Cultures of Fatherhood

Is it possible that fatherhood is not a generic global concept with similar priorities, but that different cultures perceive fatherhood and its function in differing ways?

Perhaps I could discuss this initially within the narrow band of a Christian worldview. I was in a cross-cultural church on Fathers Day. The pastor invited the fathers present to stand. He asked three women to pray for them; one Australian married to a Ugandan, a British woman married to a British man; and a Ugandan lady married to a Ugandan man. They all prayed beautifully.

Analytically, It was interesting what they prayed for, since it demonstrated what people regard as the primary need and function of a father. The two western women (including the one in a cross-cultural marriage) made wisdom the most important ingredient they wanted God to give to fathers in leading their families. The Ugandan lady prayed grace for the fathers in providing for their children with education and physical needs, as overseers of their families. Could I say that Wisdom in leadership was the Western priority, and providence in leadership was the African perspective? You might think these prayers are insufficient evidence to justify this opinion; that cultures vary in their view of fatherhood. My discernment is not impulsive, nor my understanding too narrow, since it is based on more than these prayers, but on several years of listening and learning. Allow me to give you further support to my distinctions, using other sources.

I am regarded as a pastor wherever I preach in African churches. As I revisit congregations and build a relationship with the people, I am sometimes approached by young adults, with the specific and honourable request of becoming their “father”.

Of course, this in itself is a major cultural difference, since African children often have more than one father. Certainly, there is their biological father, but all uncles (brothers to the biological father) are regarded as fathers, bearing the responsibility and honour for giving fatherly input into the lives of their children (nieces and nephews), and would be responsible to take these children into their homes if the child’s biological father died. The extended African family therefore has a great deal of responsibility and authority over a nucleus within it. This is in stark contrast to a modern Western extended family, which can negate responsibility, and would be regarded as interfering in the affairs of a Western nuclear family, should an uncle attempt to offer a fatherly role. The African model is far more cohesive socially.

Anyway, back to the request being made to become a “father”. These sincere young Christians seek opportunity to communicate with me, and in so doing often express their prayer requests, which reveal deep concerns for their success in higher education, and prayers for God’s provision of their fees, and His support in other needs, such as desires for the right marriage partner, and God's provision when the wedding draws near. I have long since passed the suspicious level, which regards this as a request to me for money, simply because I am assumed to have more resources. I see it as a genuine respect for my “priestly” role, and their seeking emotional support in the midst of some serious challenges in a poverty stricken environment. Education is a very important priority, as is God’s fatherly provision. Perhaps God might use me to assist them in their lives somehow. As a pastor, in their minds, I become a potent intercessory mediator between them and God, for him to be their provider. The requests are deeply sincere. Essentially, my point is supported by these experiences, that fathers in Africa are primarily regarded as providers.

On a more superficial level, driving as much as I do in the thick traffic of Kampala, I notice the many "Christian" bumper stickers on cars. That's not surprising when Uganda is a highly Christianized country. The most common phrases either make references to the vehicle being covered by the blood of Jesus, or refer to God as their provider. The former popular concept of Jesus’ blood covering a vehicle I find offensive and most irreverent theologically, but my main point here is that Father God is primarily seen as a protector and provider.

The media also supports this observation. Alarmingly, there is no doubt that local newspapers relish reporting sensational family tragedies. The most recent story in Uganda, was about a man separated from his wife for some time, who went to collect his two children from her for the weekend and then clubbed the two young boys to death late that night in their sleep, calling his sister to say that his life was "finished", before hanging himself. The police investigator is reported to have set the cause of the tragedy as “poverty”. It is certainly interesting that a policeman would give a moral and socio-economic cause for a crime over and above scientific evidence, which is again very different from a Western view of crime. This kind of scenario has sadly been reported several times over the years we have lived in Uganda and the same verdict is often given at the scene - "poverty". I always wonder what could drive a person to act so heinously against their own offspring. Topically, what does this story tell us about fatherhood in Uganda? I would suggest that it supports a prevailing view on fatherhood; being that the man is primarily a provider. The father in this tragic story was desperately frustrated in his failure to be a successful provider due to poverty, which led to his hopelessness.

Susan Babirye, Fellow at Makerere University’s School of Public Health, writes in the New Vision’s Comment section, "at a household level, fathers are central in everyday decision making, particularly on issues of access, control and distribution of resources, movement outside the home as well as how many children to have and when to have them." (p15, 20-6-11). This was published the day after Fathers Day, headed "Responsible fatherhood is a pathway to safe motherhood”. The author is rightly seeking to persuade otherwise culturally disinterested fathers to get involved in protecting their wives and children more carefully at pre-natal and post-natal stages. Obviously this suggests that there is more to being a protector and provider than meets the eye. Nevertheless, Susan’s perspective confirms the African priority that fathers are the managers of resources, or the leaders in providence.

I recall Jesus making reference to the quality of fatherhood in providential terms, when he asks, "Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!“ (Matthew 7:9-11). Is this not a heavenly father who is primarily a provider? Jesus is of course talking to Semitic peasants who had vivid daily economic concerns, just like many African families. Is there anything wrong then with seeing God as our provider? Definitely not! However, I believe that there is something wrong if provision is the only perspective we have on Fatherhood.

Once we accept that fathers are primarily responsible for protecting and providing, we overlook another important aspect of fatherhood; that of counsellor, advisor in wisdom, and spiritual leader. Let’s go to the most obvious source of wisdom, Proverbs, where the source of wisdom is personified as a Father, who advises his son to listen to his wisdom and instructions, and equates it with a sound relationship to God (1:8; 2:1-6; 3:1-2). Proverbs tells us emphatically that “A wise son brings joy to his father” (10:1; 15:20; 23:24b; 29:3). Conversely, “a foolish son brings grief to his father” (17:21, 25). We should not ignore the intimate prayerful relationship Jesus had with his heavenly Father, which included seeking His insights before choosing his disciples. Think also of the Apostle Paul, who regarded his fatherhood over believers and churches of great importance to spiritual maturity (1 Corinthians 4:15). So, wisdom is important to a father, especially when exhibited by his children.

So, the balanced approach to God as our fatherly example, exhibited in human fatherhood, is that God the Father protects, provides and cherishes wisdom. Therefore, whatever our cultural priorities in fatherhood, we need to keep the balance: our fathers being morally wise, caring and protective, as well as providing emotionally and physically for our families.

PS. It would seem that my reflections are based upon a Judeo-Christian worldview, rather than being generally applicable to all worldviews. These are of course simple generalizations on cultural perspectives and are not intended to be derogatory observations about race; neither can they be seen to apply exclusively to all Western or African families. I have also met some very balanced African families and some very unbalanced Western Christian families. It is also a little limiting to only place three ingredients as necessary for fatherhood (protection, provision and wisdom), since there are other aspects such as leadership and discipline left out. However, It is more a question of highlighting the cultural priorities in fatherhood and possible cultural blindspots.

Whose Report Will You Believe?

There was a popular worship song rendered by Ron Kenoly in the 1990s that included the question, “whose report will you believe?” with a corporate response, "we shall believe the report of the Lord!" I love the dated fashion and hairstyles, and the song itself, despite what I'm about to say.

This song takes (out of context) a Biblical story about poor majority leadership and applies it with individualistic references to being healed, filled with God's Spirit, free and living in God's victory. The song was a direct inference to the report returned to Moses by the spies who went to check-out Canaan on their trek out of Egypt. There were twelve – a representative from each tribe. Joshua and Caleb returned with a favourable, positive report. The other ten gave a doubtful, fearful and negative report.

Unfortunately, the ten people swayed the crowd and hundreds of thousands of people met their deaths in the desert as a direct result, forfeiting the promised land.

I have learned the power and impact of poisonous opinions from leadership upon the minds of otherwise neutral people in a team setting. Even if a person seeks to remain neutral, something small goes down deep inside, like a tasty morsel, “down to the innermost parts” (Proverbs 18:8; 26:22). The consequences are so serious that James describes the tongue like a small rudder that steers a massive ship, or like a spark that sets a forest ablaze (James 3:5). These days, such morsels are not necessarily vocal, but can be transmitted via electronic media too. Check out all the negative junk on You Tube against Christianity, and its multiple expressions. In fact, one part of Christianity seems to be at war with other parts. The words are out there and people listen to them, whether they are factual, moderately truthful, or not.

It’s like those court case dramas, where the attorney for the prosecution shouts “objection, your honour” to inadmissible information. The judge upholds the objection and instructs the clerk to erase the statement from the court record. In reality, it makes no difference. Once something is said, it is in the minds of the hearers. The groove has been cut. The prejudice is cast. The jurors will remember it and the matter will almost certainly be mentioned in their private deliberations, even though it was inadmissible evidence. It will affect their personal judgement.

Ron Kenoly’s song takes a simplistic approach to the decoding and circulation of negative communications. The truth is more complicated. The song suggests that our individual futures are determined entirely upon our personally chosen responses. The fact is, even if we host an individualistic philosophical perspective, we all live in various community settings, whether it is a church, a neighbourhood, organization or business. In the case of the nation, Israel, it didn’t matter what choice an individual made, the majority opinion overruled the perfect will of God, and the people got God’s decisive and disciplined alternative – becoming dust busters. This is not intended as a critique of praise and worship lyrics at all, but is a challenge to team leadership and its communications.

The majority opinion can turn the tide and move a barge-like movement off its original course and even turn it away from its planned destination. At the very best, it will produce a more tortuous journey and seriously delay the best outcome for the genuine individual; possibly at great cost to the Old Faithful on route. Can you imagine the sheer frustration Joshua and Caleb might have endured, waiting for forty years with a bunch of “losers” before their faith paid off? Character building? Yes! Redemptive? Yes! Was it the perfect will of God? I believe not! In a corporate sense, it is likely to have caused the organization to become isolated from its original position and anticipated impact. History shows that God can and does start new churches and organizations, with people who are more committed to fulfilling his perfect will. This can be seen in so many Christian “movements” throughout Church history, which are now “monuments” to great pasts. They continue to function with a proud heritage, but with a reduced current impact; operating at a lower ebb than the high water mark God intended them to reach.

Let us be careful therefore, not only whose report we believe, but which reports we circulate. Personal censorship of negative or dangerous news is an important and mature approach. In this day of “freedom of speech”, we might want to be more vigilant to discern unhealthy communications. Freedom of speech includes the freedom not to speak. There is a time to be silent. In the Second World War, there was a campaign against the disclosure of information that would make others vulnerable, including catch phrases like, “loose lips sink ships”. The BBC Newsbeat reports that the British Ministry of Defence (click links to see) has recently created a TV public warning "advertisement" to military personnel, their families and friends, to think carefully before uploading, blogging, tweeting, tagging or sharing on social media sites, because some information can put lives at risk unwittingly. We might want to be more careful, to screen communications that increase negative risk, and choose to communicate a positive message, so that the best purposes of God for His Church, and humanity generally, become a stronger likelihood. The alternative is not worth thinking about.

Prayer: God help me today to have faith in your good plans for my life and those around me. Give me a discerning heart, to screen out negative messages that contradict your good plans, for my own sake, and the good of those who walk alongside me.

Pilot Error

The outcome is very telling of analysis on the flight recorder from an air accident on Air India flight IX812 from Dubai into Mangalore 0n 22-May-2010. BBC News explains that the Serbian pilot was disoriented on preparing for landing the plane, having woken up from sleeping most of the three hour flight. The recorder carries the sound of snoring. The airline declares that the pilot was well rested and thoroughly trained to handle this particular hilltop runway. What could send a well-rested pilot to sleep? One thing we do know is that the co-pilot advised the captain to pull back and go around again, but the Captain continued, coming in too high and at the wrong angle, pulling up eventually, but too late. The plane overshot the runway, burst into flames and killed around 160 people on board. One man lost sixteen relatives, including his wife, two children, an uncle, and others, who ironically, were travelling to attend the funeral of their grandmother. There were eight survivors. There was absolutely nothing wrong mechanically prior to the crash. It was not an act of terror, since no distress signal was issued by the pilot.

We could blame this on any number of technical issues, none of which I am qualified to comment upon. My observations concern the implications and lessons of this tragedy upon leadership and decision making processes. Essentially, the tragedy was caused by one man’s singular error of judgment. Had he heeded the cautionary advice of his professionally trained and appointed assistant, the outcome would have been far less harmful. The co-pilot was more vigilant, since he had been conscious prior to the approach and was more aware of his environment and its conditions. The pilot not only took his own life, but he took many people with him involuntarily.

For better or worse, this presents the serious nature of leadership with all its risks and possibilities. How often does a leader come into a situation too high and at the wrong angle because he was not alert and sufficiently conscious of his surroundings and their affect upon his approach to circumstances? How often do leaders make decisions alone, despite being surrounding by capable advisors? What dangers there are in senior leadership, sufficiently authorized with the capacity to override the pre-installed safety systems.

This is a lesson to all of us in leadership. No doubt, I have entered into situations too high and consequently taken the wrong angle. What external factors might have been clouding my judgment? Do I need to default to other competent colleagues at times and allow them to handle a situation I am not sufficiently sharp to deal with? Have I been metaphorically asleep at times and relied too heavily upon experience to get me through a situation; unprepared for what lies ahead? Leaders should build around them sufficiently competent counsel that will save from a fatal error of judgment, which could erase one from the scene, dragging many casualties into the mix; with only a few survivors. May those around us speak strongly and confidently enough, according to their informed and discerning perspective of circumstances. May we have ears to hear what is being said and not be so proud as to assume that experience and superior knowledge will carry us through; denying the opportunity for advice from co-workers. May this be the prayer of all leaders at the helm of God’s ship, the Church?

Emmauel Demands Soul Ownership

A noble prince sought to rescue residents of a walled city, without accepting negotiation from its dark leader; well aware of the resistant voices at the heart of it all, who are loathed to submit. Eventually, through badly constructed interferences, the city's leaders fail to dissuade Emmanuel from taking rightful ownership. Surely, he will take it in due time and without recourse to the greatest intellectual counter-arguments. On the contrary, he has already paid full price for its redemption.

A fascinating extract follows from John Bunyan’s book, The Holy War, published in 1682 when he was 54. Bunyan was inspired to write it from his experiences of battle as a young man, and his twelve years of unjust imprisonment for preaching the Gospel publicly. He wrote many allegories; most famously Pilgrim’s Progress. I love the Biblical accuracy of this book and its relevance even today.

“When Emmanuel had put all things in a readiness to give Diabolus battle, he sent again to know of the town of Mansoul, if in peaceable manner they would yield themselves, or whether they were yet resolved to put him to try the utmost extremity? They then, together with Diabolus their king, called a council of war, and resolved upon certain propositions that should be offered to Emmanuel, if he will accept thereof, so they agreed; and then the next was, who should be sent on this errand. Now, there was in the town of Mansoul an old man, a Diabolonian, and his name was Mr. Loth-to-stoop, a stiff man in his way, and a great doer for Diabolus; him, therefore, they sent, and put into his mouth what he should say.

So he went and came to the camp to Emmanuel, and when he was come, a time was appointed to give him audience. So at the time he came, and after a Diabolonian ceremony or two, he thus began and said, 'Great sir, that it may be known unto all men how good-natured a prince my master is, he has sent me to tell your lordship that he is very willing, rather than go to war, to deliver up into your hands one half of the town of Mansoul. I am therefore to know if your Mightiness will accept of this proposition.'

Then said Emmanuel, 'The whole is mine by gift and purchase, wherefore I will never lose one half.'

Then said Mr. Loth-to-stoop, 'Sir, my master hath said that he will be content that you shall be the nominal and titular Lord of all, if he may possess but a part.'

Then Emmanuel answered, 'The whole is mine really, not in name and word only; wherefore I will be the sole lord and possessor of all, or of none at all, of Mansoul.'

Then Mr. Loth-to-stoop said again, 'Sir, behold the condescension of my master! He says, that he will be content, if he may but have assigned to him some place in Mansoul as a place to live privately in, and you shall be Lord of all the rest.'

Then said the golden Prince, 'All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and of all that he giveth me I will lose nothing - no, not a hoof nor a hair. I will not, therefore, grant him, no, not the least corner of Mansoul to dwell in; I will have all to myself.'

Then Loth-to-stoop said again, 'But, sir, suppose that my Lord should resign the whole town to you, only with this proviso, that he sometimes, when he comes into this country, may, for old acquaintance' sake, be entertained as a wayfaring man for two days, or ten days or a month, or so. May not this small matter be granted?'

Then said Emmanuel, 'No. He came as a wayfaring man to David, nor did he stay long with him, and yet it had like to have cost David his soul. I will not consent that he ever should have any harbour more there.'

Then said Mr. Loth-to-stoop, 'Sir, you seem to be very hard. Suppose my master should yield to all that your lordship hath said, provided that his friends and kindred in Mansoul may have liberty to trade in the town, and to enjoy their present dwellings. May not that be granted, sir?'

Then said Emmanuel, 'No; that is contrary to my Father's will; for all, and all manner of Diabolonians that now are, or that at any time shall be found in Mansoul, shall not only lose their lands and liberties, but also their lives.'

Then said Mr. Loth-to-stoop again, 'But, sir, may not my master and great lord, by letters, by passengers, by accidental opportunities, and the like, maintain, if he shall deliver up all unto thee, some kind of old friendship with Mansoul?'

Emmanuel answered, 'No, by no means; forasmuch as any such fellowship, friendship, intimacy, or acquaintance, in what way, sort, or mode soever maintained, will tend to the corrupting of Mansoul, the alienating of their affections from me, and the endangering of their peace with my Father.'

Mr. Loth-to-stoop yet added further, saying, 'But, great sir, since my master hath many friends, and those that are dear to him, in Mansoul, may he not, if he shall depart from them, even of his bounty and good-nature, bestow upon them, as he sees fit, some tokens of his love and kindness that he had for them, to the end that Mansoul, when he is gone, may look upon such tokens of kindness once received from their old friend, and remember him who was once their king, and the merry times that they sometimes enjoyed one with another, while he and they lived in peace together?'

Then said Emmanuel, 'No; for if Mansoul come to be mine, I shall not admit of nor consent that there should be the least scrap, shred, or dust of Diabolus left behind, as tokens of gifts bestowed upon any in Mansoul, thereby to call to remembrance the horrible communion that was betwixt them and him.'

'Well, sir,' said Mr. Loth-to-stoop, 'I have one thing more to propound, and then I am got to the end of my commission. Suppose that, when my master is gone from Mansoul, any that shall yet live in the town should have such business of high concerns to do, that if they be neglected the party shall be undone; and suppose, sir, that nobody can help in that case so well as my master and lord, may not now my master be sent for upon so urgent an occasion as this? Or if he may not be admitted into the town, may not he and the person concerned meet in some of the villages near Mansoul, and there lay their heads together, and there consult of matters?'

This was the last of those ensnaring propositions that Mr. Loth-to-stoop had to propound to Emmanuel on behalf of his master Diabolus; but Emmanuel would not grant it; for he said, 'There can be no case, or thing, or matter fall out in Mansoul, when thy master shall be gone, that may not be solved by my Father; besides, it will be a great disparagement to my Father's wisdom and skill to admit any from Mansoul to go out to Diabolus for advice, when they are bid before, in everything, by prayer and supplication to let their requests be made known to my Father. Further, this, should it be granted, would be to grant that a door should be set open for Diabolus, and the Diabolonians in Mansoul, to hatch, and plot, and bring to pass treasonable designs, to the grief of my Father and me, and to the utter destruction of Mansoul.'

When Mr. Loth-to-stoop had heard this answer, he took his leave of Emmanuel, and departed, saying that he would carry word to his master concerning this whole affair. So he departed, and came to Diabolus to Mansoul, and told him the whole of the matter, and how Emmanuel would not admit, no, not by any means, that he, when he was once gone out, should for ever have anything more to do either in, or with any that are of the town of Mansoul. When Mansoul and Diabolus had heard this relation of things, they with one consent concluded to use their best endeavour to keep Emmanuel out of Mansoul, and sent old Ill-Pause, of whom you have heard before, to tell the Prince and his captains so.

So the old gentleman came up to the top of Ear-gate, and called to the camp for a hearing, who when they gave audience, he said, 'I have in commandment from my high lord to bid you tell it to your Prince Emmanuel, that Mansoul and their king are resolved to stand and fall together; and that it is in vain for your Prince to think of ever having Mansoul in his hand, unless he can take it by force.' So some went and told to Emmanuel what old Ill-Pause, a Diabolonian in Mansoul, had said.

Then said the Prince, 'I must try the power of my sword, for I will not (for all the rebellions and repulses that Mansoul has made against me) raise my siege and depart, but will assuredly take my Mansoul, and deliver it from the hand of her enemy.' And with that he gave out a commandment that Captain Boanerges, Captain Conviction, Captain Judgment, and Captain Execution should forthwith march up to Ear-gate with trumpets sounding, colours flying, and with shouting for the battle. Also he would that Captain Credence should join himself with them. Emmanuel, moreover, gave order that Captain Good-Hope and Captain Charity should draw themselves up before Eye-gate. He bid also that the rest of his captains and their men should place themselves for the best of their advantage against the enemy round about the town; and all was done as he had commanded.Then he bid that the word should be given forth, and the word was at that time, 'EMMANUEL.'

Extract from The Holy War by John Bunyan, published in 1668

What Makes A Healthy Nation?

This question was raised again in my mind by a recent experience traveling in a remote district of northern Uganda (Pader) with some visitors from the UK and USA, where we encountered Jacqueline, lying unconscious by the side of the main dirt road. Her parents were unavailable, being some distance away, working their garden for food to eat. Her brother was around. A local government administrator was also passing by on a motorcycle and acted as our interpreter. Thankfully we also had two doctors on board our vehicle. God had his hand on this girl, with time, place and people coming together in perfect harmony. Eventually, we all agreed that she should be taken unconscious to the nearest medical facility. We reached the best clinic in the town after my twenty minute “ambulance” style drive. It was a newly built, free facility, with an outpatients clinic and one inpatients ward. There were at least two hundred adult outpatients, mostly mothers, with at least a further two hundred young children. There was only one nurse at “triage” and one doctor attending to them all. Both of them stopped their work to attend to our patient. Everyone else waited patiently for their turn to get served – real out-and-out patience. I realized later that we had jumped a seriously long queue – a very non-British practice, but one for which I was thankful to all my Ugandan friends who might still be there waiting. The Doctor said that he had thirteen nurses available but he had given up trying to persuade them to come to work.

We later learned that Jacqueline is deaf and dumb, was suffering from a combination of epilepsy and malaria, and had just experienced a major seizure before we arrived on the scene. They put her on a drip in the ward and she regained consciousness some time after we left. She is now reported to be home again with her family. Where am I going with this story?

I can remember as a boy, loving the biography of Florence Nightingale (1820 – 1910), caring for dying soldiers in the horrific Crimean War, and her example setting the standard and inspiration for the nursing profession, founding St Thomas’ Hospital, London, in 1860. I can remember my mother telling me how this had inspired her to become a nurse. This spirit was further demonstrated to me by historical accounts of self-sacrificing medical missionaries over the last hundred years on the continent, working to eradicate leprosy in Uganda, for example. Considering that Florence and others were volunteers, committed and compassionate, I realize that today’s health workers are motivated by different forces. It is often less of a vocation and more of an employment, providing a means to survival; the by-product being community health, of a fashion. I am generalizing of course and cannot assess the motives of all medical personnel everywhere. Certainly there are some outstanding doctors in Uganda, whom I respect very highly for acting professionally and sacrificially despite extremely limited resources and challenging working conditions.

All the same, you may be aware of many African health workers who have flown away and are employed in the UK and other “developed” nations. Why? Because the stress of caring for so many people at once, the magnitude of the health problems associated with poverty, the unreliability of the wage, the scarse equipment, and the meager medical supplies; all contribute to an exodus from the nations that so badly need their services. The health sector in Africa is so badly in need of people committed to community health and the welfare of their own people. In reality, poor people are often just as concerned with themselves as rich people are, and that includes health workers. Furthermore the health budgets of governments in such countries are highly politicized, being stressed and stretched by many other demands, including education, security, infrastructure, administrative bureaucracy, systemic corruption and stately opulence.

Healthcare in Africa is a complex subject area that I cannot begin to fully address here, but some thoughts I can offer. The good thing about the clinic in Pader was that the services and treatment were free to the local community, being supported by an international medical foundation, who paid the doctor to be present. It is also interesting that Western governments are now recognizing the problem; that their international aid, aimed at assisting primary healthcare might be better invested in assisting personnel to stand in a primary position within their own countries. If Uganda is anything to go by, there is plenty of money to build clinics, but there are just way too few medical personnel available to offer even a basic service to the people that the buildings are supposed to serve. This was confirmed a few days prior when one of our doctors visited an unmanned “clinic” in Padibe; it was like visiting an empty vending machine. Buildings can never make people better. Healing hands can! Local people need professional and compassionate people, speaking the same language, to offer them these vital services. We really need all people in Africa to see their role as meaningful to the development of the nation, from the president, through the local government worker, across to the nurse extracting blood for laboratory testing.

I wish to suggest that Nation Building should be at the heart of all sectors of society, and is the heart of the matter in Africa’s development. I believe this is a foundational principal found in the Bible – nation building. Some of our major biblical heroes were highly commended for building nations outside of Israel’s personal interests. For example, Joseph helped Egypt assist nations outside itself with food supply long before the World Food Program, during a time of severe regional famine affecting at least north Africa and the Near East; Daniel served the interests of the Babylonian kingdom, Israel’s greatest enemy, to advance regional trade and development; and Esther was “born for such a time as this” to save Israel, a minority people, from genocide. We should not forget Jesus Christ, who evidently left the comforts of heaven to enter a poverty stricken world, teaching selfless ethical principals, healing ALL the sick wherever he went, and leaving no-one untouched by his encounters. It takes a sense of calling or vocation, with much grace, but it must be pursued by sincere followers of Christ, at least according to His foundational reference manual – the Bible. We need people who will serve the needs of others and not just be concerned with survival, or self-serving interests. The mindset that poverty creates is a serious health risk to Africa’s people, but “with God all things are possible!”

Prosperity Costs

Who would have thought that the favour of God upon your business could cause sinful emotions to rise up around you, leading to murderous intent in the heart of your opponents? If you have ever experienced malicious opposition in business, this would not surprise you at all. But, an opposition that leads to dying for your faith; is that how far we are prepared to go in exhibiting God’s favour upon the work of our hands? I wonder how the proponents of the extremes in Prosperity Gospel would handle this story and whether they would be prepared to go to these lengths for Jesus?

A man in Pakistan, Rasheed Masih, of Khanewal District, Punjab Province, is reported to have been murdered for being successful in growing potatoes, although, in the process, there is a demand for his conversion to Islam. The man’s success is attributed to his faith, since he was expected to convert to Islam or die for his success. This indicates a hatred for the Christian God who made his land fertile.

Certainly, I believe this man’s agricultural business was successful as a witness to the community around him of God’s favour on the work of his hands. Yahweh spoke to the Israelites in Deuteronomy, saying, “The LORD (YAHWEH) will send a blessing … on everything you put your hands to … Then all the peoples on earth will see that you are called by the name of the LORD (YAHEH).” (28: 8, 10)

I have heard of hatred and malicious practices being set-up against God’s children in sophisticated business environments. Nevertheless, I could not have predicted that fruitful production in a simple garden would lead to martyrdom for the sake of the Gospel. It brings a whole new meaning to “Faith like potatoes” (film based on a book by Angus Buchan). Perhaps the man’s convictions would not allow the glory of his success to be attributed to the name of another god? More than that, perhaps he would not relinquish his personal devotion to a God he knew, in exchange for another god he was not personally acquainted with? The secular world and inter-faith movements deny any difference between YAHWEH and Allah – they are both called “God”. This story distinguishes the devotion of followers and exposes the spirit of each “God”. Clearly, the spirit of Yahweh is different to the spirit of Allah. If they were the same, there would be no need for jealousy or murder, but only rejoicing in a shared abundance.

I was listening to George Beverly Shea last night in an interview (he is now 100 years old!), who wrote a beautiful song that my brother, Rasheed, might have thought, “I’d rather have Jesus than silver or gold … than to be a king of a vast domain. I’d rather be faithful to his dear cause. I’d rather be true to his holy name. I’d rather have Jesus than anything that this world affords today”.