When a slave owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner’s property. (Exod. 21:20-21)

Obviously here, this is a perfect example of how the Bible supports the ideals of slavery. Slaves, are owned by their masters. Bottom line. The bible says it so you better believe it. Any ideas that you have heard about equal humanity for all, or that no human should be sold or owned is a heresy and this verse here proves it.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ; not only while being watched, and in order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. (Eph. 6:5-6)

Slaves are commanded to obey us just as we obey Christ. Be dedicated full to their masters. Even in the New Testament we see the upholding beliefs that slavery should continue.

Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to talk back, not to pilfer, but to show complete and perfect fidelity, so that in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior. (Titus 2:9-10)

This just shows us exactly how slaves should act towards their masters. Whatever the masters want in any request. Even if it is sexual in nature (it does say in every respect). The slaves job is to satisfy their masters in every respect.

Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh. For it is a credit to you if, being aware of God, you endure pain while suffering unjustly. If you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God’s approval. (1Pet. 2:18-29)

This proves that even when the master is harsh or cruel, that doesn’t change the rules for the slaves. So no matter how much we beat our slaves or how much we oppress them, our bible takes our side and commands them to endure it anyway and such it up.

Now I know a lot of you are thinking, well how can we know who should be our slaves and who should not be? If anyone can be anyone’s slave, then everyone would fight to be the master of someone else. Well since our Bible is our book that tells us everything we need to know about living a good life, let’s look to the good book shall we.

If remember from Genesis, Noah’s son Ham sees Noah off drunk and sees his father naked. Instead of covering him up, he runs and spreads the news to his brothers. The brothers return and cover their father. But because Ham saw his father nude, Noah puts a curse on his son named Canaan. “Cursed be Canaan; lowest of slaves shall he be to his brothers” (Gen 9:25). The Hebrew word here for curse means “burnt.” We all know what colour skin turns when it’s burnt. Black. This is where the African descendants come from. They are Canaanites. Canaanites are those with black skin. God basically has labeled, or colour coded humans for us so we know which ones should be slaves and which ones should not be. Just look for the black people. Ham lacked honour in the way that he dealt with his father. Honour meant in this day protecting your own personal image. Black Africans, descendants of Ham, were those that lack honour and therefore deserve slavery. What Ham did was a violation of family loyalty. Or as one scholar puts it.

“violation of familial loyalty that marked Ham and his African descendants as utterly devoid of honour and thus fit for slavery.” – Stephen R. Haynes

The Christian church has believed this and practiced this way of living for centuries. It took until the fifteenth century until western Europe started finally realizing and stabilizing the belief that it slavery only based on ethnicity that is commended from God. So if there was any question in your mind about a good, God-honouring lifestyle that will please the Lord it is obviously that of owning slaves with black skin.

Alright, I can’t keep going in this direction for very long without feeling a little bit sick inside. This is only some of the proof text and ideology that would have been used to prove slavery was right, good and mandated and especially to those with darker skin.

What is the problem with this biblical belief in slavery? What is missing? Why don’t we believe in slavery anymore?

At this point, I will be whiteboarding the arguments and points taken by everyone, pointing out specific items about how we interpret scripture.

Things that need to come up in the conversation and expounded on.

Chapters and Verses
There are over thirty-thousands verses in the bible, and somehow we think each individual verse is written down in a separate world all by itself that we can pluck out of it’s time and context and apply it to our own lives now. The bible was never meant to be like this. The bible was written as sixty-six different books all telling one story, all pointing to one person. When we start to pick apart the bible and use it to support our own statements, use it for our own comfort and use it for our own agenda it becomes a device that was created for our own selfishness. The bible is meant to be read as a whole. Every verse and chapter fits wonderfully into the whole, not vice versa. Eventually what happens is we start searching for things that aren’t there. If only we can find the right verse to prove my point then it will be justified. Well we aren’t the first ones to have that problem, turns out this is what the Pharisees did too. They were so focused on the text that they missed what the text was actually pointing to.

John 5:39-40
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

Not How things Happened but Israel’s attempt to answer Why?
The old testament is filled with different kinds of writing. Some of it is to answer the question how something happened (ie. historical narratives), some of it is to answer why something is happen (ie. first chapter of genesis), some of it is to wrestle with how people feel when something happens (ie. psalms), some of it is to explain what they’ve learned (ie. proverbs). So the question we need to ask everytime, is which one is it? What questions is it answering?

Moral Code Book
If anything, the bible shows us all these rules and then explains how those aren’t the point. Jesus fully broke some of these rules but did he break them just to make some more of his own? It’s interesting because I find most Christians use the bible to back up every moral claim they have to make. It’s always controversial ones too that they have to use the bible. You don’t need to use the bible to tell me that murder is wrong, or I shouldn’t steal. You don’t have to use the bible to show me that adultery is wrong either. Yet it’s almost as if we use the bible to support every conviction we have.

Romans 7:6
But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Geography/Science Textbook
Is this what the bible is for? No. The bible is full of multiple kinds of literature and each one needs to be read in its own light and context. By not doing that is

Inerrant/Authoritative
Authority – Joe talked about this a bit. Shakespeare play explanation.

Inerrant – We know the bible has historical contradictions. We know the bible doesn’t match science (ie the earth is not flat). Is inerrant really the word that we want to use? That seems to make it sound like it doesn’t have any errors. The bible itself doesn’t really even give itself that kind of language.

Can we really take these verses at face value without understanding and applying the context in which they were written, who they were written to and why they were written? Are verses ceasing to do justice? How do we look at the entire story of the bible and then ask ourselves does slavery fit into the Kingdom of God from what we know about the kingdom of God so far? Just because the bible says it does that mean it’s still a moral command for our lives today?

There are more modern beliefs that we could ask the same questions with. How about the prosperity gospel? There is entire movements of churches that honestly believe that God has promised to bless them with whatever they want, even financially, just by having enough faith and asking. They use text like Jeremiah 29:11 to prove.

Or what about a literal seven days of creation? This is a core belief of many evangelicals, but it is founded on a complete misunderstanding of what the Bible is and how it should be read. It is not a science book. It is not attempting to give us answers to questions of how things were done.

If we attempt to use the bible has an informational textbook meant only to tell us how to act and what to believe, then I fear that we will forever miss the point and the beauty of the Scriptures. Unforunately, we have been trained to be informational readers. To have an effective place in the world, it is very related by how you access and use information. We Google questions and it gives us answers. We expect the same out of the bible. What ends up happening is that the person or group possessing the best information is in a position to control their world of activity and interest. However, what if we started approaching the text as more formational rather than informational. This means that we read the bible so we can encounter God through the writings of the mothers and fathers of the church. The text then opens us up to be controlled by God for God’s purposes. This is the opposite of what we know, because now we are no longer able to impose our purposes upon the world.

“Unfortunately, we have been trained as informational readers, not spiritual readers. When we do informational reading, we exercise almost total and complete control over the text. We usually select the material we are going to read. We read te text with our own agenda already in place, knowing in advance what we expect to receive, what problems we want the text to solve for us. We read the text analytically, viewing it as an object over which we as subject exercise our control, to ensure that it conforms more or less comfortably to our desires and purposes. We read the text as rapidly as possible, to amass as much information as we can in as little time as possible. (Have you ever caught yourself marking your place and looking ahead to see how much was left?) The final goal of informational reading is our mastery of the text for the fulfillment of our purposes.

Spiritual or formational reading is the exact opposite of informational reading. Spiritual reading is entered into best, perhaps, when the text is chosen for us–for instance, but the use of a lectionary. This way we begin by yielding control to someone or something outside of our agenda. This facilitates one of the primary purposes of spiritual reading–to allow the text to have control over us and become a place of encounter with God. Instead of the text being an object controlled by us, the text becomes the subject; we, in-turn, become the “object” addressed by God through the text.”
- M Robert Mulholland Jr.

When we learn to be formed by the bible, things start to present themselves to us that we never would have found if we were simply just looking for information. We start to look at the bible as not some informational piece that is floating in space, completely separate from when and where it happened. Instead, when we allow the stories to form us, we For instance, here are some of the things that we start to understand that Rob Bell points out in his book Velvet Elvis.

When Jesus is asked about divorce, he is entering into a dialogue that was one of the big discussions of his day. Other Rabbis before him already said specific things about divorce and when he gives an answer, he sides with one of the Rabbis. So the question is about divorce, but it is also about which Rabbi he sides with, Hillel or Shamai. You can’t just grab this line about divorce and throw it at someone 2000 years later to prove your morals to them.

Look at Deuteronomy, the entire book is patterend after treaties that were common in its day. The writer basically took a regular legal document and changed the content and the names but kept the form the same.

Look at the book of Mark, it is arranged by coronations ceremonies of the Roman emperor. He was very intentional about the order of events leading up to Jesus’ death. His readers would have been familiar with these Roman coronation events. This means that we can’t read into Mark’s book (which by the way, like Dom told us last week, all the other gospel writers used Mark) about the historical order of what was happening. Mark is doing something else here. Mark wants you to see Jesus as king….kind of like Caeser.

Or how about John, the first three miracles in te book of John are directly related to the three major gods of Asia Minor, the region John writes his gospel to. Dionysus was the god who turned water into wine. Asclepius was the god of healing, and Demeter was the godess of bread. John is making major comparisons here, showing that Jesus is better than their gods.

The first chapters of Revelation follow the sequence of events of the Domitian games, held in honor of the caesar who was in power at the time it was written. Domitian would address the leaders of the various provinces, then his choir of twenty-four would sing worship songs to him, and then there would be a horse race track. John is writing to people who knew this and was showing them that Domitian is a fake and Jesus is real.

The writers of the Bible are communicating in a language that their world understands and communicates in. They are using symbols and imagery and referring to things that the people reading them at that time knew and understood. The bible can form us and shape us because it contains truth about what it looks like when God is at work through actual people. It does not offer us an manual on exactly how to live perfectly. It simply shows us how people acted and lived that God worked through. If we are honest with ourselves and someone wrote down how we lived and acted right now, I think we would be honest that while God may work through us, no one should be mimicking our lifestyles if they are trying to follow God’s will. We are simply part of the story.

Joe talked about it a few weeks. The idea of working things out in humility and community. That is the only way the Bible can be interpreted. If you want to sit at home by yourself and “read the bible like it is” you will be alone and read your own perspective into the scriptures. You will use it for information. There is no such thing as reading the bible like it says. It has to be interpreted. Decisions have to be made for what it means for us today. This is why we read it and are shaped by it in community. This is why we have dialogue in the middle of the sermon. This is why we are attached to a larger governing body of Christians called the Free Methodist Church. This is why normally when we do series at theStory we do them exegetically; meaning we take an entire section of the story and we figure out everything about it. When we choose to do topical preaching, we end up having a view that we want to convince you of and take verses from everywhere (like the defense of slavery) to prove what we already think is true. This isn’t wrong, it’s just not complete.

When we read the bible to be formed, we have to constantly wrestle with the greek and hebrew words, who it was written to, who was writing it, when was it being written, why was it being written and what it means for us today. If we are simply looking to be informed, especially just to support our pre-determined beliefs all those things don’t really matter.

When we choose to be formed by the Bible, we see the story in a different light. It is no longer used to prove theological points in a debate, rather it is used as a reference point and leaves us with the question, so what now? Before it was this is how it was, this is what it says so this is how it is. Now it is more like, this is how it was, this is why it said it, now what? We are constantly left to struggle and wrestle with the story as we make sense of it in our own lives. The Bible isn’t there to answer our tough questions. The bible is not some all around answer book. In the New Testatment, Jesus is asked about 25 or so questions, does any of you know in how many of them he gives a direct answer? Three of them. Many times he answered with a story. And we talked about this while doing the parables. Stories demand participation and struggle, they do not allow you to leave with answers. Do you know how many questions Jesus asks? Over two hundred of them. Stories and questions, that is what the bible leaves us with; not morals and answers. The bible is a big story and it leaves us with question after question of what now? That is why you are here. Together we are trying to figure out what we should do now with what we’ve read? What is God trying to do? Where are we missing the mark and how can we be transformed by what we are reading.

I think there is a general consensus in the room that slavery, owning another human being, is not right. Yet for hundreds of years racism was seen as a biblical supported belief. I proved to you, using the typical ways that we prove most of our beliefs that slavery was right, that racism is good and biblically mandated. There is more verses supporting slavery than there is about most of our problems with pornography, homosexuality, polygamy and pre-marital sex. Yet for some reason, there is no way we would buy the belief that slavery is a good and healthy way to live life. This is because we are actually trusting communities that are following Christ before us to make decisions for us on what is proper way or an improper way to interpret scripture. We’ve done the same with allowing women to speak in church, on not selling all our possessions and giving them to the poor, or wearing two types of clothing at the same time. At some point, we decided that these beliefs and interpretations did not make sense for the world that we live in now.

This week I’m going to try to tie up everything that Joe and Dom have presented to you about the bible. Our basic underlying question that drives today is “so what now?” If our faith and our lifestyles are based around this book called the Bible, and we don’t really understand it well at all, what does that say about our lives? Does the Bible even speak to any of our modern day issues at all? Even if it did, should the bible be a moral code book and should we do what it says?

It is crucial that we continue to keep having these debates and dialogue. As new issues arise like homosexuality, celebrity culture, the internet or pornography we need to stay close to our communities and interpret them together. Joe showed us how the early church communities did it, in that it seemed good to them and the holy spirit to do a particular thing. Jesus expects us to constantly be engaged in these dialogues, endlessly processing what it means to actually live out of the Scriptures. This isn’t easy. But it does once again leave us uncomfortable, not able to simply get answers and walk away. Let me offer an analogy that might help explain what I feel like we are left with, Robert Capon refers to this in his book The Finger Prints of God. Let’s watch this video.

This juggler’s name is Michael Moschen. He is considered one of the world’s best jugglers. Here is what he says in regards to his own juggling.

“Juggling is a right-brain activity that involved letting yourself go, letting things happen. To make three balls go around with two hands is so contrary to reason that it just makes you giggle. It’s mystical.

The most interesting part of my work is learning how to touch an object, and discovering how the objects give up their secrets. What I’m after is the essential spiritual magnetism of a shape.

I made a rule that I would never close my hand around the ball, that I would always keep my hand open. It’s virtually impossible to have real control over an object if you’re doing that. It was the most difficult of choice I could make, because it’s the opposite of what a juggler is supposed to do. it offers only vulnerability. Juggling could be less about control than about the struggle to accept the fear and turmoil surrounding uncontrollable events.”

I wonder if this is a proper analogy to explain how we are supposed to use the Bible in our lives and communities. This analogy helps us in all sorts of ways. It especially helps us give up the idea of the image of control, which is how we normally would read the Bible. It now becomes more about watching a divine juggler. When you watch Michael juggle, you do not stare and study the incidental properties of the items he is juggling. Rather it is the mystery and beauty of the entire performance that fascinates you. You can really only appreciate the juggler when you look at the act as a whole. The Bible reveals itself to us this way. The Bible is one of the things that God is juggling. We don’t discover the beauty of the act sifting through the individual properties of the the details of the Bible’s content. All that only makes sense in the perspective of looking at the entire juggling act.

Back to Moschen

“A juggler is not a secure person. A juggler, by definition, should be an insecure person. The exhilaration of a breathtaking performance can be shattered in an instant by the dreaded “drop”.” Moschen who tens to acknowledge the occasional drop by gazing querulously at the wayward ball, claims not to be averse to being exposed as mortal. “If you want to get anywhere you have to embrace failure, not flee from it.”

“Do you see what that allows you to say about the Spirit’s “failures” in Scripture? Is the Bible’s apparent date of 4004BC for the creation of the world a problem for you in view of the astrophysicists’ contention that it happened billions of years ago? Does the Spirit’s inclusion of factual errors give you pause? (The hare does not chew the cud, despite Leviticus 11:6.) Are you upset by the early church’s expectations that the second coming of Christ was just around the corner? Don’t let such things bother you. Don’t let them take your eye off the mysterious revelation that’s at the heart of the Spirit’s whole juggling act. They aren’t problems to be solves; they’re simply wayward cigar boxes that got out of the Spirit’s hand at one point. They’re failures that he embraces — he gazes at just as querulously as we do — without letting them stand in the way of getting on with his astonishing performance. When the Spirit inspires the Bible, he doesn’t operate as a puppeteer, controlling its authors and editors and reader like to many marionettes. He deals with whatever is available to him. He gets his way by embracing their intractability, not by overriding it.” – Robert Capon

This is what we need to embrace when looking at the Bible. It is the entire performance of a great juggler, who is even better than Moschen. It’s the whole performance of scripture we are looking at, not the literal significance or even the eternal truths of everything single part, they are there, but that’s not really the point. Don’t sit around asking questions about every individual part, let the entire act take you in.

So with what we’ve heard over the last few weeks about the Bible, how we should live with it, interpret it and find it’s place in our community and lives what I would like to do is come up with a sentence or two together that helps us understand what we are doing when we are reading, using and interpreting the Bible. Will this sentence have words like inerrant, infallible or authoritative? How do we create a dummy’s guide of what the bible is to us and how we should read it? How do we make room for theology that changes or that shouldn’t change?

“The matter is simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any words in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. My God, you will say, if I do that my whole life will be ruined. How would I ever get on in the world.

Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian Scholarship is the Church’s prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming to close. Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament.” – Soren Kierkegaard

Haiti. Two months ago I could not have pointed to it on a map. Today, I’ve had a complete overload of history lessons, French/Creole, foreign aid logistics and rice. A few weeks after the recent earthquake, a good friend of mine who works with Emmanuel International got a call to go back to Haiti to help them with their food distributions. Emmanuel was connected to ten different sites where there was about fifteen thousand people that were part of them. He didn’t want to go into the middle of a crisis alone, so I was the fortunate friend who got to go with him. Now I am back home, sitting in front of my 22″ LCD monitor, with a full stomach, car parked out front, a fridge of rotting leftovers, surrounded by commercial businesses and the ground is covered in white snow. There is no way to properly explain the culture shock going from one culture to the next and then back home in such little time. The only feeling it leaves me with is hope and humility.

We showed up in Haiti, with our main objective being to try and get our hands on some of the hundreds of millions of dollars of food aid that was pouring into the country. We wanted to load up the food into our trucks and ship it to our sites so the people could eat. This one goal turned out to be harder than suggested. After filling out multiple paper forms, calling people, sending e-mails, randomly showing up in important people’s offices and waving our Canadian passports around like they were the golden ticket, we left after two weeks without even getting a drop of grain from the World Food Program. We were able to get shelter from an organization called ShetlerBox. That was our biggest accomplishment in terms of putting aid into people’s hands. In terms of actually distributing food and supplies to the people that needed it most, we felt like we were failing miserably. Then there was the added stress of trying to buy all the food locally. It was well known that with the amount of free non-Haitian food coming into the country we had to be careful that we didn’t put extra pressure on what was left of the feeble economy by purchasing outside of the country.

If you are feeling hopeless about our efforts there, then I think I’ve accurately explained how we felt. It was a country in turmoil and then a few white guys walk in there and try to help.

However, throughout the trip, there was moments where I just didn’t know what to think. As I was sitting in the home we stayed at I could hear singing. There was an all day fasting and prayer church service going on right outside our gate. Here I was, with a belly full of rice, wandering through hundreds of people singing and dancing, with intentional empty stomachs and gratitude towards God. It was a moment I will never forget. The contrast of realities that was all around me was hard to understand. It was then I realized that my feeble attempts to accomplish anything worthwhile were all at the mercy of something a lot larger than myself. I was trying to get them food to eat. They were giving up that food to worship God.

Constantly changing my perspective is my only known defense against such encounters. It is way too easy not to change. I could easily get mad at the fasting tent city, that they weren’t out trying to find work and feed their children. I could easily get frustrated that they were worshiping a God that seemingly doesn’t care about them. However, I’m left wondering if the way I see the world and disaster isn’t the right way. At the very least, it isn’t the only way. So I’m forced to try and see the world through their eyes. I don’t think I can do that very well. I find myself getting frustrated at their uncaring attitude towards productivity and efficiency. I find myself feeling like I’m the only one who cares or who is doing anything.

As I shift perspective I start to see everything differently. I start to see that I am part of the reason they are the way they are what they are. I have oppressed them. Maybe not directly, but my culture, my lifestyle, my consumption, my politics and my religion have all played a part in creating societies that are rendered unable to be free. If I walk into their culture and expect them to be freed from oppression the way I want it to happen, it does nothing but perpetuate the system that I’m trying to free them from. It was easy to see Haiti as the problem, and me as the solution, all it would take was to bring my solutions to their problems.

I feel humbled because the only way Haiti will be free is that Haiti will realize they are oppressed, and they will seek to be free from oppression so they can be more truly human. If their oppressors walk into the country and start demanding they act and live a specific kind of way so they can be free, it will help no one. So my trip to Haiti very quickly evolved from being me going over there to help them, to me being there and living with them. We waited for direction from their pastor. We worked on their schedules. We drove their cars. We asked permission before we did anything. We tried to completely serve and submit to the Haitians. This was very difficult; yet absolutely necessary. Many times I thought my way was better. Many times I knew my way was better. This didn’t matter. I was not there to change them and show them how to be better. I was there to work and live alongside of them as they struggled for freedom.

This took a little getting used to. However, when you are working and submitting to the authority of someone you don’t see eye to eye with you are forced to see things that you never would have seen before. You see the world differently. In many ways, you’re able to see the world. You allow for your convictions to be put aside about the way things work and trust in something bigger and outside of yourself. Only by doing this, will Haiti ever become free. I cannot fight, steal, convince and manipulate Haitians into being free. They will only achieve freedom if they do it and want it and it will only happen if it happens their way, not ours. I have to serve them. I have to work alongside of them and be led by them. Overtime you start to see people that you respect and trust pop up all over the place. You see people’s hearts and passion and hospitality. My respect for the other has grown tremendously.

If we truly want to help overseas and not oppress those we are there to help, then we must submit, serve and live with the people we are going to help. We have to work by their agenda. We have to empower them to take control of their own future and not imagine one for them and convince them that they want it. I think we’ll be pleasantly surprised at what the human heart and brain is capable of. It gives me hope.

So I leave you with this: go on trips, work with those that are less fortunate, help the marginalized and fight for the oppressed. These are all good and noble things. Do it with the knowledge that you can’t save them and you can’t change them and you can’t free them. The only thing you can do is be like them; be with them. So if you really want to help, then you must put down your solutions and become part of the problem.

Some of my favourite quotes from this clip.

“The whole thing is new age satanic demonic paganism. And people are just stunned by the visuals. The visuals are amazing because Satan wants you to emotionally connect with the lie.”

“I have two home theaters, and three tivos”

“we are a creative church, we just don’t like satan, we love the arts, we just don’t like satan” (applause)

For the next couple of weeks a good many of the nations of the world will be gathered together in Vancouver at the behest of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), and under the banner of the five rings as well as the surveillance of the Security Forces.  Welcome to Vancouver 2010: we attend “with glowing hearts”!

But beyond all the hype, looking past the selective (and distorted) presentation of the Games that dominate the mainstream media, the Olympics serve as an almost perfect example of the way in which the death-dealing economics of our day function.  Juvenal tells us that the citizens of imperial Rome were willing to surrender their right to be politically involved in exchange for “bread and circuses”, and I reckon that things are much the same in our world of global capitalism.

Because the truth is that the Olympics are a fundamentally violent and death-dealing event, designed in order to transfer wealth, property, power, legal rights, and land out of the hands of the poor and the public and into the hands of the wealthy and the privileged – it really doesn’t take much work to start to learn this but for those who have chosen to remain ignorant, I recommend the writings of scholars like Helen Lenskyj, as well as the relevant information on websites run by the Olympic Resistance Network, No 2010, and the Vancouver Media Co-op.  So, with the arrival of the Olympics in Vancouver, no one should be surprised to see the dismantling of poor communities, the theft of land by massive real estate corporations, the criminalization of poverty, the destruction of precious environmental sites, the withdrawal of human and civil rights, and the transfer of public wealth into the hands of corporate sponsors, private companies, and Security Forces.  Adding insult to injury, the people of Vancouver will be stuck with the bill for this and will be paying it for many years to come.  Again, I should emphasize that there is nothing particularly shocking about this – this is the way in which the Olympics have always functioned and this is standard activity when it comes to the death-dealing ethics of global capitalism.

However, what is interesting about the Olympics is the way in which they are structured in order to garner public support and make criticisms difficult.  It is fairly easy for most people to understand, at least at some level, the death-dealing nature of contemporary economics when one talks about the practices of Canadian mining companies in Latin America, of Canadian owned t-shirt sweatshops in Honduras, of the Royal Bank of Canada’s involvement with the tar sands in Alberta (and you all are already aware of these things, right?), but it is much more difficult to gain a public voice, or gain public respect, when speaking critically of the Olympics.  This is because the Olympics have been able to draw upon other powerful motifs that exist within our culture – the glorification of youth, the respectability of ‘amateur’ athletes, patriotism, the thrill of competition, the heart-rending stories of trials and losses overcome and, of course, the pure entertainment value of it all.  I mean, I can honestly say that I think nothing good of the Olympics… but part of me still wants to watch the Canadian hockey games!  This is a fine example of the ways in which the economics of death disciplines our desires, so that we end up loving that which kills us.  Consequently, the Games end up being so breath-taking, so emotional, so full of ‘human interest’ stories, that those who speak critically of them are rapidly marginalized as insensitive upstarts (or just plain old assholes) who are pursuing causes that might be decent enough on their own (it’s difficult to say that caring about poor people is bad thing…) but who are doing so at the wrong time.  Of course, this is all ideology functioning in its most sinister way – the fact is that the Olympics are exactly the right time to be pursuing these causes and trying to bring about an alternative form of economics, because the Olympics are so deeply interwoven with the economics of death.  Of course, those who spread this ideology understand this – the IOC knows what really goes on with the Games as they are the ones who made it that way (in conjunction with their corporate sponsors and various political supports) – which is precisely why the ideology is spread.  If the protestors were completely wrong in the arguments they make about the relation of the Olympics to death-dealing economics then the IOC et al. could respond to their arguments and demonstrate how they are wrong.  However, because the protestors are right, the IOC must find a way to invalidate the arguments without actually responding to them.

With these things in mind, I thought that I would act in solidarity with those who are opposed to the economics of death in Vancouver.  I am tired of people simply speaking, writing or reading about ‘Kingdom economics’ or some sort of alternative economics of life, and desire to spend more time with those who are actually acting to bring these things about.  In this regard, I am inspired by the words of Mikhail Bakunin (spoken when he quit the Jura Federation in 1873):

During the last nine years more than enough ideas for the salvation of the world have been developed… and I defy anyone to come up with a new one. This is the time not for ideas but for action, for deeds.

Ain’t that the truth, eh?  Something to keep in mind, perhaps, when attending yet another conference on subversive, kingdom-based economics?

Anyway, on February 13^th, I joined up with a Black Bloc at an anti-Olympic protest aimed at claiming a key intersection and disrupting the flow of traffic to Whistler on the first day of the Games.  Unfortunately, the riot police were far better organized than the protestors and the action was not a success.  At this point, legal constraints prevent me from saying anything further about the specifics of what took place.  However, I do wish to comment on the protest more generally.

First of all, I think events like protests are important because our commitment to an economics of life necessarily requires us to confront, expose, and demolish the economics of death.  In order to construct a society that is more just, less just ways of organizing life together must be destructed.  This should be obvious.  So, at least those who participated in the protest that occurred on February 13^th were willing to take a genuine stand for their convictions and were willing to pay a price for taking that stand (several people were assaulted by police officers, others were imprisoned, and so on).  Although some may have been afraid, they did not allow that fear to prevent them from acting out their beliefs, and this is genuinely admirable.  It is, at least, a step up from those who get together just to talk about these things and then never do anything but talk.

However, when engaging in this necessarily creative and destructive work, the participants must be careful to ensure that they do not simply end up perpetuating or replicating prior forms of oppression and dehumanization.  This, of course, is what we saw take place in the fall-out of the October Revolution in Russia and the Cultural Revolution in China (as the opponents of Communism, Marxism, Socialism and other more Christian ways of structuring life together have never failed to remind us).  Perhaps some of the so-called ‘violence’ that took place at the protest could also be an illustration of this – to put it crudely, a dog that is regularly beaten will learn to bite back but, even then, one should only feel compassion for that dog.  One doesn’t punish that dog, instead one should go after those who beat the dog.  However, I emphasize the word ‘perhaps’, because I’m not sure that much of what was described as ‘violence’ at the protest was really all that violent.  What we need is a much more sustained public reflection upon what does and does not constitute ‘violence’ and when such ‘violence’ is or is not appropriate.  After all, if the Toronto Dominion Bank and the Hudson Bay Company are fundamentally death-dealing in their actions, and if they exist on stolen property, is it then inappropriate to smash their windows?  Wasn’t Jesus action in the Jerusalem Temple even more violent than what the protestors did in Vancouver on the 13^th?  At the very least, we should be wary of accepting definitions of violence that are provided for us by those who benefit from the death-dealing status quo of global capitalism (for these people will tell us that the Olympics are driven by a commitment to peace and solidarity – even though we know that the Olympics are fundamentally violent against indigenous people, poor people and the environment – while also telling us that people who wear black and break two windows [yes, only two windows were broken] are raging violent criminals).

That said, I think that the greatest danger facing those who wish to protest against the death-dealing economics of our day is not that of perpetuating cycles of violence; rather, the danger is that of falling into a spectacular form of resistance that is composed of simulacra of actions rather than practicing anything that is genuinely disruptive and creative.  Now, by speaking of ‘spectacular’ resistance I am drawing on the insights provided by Guy Debord’s famous book, The Society of the Spectacle.  In that book, Debord argues that our focus in life has gradually shifted from a focus upon being (pre-capitalism), to having (nascent capitalism), to appearing (contemporary capitalism).  This focus upon appearances leads us to live spectacular lives, wherein we lose track of ourselves as genuine historical agents capable of engaging in transformative actions.  Instead, we become focused upon creating certain images (or brands) around ourselves.  It is this focus that I think has infused much of the culture of resistance (Andrew Heath and Joseph Potter analyze this in greater detail in their book, The Rebel Sell: Why the Culture Can’t be Jammed).  Thus, people think they are creating a change simply by dressing in black, disrupting traffic, tipping over newspaper boxes, and so on.  But this is mostly untrue.  The truth is that the protest on February 13^th failed to achieve its objective and to claim it as a victory is dishonest.  Not only that, but to claim it as a victory – which I’m sure is done with good motives, in order to inspire people to continue to resist, to not give up, and so on – is actually self-defeating.  It is self-defeating because it prevents us from learning from our failures so that we can go on to succeed.  Failure must be truly recognized if success is to follow.  To call failure success is only to ensure that we will continue to fail.

Now I wish to highlight this because I think that the same criticism applies to many of the actions being taken by Christians who are trying to pursue an alternative economics and restructure their lives together.  Sadly, much of that activity remains stuck at the level of image, appearance, and simulacrum, and fails to get to the core of things or create any significant or genuinely meaningful change.  Therefore, it is my hope that those who attend this conference on Kingdom Economics will be able to make the transition from words to deeds and from a series of failures to Spirit-empowered success.  It is time that more Christians stopped talking amongst themselves and joined others on the barricades.  It is time that more Christians spent less time trying to find the perfect theological perspective on reality, and spent more time actually participating in reality.  And, perhaps it is also time that we learn to sacrifice some of our values and beliefs in order to enact positive change.  To be very honest, I would be willing to abandon my own values if I thought, even for a minute, that doing so would make a difference for those who are oppressed and abandoned today.  Now, before you dismiss this idea out of hand, do remember that Jesus was damned and forsaken by God because of his commitment to the poor and abandoned, and Paul also writes that he would be willing to cursed and cut off from Christ if it would assist in the salvation of Israel.  The pursuit of abundant life (for all, not just for some) might well lead us to be counted amongst the damned.  The pursuit of God’s economics might very well result in our excommunication.  So be it.  Despite everything, we will continue to pray: Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, have mercy upon us, sinners.

Lately, at theStory, we are tackling the theology around the scriptures.  What are they?  What do they have to say to us?  How much authority should they have?  They are questions that need to be dealt with over and over again because every thing we deal with uses the Bible as a tool to help teach and understand.  It’s crucial that a community comes to agreement on what the Bible is, and how it is to be used within their community before teaching is ever done from it.  So this is what we are attempting to do.  Build a theology of the Bible.  This isn’t to put into stone what the Bible is absolutely (there has been enough Christians in history that have tried to do that already).  Rather it is simply making a decision that this is where we are coming from.  If someone disagrees on how we read the Bible, that is ok, but at some point we have to make a decision and explain what role the Bible has in our community.

I am not one for certain absolute statements of truth.  I don’t think we do a very good job at them so I tend to stray away from them and prefer to be taught and challenged by stories and dialogue.  However, at some point we all need to make a decision that this is what is going to happen or this is what we believe so we can move onto more things.  It isn’t to say we are absolutely right or that we will never change.  It is to say though that this is what we are agreed upon for now, so all conversation and dialogue can evolve to newer things.  If the conversation needs to come up again at a later time about what the Bible is and what role it should play, then that is fine and we will have that conversation.  We can’t live our entire lives skeptical of everything all the time or else we will never make any progress.  At some point we need to make decisions and just move on, acknowledging along the way that we could be wrong, unafraid to go back and give reason for our beliefs and still be challenged on them, but we are doing the best we can and avoiding being paralyzed by uncertainty.

Which leads me to the idea of “non-negotiables.”  This is a term that many use to explain things that they are unwilling to change their mind on.  Typically these things are beliefs about the resurrection, the atonement etc.  The creeds are normally considered non-negotiable.  Some people have more of them like sexuality, afterlife, environment and others have very little.  I take issue with the word non-negotiable.  It is basically saying the dialogue is over, you aren’t changing your mind so let’s talk about something else.  There is no longer room to grow, evolve or be challenged if you are unwilling to change or are unwilling to be open to change.  I would take the stance that no thing, ever, should be non-negotiable (and for all you philosophers out there, this statement is negotiable, leave a comment to negotiate).  I would argue though that only in the places where you are willing to negotiate, be challenged and admit that you could be wrong are the places that you will ever grow and evolve.  It is the paradox of dialogue.  You use logic, you make statements, you argue your points but there is always someone else in the conversation who is doing the same thing on the other side who is just as passionate as you are.  If you had a non-negotiable then it becomes a one sided conversation, you have stopped listening to the other person.  Who really cares what they are saying if you are unwilling to negotiate your own position.  Non-negotiables turn dialogues into monologues.  You end up giving instructions, using cliches and making generalized statements without having your facts challenged.

This isn’t to say that you cannot believe something and be shaped and formed by that thing.  This isn’t to say that you can’t have foundational beliefs that other beliefs grow from.  Isn’t this essentially what faith is?  You believe something that isn’t certain.  It isn’t necessarily impossible, and it could be probable or improbable, but it is not for certain or else it is no longer faith.  This is simply saying that when you choose to be unwilling to change your mind on something, you cease to grow in that area.

My issue is when non-negotiables are being forced on you by the opposing party.  If we must have non-negotiables, then they belong with people that agree with them, not against people that disagree with them.  If you and I are going to have a conversation about Jesus’ sermon on the mount and the implications it has for our lives then you and I must first have some sort of agreement and understanding on what are the previous assumptions that we both are allowed to have in the dialogue.  If/when we both can agree on certain presuppositions, then the conversation can progress.  This is where non-negotiables (if we must call them that) have their place.  They do not have a place when someone doesn’t agree on the non-negotiable.  They cannot be used as items of force or a stand-still in an argument, they should be used to benefit the dialogue and give it more freedom.  Non-negotiables are not there to protect beliefs so they don’t become tainted or to split the camp into two opposing parties.  They are there to give common ground, a foot to stand on and a reference point so the dialogue is fruitful between two people who already agree on what the non-negotiable is.

The creation of the creeds were to do this.  They were created to give Christians unity and direction to grow and evolve as a church.  However they were also used forcefully to kick people out of the church and create an us and them mentality, and this is where my problem lies.  Just because someone disagrees with your non-negotiables is not reason to kick someone out of a church, or your conversation.  Rather it just means you should be having a different conversation.  Seek to learn and be educated by the questions they have about your so called non-negotiables.  Be challenged.  Accept that you could be wrong and use it as an opportunity to become more honest in your faith but don’t use it as an attack weapon to make wild accusations that really have nothing to do with the topic.

Knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry human beings pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other.
- Paulo Freire

So here is an idea off the top of my head. Forgive me for not thinking out the logistics of it all, but I’m allowed to dream so let me be.

What if the summer Olympics had a permanent location, and that location was Haiti. I think we are at about the point where the Western world owes some poorer countries that we’ve oppressed could use some favour coming their way. Hosting the Olympics would mean massive amounts of infrastructure upgrades for their major cities and would be a major source of employment for all kinds of Haitians. The western countries, who are all bidding to bring the Olympics to their countries could all pitch in large sums of money to benefit the Haitian people and have an excellent permanent facility for the games every four years.

Each country would get a certain amount of ticket allocated every four years and that many people from their country could come. It could also be used as an international training facility for the other 3 years and 50 weeks, which would mean you would have to keep employing Haitians all year long. Basically, Haiti’s export market would be the Olympics.

It will never happen. Countries are all too prideful and want to show off their sites and spend billions of dollars on flashy opening ceremonies and HD camera shots of their tourist sites. They wouldn’t want to throw any real money at benefiting and uplifting another country out of debt when they don’t stand to directly benefit from it (ie. we will give them our rice really cheap so we don’t have to buy their rice from their markets).

Find the poorest cold country in the world and do the same for the winter Olympics. Permanent location. I think it has potential. That’s my idea before I go to bed.

Pastor and I went to the bank today and we bypassed the lineup outside and went straight in- pastor saying that we’re just going to ‘information’.  Then inside the bank there’s about 15 people lined up and pastor, after going to information…. goes up and stands beside someone already at a teller and waits for them to finish.   Then he starts doing his own banking.   Just went in front of 15 people… classic.   I asked him about it after and he said ‘the people in line have longer to live than me, they can wait.’

And now I pass you on to Rachel…

The rooster always wakes me up. Early. Earlier than I get up, ever! Even for work at 7am.

Lucky I brought ear plugs because I remembered that a rooster liked to crow in Swaziland as well. Right outside my window it seems, but I’m sure everyone feels that way. The dogs bark too, but they don’t bother me as much.

I am usually one of the first ones up and decide to get a bit of reading for school. Pretty soon the house was bustling with people and the tent city outside my window was singing as they make breakfast.

The past two days we have sorted medications to get ready for distribution at our medical clinic. Outside the music is blaring and Justin Timberlake is bringing sexy back. The children are singing along serenading us as we sort.

The tent city outside has no latrine, so there are current problems with illness as a result of that, no clean water, cooking over fires and a variety of other disaster related problems. It is not easy for the people. And yet, they are strong and resilient.

We went with Emma’s sister, Olange to go check on the mom and her newborn living in the backyard. The baby is so small. I’ve never seen a baby 2 days old before. We were able to do some health teaching with the mom and ask her how the breastfeeding is going. She seems to be doing well. It helps that Emma’s sister is also a nurse in Miami (and speaks Creole!). It made me realize how versatile/flexible nursing is…health teaching in a tent with mom and baby in Port au Prince. Amazing.

The past two days have been Shelter Box setup days. Shelter boxes are these huge plastic containers that hold a 6 person tent, water jugs, cooking utensils (sometimes a stove), tools, sleeping bags, toys for children, etc. We were able to get a substantial donation. Our team was pretty upset to still see over 3000 Shelter boxes sitting in the warehouse waiting for families. They were donated to World Vision. I hope they get out of that warehouse soon!

Once we get word that a Shelter Box needs to be set up and so we jump up and hop into the TapTap to get on our way. (This being said, transportation is a huge issue here. So this is based on the assumption that a TapTap is available.)
It is amazing driving through Port au Prince. Today it seemed to be laundry day for the women and an afternoon of checkers for the older men. Children would wave to us as we drove by and we yell “Bonju” (Creole hello, similar to Bonjour in French). We passed by one house where they are starting to rebuild out of the rubble.

Soon after driving down many dirt streets full of potholes and bumps, we arrive at the intended destination. We jump out and greet the family and ask them where they would like their new tent. One friend of the family who spoke pretty good English told us that their last tent wasn’t that great and that they are so happy to have this one. These two adorable girls come up to me and say in perfect English, you are beautiful. I think they were practicing in the corner and working up courage to talk to me.

We set up a few more tents. But it takes so long to navigate through the traffic that we only get a few up today. But the families are so grateful it makes it worthwhile. The second house we visited is the house of a pastor. The church is still standing and actually one of the biggest (and nicest) we have seen. Then we walk around back and see where the family is living. It’s a house made out of rubble and remains. There is a large cement cistern where they are collecting water. I think it is their drinking water because they ask us for some. We don’t have any to give. I feel awful. Despite the shelter, there is always another important need. I wish we could fill them all.

The next place we visit is a tent community near a ravine. There is garbage everywhere and pigs sleeping in the garbage. There are people everywhere. This young girl with a cast on her leg and arm comes out of a tent. She has no crutches and no follow up appointment. She asks us to take a look at her foot. She has some concerns. We assess her and everything seems okay at the moment, but she really needs to be seen and get that cast off. We do some more health teaching in the tent. I love nursing!

This tent was a bit more frustrating. I guess the manufacturers are having trouble keeping up with the demand so it’s a few different types of tent. I am not a camper, but give me a tent and I could set it up. We’re experts.

When we get back to Pastor’s house, we go upstairs to rest (it is like 95 degrees outside!) We are informed that a family living with Pastor has been trying to set up at tent since we left to go help the others. We quickly run to their aid and get that tent up faster than any other we have set up. You should have seen their children running and jumping through the tent. It was such a little thing but they were so happy to have a sturdy shelter. It almost made me cry.

The UN flights out of Haiti at the Canadian embassy are no longer on a daily basis and Nathan was unable to get a flight until Friday. So that means he is taking a bus to Dominican in the morning to catch a cheap flight home. Which is sad for me, since I just got here. We dropped him off at the “bus station” near the American Embassy and the UN compound. The line at the American Embassy is triple the size at the Canadian one!
It was so weird leaving Nathan in the middle of nowhere (it seemed) to fend for himself. I know he’s fine. But it was still an awful feeling. I may or may not have cried.

We spend most afternoons chatting and getting to know one another a bit better, showing pictures, sharing stories, and helping out in any way we can.

One thing that I have been thinking about is that in Haiti, I sleep on a mattress, wherever they tell me to, eat whatever is in front of me (and am always grateful), “shower” or wash with whatever cold water is available…I don’t care about my appearance, fashion, what’s on nightly tv, etc. I am not trying to compare, just wondering why life is not more like that in North America?! Why are we so spoiled and selfish? I think everyone should try to feel hungry for a day (or two) or sleep on the ground outside (in the rain) and see what it is like for the people. I’ve barely put myself in their shoes…I can’t even begin to imagine.

Sidebar- I’m really thinking and wresting with the social determinants of health this weeks. I might post about this separately when I can collect my thoughts. I want to believe that they should be human rights, but everything seems so political. I’m beginning to understand why people are starting to refer to them as the political determinants of health.

After dinner more visitors arrive and we sit to chat until we’re too sleepy to continue. It has been a hot and sticky day so there is a line up for the showers (trickle of cold water out of a tap in the ceiling, but hey I’m not complaining! It’s the most refreshing shower I’ve ever had!) Then we pile into bed to get ready for the next.

The dogs howl at the rain. I hope the tents we set up with hold up to the elements and I pray for those without. For them, it will be a long night…I think about the Shelterboxes in the warehouse.

• Going to Haiti
• God Saved Those Two Houses Over There: Haiti Day 1-2
• The Earthquake Only Lasted 15 Seconds, Praise God: Haiti Day 3-4
• Haiti Day 4-5
• Helpful Links on Haiti Aid
• Haiti Day 5-6: Finally Some Communication with the UN and Getting Things Rolling
• Haiti Day 7 - Brazil Just Gave Us A Truckload of Food
• Haiti Day 8
• Haiti Day 11 and 12
• Haiti Day 1 and 2: Rachel's Version
• Pastor Martinez Jovin from Haiti
• Haiti Day 3 and 4: Rachel's Version
• Haiti: Becoming Part of the Problem, not the Solution

Ladies and Gentlemen, introducing the man behind the stories, and his wonderful, caring wife.  Martinez and Emma Jovin.

• Going to Haiti
• God Saved Those Two Houses Over There: Haiti Day 1-2
• The Earthquake Only Lasted 15 Seconds, Praise God: Haiti Day 3-4
• Haiti Day 4-5
• Helpful Links on Haiti Aid
• Haiti Day 5-6: Finally Some Communication with the UN and Getting Things Rolling
• Haiti Day 7 - Brazil Just Gave Us A Truckload of Food
• Haiti Day 8
• Haiti Day 11 and 12
• Haiti Day 1 and 2: Rachel's Version
• Pastor Martinez Jovin from Haiti
• Haiti Day 3 and 4: Rachel's Version
• Haiti: Becoming Part of the Problem, not the Solution

Early in the morning we awoke (2:45ish) to get ready to get on the road to Haiti and to our surprise there was breakfast on the table. We received word from Nathan that the earliest UN flight available was not until Tuesday morning and we would not be able to bring our supplies on that flight. So, we decided to take the bus. But that didn’t pan out either. So Pastor hired a fellow to drive us all the way to Haiti. Carlos spoke both Spanish and French (not Creole) and drove us for the 5 hours. I could understand him pretty well. He told me he was proud that he can get there in 5 hours when the bus takes 9 hours. Nathan took the bus. We waited at a Total gas station and slept until Nathan and Daniel picked us up to take us into Port au Prince. Driving into Haiti was interesting. The border was complete chaos. People were everywhere! Motorcycles flying by with too many people on them. Cabs (called Tap Taps here) going way to fast with too many people on board. We realized that using your horn here is not asking for permission, it’s telling other drivers that you are coming and to go faster or get out of the way. It was difficult to tell at the border what was for sale and what was aid. There were people in boats rowing food back to somewhere…hungry bellies I’m guessing. Living on a border-town in Sarnia, I’m so used to customs. However, we just drove right on through, I can completely understand how those people could traffic children easily. There were two gates we passed through and it seemed like there were just average people holding the doors open. There were not many armed or uniformed men patrolling.

Driving into Haiti we noticed a large UN compound present at the top of the hill. We continued on to the gas station without problem, just a few stares

It was so nice to give Nate a huge hug and he helped us load all our luggage onto Pastor Martinez’s Land Rover. The streets here are worse than Swaziland. It’s a wonder these vehicles survive! A fellow here told us there are not a lot of North American made trucks because they simply don’t last. I can understand why. There are more potholes and road bumps than actual road it seems. We traveled through Port au Prince. At first it was difficult to see the devastation until you got into the core of the city. But as you continued on, it was more and more obvious, more CNN style stuff.

It’s hard to truly express and I’m sure a lot of you have seen it on TV, but it’s different in person.

I don’t really have words just yet.

We got to meet the rest of the people living here. It’s kind of a mish-mash of everyone and anyone willing to help out. Nurses mostly, which makes me smile. We ate lunch together (peanut butter sandwiches) and then the 4 of us (Andrew, Connie, Perry and myself, crashed hard for a quick nap).

Nathan and Chris were on their way out the door to collect the Shelter Boxes Nathan has been blogging about. We unloaded 18 large tents with supplies included which is awesome! We are going to be setting one (or two) up today. I can’t imagine how you would decide who gets one and who doesn’t. I’m glad it’s not me making those kind of decisions.

After that, Nathan and I walked to the Canadian Embassy (don’t worry Mom, it’s just around the corner) and I’m glad I went because Nathan doesn’t speak ANY languages. Most everyone here (even NGO or UN/Aid workers are primarily French or Creole) and I’m lucky that my comprehension is much better than my conversation. We quickly met two children, ages 11 and 13 who spoke broken English and we started chatting.

The first thing he says to me is “my father died, in the earthquake.”

I’m speechless. Then he chatters on, asking me all sorts of questions: who am I, where did I come from, how old am I, what do I do for a living? We converse in “franglais” until we get to the Embassy. Nathan is trying to figure out how to get home. I ask the guard there if there is any information and he tells us to come back in the morning. I guess Nathan could survive without me as long as he had his phone and his app to translate from English to French. So our escorts wait for us and we chat all the way back. They are very nice young boys. I ask them where they live and they point down the road, I’m guessing the tent city, but I’m not certain.

It’s hot outside and we come in Pastor’s house to cool down.

Pretty soon, we get word that there is a family that needs a shelter. The mom has just had a baby and there is a bit of confusion as to when and where, but we know it’s recent and guessing she was discharged from the hospital today, the baby is 1-2 days old. Pastor comes upstairs to ask us if we can go set up one of the Shelter box tents for them in his backyard. So outside we go in the dusk (6pm) and start setting up this large tent. The family moved right in.

After reading about healthy breastfeeding and mother/baby issues this week for my classes I am wondering about how this new mother is managing. My heart goes out to her and the family. I want to help and then realize that we kind of just did? But it doesn’t seem enough. Dinner is rice and beans. Pretty delicious. And for dessert, mango! Super delicious. The boys sat with Pastor to ask him about priorities. He looks worn out. After dinner it’s dark and the day is mostly over. We email, read, chat and go off to bed one by one. I am early to bed because I’m still sleepy from travel. I shove in my ear plugs and get ready for barking dogs and crowing roosters to sing me to sleep.

• Going to Haiti
• God Saved Those Two Houses Over There: Haiti Day 1-2
• The Earthquake Only Lasted 15 Seconds, Praise God: Haiti Day 3-4
• Haiti Day 4-5
• Helpful Links on Haiti Aid
• Haiti Day 5-6: Finally Some Communication with the UN and Getting Things Rolling
• Haiti Day 7 - Brazil Just Gave Us A Truckload of Food
• Haiti Day 8
• Haiti Day 11 and 12
• Haiti Day 1 and 2: Rachel's Version
• Pastor Martinez Jovin from Haiti
• Haiti Day 3 and 4: Rachel's Version
• Haiti: Becoming Part of the Problem, not the Solution