One of my students, from Myanmar, was talking to a nurse (the mother of his friend) about Christianity. She also lived in Myanmar and was a devout Buddhist. My student asked her what she liked about Christianity and what she did not. As far as what she did not, the main thing was how many Christians dump a lot of the Myanmar culture in favor of Western patterns. Sadly, that can be the result of Christianity percolating through Myanmar cultures via Western missionaries. I hope some of that can change.
However, when asked what she likes about Christianity, it was how at the hospital in which she worked, she noted how Christians demonstrated care and concern for the sick. They would gather around their own sick. The Christian leaders would also do visitation, and even do so for non-Christian patients. As a nurse, this seemed important to her. This contrasted Buddhists, particularly Buddhist monks, who practiced a sort of disconnection with the suffering of others.
I shared this little story in a different class and discussion started as to what the response should be to this. Of course, dealing with the negative side, it is quite reasonable to accept that perhaps Christians have gone too far in turning their back on some valuable aspects of culture in Myanmar. Responding to the other side is a bit more complicated.
Responding to the issue of Christians demonstrating care is an issue of Pastoral Theology. In fact, Margaret Whipp (SCM Guide: Pastoral Thoelogy) says that Pastoral Theology is the “study of how and why Christians care.”
So lets consider some people responses to this nurse in Myanmar.
#1. ”Christians care because they are no longer spiritually dead. Being saved, they are transformed— made new in Christ, and spiritually alive.”
#2. ”Christians care because they have the Holy Spirit indwelling them.”
#3. ”Christians care because caring is commanded of us in the Bible.”
#4. ”Christians care because we are seeking to follow the example of Jesus.”
In one manner or other, the above four statements could be said to be true. They are, however, not equally relevant to the situation described here.
#1 is a pretty awful response. First, it uses a lot of “Christian-ese”— a lot of lingo and metaphors that don’t really mean much to those from a different worldview. Added to this, the one clear thing stated that the Buddhist nurse is likely to pick up on is that she is “spiritually dead.” Even if it is not clear to her what that means, clearly it sounds like an insult. It is not a beneficial direction to go on.
#2 is not much better. It might even be worse. First, the theology of the indwelling of the third person of the Godhead is pretty challenging for Christians to grasp, so this seems a bad choice. Also, it doesn’t seem to answer the question. How does having the Holy Spirit relate to being more caring?
#3 is poor in that it sounds a bit “cult-y.” It is almost like, “We don’t want to care… but we gotta.”
#4 is the best. Christianity is supposed to be Christocentric. It certainly should not be Christian-centric. In fact, if some Christians are caring, there are certainly other who are not. However, we are supposed to have Jesus as our guide and example. Bringing the question back to Jesus, keeps Jesus at the center. This should be clearer for the nurse and lead to more good conversation.
