I've been thinking about this expression a bit since our meeting. It was raised in our discussion of a code of conduct on conversion in Toulouse in relation to church Diakonia or to economic and social pressure, subtle or overt. But I wondered about the expression itself, it seems a very loaded phrase - why call people who convert for potential worldly benefits rice Christians - why are they not tea and scone Christians, or spaghetti Christians or meat and two veg Christians? I suppose what I mean is that is makes so many assumptions both about the people likely to be so venal as to change religion - people who eat rice; and about those doing mission as well - Christians are of course bringing the rice. I really wonder about this, isn't there something in the Bible when the 72 are sent out which encourages those carrying the good news to actually eat and drink what is offered to them in the houses that welcome them in peace. (And of course despite this stream of consciousness writing the glories of the internet mean I've now just checked the reference Luke 10.7 "Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you".) It isn't at all the holy, wonderful Christians bringing rice but very often actually others who we seek to do mission to feed us.
However, unfortunately it would seem that the term "rice Christian" is commonly used in discussions of these kinds of issues. I really think it would be great if we could come up with another expression - how about social mobility Christians or survival Christians, surely there must be a better idea.
And then there's Kajsa Ahlstrand's remark reflecting that there is surely something problematic in referring to some converts as rice Christians while also trying to listen to Asian theologians who affirm that "God is rice".
What I did find heartening in the discussions in Toulouse was the overwhelming agreement that Christians service in the world is not about receiving anything in return, neither rice nor potatoes nor souls saved. Service is freely offered just as God's love is freely offered. No strings attached.
So to end a long quote on God is rice from an address by the WCC's former general secretary Konrad Raiser
"From an Asian perspective, Masao Takenaka has pointed to the way in which images and symbols rooted in the local culture can nurture the power of spiritual imagination and shape the human sense of responsibility. In an essay on Asian spirituality entitled God is Rice, he interprets a poem by the Korean Christian poet Kim Chi Ha, Heaven is Rice, which meditates on the highly symbolic character of rice as the daily food for people in Asia. "The Chinese character for peace (wa) literally means harmony. It derives from two words: one is rice, and the other is mouth. It means that unless we share rice together with all people, we will not have peace. When every mouth in the whole inhabited world is filled with daily food, then we can have peace." This leads to two important considerations: "When we say that God is rice, we do not mean that we should worship rice. We take rice as the symbol of God's gift of life. … Second, if we acknowledge that God is rice, the symbolic source of the whole creation, and if we accept nature as our companion rather than as an object to be conquered or exploited, there will be a decisive change in our attitude towards the ecological issues."
This approach to spirituality as rooted in the culture of people, especially the people of the 'Third World', is reflected also in the report of the 1992 Assembly of the Ecumenical Association of Third World Theologians in Nairobi. In his introduction, K.C. Abraham quotes the preparatory statement by the Theological Commission of EATWOT which, referring to the same poem by Kim Chi Ha, says: "The cry of the Third World is a cry for life. It is a cry for freedom and dignity that constitute life as human. It is a cry for the rice and bread that sustains life as well as for the community that symbolizes and grows from rice and bread eaten in company. … Rice and bread for one person alone may not be spiritual because it may be selfish. … Or in the words of Nikolai Berdiaev, rice for myself alone may be unspiritual, but rice for my hungry sister and brother is spiritual. Thus our cry for life is a cry for the bread and the rice of life and for the spirituality of all the activities, processes and relationships bound up with producing and sharing rice and bread. Ours is a cry for a spirituality of and for life."
No comments:
Post a Comment