel but also every nation. Our culture, our civilization, our national identities are important to God. The Israelites were being abused as a nation by the authority and under color of the nation in which they lived. An oppressive and authoritarian government was systematically destroying the Israelites cultural identity and denying them the right to live peacefully in the land that had been legally given to them. God was concerned about these things, both the destruction of Israel and illegal action of the nation. God took action to not only save the Israelites but to chastise the Egyptians and reminded both nations that He is the final king and judge on Earth!
If God was concerned about these things at that time it is safe to say that He still is today. Too often we forget that our government, our culture, our national identity is something given to us by God to institute His law on Earth. This is not an insignificant thing. When nations or peoples refuse to enforce the laws of God even at even the most basic level then God has, or so the Bible tells us, judged them and replaced them. It may be that God is patient. It may be that He does not want to judge. It is true that there are limits beyond which His patience and limits cannot be stretched.
Leaders who do not maintain honest, just and responsible administrations sit under the wrath of God. I do not find it a simple coincidence that the two basic areas that God demonstrated His power against the Egyptians were their religion (The plagues) and their military (drowned in the Red Sea) Egypt was a Theocracy. Pharaoh was worshiped as a god. The state supported an official religion. Each of the plagues was directed against a specific Egyptian god and the drowning of the army was no different. The drowning of Pharaoh and his army in the Red Sea was the final condemnation of not only a false religion but also of a corrupt government that had failed to up hold justice and fairness and law.
God looked at the Pharaoh and measured him by his own standard, found him wanting and refused to let him cross the sea as a righteous man as Egyptian religions said he must do after death. If you know anything about ancient Egyptian religion you see what happened here. Pharaoh was shown to be a false god. He did not meet even the requirements for salvation prescribed by even his own false religion. The Israelites crossed the Red Sea because God found them righteous. Pharaoh drowned because of his sin. Hallelujah! Is it not wonderful that while more patient than we God will judge the unrighteous nations and individuals of Earth! God demands that we live righteous lives and that our governments uphold his laws. When nations do not up hold the justice of God on Earth we have the right to petition God for justice and God will, in His time give us justice! Amen!
4. “God was concerned” Obviously, I have dealt with this at length already. God was and is concerned about many aspects of our life. However, I believe that sometimes we need to restate the obvious. God is concerned about us. He was concerned enough to send Moses. He was concerned enough to part the Red Sea. He was concerned enough to destroy the Egyptian army and expose the Egyptian religion as fraudulent. He was concerned enough to provide the Israelites with water, manna, and quail. He was concerned about the situation on Earth and did something about it. Because God is concerned I do not have to be! Years ago I heard a sermon by a man named Buddy Cave. He was the pastor of a small church that my family attended. He made a statement that I have remembered all these years. In a sermon on prayer he said: “If you are concerned about something it is big enough to give it to God in Prayer. God is concerned with all our needs. And, if you are concerned about then God is concerned about it. And, if God is concerned about then you don’t need to be concerned about it. Because if God is concerned about your problems you have all the help you need.” Amen! How wonderful to know that God is concerned with my needs. What comfort is found in knowing that God is concerned that I live in a nation that executes justice on Earth! What a tremendous thing to realize that the concern of God means that God will take action on those concerns.
What a great passage.
Until Next Time
Your Biblical Interpreting blogger
Fai-Mao
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Mission Trips, Who Needs them? Not my child
I must admit that one of my favorite things to do is to make controversial statements that really get people mad. I must also admit that I especially like to do this when I feel I am right about something and wish to really show people how wrong they are. I also admit that I sometimes have to eat my words. I will also admit to never having been accused of having a great deal of subtlety or tact. I have, or so it seems a rather broad streak of the Curmudgeon in me. In fact, I sort of like being a curmudgeon and sincerely believe that the Church needs more curmudgeons. Since I know of no official job description for the office of Church Curmudgeon I am going to, in this instance, take up the mantle and proclaim myself an official curmudgeon. Do not misunderstand, the Church does not need people who are a curmudgeon about everything but rather people that are willing to point out areas within our Christian lives, both private and corporate that need improving. These people may need to take rather unpopular or strange stands to help bring about reform, repentance or rededication in the Church and in individuals. Also, as befits a true curmudgeon, I believe I am right, completely and totally right and that most other people are wrong. Therefore, if I sound like I am riding a bit of a spiritual high horse, well I am, it comes with the job of curmudgeon. As an official curmudgeon I am going to ask what I hope will be relevant, revealing and spiritually convicting rhetorical questions about something that has been bothering me for quite a long time. But because I am operating in my capacity as a Curmudgeon, I am not going to waste words being overly nice in a misguided attempt to not offend anybody. I am not going to beat around the bush either. I am going to attempt to hit you verbally between the eyes as hard as I can with as heavy an object as I can find. I am going to state my case as forcefully and bluntly as possible and not worry whether anyone agrees. I want everyone who is considering engaging in this sin to hear a clear call to repentance
But, before I give you my cause and what I, as a curmudgeon think, should be done about it I feel that I should enlighten you as to my qualifications for being a curmudgeon on this topic. I am a US citizen that lives abroad. My wife is not an American and I live in Asia because it is her home. I doubt very much if I will ever live in the US again. While I work for a Christian organization, I did not come to Hong Kong to be employed by that organization, I came here to live where my wife is comfortable thereby fulfilling the Biblical injunction that a husband is to "leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife". I am not a missionary and never have been. However, because I live in a city (Hong Kong) with a large missionary population and work for a Christian organization I know a lot of missionaries. Thus, by default I have become an observer of my own land, my own culture and my own religion from a distance and through the eyes of one who has intimate knowledge both his own and another culture. What all of this means is that I am something of a voluntary "Phillip Knowland": a man without a country. Actually, that is not true. In many ways, I am an ex-American; I am simply now a person who lives in Hong Kong, a non-Chinese Hong Konger. But in any case, I feel that I am in a unique position to observe attitudes and practices that many North American and European Christians demonstrate while engaging in "Mission Trips" or "short-term" missions in Hong Kong and that I believe are not only hurtful to the eventual evangelization of China but also sinful. I also assume that because these things are done here that they are done through out the world. (Though it is possible that all the incompetent short-term missionaries come here.) I believe this so strongly that I think it would be better for many "lay Missionaries" to stay at home. That leads me to a question that any self-respecting curmudgeon must ask himself, "Who needs mission trips?"
I realize that saying that mission trips for high school students and short term missions by adult lay Missionaries do more harm than good is tantamount to saying that our children should spend their time playing broom hockey with the devil. However, I have had to put up with uppity mission trip kids and arrogant, holier-than-thou lay missionaries for years. The least you can do is to hear me out before you excommunicate me.
Why, I ask with rhetorical drama, do people go on short-term missions? What do our kids really do on mission trips? Well, in the past few years the school I work for has had a group of lay missionaries fly all the way from the US to build wooden shelves for my library. I've also seen a group of college freshmen arrive to spend five weeks doing unspecified "ministry" work in seven different Asian countries. I see other people that come to Hong Kong to supposedly evangelize school kids by "teaching" conversational English for two weeks. (I've never met anybody converted by this sort-term activity.) I've met people that come here with a suitcase full of Bibles that they are planning to smuggle across the border into the non-SAR portion of China. One of these had bought the Bibles in Taiwan, which uses a different set of Chinese characters, and are effectively a foreign language to the average person in China. (In addition to the fact that it is illegal to distribute anything printed in Taiwan in the PRC but Bibles can bought at any book store in the PRC!!!) Other short-term missionaries I have met wanted to "fellowship" with the "pure" Christians of the underground church in China. For the most part, what I see is a group of people coming here to, in my opinion, embellish their spiritual ego by going home after three weeks and saying "Oh, isn't God so good! What a blessing to go help those poor unfortunate heathen who can't speak good English, wear funny clothes and eat food that would turn a normal person's stomach." You may think that I am exaggerating a bit (I do not) but even if I am the point is still valid. Given the very real cultural and economic differences that exist between the US and all third world countries it is IMPOSSIBLE or at least very, very, very hard for non-trained personnel to go to a foreign country and to do any kind of meaningful evangelistic work in three weeks. Pardon me for sounding crass and unspiritual but it appears to me that some people have adventure vacations by bungee jumping off the side of volcanoes or bridges others go white-water rafting; still others do eco-touring in the jungles of South America; Christians do mission trips.
Now, to be fair, I have also seen professionals come here and train local Christians how to produce radio or television programs and conduct needed training for local pastors and do many other things to aid in the spread of the Gospel in China. However, I believe that these are the exceptions that prove the rule. I also have a great deal of respect for most of the professional missionaries that I have met here many of whom are my friends. But, there needs to be a clear line drawn between a professional missionary or a professional doing a professional activity and a fumbling, untrained, culturally insensitive do-gooder.
Let me use an example of what I mean from another field. If someone became concerned about the level of health care being provided by the local hospital they might go and volunteer in their local hospital. They could visit children as a candy striper, perhaps work in the laundry or kitchen, and maybe clean the floors or bathrooms. But, would the hospital put them in the emergency room as a physician's assistant? Would they be able to volunteer as a surgeon? My guess is not unless they had the requisite training. Would it make any difference if they were volunteering in a Christian hospital? No. Would you, as a patient want an untrained medical worker administering medication to you? Would it make any difference if they were really sincere and felt a strong calling from God to be a short-term health-care worker and had diligently saved $1000.00 to come to work there?
Well, what is more important, a person's body or a person's soul? Why then do we allow untrained people to go into short-term missions? Especially when often times, as missionaries have told me, short-term workers end up hindering the furtherance of the evangelization process in that mission field? One has told me that the only type of short-term missionary she needs in her family is someone to come and do her laundry and clean her house so she and her husband would have more time to actually perform their duties as missionaries. Any takers on that one?
Let me get personal; a group of short-term missionaries came this past summer and built shelving for the library at the school where I am a librarian. They were good people. I have no problem with them as people. I am not questioning their salvation, theology or personal lives. However, I would like to question their calling as short-term missionaries. Here is why. This was a team of about five people. They each probably raised a little over US$1000.00 dollars to pay for their flight in and out of Hong Kong. They stayed in the apartment of a teacher for three weeks. During that time they really did do a lot of maintenance around our buildings. We were and should have been grateful. However, suppose, just for the sake of argument, they had each taken that US$1000.00+ and donated it to the school. We could have hired a handyman for nearly 12 months at an above average rate of pay in Hong Kong. Which would have done more for the school? Just as importantly which would have done more to lift the lives of at least one Hong Kong family out of poverty? Also, would the fact that each of these people had contributed $1000.00 to the school keep them from being able to do needed carpentry work for the needy in their community? No. As a curmudgeon, I must ask: would they have furthered the advancement of God's kingdom more by staying home and sending the school money? I think so, I really do.
I have also seen a drama group perform for our students. They were performing a skit that used breakfast cereal. This missionary drama team changed the breakfast cereal to rice because they did not think that students in a school that uses an American Curriculum where most of the students, though Chinese, were born in the US would know what Corn Flakes were. Yeah, my daughter rides home on a water buffalo and we just pretend it is a bus. Don't get me wrong; I am not saying that it is not worthwhile for college students to want to be missionaries. I am saying you can't do the seven-countries-in-five-weeks thing. You also cannot perform meaningful missionary activity when you do not understand the culture you are ministering to. This kind of trip is not in my opinion a missionary activity it is a sanctified vacation. I am sure that the participants go home with good memories and a warm fuzzy feeling of having ministered to the lost. The question is why do we have to travel 12 time zones away to do that? Is there no place near their home where Christian service is needed? If you want to travel and see far-way places then do so. Yes, behave like a Christian just do not try to sanctify your vacation as something holy.
Whatever happened to the idea of the great commission? You know "But you shall receive power --- Ability, efficiency and might---- when the Holy Spirit comes upon you; and you shall be My witnesses in Jerusalem and all Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the ends ---- the very bounds---- of the earth." Act 1:8 (Amplified version)
Each of us has our Jerusalem. Are we witnesses there? It appears to me that Christians are more concerned about the lost at the “ends of the Earth�, than they are about the lost at the “ends of the street�. Could it be that it is easier to come to Hong Kong where nobody knows you and to witness to people that do not know what great hypocrites we are? Yes, it is and I believe that this is why Jesus told us to start at home first. We need to become bold witnesses to those closest to us because they see us for what we are and thus we are forced examine our lives so that our entire body becomes a witness. How much sin would we expunge from our life if we took seriously the idea of evangelizing our neighbors through our lifestyle? How many more evangelistic words could we speak if our personal lives did not betray our hypocrisy?
Oh, I know another why we don't send our kids away for two years to third world countries; it might make our kids late for college and that might keep them from getting a good job. Or, they might actually decide to live a consistent Christian life. How horrible to forgo our sanctified vacations and end up really serving the poor and lost by doing the will of God effectively. What would happen next? Do you suppose our children might ask us about our tithing? I could go on about the fact that what the Church in the third world really needs is not more short-term missionaries but rather more of the outrageous amount of wealth that American Christians WASTE each year. For example: I have been told that American women spend more on cosmetics each year than the combined Gross National Product of all the countries on the continent of Africa minus South Africa each year combined. Suppose our wives, mothers and daughters bought a few fewer paint rollers and a little less paint and suppose that money went to feed the poor? Suppose our husbands, fathers and sons bought a few less golf clubs, fishing rods and SUV’s? Suppose that money was spent on building houses for the homeless? Suppose Christians really believed that every time we feed the hungry, clothed the naked, and housed the destitute we were doing the same for Christ? Would our concept of what a short-term missionary is change as well? You bet it would.
But we have strayed. This is not a gripe about materialism in the church as worthwhile as that topic might be, but about the useless nature of mission trips. So, more to the point, suppose the youth in your church didn't do a mission trip this summer? Instead of a mission trip suppose they worked full-time at the local grocery store, fast food outlet and gave 75% of the income they earned to a charity or better yet to full-time professional missionaries. Suppose when their non-Christian friends asked them "What happened to all the money you earned this summer? Like where is your new car, man? Why don't you have a really cool new pair of over engineered, outrageously expensive, fashionably ugly, make your feet look like you just arrived from another planet populated by color-blind space aliens, running shoes to show off?" What if our children were able to answer: "I fed the hungry, clothed the naked and gave comfort to the poor and contributed to the evangelism of the lost. I did this because Jesus commands us to love those less fortunate than me. Because you know, there are some thing's more important than being able to have new car or wearing the latest sneakers." What a powerful witness! Somehow I think most of us would rather have Christianized adventure vacation. It is easier to stoke our spirituality than to really sacrifice for the gospel. I also think that it is easier to ask Christian acquaintances for cash for a mission trip than to work all summer and give the earnings to charity. Not to mention a mission trip is more glamorous.
Suppose instead of flying to Hong Kong to paint and do carpentry work for my school, the short-term team had driven across town and painted the house of an elderly couple. Suppose they had spent time repairing a church in the poor section of their hometown? Suppose instead of flying to nine-countries in five weeks the drama team donated money to buy textbooks for a seminary in Thailand? Which is going to have a greater impact for the gospel? I believe that people, unless they are professional missionaries, should start evangelizing from their "Jerusalem" which is their family, their neighborhood, their town, and their nation.
The roar of anger from many of those reading this has already reached me. “But, but, but, I went on a mission trip and God worked in my life and I learned so much and came to know God’s will for my life and saw so much and it was soooooo helpful to my spiritual life, how can you say it was sinful?� I can say it because, Biblically speaking, your personal spiritual growth is not the point of missions. Paul, Silas, Barnabas, Peter, Phillip and any of the other apostles who were the first missionaries did not engage in missions to become better Christians. They engaged in missions to further the cause of Christ. This is not to say that missionaries do not gain spiritually from the work they do. Just that Christians are supposed to grow spiritually whether they are missionaries or not. If you are not growing spiritually a mission trip probably will not help even if you feel better for doing it. Missionaries are not more spiritual than other Christians or if they are it is only because they are more obedient to the will of God. If you need to go on a mission trip to enhance your spirituality then perhaps you need to look at why your normal spiritual life is so dry.
Do not misunderstand what I am saying. I am not saying that we should send fewer missionaries. In fact, I'm saying just the opposite, but the missionaries we send should be adequately trained and have knowledge of their cultural deficiencies. If you do not think you will have problems adjusting and ministering to people in another culture then think again. We do not want to repeat the mistakes of previous generations when western missionaries, as Jean Fritz talks about in her Newberry Award winning book "Homesick" spent time teaching Chinese women American manners.
How different from how the early church that sent out its first missionaries, Paul and Barnabas. Not only were they both mature Christians but Paul was trained as a Rabbi. Even John Mark was called to be a long-term missionary! He was supposed to be there for the whole trip and not go home early. The fact that he did not do this caused a great deal of contention between the early missionaries. Paul, Barnabas, Luke and the others were qualified professionals. Granted Peter and John and that bunch started out as untrained working class mono-cultural smucks but they received three-years of intense, personal discipleship training from God, face to face!
To be quite blunt, even the cults know how it is important for missionaries to be able to develop an understanding of the culture in which they work. That is one reason why the Mormons send their youth out for TWO YEARS. (I know this because I asked a Mormon.) What an absolute crying shame it is that cultic groups like the Mormons are better at sending short-term missionaries who are better able to develop cultural sensitivity than orthodox Christians! Is it really any wonder that Mormons often times seem to get better results? Maybe the reason that cults appear to do a better job of evangelism is not “the power of Satan working in opposition to the Gospel� but that the cults take the time needed to understand the cultures they are working in. Who should have a higher level of respect for cultures cults or Christians? Christians! Who acts like they do cults or Christians? Cults!
If we want our children to be short-term missionaries' maybe we should enroll them in a two-year program. Alternately we could spend more time evangelizing Mormons and then let them develop our missionary training programs. After all, most Mormons are Americans, so most North American Christians should have a pretty good handle on the culture that Mormons live in. Excuse me I forgot, American Christians listen only to “Gospel Radio, Christian music, watch only Christian TV programs and don’t generally mix with non-Christians maybe North American Christians really do not understand the culture where they live. But, again I digress and that is another area where the curmudgeon in me may speak up later.
So, in the end I still have to ask "Mission Trips, who needs them?" Well my answer, as a curmudgeon, is that if we continue to send out untrained, immature Christians with limited cultural understanding of the places they are visiting, do not allow them to stay long enough to gain the skills and knowledge they need to minister to the local population and have them do jobs that could be done more thoroughly by giving the cost of the airfare to groups already in this area then maybe nobody. Well at least nobody that I have met.
But, not to despair! If you think that God is calling you into a short-term mission then I suggest you answer the following questions that constitute the: Official Curmudgeon’s Practical Guide to Mission Trip Readiness Quiz.
1. Are you being asked to come by a person or group already in that location because you have special skills of a professional, technical, educational or theological nature that they need temporary help with? Yes = 50 No = 0
2. Are you engaged in local missionary activity in your local community?
Yes = 1 No = -100
3. Do you speak the local language of where you are going, or do you speak the language of the person or group you will be working for?
(If you answered no to question #1 omit the “group you will be working for part of this question).
Yes = 5 No = -50
4. Can you name at least five things about the culture you are going to that are different from yours, which are not widely known?
Yes = 5 No = -5
5. You do not think that people who wash their hair less than once a day or who take less than 6 to 10 baths or showers a week are “gross, filthy, dirty or smell bad�?
Yes = 5 No = -5
6. Have you ever had close personal contact for a period of months with a person from the culture you are going to?
Yes = 1 No = 0
7. Can you name at least three major differences between the most common religion in the area you are going to and Christianity? (They do not believe in Jesus does not count.)
Yes = 5 No = 0
8. Are you comfortable with radically different table manner than those in your family? (For example, would share a meal with people who ate off banana leaves and used their fingers as both serving spoons eating utensils?)
Yes = 1 No = 0
9. Are you willing to do laundry or clean house or other mundane or boring things that let full time missionaries do their jobs better?
Yes = 1 No = 0
10. Have you ever used an outdoor toilet that had been used by many other people (A chemical toilet or “Port-a-potty does not count, think Out-house.)
Yes = 1 No = 0
11. Would you use an out door toilet if it smelled really bad?
Yes = 2 No = 0
12. You are not squeamish when confronted with bad smells or when viewing dead animals are you?
Yes = 5 No = -5
10 Do you understand why each of the questions above might be relevant to short-term missions in many places?
Yes = 3 No = - 50
If you scored 20 or more on these questions you are probably ready to be a short-term missionary in at least one other culture. If not stay home.
But, before I give you my cause and what I, as a curmudgeon think, should be done about it I feel that I should enlighten you as to my qualifications for being a curmudgeon on this topic. I am a US citizen that lives abroad. My wife is not an American and I live in Asia because it is her home. I doubt very much if I will ever live in the US again. While I work for a Christian organization, I did not come to Hong Kong to be employed by that organization, I came here to live where my wife is comfortable thereby fulfilling the Biblical injunction that a husband is to "leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife". I am not a missionary and never have been. However, because I live in a city (Hong Kong) with a large missionary population and work for a Christian organization I know a lot of missionaries. Thus, by default I have become an observer of my own land, my own culture and my own religion from a distance and through the eyes of one who has intimate knowledge both his own and another culture. What all of this means is that I am something of a voluntary "Phillip Knowland": a man without a country. Actually, that is not true. In many ways, I am an ex-American; I am simply now a person who lives in Hong Kong, a non-Chinese Hong Konger. But in any case, I feel that I am in a unique position to observe attitudes and practices that many North American and European Christians demonstrate while engaging in "Mission Trips" or "short-term" missions in Hong Kong and that I believe are not only hurtful to the eventual evangelization of China but also sinful. I also assume that because these things are done here that they are done through out the world. (Though it is possible that all the incompetent short-term missionaries come here.) I believe this so strongly that I think it would be better for many "lay Missionaries" to stay at home. That leads me to a question that any self-respecting curmudgeon must ask himself, "Who needs mission trips?"
I realize that saying that mission trips for high school students and short term missions by adult lay Missionaries do more harm than good is tantamount to saying that our children should spend their time playing broom hockey with the devil. However, I have had to put up with uppity mission trip kids and arrogant, holier-than-thou lay missionaries for years. The least you can do is to hear me out before you excommunicate me.
Why, I ask with rhetorical drama, do people go on short-term missions? What do our kids really do on mission trips? Well, in the past few years the school I work for has had a group of lay missionaries fly all the way from the US to build wooden shelves for my library. I've also seen a group of college freshmen arrive to spend five weeks doing unspecified "ministry" work in seven different Asian countries. I see other people that come to Hong Kong to supposedly evangelize school kids by "teaching" conversational English for two weeks. (I've never met anybody converted by this sort-term activity.) I've met people that come here with a suitcase full of Bibles that they are planning to smuggle across the border into the non-SAR portion of China. One of these had bought the Bibles in Taiwan, which uses a different set of Chinese characters, and are effectively a foreign language to the average person in China. (In addition to the fact that it is illegal to distribute anything printed in Taiwan in the PRC but Bibles can bought at any book store in the PRC!!!) Other short-term missionaries I have met wanted to "fellowship" with the "pure" Christians of the underground church in China. For the most part, what I see is a group of people coming here to, in my opinion, embellish their spiritual ego by going home after three weeks and saying "Oh, isn't God so good! What a blessing to go help those poor unfortunate heathen who can't speak good English, wear funny clothes and eat food that would turn a normal person's stomach." You may think that I am exaggerating a bit (I do not) but even if I am the point is still valid. Given the very real cultural and economic differences that exist between the US and all third world countries it is IMPOSSIBLE or at least very, very, very hard for non-trained personnel to go to a foreign country and to do any kind of meaningful evangelistic work in three weeks. Pardon me for sounding crass and unspiritual but it appears to me that some people have adventure vacations by bungee jumping off the side of volcanoes or bridges others go white-water rafting; still others do eco-touring in the jungles of South America; Christians do mission trips.
Now, to be fair, I have also seen professionals come here and train local Christians how to produce radio or television programs and conduct needed training for local pastors and do many other things to aid in the spread of the Gospel in China. However, I believe that these are the exceptions that prove the rule. I also have a great deal of respect for most of the professional missionaries that I have met here many of whom are my friends. But, there needs to be a clear line drawn between a professional missionary or a professional doing a professional activity and a fumbling, untrained, culturally insensitive do-gooder.
Let me use an example of what I mean from another field. If someone became concerned about the level of health care being provided by the local hospital they might go and volunteer in their local hospital. They could visit children as a candy striper, perhaps work in the laundry or kitchen, and maybe clean the floors or bathrooms. But, would the hospital put them in the emergency room as a physician's assistant? Would they be able to volunteer as a surgeon? My guess is not unless they had the requisite training. Would it make any difference if they were volunteering in a Christian hospital? No. Would you, as a patient want an untrained medical worker administering medication to you? Would it make any difference if they were really sincere and felt a strong calling from God to be a short-term health-care worker and had diligently saved $1000.00 to come to work there?
Well, what is more important, a person's body or a person's soul? Why then do we allow untrained people to go into short-term missions? Especially when often times, as missionaries have told me, short-term workers end up hindering the furtherance of the evangelization process in that mission field? One has told me that the only type of short-term missionary she needs in her family is someone to come and do her laundry and clean her house so she and her husband would have more time to actually perform their duties as missionaries. Any takers on that one?
Let me get personal; a group of short-term missionaries came this past summer and built shelving for the library at the school where I am a librarian. They were good people. I have no problem with them as people. I am not questioning their salvation, theology or personal lives. However, I would like to question their calling as short-term missionaries. Here is why. This was a team of about five people. They each probably raised a little over US$1000.00 dollars to pay for their flight in and out of Hong Kong. They stayed in the apartment of a teacher for three weeks. During that time they really did do a lot of maintenance around our buildings. We were and should have been grateful. However, suppose, just for the sake of argument, they had each taken that US$1000.00+ and donated it to the school. We could have hired a handyman for nearly 12 months at an above average rate of pay in Hong Kong. Which would have done more for the school? Just as importantly which would have done more to lift the lives of at least one Hong Kong family out of poverty? Also, would the fact that each of these people had contributed $1000.00 to the school keep them from being able to do needed carpentry work for the needy in their community? No. As a curmudgeon, I must ask: would they have furthered the advancement of God's kingdom more by staying home and sending the school money? I think so, I really do.
I have also seen a drama group perform for our students. They were performing a skit that used breakfast cereal. This missionary drama team changed the breakfast cereal to rice because they did not think that students in a school that uses an American Curriculum where most of the students, though Chinese, were born in the US would know what Corn Flakes were. Yeah, my daughter rides home on a water buffalo and we just pretend it is a bus. Don't get me wrong; I am not saying that it is not worthwhile for college students to want to be missionaries. I am saying you can't do the seven-countries-in-five-weeks thing. You also cannot perform meaningful missionary activity when you do not understand the culture you are ministering to. This kind of trip is not in my opinion a missionary activity it is a sanctified vacation. I am sure that the participants go home with good memories and a warm fuzzy feeling of having ministered to the lost. The question is why do we have to travel 12 time zones away to do that? Is there no place near their home where Christian service is needed? If you want to travel and see far-way places then do so. Yes, behave like a Christian just do not try to sanctify your vacation as something holy.
Whatever happened to the idea of the great commission? You know "But you shall receive power --- Ability, efficiency and might---- when the Holy Spirit comes upon you; and you shall be My witnesses in Jerusalem and all Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the ends ---- the very bounds---- of the earth." Act 1:8 (Amplified version)
Each of us has our Jerusalem. Are we witnesses there? It appears to me that Christians are more concerned about the lost at the “ends of the Earth�, than they are about the lost at the “ends of the street�. Could it be that it is easier to come to Hong Kong where nobody knows you and to witness to people that do not know what great hypocrites we are? Yes, it is and I believe that this is why Jesus told us to start at home first. We need to become bold witnesses to those closest to us because they see us for what we are and thus we are forced examine our lives so that our entire body becomes a witness. How much sin would we expunge from our life if we took seriously the idea of evangelizing our neighbors through our lifestyle? How many more evangelistic words could we speak if our personal lives did not betray our hypocrisy?
Oh, I know another why we don't send our kids away for two years to third world countries; it might make our kids late for college and that might keep them from getting a good job. Or, they might actually decide to live a consistent Christian life. How horrible to forgo our sanctified vacations and end up really serving the poor and lost by doing the will of God effectively. What would happen next? Do you suppose our children might ask us about our tithing? I could go on about the fact that what the Church in the third world really needs is not more short-term missionaries but rather more of the outrageous amount of wealth that American Christians WASTE each year. For example: I have been told that American women spend more on cosmetics each year than the combined Gross National Product of all the countries on the continent of Africa minus South Africa each year combined. Suppose our wives, mothers and daughters bought a few fewer paint rollers and a little less paint and suppose that money went to feed the poor? Suppose our husbands, fathers and sons bought a few less golf clubs, fishing rods and SUV’s? Suppose that money was spent on building houses for the homeless? Suppose Christians really believed that every time we feed the hungry, clothed the naked, and housed the destitute we were doing the same for Christ? Would our concept of what a short-term missionary is change as well? You bet it would.
But we have strayed. This is not a gripe about materialism in the church as worthwhile as that topic might be, but about the useless nature of mission trips. So, more to the point, suppose the youth in your church didn't do a mission trip this summer? Instead of a mission trip suppose they worked full-time at the local grocery store, fast food outlet and gave 75% of the income they earned to a charity or better yet to full-time professional missionaries. Suppose when their non-Christian friends asked them "What happened to all the money you earned this summer? Like where is your new car, man? Why don't you have a really cool new pair of over engineered, outrageously expensive, fashionably ugly, make your feet look like you just arrived from another planet populated by color-blind space aliens, running shoes to show off?" What if our children were able to answer: "I fed the hungry, clothed the naked and gave comfort to the poor and contributed to the evangelism of the lost. I did this because Jesus commands us to love those less fortunate than me. Because you know, there are some thing's more important than being able to have new car or wearing the latest sneakers." What a powerful witness! Somehow I think most of us would rather have Christianized adventure vacation. It is easier to stoke our spirituality than to really sacrifice for the gospel. I also think that it is easier to ask Christian acquaintances for cash for a mission trip than to work all summer and give the earnings to charity. Not to mention a mission trip is more glamorous.
Suppose instead of flying to Hong Kong to paint and do carpentry work for my school, the short-term team had driven across town and painted the house of an elderly couple. Suppose they had spent time repairing a church in the poor section of their hometown? Suppose instead of flying to nine-countries in five weeks the drama team donated money to buy textbooks for a seminary in Thailand? Which is going to have a greater impact for the gospel? I believe that people, unless they are professional missionaries, should start evangelizing from their "Jerusalem" which is their family, their neighborhood, their town, and their nation.
The roar of anger from many of those reading this has already reached me. “But, but, but, I went on a mission trip and God worked in my life and I learned so much and came to know God’s will for my life and saw so much and it was soooooo helpful to my spiritual life, how can you say it was sinful?� I can say it because, Biblically speaking, your personal spiritual growth is not the point of missions. Paul, Silas, Barnabas, Peter, Phillip and any of the other apostles who were the first missionaries did not engage in missions to become better Christians. They engaged in missions to further the cause of Christ. This is not to say that missionaries do not gain spiritually from the work they do. Just that Christians are supposed to grow spiritually whether they are missionaries or not. If you are not growing spiritually a mission trip probably will not help even if you feel better for doing it. Missionaries are not more spiritual than other Christians or if they are it is only because they are more obedient to the will of God. If you need to go on a mission trip to enhance your spirituality then perhaps you need to look at why your normal spiritual life is so dry.
Do not misunderstand what I am saying. I am not saying that we should send fewer missionaries. In fact, I'm saying just the opposite, but the missionaries we send should be adequately trained and have knowledge of their cultural deficiencies. If you do not think you will have problems adjusting and ministering to people in another culture then think again. We do not want to repeat the mistakes of previous generations when western missionaries, as Jean Fritz talks about in her Newberry Award winning book "Homesick" spent time teaching Chinese women American manners.
How different from how the early church that sent out its first missionaries, Paul and Barnabas. Not only were they both mature Christians but Paul was trained as a Rabbi. Even John Mark was called to be a long-term missionary! He was supposed to be there for the whole trip and not go home early. The fact that he did not do this caused a great deal of contention between the early missionaries. Paul, Barnabas, Luke and the others were qualified professionals. Granted Peter and John and that bunch started out as untrained working class mono-cultural smucks but they received three-years of intense, personal discipleship training from God, face to face!
To be quite blunt, even the cults know how it is important for missionaries to be able to develop an understanding of the culture in which they work. That is one reason why the Mormons send their youth out for TWO YEARS. (I know this because I asked a Mormon.) What an absolute crying shame it is that cultic groups like the Mormons are better at sending short-term missionaries who are better able to develop cultural sensitivity than orthodox Christians! Is it really any wonder that Mormons often times seem to get better results? Maybe the reason that cults appear to do a better job of evangelism is not “the power of Satan working in opposition to the Gospel� but that the cults take the time needed to understand the cultures they are working in. Who should have a higher level of respect for cultures cults or Christians? Christians! Who acts like they do cults or Christians? Cults!
If we want our children to be short-term missionaries' maybe we should enroll them in a two-year program. Alternately we could spend more time evangelizing Mormons and then let them develop our missionary training programs. After all, most Mormons are Americans, so most North American Christians should have a pretty good handle on the culture that Mormons live in. Excuse me I forgot, American Christians listen only to “Gospel Radio, Christian music, watch only Christian TV programs and don’t generally mix with non-Christians maybe North American Christians really do not understand the culture where they live. But, again I digress and that is another area where the curmudgeon in me may speak up later.
So, in the end I still have to ask "Mission Trips, who needs them?" Well my answer, as a curmudgeon, is that if we continue to send out untrained, immature Christians with limited cultural understanding of the places they are visiting, do not allow them to stay long enough to gain the skills and knowledge they need to minister to the local population and have them do jobs that could be done more thoroughly by giving the cost of the airfare to groups already in this area then maybe nobody. Well at least nobody that I have met.
But, not to despair! If you think that God is calling you into a short-term mission then I suggest you answer the following questions that constitute the: Official Curmudgeon’s Practical Guide to Mission Trip Readiness Quiz.
1. Are you being asked to come by a person or group already in that location because you have special skills of a professional, technical, educational or theological nature that they need temporary help with? Yes = 50 No = 0
2. Are you engaged in local missionary activity in your local community?
Yes = 1 No = -100
3. Do you speak the local language of where you are going, or do you speak the language of the person or group you will be working for?
(If you answered no to question #1 omit the “group you will be working for part of this question).
Yes = 5 No = -50
4. Can you name at least five things about the culture you are going to that are different from yours, which are not widely known?
Yes = 5 No = -5
5. You do not think that people who wash their hair less than once a day or who take less than 6 to 10 baths or showers a week are “gross, filthy, dirty or smell bad�?
Yes = 5 No = -5
6. Have you ever had close personal contact for a period of months with a person from the culture you are going to?
Yes = 1 No = 0
7. Can you name at least three major differences between the most common religion in the area you are going to and Christianity? (They do not believe in Jesus does not count.)
Yes = 5 No = 0
8. Are you comfortable with radically different table manner than those in your family? (For example, would share a meal with people who ate off banana leaves and used their fingers as both serving spoons eating utensils?)
Yes = 1 No = 0
9. Are you willing to do laundry or clean house or other mundane or boring things that let full time missionaries do their jobs better?
Yes = 1 No = 0
10. Have you ever used an outdoor toilet that had been used by many other people (A chemical toilet or “Port-a-potty does not count, think Out-house.)
Yes = 1 No = 0
11. Would you use an out door toilet if it smelled really bad?
Yes = 2 No = 0
12. You are not squeamish when confronted with bad smells or when viewing dead animals are you?
Yes = 5 No = -5
10 Do you understand why each of the questions above might be relevant to short-term missions in many places?
Yes = 3 No = - 50
If you scored 20 or more on these questions you are probably ready to be a short-term missionary in at least one other culture. If not stay home.
Leaving America
Let me start out by saying that I am an ex-American. While still a citizen of the US I have not lived in the US for years. My wife is Chinese and her family is here. My child was not born here but grew up here and is not really comfortable in the rural US settings that I remember. Thus I am caught between the love of my native culture with the rhythm and pace of the small Texas town and the frenetic crowdedness of Hong Kong. I have thought long and hard about renouncing my US citizenship. But, changing your citizenship is, in many ways, like getting married. You are in the new country for "better or worse until death do you part." Indeed, it strikes me that it is easier too change your spouse than to change your nationality the difference being that to renounce your citizenship you don't need a lawyer.
That is why when I read article after article in paper after paper about people in the US who want leave the US because George Bush is the president for four more years I simply have to smirk. I don't know who will read this blog. But if you are one of the people who are considering this then let me as an American ex-patriot give you some advice. Stay where you are. It isn't better somewhere else. I know I've been there; I've done that. While my reasons for renouncing my US citizenship were, I think better thought out and based upon sounder logic than simply being frustrated that my party had lost an election it was still a mistake and it is a mistake that if you make it. You cannot call it back. Here are some reasons why
In some of the articles I've read people said they were tired of dealing with all the �Christians� and the context of the sentence clearly implied that they thought Christians were evil people. I'm not going to challenge their assumption. Not because I necessarily believe they are right but because I can say that unless they go someplace like Northern Europe, if there, it doesn't get any better. I am also assuming that if they think Christians are bad they will also think that the Buddhist here in Hong Kong who phonyhoney money to the gods of the underworld so that they can have a good life the next time around are also rather depraved. Indeed, the good-land Buddhism as practiced here with it's evil spirits and thousands of gods to bribe so that your stay in purgatory between incarnations is shorter makes the Southern Baptist look good. The whole idea of Chinese Buddhism is, as it is practiced by the locals, not necessarily as it is presented in English guides to religion, is that not only do you suffer less in the next life but you suffer less with more mo. but one of the ways you get a better life in the next incarnation is to BRIBE the gods of the underworld.
Hong Kong is most devoutly and overtly religious place I think I have ever seen not only the Buddhist but the Christians here are quite bold and try hard to evangelize. Christianity is growing at a rapid pace and Buddhism is trying to hold its own. And don't think the Buddhist here are not evangelistic. They are. Where else? South America? Get real they are 98% Roman Catholic and Catholic dogma is an official part of the state. Furthermore, they are not the nearly lapsed Catholics that are politically liberal that you find in the US. They take their faith SERIOUSLY. So these people in the paper want to run from a place where only about one third of the population attends a religious service once a week to a place where 90% plus of the population does? I am sorry. That is idiotic.
Other articles I read have mentioned people wanting to go to nations like Canada or New Zealand, that they the distraught voter feels would be more suitable with their politics. Really? What happens to the Canadian economy if three-million people or a million or �½ a million suddenly show up looking to live there? Prices go up and wages go down that's what. It is just that simple. The governments know this and they will not allow so many people to immigrate that they wreck their economy and overload their social systems. That means all the disgruntled liberal voters are going to have to spread themselves around. That means they need to think harder about where to go. That means they need to think non-English speaking.
When you think of non-English speaking countries they need to think about their children. If you were to go to a non-English speaking place are you willing to home school them like a fundamentalist Christian? I doubt very seriously that they will have bilingual English track in the local schools. Even if they do, (some schools in Hong Kong have such a program) you are not going to like the schools. Could your child do five hours of memorization work every night? I don't think so. That means private schools. Can you afford that? Doesn't that mean your kids will go to school with the children of the international corporation managers who are in that nation raping the resourcdestroyingstoying the environment for the benefit of the capitalist pig developed world? Does that bother ywould woould me if I were you. Especially since you'd probably have to work for one of those companies.
Or in the case of Hong Kong we come back to religion. The best private school in Hong Kong is one that was founded by Lutherans missionaries. I know some of the teachers there. Indeed, I know the direcpersonnelersonel. Nice lady. She attends a church with a Dallas Theological Seminary graduate Pastor. Yeah, fundamentalist in Hong Kong. Indeed, ECC it is quite probably the largest Protestant church in Hong Kong.
The Private schools here that use English fall into three categories: expensive, very expensive and cost more than Harvard. Can you afford to pay USD $30,000 a year for a private school in Hong Kong? If so you could probably find one near where you are that would be as good and less Christian. If you go with the less expensive international schools you get names like International Christian School, United Christian College, Christian Alliance International School and St. Paul's Convent School. Do you as a liberal see anything you don't like in those names? If I were leaving the US because there were too many Christians I would.
Are you a proponent of Gun control? May I suggest you don't go to any place in Asia. Yes Hong Kong has a very strict gun control law but the triads (local gangsters) still have some. I know first hand from shopping in Southern Thailand that you can purchase a used AK-47 for about USD $25.00 in the street markets. (I was only willing to pay USD $20.00 and the guy wouldn't go below USD $25.00) Try doing that in L.A.
Hong Kong and Japan are very safe but most places in Asia are not. Central and South America are worse. If you are concerned about your safety don't go there.
Racial prejudices are a world wide problem. Generally, it is worse anywhere else but the US. I mean that. If you have never lived outside the US you haven't seen prejudice
You want to see women oppressed try the middle East and Asia.
Pedophilia anyone? Go to Bangkok Yeah, 12 year-old girls and boprostitutestitutes there. Does that bother you? It should unless you're one of the people abusing those children.
A last reason not to go overseas is quite simply you will get trapped there. It happens all the time, and it happens in two ways. First, if you get that good job, and make a lot of money will you want to go back in four years to a job that makes �½ as much? Even if you have to live in a small apartment, in fear for your life aintoleranttollerant and abusive society? I didn't think so. Conversely, I know of a man in Wuhan which is a city in China. He went there 10 years ago to teach English on a two year contract. He has four children. He does not make enough money to fly back for vacations in the US. He can't really save that much because he doesn't make much. He can feed his kids and actually has a pretty good life in China but he can't leave because his standard of living wodramaticallyamaticlly. He and his family are trapped in China. Does that sound appealing?
What if an apartment that was 500 to 600 square feet cost you USD $3000.00 a month and each of your kid's school tuition was USD $1800.00 a month. What if for USD $110,000.00 a year you could barely afford an automobile? On top of all that, you would still have to fill out US tax forms every year. Doesn't sound so great anymore does it.
What about air pollution. How may days did the pollution index where you live hit 85? In most Asian cities and many South American cities that is an everyday event.
Remember the grass always looks greener but is because you are looking through your gesaltl gesault. Youlenseses lenses are tinted green by politic, envy or both.
Monday, November 15, 2004
Why Me?
I do not know if an online diary, which is effectively what a blog is is something that I should do.
It seems that many people seem to think that they have something to say and really don't. That makes me wonder if others feel that way about what I would have to say. It also seems to me that many people seem to think that they are somewhat smarter than most other people. I bet if you took a survey and were able to get honest answers that close to 70% percent of people would think they are in the top 2% when it comes to brain power. That means that most people think they are smarter than me and it is cinch they are better looking than me too.
Well, I'm not sure that I have anything to say. I know I'm not the smartest guy around. In fact, I'm pretty average in a lot of ways and I guess in a way, that is why I feel that I should blog. I get tired of reading blow-hards and third rate thinkers of all stripes who are laboring under the misconception that they have an original idea. I guess that is my motivating force for this effort. I don't believe that I am that original but I am, I believe pretty good at exposing the faulty thinking of others. It is what I do for a living. One of the funniest lines in the movie "Gallaxy Quest" was when Tim Allen told the Alien thug "It doesn't take a good actor to recognise a bad one." Well, it doesn't take a good philosopher to recognise a bad one either.
If you read this blog and enjoy it great. If you read it and it makes you think about something in your life in a new way, even better. If you read it and don't like or agree with what I have to say it doesn't bother me. So, don't let it bother you. If I make you angry, save the hate mail. It isn't worth your time to write or my time to read.
Fai Mao
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)