Wednesday, September 07, 2005
In need of a pope?
Below is an article written by an Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, a graduate professional school of The United Methodist Church.
======
In need of a pope?
D. Stephen Long
DO PROTESTANTS need the papacy? Given the recent
fascination with the pontificate of John Paul II and
with the election of Benedict XVI, it would
seem that the papacy is on the Protestant horizon in a
way that would have been unthinkable even a generation
ago. This may be the result of savvy marketing, the
omnipresence of CNN, the celebrity status of John Paul
II or a penchant for the exotic. But I think something
more is going on. It is the papacy itself that
fascinates us.
Protestants find ourselves in the odd situation of
seeing a need for the papacy. Our fate seems linked
with it. Three reasons in particular emerge for why
Protestants need the papacy.
The first reason is a negative one: Protestants need
the papacy because we must have something to protest
against. Protestantism is a 500-year-old tradition of
protest and dissent against tradition.
What began as an effort to reform the institutional
Catholic Church has become its own institution in need
of reform. But how does one dissent against a
tradition of dissent? Every act of dissent merely
reproduces the tradition; there seems no way out of
these conservative tentacles, which become
increasingly more reactionary even under liberal
guise.
The final logic of this version of Protestantism can
only be that each individual makes up his or her own
religion, which will then be defined over and against
every other individual's religion. In other words,
what holds this tradition together is that it is
against something. This kind of Protestantism needs an
object against which it dissents for its own
identity. If there were no papacy, no tradition, no
doctrine, no common moral teaching against which to
protest, it would lose its identity. As we learn from
Nietzsche and Freud, such a reactionary movement must
secretly desire the very thing it hates for the sake
of its identity.
There are also two positive reasons Protestants need
the papacy: for the sake of the unity of the church,
and for the sake of truth grounded in love.
The papacy offers an impressive visible manifestation
of the church's unity. Christians must seek the unity
of Christ's body in a visible way through the church.
Both scripture and tradition so clearly bear witness
to this claim that I need not argue for it here. When
it comes to visible unity, it is time for us
Protestants to admit that we have failed. We are
disunified beyond repair and cannot solve our
divisions through our traditionally Protestant
resources. Perhaps it is time to look to the papacy
for the necessary visible manifestation of Christian
unity; perhaps it alone provides the necessary unity
of the church through a subjective and personal
reality that mirrors that of Jesus Christ himself.
Christ left us no written sources, no legal contracts
or juridical means of unity. Instead he mediates God's
presence to us in and through human flesh.
Perhaps the papacy bears witness to this reality
better than other instruments of unity (to trade on an
Anglican term).
I would not deny that Protestants already share to an
extent in the Catholic unity. In fact, this is the
official teaching of the Catholic Church itself.
Its catechism states that "one cannot charge with the
sin of separation those who at present are born into
these communities [that resulted from separation] and
in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the
Catholic Church accepts them with respect and
affection as brothers." Those of us who came to love
God through these separated communions are correct to
declare our faith in the "one, holy, catholic and
apostolic church."
Holy scripture, the ancient confessions, baptism,
liturgy and the common life of faith, hope and love
all function in part as instruments of unity.
But none of these instruments of unity have worked to
avoid practices of ever-repeating and deepening
division and schism. Could this be because
these means are primarily objective and juridical?
Because they assume no "fleshly" mediation? Perhaps we
have tried to find unity through means that do not
express as well as they could the reality of Christ's
incarnation.
Objective and juridical means lack the human reality
of the papal unity. They cannot express affection.
They do not pronounce blessing and benediction. They
cannot ask for forgiveness for past errors or make
claims for truth. They do not grow frail, show the
wear of time, and die. All this the pope can do. He
can be loved in a way that these other instruments
of unity cannot. This is what struck me in the events
that transpired in St. Peter's Square over the past
few weeks.
Of course, the other instruments of unity do attract
our love and devotion. But they are more easily used
than loved. What we have seen in the funeral of John
Paul II and the election of Benedict XVI is the
possibility of loving the faith as a human gift that
is received, and in that very reception acknowledging
its contingency and fragility.
Hugo Rahner once wrote, "All the churches who wish to
withdraw from the unity of the church dogmatically
first of all seek refuge within the state but soon are
absorbed by the state and fall with it." This is why,
he suggested, " the guiding role of the papacy is
needed."
Can those of us who are Protestants deny this
accusation? Could we ever see in our own churches the
transnational, multicultural and multiclass
_expression of love and joy we witnessed in St. Peter's
Square? If not, then how can we refuse to acknowledge
the beauty of the papacy?
The final reason Protestants need the papacy is to
avoid the subordination of truth to power that so
characterizes the modern era and its totalitarian
politics. We have lived through an era in which it was
assumed that every truth claim was finally nothing but
a disguised appeal for power. The great hermeneuts of
suspicion taught us to look upon truth with this
posture, and it is difficult to free ourselves from
it--to abandon ourselves to the possibility that truth
might be more basic to our lives than the will to
power. We fear we will give up something significant
if we give up this posture. We fear that the stance of
assuming truth or goodness is more basic than power
will inevitably lead not to unity but to an improper
totalizing or fascism, and this some Protestants seem
to fear more than the loss of truth itself.
John Paul II taught us to risk truth and not be
content with the modern assumption that peace can only
be had when we confess power as the most basic reality
of our lives. He was not alone in bearing witness
before the world to "the splendor of truth." This has
been a common witness of the papacy in the modern era,
and contrary to all expectations of those who thought
that the suspicious posture was necessary for the sake
of peace, the posture of suspicion produced more
violence than the assumption of a basic and
foundational truth and goodness.
This is the beautiful scandal of the papacy: it is an
institution that proclaims that truth is more basic
than power even when those of us weaned on a
(Protestant) hermeneutics of suspicion can only see
the papacy as a contradiction.
To see the beauty of truth requires a Protestant
rethinking of the papacy. This does not mean denying
that truth and power are always linked, but it does
mean rejecting the notion that the former is always
vitiated by the latter. Even where we still disagree
with what the Catholic Church pronounces, we will have
to address the truth of what is pronounced and not
simply dismiss it as a sinister play for power.
Don't get me wrong. I have no romantic illusions about
the papacy. I understand its historical legacy and the
legitimate reasons why Protestants separated from the
Catholic Church. But Catholics themselves acknowledge
this history as well. "Serious dissensions appeared,"
the Catholic catechism tells us, "and large
communities became separated from full communion
with the Catholic Church--for which, often enough, men
of both sides were to blame." The Catholic Church has
acknowledged contributing to the ruptures that divide
us, ruptures that are always sin. We Protestants must
now reciprocate and name our sin in dividing Christ's
body. Can we do this without rethinking its unity in
the primacy of the bishop of Rome? I do not think so.
At one point in history, to be a Protestant was
explicitly or tacitly to will an end to the papacy. I
think many Protestants can now confess that was
a mistaken view. Both the church and the world would
sorely lack a necessary witness if there were no
papacy. If being a Protestant means willing the end
to the papacy, then I find myself no longer capable of
willing such an act.
This stance does not require abandoning what is good
in Protestant traditions. I for one cannot leave my
separated Wesleyan communion behind. The hymns,
doctrine, discipline and liturgy of that tradition
gave me faith and taught me to love God. But neither
can I will an end to the unity the papacy clearly
produces throughout the world.
So what is to be done? Only two possibilities seem to
present themselves. Either we try to find a place for
our separated communities from within the Catholic
Church or we find a place for Catholic unity from
within our separated communities. Neither can be
accomplished without willing the visible unity the
papacy embodies.
D. Stephen Long teaches at Garrett-Evangelical
Theological Seminary in
Evanston, Illinois.
COPYRIGHT 2005 The Christian Century Foundation
======
In need of a pope?
D. Stephen Long
DO PROTESTANTS need the papacy? Given the recent
fascination with the pontificate of John Paul II and
with the election of Benedict XVI, it would
seem that the papacy is on the Protestant horizon in a
way that would have been unthinkable even a generation
ago. This may be the result of savvy marketing, the
omnipresence of CNN, the celebrity status of John Paul
II or a penchant for the exotic. But I think something
more is going on. It is the papacy itself that
fascinates us.
Protestants find ourselves in the odd situation of
seeing a need for the papacy. Our fate seems linked
with it. Three reasons in particular emerge for why
Protestants need the papacy.
The first reason is a negative one: Protestants need
the papacy because we must have something to protest
against. Protestantism is a 500-year-old tradition of
protest and dissent against tradition.
What began as an effort to reform the institutional
Catholic Church has become its own institution in need
of reform. But how does one dissent against a
tradition of dissent? Every act of dissent merely
reproduces the tradition; there seems no way out of
these conservative tentacles, which become
increasingly more reactionary even under liberal
guise.
The final logic of this version of Protestantism can
only be that each individual makes up his or her own
religion, which will then be defined over and against
every other individual's religion. In other words,
what holds this tradition together is that it is
against something. This kind of Protestantism needs an
object against which it dissents for its own
identity. If there were no papacy, no tradition, no
doctrine, no common moral teaching against which to
protest, it would lose its identity. As we learn from
Nietzsche and Freud, such a reactionary movement must
secretly desire the very thing it hates for the sake
of its identity.
There are also two positive reasons Protestants need
the papacy: for the sake of the unity of the church,
and for the sake of truth grounded in love.
The papacy offers an impressive visible manifestation
of the church's unity. Christians must seek the unity
of Christ's body in a visible way through the church.
Both scripture and tradition so clearly bear witness
to this claim that I need not argue for it here. When
it comes to visible unity, it is time for us
Protestants to admit that we have failed. We are
disunified beyond repair and cannot solve our
divisions through our traditionally Protestant
resources. Perhaps it is time to look to the papacy
for the necessary visible manifestation of Christian
unity; perhaps it alone provides the necessary unity
of the church through a subjective and personal
reality that mirrors that of Jesus Christ himself.
Christ left us no written sources, no legal contracts
or juridical means of unity. Instead he mediates God's
presence to us in and through human flesh.
Perhaps the papacy bears witness to this reality
better than other instruments of unity (to trade on an
Anglican term).
I would not deny that Protestants already share to an
extent in the Catholic unity. In fact, this is the
official teaching of the Catholic Church itself.
Its catechism states that "one cannot charge with the
sin of separation those who at present are born into
these communities [that resulted from separation] and
in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the
Catholic Church accepts them with respect and
affection as brothers." Those of us who came to love
God through these separated communions are correct to
declare our faith in the "one, holy, catholic and
apostolic church."
Holy scripture, the ancient confessions, baptism,
liturgy and the common life of faith, hope and love
all function in part as instruments of unity.
But none of these instruments of unity have worked to
avoid practices of ever-repeating and deepening
division and schism. Could this be because
these means are primarily objective and juridical?
Because they assume no "fleshly" mediation? Perhaps we
have tried to find unity through means that do not
express as well as they could the reality of Christ's
incarnation.
Objective and juridical means lack the human reality
of the papal unity. They cannot express affection.
They do not pronounce blessing and benediction. They
cannot ask for forgiveness for past errors or make
claims for truth. They do not grow frail, show the
wear of time, and die. All this the pope can do. He
can be loved in a way that these other instruments
of unity cannot. This is what struck me in the events
that transpired in St. Peter's Square over the past
few weeks.
Of course, the other instruments of unity do attract
our love and devotion. But they are more easily used
than loved. What we have seen in the funeral of John
Paul II and the election of Benedict XVI is the
possibility of loving the faith as a human gift that
is received, and in that very reception acknowledging
its contingency and fragility.
Hugo Rahner once wrote, "All the churches who wish to
withdraw from the unity of the church dogmatically
first of all seek refuge within the state but soon are
absorbed by the state and fall with it." This is why,
he suggested, " the guiding role of the papacy is
needed."
Can those of us who are Protestants deny this
accusation? Could we ever see in our own churches the
transnational, multicultural and multiclass
_expression of love and joy we witnessed in St. Peter's
Square? If not, then how can we refuse to acknowledge
the beauty of the papacy?
The final reason Protestants need the papacy is to
avoid the subordination of truth to power that so
characterizes the modern era and its totalitarian
politics. We have lived through an era in which it was
assumed that every truth claim was finally nothing but
a disguised appeal for power. The great hermeneuts of
suspicion taught us to look upon truth with this
posture, and it is difficult to free ourselves from
it--to abandon ourselves to the possibility that truth
might be more basic to our lives than the will to
power. We fear we will give up something significant
if we give up this posture. We fear that the stance of
assuming truth or goodness is more basic than power
will inevitably lead not to unity but to an improper
totalizing or fascism, and this some Protestants seem
to fear more than the loss of truth itself.
John Paul II taught us to risk truth and not be
content with the modern assumption that peace can only
be had when we confess power as the most basic reality
of our lives. He was not alone in bearing witness
before the world to "the splendor of truth." This has
been a common witness of the papacy in the modern era,
and contrary to all expectations of those who thought
that the suspicious posture was necessary for the sake
of peace, the posture of suspicion produced more
violence than the assumption of a basic and
foundational truth and goodness.
This is the beautiful scandal of the papacy: it is an
institution that proclaims that truth is more basic
than power even when those of us weaned on a
(Protestant) hermeneutics of suspicion can only see
the papacy as a contradiction.
To see the beauty of truth requires a Protestant
rethinking of the papacy. This does not mean denying
that truth and power are always linked, but it does
mean rejecting the notion that the former is always
vitiated by the latter. Even where we still disagree
with what the Catholic Church pronounces, we will have
to address the truth of what is pronounced and not
simply dismiss it as a sinister play for power.
Don't get me wrong. I have no romantic illusions about
the papacy. I understand its historical legacy and the
legitimate reasons why Protestants separated from the
Catholic Church. But Catholics themselves acknowledge
this history as well. "Serious dissensions appeared,"
the Catholic catechism tells us, "and large
communities became separated from full communion
with the Catholic Church--for which, often enough, men
of both sides were to blame." The Catholic Church has
acknowledged contributing to the ruptures that divide
us, ruptures that are always sin. We Protestants must
now reciprocate and name our sin in dividing Christ's
body. Can we do this without rethinking its unity in
the primacy of the bishop of Rome? I do not think so.
At one point in history, to be a Protestant was
explicitly or tacitly to will an end to the papacy. I
think many Protestants can now confess that was
a mistaken view. Both the church and the world would
sorely lack a necessary witness if there were no
papacy. If being a Protestant means willing the end
to the papacy, then I find myself no longer capable of
willing such an act.
This stance does not require abandoning what is good
in Protestant traditions. I for one cannot leave my
separated Wesleyan communion behind. The hymns,
doctrine, discipline and liturgy of that tradition
gave me faith and taught me to love God. But neither
can I will an end to the unity the papacy clearly
produces throughout the world.
So what is to be done? Only two possibilities seem to
present themselves. Either we try to find a place for
our separated communities from within the Catholic
Church or we find a place for Catholic unity from
within our separated communities. Neither can be
accomplished without willing the visible unity the
papacy embodies.
D. Stephen Long teaches at Garrett-Evangelical
Theological Seminary in
Evanston, Illinois.
COPYRIGHT 2005 The Christian Century Foundation
Monday, August 22, 2005
Cab rides
After travelling so much, taking a cab ride from and to the airport has becoming a regular activity. You spend half-an-hour a week, or more if there is traffic, in a cab. Sometimes you got a chatty cab driver and ended up conversing with him for the 15 minutes of so you are with him. As long as they don't ask me to chat at five in the morning, I'm fine. It all depends on how you answer his first question, "How are you doing?" After chatting with so many cab drivers in this United States, you got to have some admiration for them. They, and their dreams, are as diverse as the people that compose this nation. They are very knowledgable too with current news.
On the way from O'hare to my downtown apartment, I happened to be in a cab driven by an Egyptian. You think he is your regular cab driver. He was pursuing his degree in MBA. He worked for Pfizer when he was in Egypt. Pfizer was in the midst of some drug problem when I was taking his cab. Sure enough, he knew about it. Will he be driving cab forever? I don't think so.
On another ride from O'hare to downtown Chicago, I got into a cab driven by a Pakistani. "Assalammualaikum" was the first word coming out of his mouth when he learned that I came from Indonesia. I answered him accordingly. He has a family here in the States. Has he ever thought about going back to Pakistan? Yes. But just like any other immigrants, they think about going back, but never make it. He has two or three kids. He is Moslem, and wants his kids to be good Moslems too. Something that will definitely be very challenging here. About his job, no, he was not driving a cab all the time. He has a full-time job as a machinist. He was a machinist before and life was good, until 9/11 happened. He got laid off, and found it difficult to get a job with his Middle-East background. Fortunately, he was able to get a job eventually.
On a ride from Washington Reagan to Vienna, Virginia. A lady was my cab driver. I did not ask whether she was still married. She told me she drove cab so that she did not have to beg money from her husband (forgot whether she was using past tense or present). She told me how the cab system work. She did not own the car, but she leased it from the cab company for the weekend. She loves Virginia, and would prefer to drive within Virginia. No, no DC, she said. We also chatted about airline. She said that she wanted to fly jetBlue someday. It had been a while since her last flight. Oh, she did not like Southwest. She said that you feel like a cattle when flying Southwest. Oh well, I like Southwest. I am flying it right now. It's all the luv.
On a ride from Vienna, Virginia to D.C. Union Station. My driver was a Palestinian. I think he said he was married to a Thai. He told me how he value education. He told me that he was paying the price (driving a cab) for not having good education. I told him, why not go back to school. He told me that his English was bad. Hey, you know what, you don't try, you don't know. I think I told him the story about the Egyptian cab driver. I told him my English sucked as well when I first came here.
On a ride from Indianapolis airport to downtown Hilton. My driver was a Somalian. He was the first Somalian I have ever met. And, I was the first Catholic Chinese that he ever met. About 40,000 to 50,000 Somalian get a green card each year through a special program. He was one of those, and now he is just trying to sponsor all his relatives, the last of which will be coming here later this year. A son of a late diplomat, he had been to some countries. His sister studied at the University of Loyola in Chicago. I asked him what he did back home. He told me that since his Dad was a diplomat, he had just been studying. He speaks French (and one other European language). He has a family, his wife is an Indian. Asked about going back to school, he said he needed money to sponsor his relatives to come to the States. With his last relative coming here this year, he may be able to start save some money for himself.
On a ride from downtown Chicago, which should end up at O'hare with a transit at the office to pick up my colleague. I asked him, "Can I have the air-conditioner please?" He told me it was broken. That's it. I am done. We are done.
-binsar-
On the way from O'hare to my downtown apartment, I happened to be in a cab driven by an Egyptian. You think he is your regular cab driver. He was pursuing his degree in MBA. He worked for Pfizer when he was in Egypt. Pfizer was in the midst of some drug problem when I was taking his cab. Sure enough, he knew about it. Will he be driving cab forever? I don't think so.
On another ride from O'hare to downtown Chicago, I got into a cab driven by a Pakistani. "Assalammualaikum" was the first word coming out of his mouth when he learned that I came from Indonesia. I answered him accordingly. He has a family here in the States. Has he ever thought about going back to Pakistan? Yes. But just like any other immigrants, they think about going back, but never make it. He has two or three kids. He is Moslem, and wants his kids to be good Moslems too. Something that will definitely be very challenging here. About his job, no, he was not driving a cab all the time. He has a full-time job as a machinist. He was a machinist before and life was good, until 9/11 happened. He got laid off, and found it difficult to get a job with his Middle-East background. Fortunately, he was able to get a job eventually.
On a ride from Washington Reagan to Vienna, Virginia. A lady was my cab driver. I did not ask whether she was still married. She told me she drove cab so that she did not have to beg money from her husband (forgot whether she was using past tense or present). She told me how the cab system work. She did not own the car, but she leased it from the cab company for the weekend. She loves Virginia, and would prefer to drive within Virginia. No, no DC, she said. We also chatted about airline. She said that she wanted to fly jetBlue someday. It had been a while since her last flight. Oh, she did not like Southwest. She said that you feel like a cattle when flying Southwest. Oh well, I like Southwest. I am flying it right now. It's all the luv.
On a ride from Vienna, Virginia to D.C. Union Station. My driver was a Palestinian. I think he said he was married to a Thai. He told me how he value education. He told me that he was paying the price (driving a cab) for not having good education. I told him, why not go back to school. He told me that his English was bad. Hey, you know what, you don't try, you don't know. I think I told him the story about the Egyptian cab driver. I told him my English sucked as well when I first came here.
On a ride from Indianapolis airport to downtown Hilton. My driver was a Somalian. He was the first Somalian I have ever met. And, I was the first Catholic Chinese that he ever met. About 40,000 to 50,000 Somalian get a green card each year through a special program. He was one of those, and now he is just trying to sponsor all his relatives, the last of which will be coming here later this year. A son of a late diplomat, he had been to some countries. His sister studied at the University of Loyola in Chicago. I asked him what he did back home. He told me that since his Dad was a diplomat, he had just been studying. He speaks French (and one other European language). He has a family, his wife is an Indian. Asked about going back to school, he said he needed money to sponsor his relatives to come to the States. With his last relative coming here this year, he may be able to start save some money for himself.
On a ride from downtown Chicago, which should end up at O'hare with a transit at the office to pick up my colleague. I asked him, "Can I have the air-conditioner please?" He told me it was broken. That's it. I am done. We are done.
-binsar-
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
you
when i woke up
when i was taking shower
when i was brushing my teeth
when i was walking to my work
when i was staring at my monitor
when i was having my lunch
when i was chatting with friends
when i was having fun
when i was having dinner
when i was procastinating
when i went to bed
even...when i was sleeping
-BiNs- 7/20/05
when i woke up
when i was taking shower
when i was brushing my teeth
when i was walking to my work
when i was staring at my monitor
when i was having my lunch
when i was chatting with friends
when i was having fun
when i was having dinner
when i was procastinating
when i went to bed
even...when i was sleeping
-BiNs- 7/20/05
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
(no title)
enam tahun sudah kuberpisah denganmu
tak terasa begitu cepatnya waktu berlalu
kuingin kembali ke masa lalu
andaikan waktu tak cepat melaju
hidup itu penuh teka-teki
tak pernah terpikir di dalam hati
jika saat ini ku ada di sini
menikmati indahnya hari
terangan kembali masa-masa indah
di mana tawa tak pernah lelah
kurangkai puisi ini untuknya
di dalam hati ini kau kan s'lalu berada
-binsar-
enam tahun sudah kuberpisah denganmu
tak terasa begitu cepatnya waktu berlalu
kuingin kembali ke masa lalu
andaikan waktu tak cepat melaju
hidup itu penuh teka-teki
tak pernah terpikir di dalam hati
jika saat ini ku ada di sini
menikmati indahnya hari
terangan kembali masa-masa indah
di mana tawa tak pernah lelah
kurangkai puisi ini untuknya
di dalam hati ini kau kan s'lalu berada
-binsar-
Thursday, February 24, 2005
The Passion of the Christ
Pasio
by BiNs '04
"Terimalah dan makanlah!
Inilah tubuh-Ku yang dikurbankan bagimu."
Cawan yang tak terjauhkan dari-Mu
Di taman Getsemani
Derita yang harus Kau pikul
Awal dari sebuah pasio
Kýrie, eléison
"Terimalah dan minumlah!
Inilah piala darah-Ku,
darah perjanjian baru dan kekal,
yang ditumpahkan bagimu
dan bagi semua orang
demi pengampunan dosa.
Kenangkanlah Aku
dengan merayakan peristiwa ini."
Darah yang tercurahkan di kayu salib
Anak domba yang terkorbankan
Derita yang harus Kau pikul
Akhir dari sebuah pasio
Chríste, eléison
Kau s'lamatkan umat-Mu
Kau korbankan Putra-Mu
Kau harapkan umat-Mu 'tuk berubah
Sudahkan kami berubah?
Agnus Déi,
qui tóllis peccáta múndi,
miserére nóbis.
Tinggallah dalam hati kami
Tubuh dan darah-Mu
Agar pasio tak tersiakan
by BiNs '04
"Terimalah dan makanlah!
Inilah tubuh-Ku yang dikurbankan bagimu."
Cawan yang tak terjauhkan dari-Mu
Di taman Getsemani
Derita yang harus Kau pikul
Awal dari sebuah pasio
Kýrie, eléison
"Terimalah dan minumlah!
Inilah piala darah-Ku,
darah perjanjian baru dan kekal,
yang ditumpahkan bagimu
dan bagi semua orang
demi pengampunan dosa.
Kenangkanlah Aku
dengan merayakan peristiwa ini."
Darah yang tercurahkan di kayu salib
Anak domba yang terkorbankan
Derita yang harus Kau pikul
Akhir dari sebuah pasio
Chríste, eléison
Kau s'lamatkan umat-Mu
Kau korbankan Putra-Mu
Kau harapkan umat-Mu 'tuk berubah
Sudahkan kami berubah?
Agnus Déi,
qui tóllis peccáta múndi,
miserére nóbis.
Tinggallah dalam hati kami
Tubuh dan darah-Mu
Agar pasio tak tersiakan
Friday, December 10, 2004
Getting a girlfriend in a business world
Bulan lalu pas lagi minum-minum di bar ama coworkers..kita ngomongin ttg. relationship. Lucu juga sih....rame-rame gitu....coworker gw ada satu orang Korea-Amerika gitu udah punya 'tunangan' malah di Korea. Kenapa 'tunangan' (pake tanda kutip)? Soalnya belon ada cincin di tangannya ehehehe..girlfriendnya anggep mereka fiance satu sama laen...tapi yg cowok mungkin kaga :p
Anyway...lagi ngomongin nih....cari cewek itu...sama apa ngga sih sama cari kerja? Tau kan..kalo orang cari kerja itu...kirim resume sebanyak-banyaknya....ntar mana yg kasih offer, mana yg reject...terus kalo offer lebih dari satu, terus kan kita pilih dong mana yg kita bakal accept, kaga bakal dong accept semuanya. Nah...cari cewek...apa musti gitu juga ya? Pendekatan ke semua cewek gitu..terus entar mana yg kasih offer...diliat lagi mana yg paling menguntungkan, terus di-accept hehehehe.
Gw sih argue nya waktu itu kalo cari cewek itu NGGA SAMA ama cari kerja hehehehe. Ga bisa dong sukain, deketin, tembakan semuanya...terus udah itu baru liat mana yg kasih offer hahahhaha. Kalo cari cewek itu...kirim resumenya satu satu aja...ntar dah ditolak satu, baru kirim ke tempat laen.
BTW...temennya Effendi ada yg punya pendapat laen juga. Dia bilang katanya..kalo cewek itu enak banget ya, bisa nunggu ditembakin 5 cowok, udah itu baru pilih mana yg bakal dia bilang iya. Gimana kalo kita cowok-cowok juga pake cara yg sama, tembakin 5 cewek, terus entar liat mana yg kita mau (sama aja kayak kirim resume sebanyak-banyaknya gitu) hehehhe.
Yang paling nyebelin tuh coworker gw satunya lagi...dia 'atasan' gw sih..cuman ga direct..dia bukan boss gw. Pas itu ada satu orang item gitu, cewek...bodinya lumayan 'gede', lagi duduk gitu. Masa dia bisik-bisik ke gw...tanyain...lu mau kirim resume lu ke cewek itu kaga? Buset deh.
Hmmm...terus ini....gw tadi mikir mikir sendiri analogi laen lagi (pantes ada anak yg bilang kalo gw analoginya suka aneh-aneh...dan kalo ini anak baca blog gw ini...pasti senyam-senyum sendiri...ayo berenti senyam senyum!). Gimana kalo cari cewek itu dianalogikan ama orang cari investasi saham.
Nih..gw kasih tau cara investasi saham:
Pertama-tama....cari dulu saham mana yg prospeknya paling bagus. Terus....cari mana yg bagus buat long term investment, yg nilainya makin hari makin naik.
Nah..sama kan tuh kayak cari cewek...cari mana yg long term investment. At least itu buat gw ya....ga tau lagi...banyak juga yg lebih suka short-term investment sih.
Kedua....kita musti cari saham yg underprice by the market. Itu artinya, saham-saham yg kita percaya bahwa harga pasarannya itu lebih rendah daripada harga seharusnya. Harga seharusnya itu berdasarkan pengamatan dan penilaian kita ttg. perusahaannya. Jadi kalo misalnya kita bilang perusahaan X itu bagus dan harga sahamnya mustinya tuh bisa $10....nah kalo di pasaran cuman dijual $8...berarti underpriced.
Nah...ini nih yg musti kita incer...beli saham-saham yg underpriced...dengan harapan entar kalo pasar udah sadar bahwa pasar salah nilai saham, harga itu bakal naek dan kita bakal untung.
Nah, cari cewek model-model kayak gini juga bukan? Cari yg cakep banget, yg dikejar banyak cowok. Mati aja lu..harganya tambah naek terus dan akhirnya overpriced. Udah gitu, susah lagi dapetnya. Coba sekarang cari yg keliatannya doang biasa-biasa, padahal dalamnya tuh bagus gitu. Jadi kita yakin kalo ini cewek benernya ok banget, tapi orang laen ga sadar...kan artinya underprice tuh. Hehheehe...lebih gampang dapetnya dan kita untung at the end. :p
Terusss...ini ada lagi pas ngomong-ngomong ama temen Korea-Amerika gw. Ini orang ya...udah punya cewek di Korea, tapi selalu masih jelalatan. Heran gw...di tiap tempat kerja gw, pasti aja ada orang-orang tipe gini...tapi justru gw suka sih...just for fun hahahaha...soalnya gw ga bakal terpengaruh. Dia bilang....tiap orang tuh kalo makan, pasti ada entré (makanan utama) dan ada side dishes (makanan kecil sampingan). Dia bilang....side dishes-nya itu satu paket ama makanan utamanya. Cewek dia tuh makanan utamanya...yg laen tuh ya side dishes-nya yg dateng bareng ama makanan utamanya. Gw bilang aja ama dia...ya elu sih orang Korea. Di restoran Korea sih emang kimche-nya tuh gratis dateng bareng ama makanan utama. Yg ga tau kimche, itu sejenis kubis acar Korea. Gw bilang ama dia, gw Chinese...di restoran chinese masalahnya itu spring roll datengnya ga gratis ama makanan utamanya, musti beli sendiri terpisah hehehehe.
Ya udah...gitu aja...hehehehe..hope you understand the business world better :p
Anyway...lagi ngomongin nih....cari cewek itu...sama apa ngga sih sama cari kerja? Tau kan..kalo orang cari kerja itu...kirim resume sebanyak-banyaknya....ntar mana yg kasih offer, mana yg reject...terus kalo offer lebih dari satu, terus kan kita pilih dong mana yg kita bakal accept, kaga bakal dong accept semuanya. Nah...cari cewek...apa musti gitu juga ya? Pendekatan ke semua cewek gitu..terus entar mana yg kasih offer...diliat lagi mana yg paling menguntungkan, terus di-accept hehehehe.
Gw sih argue nya waktu itu kalo cari cewek itu NGGA SAMA ama cari kerja hehehehe. Ga bisa dong sukain, deketin, tembakan semuanya...terus udah itu baru liat mana yg kasih offer hahahhaha. Kalo cari cewek itu...kirim resumenya satu satu aja...ntar dah ditolak satu, baru kirim ke tempat laen.
BTW...temennya Effendi ada yg punya pendapat laen juga. Dia bilang katanya..kalo cewek itu enak banget ya, bisa nunggu ditembakin 5 cowok, udah itu baru pilih mana yg bakal dia bilang iya. Gimana kalo kita cowok-cowok juga pake cara yg sama, tembakin 5 cewek, terus entar liat mana yg kita mau (sama aja kayak kirim resume sebanyak-banyaknya gitu) hehehhe.
Yang paling nyebelin tuh coworker gw satunya lagi...dia 'atasan' gw sih..cuman ga direct..dia bukan boss gw. Pas itu ada satu orang item gitu, cewek...bodinya lumayan 'gede', lagi duduk gitu. Masa dia bisik-bisik ke gw...tanyain...lu mau kirim resume lu ke cewek itu kaga? Buset deh.
Hmmm...terus ini....gw tadi mikir mikir sendiri analogi laen lagi (pantes ada anak yg bilang kalo gw analoginya suka aneh-aneh...dan kalo ini anak baca blog gw ini...pasti senyam-senyum sendiri...ayo berenti senyam senyum!). Gimana kalo cari cewek itu dianalogikan ama orang cari investasi saham.
Nih..gw kasih tau cara investasi saham:
Pertama-tama....cari dulu saham mana yg prospeknya paling bagus. Terus....cari mana yg bagus buat long term investment, yg nilainya makin hari makin naik.
Nah..sama kan tuh kayak cari cewek...cari mana yg long term investment. At least itu buat gw ya....ga tau lagi...banyak juga yg lebih suka short-term investment sih.
Kedua....kita musti cari saham yg underprice by the market. Itu artinya, saham-saham yg kita percaya bahwa harga pasarannya itu lebih rendah daripada harga seharusnya. Harga seharusnya itu berdasarkan pengamatan dan penilaian kita ttg. perusahaannya. Jadi kalo misalnya kita bilang perusahaan X itu bagus dan harga sahamnya mustinya tuh bisa $10....nah kalo di pasaran cuman dijual $8...berarti underpriced.
Nah...ini nih yg musti kita incer...beli saham-saham yg underpriced...dengan harapan entar kalo pasar udah sadar bahwa pasar salah nilai saham, harga itu bakal naek dan kita bakal untung.
Nah, cari cewek model-model kayak gini juga bukan? Cari yg cakep banget, yg dikejar banyak cowok. Mati aja lu..harganya tambah naek terus dan akhirnya overpriced. Udah gitu, susah lagi dapetnya. Coba sekarang cari yg keliatannya doang biasa-biasa, padahal dalamnya tuh bagus gitu. Jadi kita yakin kalo ini cewek benernya ok banget, tapi orang laen ga sadar...kan artinya underprice tuh. Hehheehe...lebih gampang dapetnya dan kita untung at the end. :p
Terusss...ini ada lagi pas ngomong-ngomong ama temen Korea-Amerika gw. Ini orang ya...udah punya cewek di Korea, tapi selalu masih jelalatan. Heran gw...di tiap tempat kerja gw, pasti aja ada orang-orang tipe gini...tapi justru gw suka sih...just for fun hahahaha...soalnya gw ga bakal terpengaruh. Dia bilang....tiap orang tuh kalo makan, pasti ada entré (makanan utama) dan ada side dishes (makanan kecil sampingan). Dia bilang....side dishes-nya itu satu paket ama makanan utamanya. Cewek dia tuh makanan utamanya...yg laen tuh ya side dishes-nya yg dateng bareng ama makanan utamanya. Gw bilang aja ama dia...ya elu sih orang Korea. Di restoran Korea sih emang kimche-nya tuh gratis dateng bareng ama makanan utama. Yg ga tau kimche, itu sejenis kubis acar Korea. Gw bilang ama dia, gw Chinese...di restoran chinese masalahnya itu spring roll datengnya ga gratis ama makanan utamanya, musti beli sendiri terpisah hehehehe.
Ya udah...gitu aja...hehehehe..hope you understand the business world better :p
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Retret
Satu setengah minggu lalu kan gw pergi retret nih. Enak
bangettt...udah lama banget ga ikut retret orang Indo. Di SMA kan tiap
taon pasti ada retret....di amrik ini baru sekarang ini bisa retret
lagi ama anak-anak Indo. Yang adain sih mudika-nya Michigan, tapi yang
datang ada dari Ohio (banyak banget), Texas, Delaware, etc etc.
BTW...ini gw nulis apa yg gw pikir.....dan bukan intended untuk dibaca
orang-orang yg blon bener-bener kenal gw hehehee. Just in case ada
peserta retret yg juga baca tulisan gw ini....jangan langsung
nge-judge gw :)
Kumpul-kumpulnya ama anak-anak Indo sih enak...retretnya benernya juga
enak. Tapiiii....ini ternyata kumpulan karismatik. Akhirnya sadar
juga..kayaknya gw ini golongan konservatif deh. Dulu gw pingin banget
Katolik gitu biar lebih kayak Protestan, biar lebih hidup gitu...biar
lebih karismatik. Tapi setelah liat di retret ini...karismatiknya udah
bener-bener karismatik abis. Udah bukan cuman lagunya yg live...tapi
cara doanya, cara keluarin emosinya semua juga udah beda. Tepok-tepok
tangan sih ok ok aja..tapi kalo udah ada yg lompat-lompat gitu. Terus
tentang bahasa roh juga..banyak yg bisa bahasa roh. Ga begitu sreg aja
dengernya. Tapi ya....ga boleh ngejek juga sih...kalo ngejek orang
pake bahasa roh...sama aja dengan menghujat Roh Kudus...dosa yg kaga
bisa diampunin. Tapi gw cuman ga sreg aja.
Yang jadi presenter di retret ini tuh orang dari Surabaya. Keren juga,
ternyata di surabaya ada kelompok praise & worship katolik. Biasanya
yg ada gituan kan dari protestan aja. Cuman sekarang gw sendiri ga
yakin kalo gw bakal bisa sreg ikut ikutan gituan. Gw lebih suka yg
tenang-tenang..hehehehe.
Yang gw ga setuju tuh...si presenter ada bilang gitu kalo nyanyi ya
musti disertai ama ekspresi fisikal juga gitu....angkat tangan lah dll
dll dll. Nah lho..buat gw itu tuh ga perlu. Ya kalo mau silakan...tapi
kalo emang caranya beda, ya kan ga ngurangin artinya dong mustinya. Mo
tangan di kantong kek, mo tangan dilipet kek, kan terserah dong
mustinya.
Terus hal laen lagi..si presenter ada ngomong ttg. gimana kita tuh
bakal selalu dilindungin Tuhan..bahwa kita harus percaya ama Tuhan.
Bener sih. Tapi dia pake contoh jakarta taon 1998...dia bilang orang
tuh ga perlu ampe lari lari ke luar negeri gitu buat cari
selamat....harusnya cukup percaya aja dan doa. Emang kalo orang ampe
ngaku dia Islam cuman buat cari selamat, itu ya mungkin salah lah.
Tapi kalo cuman lari ke luar negeri. I think it's justified.
Sekarang....kan Tuhan selamatin kita bukan pake cara sulap, mungkin
aja kita diselamatin dari riot itu dengan lewat pilot yg terbangin
pesawat, supir taksi yg antar kita ke bandara. Bener ngga? Gw paling
ga suka ama orang-orang Kristen yg selalu bilangnya pasrah ke Tuhan to
the point of ridicule. Taon 1998, SMA Katolik Frateran surabaya adakan
acara wisata buat graduation ke Jakarta. Udah tau situasi ga jelas,
masih nekat...akhirnya repot sendiri kan di jakarta.
Terus tentang bahasa roh....ya yang satu ini yang gw setuju ama
presenter nya dan gw juga pingin bisa...tapi either gw emang blon
waktunya bisa, ato emang gw bukan termasuk yg dapet karunia/talenta
untuk itu. Time will tell. Cuman tetep lho..sampe hari ini..kalo
dengerin orang nyanyi...terus taunya sambil bahasa roh...aneh aja
kedengerannya.
Hmmm...mo nulis apa lagi yaaaaa. Oh...gw seneng aja ama komen-komen
dari presenternya. Komen-komen ttg. Katolik - Protestan maksud gw. Gw
suka di Katolik, soalnya ga pernah jelek-jelekin dan serang agama
laen...which was reinforced during the retreat. Ada dua peserta retret
tuh dari Protestan. Presenternya aja ngakuin kalo Katolik ama
Protestan tuh imannya sama...waktu itu dia lagi bilang ttg. kawin
campur antar-Kristen....gimana yg satu sebaeknya ngalah....either
semuanya ke Protestant ato ke Katolik, soalnya imannya tetep sama.
Kapan hari ada yg tanya ama gw, napa gw Katolik, tapi kok kayaknya
perhatiin juga ttg. aktifitas di Protestant gitu. Gimana ya...pingin
aja gitu suatu saat gitu gereja Kristen bisa balik lagi jadi satu
gereja aja, kayak jaman dulu gitu. Ada lho yg bilang kalo armageddon
ga terjadi sampe gereja-gereja disatukan. Yang buat gw sedih tuh...ada
temen deket gw sendiri yg Protestant, yg ga mau ngakui kalo Katolik
itu juga Kristen..katanya...Katolik bukan Kristen. Parah sih kalo yg
kayak gini....temen deket lagi..bayangin aja.
Udah deh...ciao.
bangettt...udah lama banget ga ikut retret orang Indo. Di SMA kan tiap
taon pasti ada retret....di amrik ini baru sekarang ini bisa retret
lagi ama anak-anak Indo. Yang adain sih mudika-nya Michigan, tapi yang
datang ada dari Ohio (banyak banget), Texas, Delaware, etc etc.
BTW...ini gw nulis apa yg gw pikir.....dan bukan intended untuk dibaca
orang-orang yg blon bener-bener kenal gw hehehee. Just in case ada
peserta retret yg juga baca tulisan gw ini....jangan langsung
nge-judge gw :)
Kumpul-kumpulnya ama anak-anak Indo sih enak...retretnya benernya juga
enak. Tapiiii....ini ternyata kumpulan karismatik. Akhirnya sadar
juga..kayaknya gw ini golongan konservatif deh. Dulu gw pingin banget
Katolik gitu biar lebih kayak Protestan, biar lebih hidup gitu...biar
lebih karismatik. Tapi setelah liat di retret ini...karismatiknya udah
bener-bener karismatik abis. Udah bukan cuman lagunya yg live...tapi
cara doanya, cara keluarin emosinya semua juga udah beda. Tepok-tepok
tangan sih ok ok aja..tapi kalo udah ada yg lompat-lompat gitu. Terus
tentang bahasa roh juga..banyak yg bisa bahasa roh. Ga begitu sreg aja
dengernya. Tapi ya....ga boleh ngejek juga sih...kalo ngejek orang
pake bahasa roh...sama aja dengan menghujat Roh Kudus...dosa yg kaga
bisa diampunin. Tapi gw cuman ga sreg aja.
Yang jadi presenter di retret ini tuh orang dari Surabaya. Keren juga,
ternyata di surabaya ada kelompok praise & worship katolik. Biasanya
yg ada gituan kan dari protestan aja. Cuman sekarang gw sendiri ga
yakin kalo gw bakal bisa sreg ikut ikutan gituan. Gw lebih suka yg
tenang-tenang..hehehehe.
Yang gw ga setuju tuh...si presenter ada bilang gitu kalo nyanyi ya
musti disertai ama ekspresi fisikal juga gitu....angkat tangan lah dll
dll dll. Nah lho..buat gw itu tuh ga perlu. Ya kalo mau silakan...tapi
kalo emang caranya beda, ya kan ga ngurangin artinya dong mustinya. Mo
tangan di kantong kek, mo tangan dilipet kek, kan terserah dong
mustinya.
Terus hal laen lagi..si presenter ada ngomong ttg. gimana kita tuh
bakal selalu dilindungin Tuhan..bahwa kita harus percaya ama Tuhan.
Bener sih. Tapi dia pake contoh jakarta taon 1998...dia bilang orang
tuh ga perlu ampe lari lari ke luar negeri gitu buat cari
selamat....harusnya cukup percaya aja dan doa. Emang kalo orang ampe
ngaku dia Islam cuman buat cari selamat, itu ya mungkin salah lah.
Tapi kalo cuman lari ke luar negeri. I think it's justified.
Sekarang....kan Tuhan selamatin kita bukan pake cara sulap, mungkin
aja kita diselamatin dari riot itu dengan lewat pilot yg terbangin
pesawat, supir taksi yg antar kita ke bandara. Bener ngga? Gw paling
ga suka ama orang-orang Kristen yg selalu bilangnya pasrah ke Tuhan to
the point of ridicule. Taon 1998, SMA Katolik Frateran surabaya adakan
acara wisata buat graduation ke Jakarta. Udah tau situasi ga jelas,
masih nekat...akhirnya repot sendiri kan di jakarta.
Terus tentang bahasa roh....ya yang satu ini yang gw setuju ama
presenter nya dan gw juga pingin bisa...tapi either gw emang blon
waktunya bisa, ato emang gw bukan termasuk yg dapet karunia/talenta
untuk itu. Time will tell. Cuman tetep lho..sampe hari ini..kalo
dengerin orang nyanyi...terus taunya sambil bahasa roh...aneh aja
kedengerannya.
Hmmm...mo nulis apa lagi yaaaaa. Oh...gw seneng aja ama komen-komen
dari presenternya. Komen-komen ttg. Katolik - Protestan maksud gw. Gw
suka di Katolik, soalnya ga pernah jelek-jelekin dan serang agama
laen...which was reinforced during the retreat. Ada dua peserta retret
tuh dari Protestan. Presenternya aja ngakuin kalo Katolik ama
Protestan tuh imannya sama...waktu itu dia lagi bilang ttg. kawin
campur antar-Kristen....gimana yg satu sebaeknya ngalah....either
semuanya ke Protestant ato ke Katolik, soalnya imannya tetep sama.
Kapan hari ada yg tanya ama gw, napa gw Katolik, tapi kok kayaknya
perhatiin juga ttg. aktifitas di Protestant gitu. Gimana ya...pingin
aja gitu suatu saat gitu gereja Kristen bisa balik lagi jadi satu
gereja aja, kayak jaman dulu gitu. Ada lho yg bilang kalo armageddon
ga terjadi sampe gereja-gereja disatukan. Yang buat gw sedih tuh...ada
temen deket gw sendiri yg Protestant, yg ga mau ngakui kalo Katolik
itu juga Kristen..katanya...Katolik bukan Kristen. Parah sih kalo yg
kayak gini....temen deket lagi..bayangin aja.
Udah deh...ciao.
