Thursday, 31 July 2014

Inspirational people: Richard Teo. "Our greatest fear should not be of failure but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter" Francis Chan

失敗不應該是我們最大的恐懼Our greatest fear should not be of failure  
 
 
 
 
“Our greatest fear should not be of failure but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.”
 
Francis Chan, Crazy Love: Overwhelmed by a Relentless God.
 
「我們最該恐懼的不是失敗。在不重要的事上過度成功才是我們最該恐懼的。」
 
 
 
 
新加坡千萬身家美容醫生Richard Teo英年早逝的臨終感言:
 
 
 
 
大家早安!因為化療的緣故,我的聲音有點沙啞,敬請原諒。首先我以自我介紹開始我的講話:我的名字叫理查德,受邀於我的朋友丹尼而來。
 
 從年輕時候起,我就是當今社會的典型產品,這之前,我的生活理念與習慣一直受到現今媒體的渲染。從小,我在社會環境的影響下就一直以為快樂是以成功來衡量。
 
 來自小康之家的我自小就極為好勝,無論是運動、學業、領導能力,我都要爭取成為最棒,最好的!雖然也都能如我所願,但這些並不能為我帶來金錢財富。
 
 幾年前,當我還是眼科的見習生時,當我看見許多醫生朋友都一一離開國營醫院到私營企業行醫,而且個個都賺大錢時,我就開始感到不耐煩。當時我對自己說,夠了,我現在走的這條路太長了。
 
 當時醫療美容業正在蓬勃發展,相信你們也知道美容行業在幾年前就一直迅速發展。我也認為那是個賺錢的大好良機。當時我就對自己說,不能待在眼科了,我要到醫療美容界發展。之後,我就真的離開了國營醫院轉到醫療美容界開拓我的事業。
 
 事實上,我們的社會從沒有把一位普通的全科醫生當成英雄。絕對不會!對他們來說所謂的英雄是上流社會的名媛,政治家及富豪,所以我就立誌要成為他們的一份子,因此我也立誌轉向醫療美容業。當我還在當私營醫院業余全科醫生時,許多病人會抱怨三十塊錢的診金太貴。他們會說,哇!這醫生收費好貴呀!但這批同樣的病人卻願意付高達新幣一萬元做抽脂手術!後來我就對自己說,好!那就別再為人治病了,我要成為美容師,一位受過正式訓練,備有醫療知識的美容師。
 
 後來我真的無論抽脂手術,隆胸手術,眼皮手術等等都做…這一切真的為我帶來了財富,我的診所預約期從剛開始的1個星期到1個月到2個月,之後還排到3個月!美容行業的需求量大得驚人,許多女人都迫不及待地排隊等著醫生把他們變更漂亮,那麽多愛美的女人讓我樂此不疲。診所的生意蒸蒸日上,我從1位醫生,再聘請2位,3位,甚至4位醫生。我對所擁有的這一切都永遠無法感到滿足,因為我需要更多更多。後來我們就擴展到印度尼西亞,並設立了特別小組專門把印度尼西亞的一些闊太太引來診所。事事如意的我以為我叱咤風雲的時機到了。
 
 大約在20112月份,我告訴自己,既然我現在有那麽多閑錢,我要為自己買第1輛法拉利。當我準備下訂單的同時,我也在物色買土地蓋洋房。我對一位年賺500萬的銀行家朋友說,來!我們一起買地建幾棟房子吧。
 
 當時正是我人生的巔峰,我正準備好好地享受一番,在此同時,我的朋友們對我說,理查德,跟我們一起去教堂吧。
 
 在二十年前,我就已經是受過洗禮的基督徒了,但那時是因為我的朋友都成了教徒。為了跟風,我也參加洗禮儀式。這樣一來我就能在表格上填寫“基督徒”三個字來享受跟風的樂趣;事實上,我連一本聖經都沒有,也不知那是什麽東西。我去了幾回教堂後,覺得無趣,就對自己說,不去教堂了,是時候該上大學了。我還有好多東西要追求-譬如女朋友,學業,體操等。我心想我擁有的這一切不是靠上帝而是靠自己努力得來的,有誰還需要上帝?我靠自己就行了。
20112月,在滿腔傲慢中,我告訴我的朋友們說,你去叫你的牧師把禮拜時間改到下午兩點,我可能會考慮參加。
 
 隔天,我作了PET scan(正子掃描)之後,醫生就證實了我患上末期肺癌第4B期並且已擴散到腦部、半條脊椎、兩個肺都長滿了密密麻麻的腫瘤、肝臟、腎上腺等。我對自己說,這不可能!我昨天還到健身房舉重健身,到底是怎麽回事?不知您是否能了解我當時的心情。前一刻我還站在高高的山峰上,怎麽知道第二天就收到這晴天霹靂的消息,我的世界頓時顛覆。
 
 我無法接受!我有一百多個親戚,他們當中沒有一人得過癌癥。我一直都認為我擁有很好的基因,這不該發生在我身上。我的親戚當中有好多都煙不離手但他們都沒事,為什麽患肺癌的會是我?我無法接受這事實!
 
 我臥在手術臺上,楞視著冰冷的周圍,突然間聽到一個聲音,那不是外來的。這個聲音雖小,但我很清楚的感覺到那是發自心裏的聲音,是我從未體驗過的感覺。
 
 祂說:這一切都必須發生在你人生的高峰!因為那是唯一能夠讓你了解的方法。我頓時嚇了一跳,哇!那是哪裏來的聲音?一般是當我們自言自語時,我們會用,好!我該幾點離開這裏?或者說我該上哪兒吃飯?我們不會對自己說,你該去哪兒?
 
 但這個聲音卻說,這一切都必須發生在你人生的高峰!因為那是唯一能夠讓你了解的方法。當時的我情緒崩潰忍不住痛哭落淚,接下來的日子裏,我才深深明白為什麽那是唯一能讓我了解的方法。
 
 我一向驕傲也很有天賦,所以我認為我的生命中不需要依靠任何人。我充滿自信與自負。那之後,我也開始了解到陷在困境中的人並不一定是貧窮的。事實上,許多貧窮人過得比你我還幸福快樂,因為他們容易滿足。困苦能發生在有錢人的身上,它能是肉體上、精神上或是社群中等等;而我也在接下來的幾個月裏體會到什麽是真正的快樂。
 
 從前的我以為有錢就是快樂,而快樂就是要不斷地追求財富。
 
 讓我告訴你當我在臨終邊緣時,我的法拉利跑車,想買的土地和洋房,生意等對我已經變得毫無意義了。這些東西都無法為我帶來一丁點的安慰和快樂,你認為我還能抱著我的跑車而感到愉悅嗎?不!不可能!真正的快樂是來自於與人的溝通,許多時候都是我們的自尊心作祟。
 
 從前的我會在農歷新年時,駕著我的跑車到親朋戚友們的家向他們炫耀,我當時還以為那是快樂。你真的認為那賣你跑車的銷售員真的替您高興嗎?你的親朋好友真的能與您分享你所謂的喜悅嗎?
 
 事實上,你只是讓他們更加羨慕、妒嫉甚至憎恨你。他們並不能和您分享你所謂的喜悅,那只是非常短暫的炫耀、讓他們知道我擁有他們沒能力擁有的,而我當時竟然以為那就是快樂!所以其實我們是把自己的快樂建築在別人的痛苦上,那不叫快樂。
 
 當我面對死亡時,我無法想象我還能抱著我心愛的跑車而感到歡喜。真正的快樂是來自於人與人之間的溝通。幾個月前,當我還感到非常頹喪時,我發現與家人、朋友們溝通能使我更有力量,他們在我身邊分享我的苦與樂、那才是真正的快樂。
 
 你們知道什麽能使你展顏歡笑嗎?那種快樂是來自於幫助受苦難的人(助人為樂之本)。因為我經歷過、所以我知道其中苦樂的滋味。
 
 有很多和我一樣患癌的病人跟我說,有很多人不斷地告訴他們:你一定要保持樂觀,一定要樂觀。他們心裏想:說得好!你為何不試著站在我的立場,試著告訴你自己一定要保持樂觀。
 
 我就不一樣。因為我目前還是病患,所以我就到處與其它癌癥病人分享及鼓勵他們,因為我與他們是同病相連,所以也使我們比較容易溝通。
 
 讓我總結,我提過我們必須盡早認清我們生命中的重點,而且是越早越好,千萬不要像我,因為以我過去的個性,我別無選擇,只能通過最痛苦的路才能使我重新認識這些。
 
 我認為富裕並沒有錯,但問題是我們不懂得支配財富。我們有越多還要擁有更多,我經歷過,那是種泥足深陷的情況,它會讓你無法自拔而失去方向,這都是我們人類的本能,不容易躲避。
 
 我們都是專業人士,有一天我們都會各自到不同的私營企業行醫,開始我們的事業- 這是當然的!你該記得一點就是,你所累積的財富其實並不屬於你的。我們都無權擁有這些財富,因為有一天你一定會拋下這一切。
 
 今天就到此,很高興能與你們分享,謝謝!
 
"Your Majesty, Some men's ambition is art. Some men's ambition is fame. Some men's ambition is gold. My ambition is the souls of men."
William Booth, founder of the Salvation Army, when asked by King Edward VII to sum up his life's work.
「陛下,有些人的野心在於藝術。有些人的野心在於名聲。有些人的野心在於金子。我的野心在於人的靈魂。」
 
 
Mayday五月天【乾杯Cheers
 
 
 
 
我傾向於以反順序看事物:如果此生所追求的人事物能使我們在臨終前回想時露出笑容的話,此生就很受祝福了。
 
I tend to look at things in reverse order: if what one's pursuing in life will bring a smile to that person's face as he/she thinks about it laying on his/her deathbed, then he/she’s very blessed.
 
 
Dr Richard Teo’s speech (original English version)
 
Hi good morning to all of you. My voice is a bit hoarse from the chemotherapy, so please bear with me. I thought I’ll just introduce myself. My name is Richard, I’m a friend of Danny’s, who invited me here.
 
I’d just begin to say that I’m a typical product of today’s society. Before this, I was talking about how the media influences us etc. So I’m a typical product of what the media portrays. From young, I’ve always been under the influence and impression that to be happy, is to be successful. And to be successful, is to be wealthy. So I led my life according to this motto.
 
Coming from a poor average family, back in those days, I was highly competitive, whether in sports, studies, leadership. I wanted it all. I’ve been there, done that. But at the end of the day, it’s still about money.
 
So in my recent last years, I was a trainee in ophthalmology, but I was getting impatient, cos I had friends of mine who were going out into private practise, making tonnes of money. And there I was, stuck in a traineeship. So I said, ‘Enough, it’s getting too long.’ At that time, there was a surge in protégés of aesthetic medicine. I’m sure you’re aware, aesthetic medicine had peaked over the last few years, and I saw good money in there. So much so that I said, ‘Forget about ophthalmology, I’m gonna do aesthetic medicine.’ So that’s what I did.
 
The truth is, nobody makes heroes out of the average GP in the neighbourhood. They don’t. They make heroes out of rich celebrities, politicians, rich and famous people. So I wanted to be one of these. I dived straight into aesthetic medicine. People were not willing to pay when I was doing locum back in those days. Anything more than $30, they would complain that “Wah, this lo kun (doctor) jing qwee (very expensive)”. They made noise and they were not happy. But the same people were willing to pay $10 000 for a liposuction. So I said, ‘Well, let’s stop healing the sick, I’m gonna become a beautician; a medically-trained beautician.’
 
And that was what I did – liposuction, breast augmentation, eyelid surgeries, you name it, we do it. It was very good money. My clinic, when we started off, waiting time was 1 week; 1 month; became 2 months; became 3 months. There was so much demand that people were literally queuing up to have aesthetic work done on them. Vain women – easy life!
 
So the clinic grew. I was so overwhelmed, from 1 doctor, I employed 2, then 3, then 4 doctors, and carried on. Nothing is ever enough. I wanted more and more and more. So much so that we set up shop in Indonesia to lure all the Indonesian tai tai’s. We set up shop, set up a team of people there, to get more Indonesian patients to come in. So, things were doing well. I’m there, my time has arrived.
 
Around some time in February last year, I said, ‘OK, I have so much spare cash, it’s time to get my first Ferrari. So there I was, getting ready for the deposit. ‘OK! There comes my first Ferrari!’ I was looking for land, to share with some of my friends. I have a banker friend who makes $5 million a year. So I thought, ‘Come, let’s come together. Let’s buy some land and build our houses.’
 
I was at my prime, getting ready to enjoy. At the same time, my friend Danny had a revival. They were going back to church, some of my close friends. They told me, ‘Richard, come, join us, come back to church.’
 
I have been a Christian for 20 years; I was baptised 20 years ago, but it was because it was fashionable to be a Christian then. All my friends were becoming Christians then. It was fashionable! I wanted to be baptised, so that when I filled in a form, I could put there “Christian” – feels good. In truth, I had never had a bible; I don’t know what the bible is all about.
 
I went to church for a while, after some time, I got tired. I said it’s time to go to NUS, stop going to church. I had a lot more things to pursue in NUS – girls, studies, sports etc. After all, I had achieved all these things without God today, so who needs God? I myself can achieve anything I want.
 
In my arrogance, I told them, “You know what? You go tell your pastor to change your sermon to 2pm. I will consider coming to church.” Such arrogance! And I said 1 statement in addition to that – till date, I don’t know I’ve regretted saying that – I told Danny and my friends, “If God really wanted me to come back to church, He will give me a sign.”. Lo and behold, 3 weeks later, I was back at church.
 
In March 2011, out of the blues – I was still running around, ‘cause I’m a gym freak and I always go to the gym training, running, swimming 6 days a week. I had some backache, and that’s all I had, but it was persistent. And so I went for an MRI to exclude prolapsed disc. And the day before I had my scan, I was still in the gym, lifting heavy weights, doing my squats. And the next day, they found that half my spine had bone marrow replacement. I said, “Woah, sorry, what’s that?”
 
We had a PET scan the next day, and they diagnosed that I had terminal lung cancer, stage 4B. It had spread to the brain, half the spine, whole of my lungs were filled with tumour, liver, adrenals…
 
I said, “Can’t be, I was just at the gym last night, what’s going on?” I’m sure you know how it feels – though I’m not sure if you know how it feels. One moment I was there at the peak, the next day, this news came and I was totally devastated. My whole world just turned upside down.
 
I couldn’t accept it. I have a hundred relatives on both sides, my mom and my dad. 100 of them. And not a single one has cancer. To me, in my mind, I have good genes, I’m not supposed to be having this! Some of my relatives are heavy chain smokers. Why am I having lung cancer? I was in denial.
 
So the next day, I was still in a state of denial, still unable to accept what was going on. There I was lying in an operating theatre in a hospital, for a needle biopsy (for histology). There I was, just completed the biopsy, and lying in the operating theatre. The nurses and doctors had left; told me I had to wait for 15 minutes to do a check X-ray to make sure there’s no pneumothorax (a complication).
 
And there I was, lying on the operating table, staring blankly at the ceiling in a cold, quiet operating theatre. Suddenly I just heard an inner voice; it was not like coming from outside. It was inside. This small inner voice that I had never felt before. And it said very specifically, it said, “This has to happen to you, at your prime, because it’s the only way you can understand.”
 
I said, “Woah, why did that come from?” You know, when you speak to yourself, you’d say, “OK, what time should I leave this place? Where shall I have dinner after this?” You’d speak from a first person point of view. You don’t say, “Where should YOU go after this?” Whereas the voice that came spoke as a third party. It said, “This has to happen to YOU, at YOUR prime, because this is the only way YOU can understand.” At that time, my emotions just overflowed and I broke down and cried, alone there. And I knew then, subsequently, what it means to understand that why this is the only way.
 
Because I had been so proud of myself, my whole life, I needed nobody else. I was gifted with things that I could do, why do I need anybody else? I was just so full of myself that there was no other way I could have turned back to God.
 
In fact, if I were diagnosed with stage 1 or 2, I would have been looking around busily for the best cardiothoracic surgeon, remove a section of the lobe (do a lobectomy), do preventive chemotherapy…The chances of it being cured is extremely high. Who needs God? But I had stage 4B. No man can help, only God can.
 
A series of events happened after that. I wasn’t sold after that, because of the inner voice, I became believing, prayers, all that. No I wasn’t. To me, it was just ‘maybe there was a voice; or maybe that was just me talking to myself.’ I didn’t buy the story.
 
What happened next was that I was being prepared for chemotherapy. I started off with a whole brain radiation therapy first; takes about 2 -3 weeks. In the meantime they prepared me for chemotherapy, supplements etc. One of the things they used for chemo was a thing called Zometa. Zometa – they use it to strengthen the bones; once the bone marrow (replacement) is cured of cancer cells, it becomes hollow, so we need Zometa to strengthen the bone to prevent compression fractures.
 
One of the side effects of Zometa is that it can cause osteonecrosis (bone death) of the jaw, and I had to have my wisdom teeth removed. Years ago, I had my upper wisdom teeth removed, cos it was giving me trouble. The lower ones didn’t give me trouble so I said, “Forget it, just leave it.” So of cause, Danny volunteered to remove it for me.
 
So there I was, lying there in a dental chair, asking myself, suffering all the side effects of radiotherapy, and now I have to go through wisdom tooth surgery. As if I’ve not had enough to suffer! So I asked Danny, “Eh, bro, is there any other way? Can I not go though this?” He said, “Yes, you can pray.”
 
I said, “What’s there to lose? Ok lah, pray lah!” And so we prayed. And we did an X-ray after that. Everything was all there, all the appliances and everything. And lo and behold, the Xray showed that there was no wisdom teeth in the lower jaw. I know most people have 4 wisdom teeth, maybe some have none, but to be missing one or 2, as I understand – I’m not too sure, as I understand – is not that common.
 
Still I was, “Nah, I don’t care about that.” To me, as long as I didn’t have to take out the tooth, I was happy. At that point, I still wasn’t sold on prayers. Maybe it was just a coincidence – for whatever it’s worth.
 
I continued meeting my oncologist, asking him, “How long do I have?” I asked him. He said, not more than 6 months. I said, “Even with chemotherapy?” About 3 – 4 months, he said.
 
I couldn’t grasp that. It was difficult to come to terms. And even as I went through radiotherapy, I was struggling everyday, especially when I wake up, hoping that it’s just a nightmare; when I wake up, it’s all over.
 
As I was struggling, day after day, I went into depression, which is the typical denial, depression blah blah blah that you go through. But for 1 reason, I don’t know why, there was this specific day that I was supposed to meet my oncologist. At about 2pm, I felt this sudden surge of peace, comfort, and in fact, a little happiness. It was just overflowing. For no rhyme or reason, it just came about 2pm, as I was getting ready, dressing up to meet my oncologist. So much so that I whats-apped all my friends that, “Bros, I just feel so good suddenly! I don’t know why, it just came!”
 
And it was only days, or was it weeks after, that Danny revealed to me that he had fasted for 2 days for me, and he was bargaining with God, and fasted for 2 dyas, and he ended his fast at that exact same point, about 2pm thereabouts, that this surge of sensation came to me for no rhyme or reason. And I didn’t know that he was fasting for me. And when he ended the fast, I felt that sensation!
 
Whoa, things were getting a bit too coincidental. I was starting to buy a bit of the story, but still I wasn’t sold. As days passed by, I completed my radiotherapy, about 2 weeks plus. Getting ready for chemo, so they let me rest for a few days.
 
See, the mortality rate of lung cancer : Lung cancer has the highest mortality rate. If you add up breast, colorectal (colon) cancer, and prostate cancer (the top few cancers in Singapore for men and women), if you add up the mortality rate of these 3, it still doesn’t add up to lung cancer. Simply because, you understand, you can remove the prostate, the colon, the breast, but you cannot remove your lungs.
 
But there’s about 10% of lung cancer patients who do pretty well for some reasons, because they have this specific mutation; we call it the EGFR mutation. And it happens, only 90% of the time, in Asian ladies who never smoked in their lives. Me, first of all, I’m male. 2ndly, I’m a social smoker. I take one a day after dinner; weekends, when my friends offer me, I take it as well. I’m a light smoker, not a social smoker. But still, my oncologist was still not hopeful for me to have this mutation.
 
The chances of it happening for me was maybe 3-4% for me to get it. That’s why I was being primed to go for chemo. But through all the intense prayers, friends like Danny, people that I don’t even know, it turned out that, during my waiting for chemo, the results came back that I was EGFR positive. I was like, “Woah, good news!” Cos now I don’t have to undergo chemo at that time, because there’s this oral tablet that you can use to control this disease.
 
Just to share with you some idea – this is a CT scan – thorax – of my lungs, before treatment.
 
Every single dot there is a tumour. You can see all the mets (metastasis) there. This is just one single plane. Literally I had it in both lungs, and I had literally tens of thousands of tumour. That’s why the oncologist told me, even with chemo, at most 3-4 months.
 
But because of this mutation, they have this oral medication. This is what happened after 2 months of treatment. As you can see over here; this is what God can do. And that’s why I’m still here having this opportunity to share with you. As you can see over here, the difference between before and after treatment.
 
At that point, I said, “Well, it’s to be expected, isn’t it? The medicine is good.” I’m still not buying the story. Well, the guys prayed for me and the tumour markers started to come down. 90% of the tumours were wiped out, and the tumour markers came down to more than 90% over the next few months.
 
But still, you know, once you have the clinical knowledge, you know the statistics. One year survival, two year survival; having all this knowledge is not a good thing. Cos you live with the knowledge that even with all this, the cancer cells are so unstable, they keep mutating. They will overcome and become resistant to the drugs, and eventually you’re gonna run out of medication.
 
So living with this knowledge is a huge mental struggle, a huge mental torture. Cancer is not just about a physical struggle, it’s a huge mental torture. How do you live with no hope? How do you live with not being able to plan for the next few years? The oncologist tells you to bear with it for the next 1 – 2 months. So it’s a lot of struggles as I went through: March, then April. April was my lowest point, in deep depression, struggling even as I was recovering.
 
And one of those days, I was there in bed, struggling in the afternoon, asking God, “Why? Why do I have to go through this suffering? Why do I have to endure this hardship, this struggle? Why me?”
 
As I fell asleep, in my dreamy state, a vision just came, that says Hebrews 12:7-8.
 
Now mind you, at this time, I had not read the bible. I have no clue what’s Hebrews, I don’t even know how many chapters there are. Totally clueless.
 
But it says Hebrews 12:7-8, very specifically.
 
I didn’t think too much of it. I just continued sleeping. Then I woke up, and I said, “What’s there to lose? I’d just check it out lah!” Danny had bought me a bible; it’s still quite new. I said, “It’s ok, just try.” So I flipped to the Old Testament. Hebrews to me sounds like something ancient, so it should be in the Old Testament right? So I flipped through the Old Testament. No Hebrews there. I was so disappointed.
 
Then I said, “Maybe New Testament, let’s have a look!”. WOW – New Testament, there’s Hebrew’s!! It says Hebrews 12:7-8. It says, “Endure hardship as discipline as God is treating you as His children.”
 
I said, “WAH!! Where did that come from?” I was getting goose pimples all over my body. I said, “This can’t be, right?” I mean, what’s the chance of somebody, who has never read the bible, to have a vision of a chapter of a specific verse, that answers my question directly?
 
I think God called to me directly as I was there sleeping, struggling with it, asking God, “Why do I have to suffer? Why do I have to suffer this?” And God says “Endure hardship as discipline as God is treating you as His child.”
 
At this point, the chance of that happening is even lesser than my EGFR being positive. There’s just no way; there’s so many millions of thousands of verses in the bible, how can I just conjure up something like that?
 
So at that point, I was sold I said, “YOU WIN! YOU WIN!!”
 
Ok , I was convinced. And so from that day onwards, I started believing in my God. And the last time I heard that inner voice was the end of April. And that inner voice, same thing, in the afternoon, as I was sleeping (this time I wasn’t struggling, just going to sleep). In a dreamy state I just heard Him say, “Help others in hardship.”
 
It was more like a command, rather than a statement. And that’s when I embarked on this journey, helping others in hardship. And I realised that hardship is not just about being poor. In fact, I think a lot of poor people are probably happier than a lot of us here. They are so easily contented with whatever they have, they’re probably pretty happy.
 
Hardship can happen to rich people; it can be physical hardship, mental hardship, social, etc. And also over the last few months, I started to understand what this true joy is about. In the past, I substituted true joy with the pursuing of wealth. I thought true joy is about pursuing wealth. Why? Cos let me put it to you this way, in my death bed, I found no joy whatsoever in whatever objects I had – my Ferrari, thinking of the land I was going to buy to build my bungalow etc, having a successful business.
 
It brought me ZERO comfort, ZERO joy, nothing at all. Do you think I can hold onto this piece of metal and it’s going to give true joy? Nah, it’s not going to happen.
 
True joy comes from interaction with other people. And at a lot of times, it is a short term pride, the past. When you pursue your wealth, Chinese New Year is the best time to do it. Drive my Ferrari, show off to my relatives, show off to my friends, do my rounds, and then you thought that was true joy? You really think that those guys who sold you your Ferrari, they share their joy with you? And your relatives, wow, they share this joy with you? In truth, what you have done is just to illicit envy, jealousy, and even hatred. They are not sharing the joy with you, and what I have is that short-term pride that wow, I have something you don’t have! And I thought that was joy!
 
So what we have is basically a short-term pride at the expense of somebody else. And that wasn’t true joy. And I found no joy at all on my deathbed, thinking of my Ferrari – to hold on to it, sayang it?!?
 
True joy I discovered comes from interaction. Over the last few months I was so down. Interaction with my loved ones, my friends, my brothers in Christ, my sisters in Christ, and only then was I able to be motivated, able to be uplifted. To share your sorrow, to share your happiness – that’s true joy.
 
And you know what makes you smile? True joy comes from helping others in hardship, and because I’ve gone through this, I know what hardship entails. In fact, there’re some cancer patients who tell me a lot of times, people come up to them and tell them, “Stay positive. Stay positive.” Yah, right. You come in my shoes and you try to stay positive! You don’t know what you’re talking about!
 
But I have the licence. So I’ve been going out to meet other fellow cancer patients, to share with them, encourage them. And I know, because I’ve been through it, and it’s easier for me to talk to them.
 
And most importantly, I think true joy comes from knowing God. Not knowing about God – I mean, you can read the bible and know about God – but knowing God personally; getting a relationship with God. I think that’s the most important. That’s what I’ve learnt.
 
So if I were to sum it up, I’d say that the earlier we sort out the priorities in our lives, the better it is. Don’t be like me – I had no other way. I had to learn it through the hard way. I had to come back to God to thank Him for this opportunity because I’ve had 3 major accidents in my past – car accidents. You know, these sports car accidents – I was always speeding , but somehow I always came out alive, even with the car almost being overturned. And I wouldn’t have had a chance. Who knows, I don’t know where else I’d be going to! Even though I was baptised it was just a show, but the fact that this has happened, it gave me a chance to come back to God.
 
Few things I’d learnt though:
1. Trust in the Lord your God with all your heart – this is so important.
2. Is to love and serve others, not just ourselves.
 
There is nothing wrong with being rich or wealthy. I think it’s absolutely alright, cos God has blessed. So many people are blessed with good wealth, but the trouble is I think a lot of us can’t handle it. The more we have, the more we want. I’ve gone through it, the deeper the hole we dig, the more we get sucked into it, so much so that we worship wealth and lose focus. Instead of worshipping God, we worship wealth. It’s just a human instinct. It’s just so difficult to get out of it.
 
We are all professionals, and when we go into private practise, we start to build up our wealth – inevitably. So my thought are, when you start to build up wealth and when the opportunity comes, do remember that all these things don’t belong to us. We don’t really own it nor have rights to this wealth. It’s actually God’s gift to us. Remember that it’s more important to further His Kingdom rather than to further ourselves.
 
Anyway I think that I’ve gone through it, and I know that wealth without God is empty. It is more important that you fill up the wealth, as you build it up subsequently, as professionals and all, you need to fill it up with the wealth of God.

Monday, 7 July 2014

Not living in fear (Rev James Liaw) 不要活在恐懼中 (廖雅各牧師) 6July 2014


(點入連結可聽有中文翻譯的講道)

There is a season set by God in our lives, so we walk side by side with God, not in front or behind God. It is important for us to have an ear to hear the spirit of God.

2Timothy 1:7
The spirit of fear (Rev Liaw thinks the meaning in English is clearer).

As a Christian, we think we are completely clean from evil spirits. This is the logical thinking pattern. But spirits do affect Christians, one of the most common one being the spirit of fear, which robs you of 4 important things:
1)      Power and authority
2)      Love
3)      Calm and well balanced mind
4)      Self-control and discipline

Who's the head enemy? Satan, the thief. 盜賊來無非是偷竊毀壞!

People think fear is just a feeling/emotion, but it is actually deeply connected with the spiritual realm.

Many people fear of living because they are fearful of what will happen every day. Then the power of fear rule over our lives. This fear needs to be broken or else we will be held in bondage. Fear can take over a person's life. Scientist did an experiment by showing research subjects some horror movies, took their blood and found that fear causes the release of 1400 chemicals! Triggering 30 hormones/neurotransmitters! Fight and fright response. If this response continues for long, your lifespan won't be long!

There are many fears we don't realize.
1)      Fear of not being accepted: Cover-up and a false personality develop.
2)      Fear of failure: prevent you from trying new things. You spend your whole life only doing things you're good at.
3)      Fear of your future: eg uni students fear of unemployment.


Fear can paralyze us and even cause us to act irrationally, and have insomnia, panic attacks etc.

Fear drains us of our courage. Fear presents everything from a negative viewpoint: Prevents us from enjoying our lives to the fullness, destroys our destiny.

Fear of discomfort

Fear of lack

Fear of sacrifice

Fear of rejection

Fear of people not understanding you

Then conclude you won't serve God…. then fear you lose God's blessings.

Fear tells you what you are truly not. Fear tells you what you lack, what you cannot do, what you will never be. Fear puts you in bondage.

God has not given to you the spirit of fear or bondage. God gave you Holy Spirit, which is a spirit of adoption.

Fear of authority figures.

You cannot say you want to overcome fear and it becomes removed, therefore we see fear has power. We need the Holy Spirit to overcome the fear.

1Peter 5:7

Fear is blocking the way. Some pray out of fear! Get rid of fear then pray. Praying out of fear is not powerful. Pray with faith and determination. Deliverance is a very important part in a Christian's life.

Bible often says, "Do not fear", so God often has to remind us.

Why does God tell us "do not fear"? He's telling us fear is coming immediately. Joshua 1:5, Moses is dead, arise go over Jordan River. God reminds Joshua 3x be courageous.

God wants to do new things in your lives, are you willing to step into the new things? Often, we want to stay in the safety zone. We will often regret it later, because we missed the opportunity. God gives us opportunities but the opportunity will not last. What prevents us from grabbing hold of the opportunity? Fear.

Every time we have an opportunity, we have two choices: 1) take hold of it, 2) fear of risk.

Everything in life involves a risk when you want to progress.

Job 3:25

God had a plan for your life. The Devil also has a plan for your life. We need to deal with the fears in our lives.


Monday, 30 June 2014

Inspirational people: Solomon part 1, was he a wise or foolish king?

When we think of Solomon, we think of wisdom. But was he truly wise? This is what I learnt from Morling College Old Testament Foundations:
Solomon is typically seen as one who began his reign well and was only led astray by his foreign wives towards the end of his life. However, there are indications that Solomon already failed to fully submit to the requirements of the Torah from the beginning of his reign.
1 Kings 4:34 tells that “From all nations, people came to listen to Solomon’s wisdom”, as exemplified by the blessing by the King of Tyre and Queen of Sheba.
What Solomon actually requested from Yahweh was a “hearing heart” so that he could discern good from evil. This wisdom is on the will and decision making rather than the emotions.
  • This wisdom to execute justice makes him “successful” as a king, eg. The prostitute’s baby.
  • The wisdom to rule/organise: It also enables him to organise his kingdom in a way so that it greatly prospered, becoming a mature, rich and influential nation.
  • The wisdom to build the temple: especially the organisation of the labour and building materials.
There is ambiguity to Solomon’s wisdom. He exhibits great human wisdom: The wisdom to skilfully organise the world. However, wisdom literature stresses that true wisdom is found in the fear of the Lord. The “fear” meaning a reverent awe that acknowledges God for who he is. The truly wise person fears the Lord and keeps his covenant. This is the kind of wisdom which Solomon ultimately failed in, when his wives turned his heart towards other gods and his heart was not wholly true to Yahweh as David’s heart had been. He exhibited covenant unfaithfulness during his reign:
  • Solomon’s sordid succession: He came to throne with some ruthless politics where he dealt ruthlessly with a conspiracy by his half-brother Adonijah, Joab and Abiathar.
  • Solomon’s alliance with Pharaoh: At the beginning of his reign he allied himself with Pharaoh. Egypt always had negative connotations in the OT.
  • Solomon’s worship at the high places: Closely related to Solomon’s marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter is the mention of his sacrifice and offerings at the high places.
  • Solomon’s bureaucracy: The bureaucracy described is exactly what Samuel had warned Israel would accompany kingship: forced labour, taxes, conscription, oppression.
  • Solomon’s palace: Solomon took seven years to build the house of Yahweh but thirteen years to build his own house.
  • Solomon’s pride: The eleven month delay between the completion of the temple and the transporting of the ark is suspicious. Was it because the presence of God was not such a priority for him?
  • Solomon’s despising the Promised Land: Solomon gave Hiram of Tyre twenty cities in Galilee as payment for “cedar, juniper and gold” for the temple. The northern tribes are impacted here.
  • Solomon’s violation of the Torah: The king was not to 1) amass a large number of horses, 2) marry many women, or 3) accumulate large quantities of gold & silver. He did all three.
Solomon provides a warning to Christians. Today we might call Solomon’s wisdom “pragmatism”. The problem with pragmatism is that we live in a broken world, a world under God’s curse. Pragmatism can be an important part of wisdom, but it must never take place of the fear of the Lord.

Wednesday, 21 May 2014

Conciliarism: more than an argument concerning the authority of popes versus councils

Abstract:
Conciliarism was more than a simply an argument concerning the authority of popes versus councils. This essay first reviews the historical events leading up to the Great Western Schism. Then it explores how threat in the unity of the church brought about the conciliar movement. Finally it analyses the various councils held in the era. From this, we make the conclusion that conciliarism was a complicated movement which came about firstly a response to the threatened division of the church due to the Great Western Schism, secondly as a result of ambitions and interests of various political powers, and thirdly, in response to the rampant abuse of papal power as a call for reformation. Therefore, the conciliar movement was not simply a power struggle between the authority of popes versus councils but an attempt to achieve unity and reformation of the Church.
 
This essay seeks to assess the view that conciliarism was more than a simply an argument concerning the authority of popes versus councils. This essay will first review the historical events leading up to the Great Western Schism. Secondly we will explore how threat in the unity of the church brought about the conciliar movement. Finally we will review the various councils held in the era to analyse whether it was simply a power struggle between the popes versus councils or something more.
 
To understand how the concept of conciliarism came about, we first need to review the historical background on the power struggles and rampant abuse of papal authority that led up to the Great Western Schism. The worst abuses in the Church and the papacy was seen after the collapse of the Carolingian Empire in the tenth century. Renewal and reform had never been so necessary[1]. A series of good reforming popes then followed[2]. There then came a period of direct confrontation between the papal and the imperial powers and an agreement called the Concordat of Worms was formed between Pope Calixtus II and Holy Roman Emperor Henry V in 1122 which ended this series of confrontations but allowed the power of papacy to grow so much that it reached its apex in the thirteenth century[3], where the Church became so rich and powerful that it resulted in abuses of every kind[4]. The rise in nationalism came a period of decline of the universal imperial authority in the West, which weakened the universal papal authority[5]. The popes became dependent on France, and were “exiled” to Avignon, giving rise to a period of “Avignon Papacy”, from 1309 to 1377, during which seven successive popes resided in Avignon, France[6] and the papacy became subservient to French state interests[7]. Historically, we could already see a constant struggle for authority between the popes and the political powers.
 
The Great Western Schism[8] then followed, where several men were simultaneously claiming to be the true pope. Another word, a struggle for authority between several papal claimants! Although on several earlier occasions there had been more than one claimant to the papacy, the antipopes had been appointed by various rival factions. This was the first time a single group of leaders of the Church created both the pope and the antipope[9]. The conflicts quickly escalated from a church problem to a diplomatic crisis that divided Europe, as secular leaders had to choose which claimant they would recognise, whereby France and its allies recognised the Avignon claimant; England, Scandinavia, Flanders, Hungary, Poland, Germany recognised the Roman claimant, and other regions changed their allegiance repeatedly[10]. We can see that this schism was driven by politics rather than any theological disagreement[11]. Faced with this international disgrace, the king of France asked the University of Paris to devise a way of ending the schism in 1393. In response to this request, each member of the faculty was asked to propose in writing the way which seemed best to him[12]. Abdication, arbitration and a church council were the three solutions proposed and the first two did not work so the later was called.
 
In church history, various councils had been called when the church was threatened with schism, such as the Council of Jerusalem which dealt with the topic of Gentile-Jew table fellowship, and councils called by Constantine over the Arian controversy. Later, as popes gained power, the council became instruments for their policies and programs. However, the crisis faced in the Great Western Schism was, “Who was the true pope and how could one known this?[13]” Canon law had stipulated that an ecumenical council must be called by a legitimate pope in order to have canonical authority. Furthermore, Gratian’s famous twelfth century work on the canon law, the Decretum, had left open the possibility of a pope falling into heresy. So how can one remove an unworthy pope and elect another one[14]? And what if there is a pope but he contumaciously refuses to call a council after sufficient requests[15]?
 
With these pressing questions being asked and the unity of the whole Church at stake, a reform movement known as the conciliar movement, came about, which held that a universal council, representing the entire church, had more authority than the pope[16]. In fact, nineteenth/twentieth century scholars Bernard Huber and Johannes Haller understood conciliarism as “an effort to provide a parliamentary government for the universal church”[17]. The other extreme was the theology of papal primacy, drawn up by Pope Leo I, that used Petrine text of Matthew 16:18-19 to justify papal authority where Peter’s relationship with Jesus was so intimate that the apostle’s judgments were considered to be identical with those of Christ. Leo held that the Pope continued to fulfil Peter’s role in the Church[18] as the “vicar of Christ”[19]. This is a very controversial topic as historical research has failed to provide any evidence before the third century that the bishop of Rome interpreted the Petrine texts in reference to himself as successor of Peter[20]. So we can see that the papacy-conciliarism argument involved two extremes, that of saying all the apostles were instituted by Christ in the same way as his vicars, and that of saying that Christ gave the power of jurisdiction immediately to Peter alone[21]. Valliere[22] observes that the Roman papacy and conciliarism were not necessarily antagonists, because in the Middle Ages the two generally complemented each other. For example, in seventh-century England, the organisation of a church of Roman obedience was accompanied by a renaissance of conciliar practice.
 
Oakley[23] observes that one should not trap the conciliar thinking of the classical age within the framework of any simple classification, and that it is possible to discern within the pattern of that thinking three broad strands: 1) The demand for reform of the church“in head and members”and the belief that this could best be initiated and consolidated through the periodic assembly of general councils. 2) Envisaging the constitution of the church in oligarchic terms, its government ordinarily in the hands of the Roman curia, the pope being limited in his power by that of cardinals with whose “advice, consent, direction and remembrance” he had to rule.3) The strict conciliar theory itself, an assertion of the superiority of general council to pope. Therefore, each individual council participant had their own agenda in mind which differed greatly from each other.
 
While things may look idealistic in theory, Biechler[24]points out that in reality the council had been beset with serious difficulties from the outset, and these only increased as time went on. For one thing, the general council had never been able to muster anything but a comparatively meagre attendance, and was unable to be truly representative of the whole church. The Council of Pisa (1409)[25] was the first council to be called, by the cardinals who had created the problem, to deal with the situation. Ironically, as Avis states[26], the schism was inadvertently exacerbated at Pisa, because when they deposed the two rival popes and elected a third pope, neither of the deposed pope accepted deposition, so this council ended up producing three popes! However, the Council of Pisa gave momentum to the growing demand for a council that would be able to unify the papacy and to reform the church.
 
Whilst the Council of Constance in 1414 was often seen as the high-water mark of conciliarism, having put an end to the Great Western Schism, it was also criticised as being deficient in the actual enactment of reform[27]. Avis[28] observes that this particular council was called under the pressure from the emperor, Sigismund of Hungary, and therefore had firm imperial support which proved decisive and had thousands in membership. The council’s purpose was threefold: 1) to restore the unity of the Church by unifying the papacy, 2) to purge the church of erroneous doctrine by dealing with the ‘heresies’ of Wyclif and Hus, 3) to reform the Church ‘in head and members’. However, although Constance succeeded in the first two points, it was the condemnation and execution of Hus that convinced Martin Luther that General Councils were not infallible, but could err in their judgments, as it was the conciliarists who implacably condemned Hus on false charges, refused to hear his protestations that he had never taught the views attributed to him and secured his execution in spite of a safe-conduct[29]. Rather than a simple struggle between papal and conciliar authority, we can see here a complicated picture of the political power encouraging a high council participation rate to achieve a sense of unity and control.
 
Pope Eugenius IV went on an offensive against the council in 1436, and the Council of Basel was a provocative move motivated by hostility to Eugenius’ manoeuvrings[30]. Ferguson[31] observes that the Council of Basel (1431-1449) carried the reforming spirit to the excess, the aftermath of which led directly to the papacy’s open hostility to the conciliar form of government, eventually outlawed in 1460 by Pope Pius II in his bull Execrabilis. It was in Basel where Nicholas of Cusa, one of the most active conciliarists[32], became so disillusioned that he took the side of papacy instead. Tierney[33] asserts that the urgent, widespread desire for unity in the Church was the very lifeblood of the conciliar movement. Avis[34] points out that for Cusanus, a General Council, by definition, was marked by the virtues of harmony, concord and unanimity. The personal rivalries, quarrels and even violence that marked the Council of Basel discredited Basel in Nicholas’ eyes. And while the council was becoming more extreme and divided, the pope was concluding an agreement with the Greeks for the reunification of the Church. One by one, the council’s most distinguished leaders left it and joined the pope’s council. What was left of the old council declared Eugene deposed and named Felix V in his stead, so ironically this gave rise to two councils and two popes, resurrecting papal schism again[35]. The council was buoyed up by enormous expectations of reform that were doomed to be disappointed at the Council of Basel, and eventually disbanded after that[36]. Although on the superficial level, the Council of Basel may seem like a direct struggle for power between the pope and council, on a deeper level it was an attempt by the conciliarists to push for reformation of the church which failed and ended with disillusion.
 
Since the Church did not reform, rampant abuse of papal authority continued on in the sixteenth century, giving rise to the Protestant Reformation where Protestants sought a new authority to trump that of the pope and ecumenical councils[37]. As Ferguson[38] puts it, the conciliar movement was seen an attempt to reform the church from within before external reform was forced on the church by Luther and others. According to Tierney[39], the Reformation, in its ecclesiological aspect at least, was a violent outburst of dammed-up conciliar aspirations. Küng[40] believes renewal and reform of the Church are permanently necessarybecause the Church consists of faithful human beings spread all over the earth, and as human beings, we are all sinful. It is only if the Council becomes the concern of the whole Church that it can succeed in genuine renewal[41]. Küng elaborates that the church is not exempt from human weakness and would not be in a state of perfection and final glory on her journey through the history until the very end[42].
 
In conclusion, it is an oversimplification to say that conciliarism was simply an argument concerning the authority of popes versus councils, as the council was called in response to multifactorial reasons. What was more complicated was that even within the conciliarists themselves, there were a range of different agendas, such as some being focused on reformation, some focused on achieving unity, some focused on the strict conciliar concept itself, etc. Rather than simply an argument concerning the authority of popes versus councils, conciliarism was firstly a response to the threatened division of the church due to the Great Western Schism and aimed at achieving unity in the church. Secondly, political ambitions and interests also played an important role so it was also a struggle between political powers. In fact, it was the imperial power behind the Council of Constance which made it so successful. Thirdly, conciliarism arose in response to the rampant abuse of papal power as a call for reformation, and indeed acted as a precursor for the Protestant reformation. Furthermore, papacy and conciliarism are not necessarily antagonists, because the two has been observed to complement each other at various points historically. Therefore, I see the conciliar movement more as an attempt to achieve unity and reformation of the Church which failed because those in the leadership positions refused reform. Since the church is not exempt from human weakness and would not be in a state of perfection until the final glory, the process of reformation will continue until the end times, when true unity occurs in a state of perfection.
 
Bibliography:

Avis, Paul. Beyond the Reformation?Authority, Primacy and Unity in the Conciliar Tradition, London: T&T Clark, 2008.

Biechler, James E.“Nicholas of Cusa and the end of the conciliar movement: a humanist crisis of identity”, Church History, 44 (1975): 5-21.

Burns, James Henderson. Conciliarism and Papalism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Ferguson, Thomas. “The Council of Pavia-Siena and Medieval Conciliarism”, Journal of Religious History, 2001(25): 1-19.

González, Justo L. The Story of Christianity Volume I: TheEarly Church to the Dawn of the Reformation, New York: Harper Collins, 2010.

Hill, Jonathan. The New Lion Handbook: The History of Christianity, Oxford: Lion Hudson, 2007.

Küng, Hans. The Council, Reform and Reunion, New York: Sheed and Ward, 1961.

Miller, J. Michael. What are they saying about papal primacy?, New York: Paulist Press, 1983.

Morrissey, Thomas E. “After Six Hundred Years: The Great Western Schism, Conciliarism, and Constance”, Theological Studies, 40 (1979): 495-509.

Moyer, Elgin. Great Leaders of the Christian Church, Chicago: Moody Press, 1951.

Oakley, Francis. “Conciliarism at the Fifth Lateran Council”, Church History, 41 (1972): 452-463.

Oakley, Francis.“New conciliarism and its implications: a problem in history and hermeneutics”, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 8 (1971): 815-840.

Powell, Mark E. Papal Infallibility: A protestant Evaluation of an Ecumenical Issue, Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009.

Previte-Orton, C.W. The Shorter Cambridge Medieval History Volume II, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.

Skarsten, Trygve R. “The Origin of Conciliarism as Reflected in Modern Historiography”, Lutheran Quarterly, 19 (1967): 296-311.

Thatcher, Oliver J. and McNeal,Edgar Holmes eds., A Source Book for Medieval History, New York: Scribners, 1905.

Tierney, Brian. Religion, Law and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Tierney, Brian. Foundations of the Conciliar Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955.

Valliere, Paul. Conciliarism: A History of Decision-Making in the Church, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Vischer, Lucas.“Is This Really 'the Unity We Seek'?”, Ecumenical Review, 44 (1992): 467-478.





[1]Hans Küng, The Council, Reform and Reunion, (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1961), 55.
[2]Justo L. González, The Story of Christianity Volume I: The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation, (New York: Harper Collins, 2010), 334.
[3]González, Story of Christianity, 343.
[4]Küng, The Council, Reform and Reunion, 66.
[5]Küng, The Council, Reform and Reunion, 68.
[6]Jonathan Hill, The New Lion Handbook: The History of Christianity, (Oxford: Lion Hudson, 2007), 215.
[7]Elgin Moyer, Great Leaders of the Christian Church, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1951), 282.
[8]González, Story of Christianity, 403.
[9]Oliver J. Thatcher and Edgar Holmes McNeal, eds., A Source Book for Medieval History, (New York: Scribners, 1905), 325-326.We elected Bartholomew, archbishop of Bari…not all cardinals were present at the election, and it was extorted from us by the threats and demands of the officials and people of the city. And although such an election is null and void, and the danger from the people still threatened us…But according to the holy fathers and to the law, of the church, he should be called apostate, anathema, Antichrist, and the mocker and destroyer of Christianity.
[10]González, Story of Christianity, 404.
[11]C.W.Previte-Orton, The Shorter Cambridge Medieval History Volume II, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971), 954.
[12]Thatcher and McNeal, A Source Book for Medieval History, 326-327. There is a third way which we propose as an excellent remedy for this sacrilegious schism. We mean that the matter shall be left to a general council. This general council might be composed, according to canon law, only of prelates, or, since many of them are very illiterate, and many of them are bitter partisans of one or the other pope, there might be joined with the prelates an equal number of masters and doctors of theology and law from the faculties of approved universities. Or if this does not seem sufficient - anyone, there might be added besides one or more representatives from cathedral chapters and the chief monastic orders, in order that all decisions might be rendered only after most careful examination and mature deliberation.
[13]Thomas E. Morrissey, “After Six Hundred Years: The Great Western Schism, Conciliarism, and Constance”, Theological Studies, 40 (1979): 503.
[14]Trygve R. Skarsten, “The Origin of Conciliarism as Reflected in Modern Historiography”, Lutheran Quarterly, 19 (1967): 298-299.
[15]Paul Avis, Beyond the Reformation? Authority, Primacy and Unity in the Conciliar Tradition, (London: T&T Clark, 2008), 85.
[16]González, Story of Christianity, 408.
[17]Thomas Ferguson, “The Council of Pavia-Siena and Medieval Conciliarism”, Journal of Religious History, 2001(25): 2.
[18]J. Michael Miller, What are they saying about papal primacy?, (New York: Paulist Press, 1983), 5-6. 
[19]James Henderson Burns, Conciliarism and Papalism, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 4.
[20]Miller, Papal primacy, 35
[21]Burns, Conciliarism and Papalism, 17.
[22]Paul Valliere, Conciliarism: A History of Decision-Making in the Church, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 120.
[23]Francis Oakley, “Conciliarism at the Fifth Lateran Council”, Church History, 41 (1972): 453-454.
[24]James E. Biechler, “Nicholas of Cusa and the end of the conciliar movement: a humanist crisis of identity”, Church History, 44 (1975): 6.
[25]Thatcher and McNeal, A Source Book for Medieval History, 327-328. This holy and general council, representing the universal church, decrees and declares that the united college of cardinals was empowered to call the council, and that the power to call such a council belongs of right to the aforesaid holy college of cardinals, especially now that there is a detestable schism.
[26]Avis, Beyond the Reformation, 75-76.
[27]Thomas Ferguson, “The Council of Pavia-Siena and Medieval Conciliarism”, Journal of Religious History, 2001(25): 2-3.
[28]Avis, Beyond the Reformation, 84-89.
[29]Avis, Beyond the Reformation, 60-61.
[30]Avis, Beyond the Reformation, 91-92.
[31]Ferguson, “The Council of Pavia-Siena”, 3.
[32]Biechler, “Nicholas of Cusa”, 6.
[33]Brian Tierney, Foundations of the Conciliar Theory, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955), 239.
[34]Avis, Beyond the Reformation, 95-96.
[35]González, Story of Christianity, 411.
[36]Avis, Beyond the Reformation, 91-92.
[37]Mark E. Powell, Papal Infallibility: A protestant Evaluation of an Ecumenical Issue, (Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009), 2.
[38] Ferguson, “The Council of Pavia-Siena”, 2.
[39]Brian Tierney, Religion, Law and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 104.
[40]Küng, The Council, Reform and Reunion, 14-15.
[41]Küng, The Council, Reform and Reunion, 38.
[42]Küng, The Council, Reform and Reunion, 30.