I think . . .

I think this is who I am:

Race: Greyish-purple
Culture: Postmodern eclectic
Language: English
Theology: Postmodern evangelical
Liturgical preference: Western contemporary or multi-cultural eclectic.
Using words like 'postmodern' and 'eclectic' indicate a vagueness that says 'you may not define me, I will choose how to define myself' - where define means essence not description. I give my right to self-definition over to the living Jesus and accept the guidance and power of the Holy Spirit in trying to make that a reality in my life.

Why?

I think in South Africa, especially in the Methodist Church, we have the ability to get away from race. I don't think we need it and I don't think it is helpful. What I have heard from Amahoro, and from people who talk about postcolonialism, tends to re emphasise race. White people have 'done' stuff to black people and now white people must fix it or stop fixing it or black people must do this or that. While I respect the need to learn from history, I want to stop worrying about whether I as a white person should be working in a predominantly black church or not. We are people together and will learn from each other.

Whether I like it or not I am English-speaking and while I can follow a little in other languages I do not have the aptitude to learn other languages easily. The other things tend to be a matter of choice and are open to change and growth! Culture, language, theology, liturgical style (and also churc h structure) tend to be the separators in the Methodist Church. Is this wrong? Or should we just work together with an interesting mix?

I think this could be rearranged and there are gaps, but I am going to work with this for the next few months.
(It's interesting that it didn't occur to me to put gender in there. I wonder why not?)