Cynicism

I was reading a really interesting article today by Jeffrey Sachs, an economist I admire. His article talks about the need to recognise the positive work of governments in combating poverty in our world. He suggests it is too easy to get disheartened by the negative news in our world. He states that,

"The point is not merely to make ourselves feel a little better, but rather to confront one of the world’s gravest threats: the widespread pessimism that today’s problems are too big to be solved. Studying the successes gives us the knowledge and confidence to step up our shared efforts to solve today’s great global challenges."

I am prone to cynicism. Even when Sachs' suggests that Australia's and Kevin Rudd's leadership on climate change I found myself scoffing at the weakness of the action. But then I was forced to stop and consider the enormity of the achievement in such a short space of time. I have been joking over the last few weeks that "under Howard we didn't have a climate change problem" (which I did nick from Good News Week). So I think we should stop and look at the positives, even if there is room for improvement.

I think that the questioning of motives and assumptions that lies at the heart of modern cynicism (rather than classical cynicism) is a healthy and needed role. Cynicism combined with pessimism is a toxic mix that is unhealthy for everybody.

I would be interested to hear when a questioning of peoples motives and/or assumptions has been a positive experience for you? I would also be interested to hear when cynicism has been a negative experience.

What I read today:

Character Test

Top Twitter tools for 2009

Poverty 2.0

Today I came across a heap of challenging quotes whilst doing some preparation (sorry all my followers on Twitter & Facebook).

The two that followed on nicely from yesterday's post were:

"I am somehow less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops." Stephen Jay Gould

"That the poor are invisible is one of the most important things about them. They are not simply neglected and forgotten as in the old rhetoric of reform; what is much worse, they are not seen." Michael Harrington

If we are to take seriously the idea that each person has dignity and worth because they are created in the image of God then poverty is the greatest challenge. We are the first generation in history that has the capacity to abolish abject poverty (people living on less than $US1 a day) in our lifetime.

Our society is built on the fact that you walk into a shop and consider an item based on its price, functionality and appearance. We put no thought into where it was produced. How much carbon, water and other precious resources were used to produce it? How much the person who produced it was paid and in what conditions they worked? Who is making the profit from the item and where are they spending that profit?

I wonder how our spending habits would change if we asked those questions as we stood in our supermarket or shopping mall? Perhaps we should carry around a picture of a poor African child when we shop. Perhaps then the poor Einstein's of our world wouldn't be forgotten.

Sorry if that sounds a bit preachy, but I am asking myself as well.

P.S. I have decided that I am going to add to the bottom of my days post any interesting articles/webpages I have come across that might be of interest. They won't necessarily relate to the day's topic but I hope you find them as interesting as I did.

What I read today:

New Atheism has five distinctive doctrines

Paris Hilton

Paris Hilton was in Melbourne today and it made the evening new bulletin. The comment from the newsreader was "the person who is famous for being famous." People who were out in Chapel street to catch a glimpse of Paris out shopping were interviewed. One, in response to the question "Why do you like Paris Hilton?" replied, "I don't know, because she's famous." I was watching all these people running around after Paris Hilton, a girl who is famous for being famous, and I thought "what does this cult of celebrity mean for communities?"

One guy interviewed at the airport was asked what he said to Paris. He responded "I just welcomed her to Australia." I wonder if that guy stands at the airport and welcomes every person arriving in Australia?

As a Christian I believe that as individual human beings we have worth because we are created in the image of God. Worth is intrinsic to who we each are. We are worth something because we each reflect the image of God and we each reflect it in a different way. When we hold up only certain people in our community as worth of special attention then we inherently ascribe greater worth to those people. When their attention is because they are "famous for being famous" how low has our need for ascribing worth become?

A friend of mine paints portraits of people who would otherwise not get their portrait painted. It is an artistic comment on the value society places on the disadvantaged in our communities.

How about tomorrow instead of reading a trashy magazine about 'celebrities' or going out to spot celebrities shopping commit to visiting someone who wouldn't otherwise have a visitor for the day. Lets give worth to everyone, not just 'celebrities'.

Perception

We all have perceptions, good or bad, about the world around us.

If you ask a non-sports fan their perception of cricket fans they would probably say old and boring, just like the game. If you asked the same person their perception of 'soccer' fans, they would probably answer hooligan. The Age had an interesting article about this very situation today. Of course more fans were ejected from the cricket than were ejected from the football last night.

The important question is how much we let our perceptions define our actions. If I have a perception that all people from a certain country will act in a certain way I am guilty of a gross generalisation. If I let that perception prevent me from interacting with those people then even worse for me because I lose the chance to meet some amazing people.

What about when we hold perceptions of a whole community. Lots of people have a variety of perceptions of Footscray. Those who aren't from around here usually have negative perceptions. Negative perceptions may have some basis in truth, but are usually at best an exaggeration and at worse an outright fallacy.

I think that a person's perception of God is the biggest determinant of their faith position. If God is perceived as a judgemental guy in the sky then faith is based on following the rules. If God is perceived as a watch maker, who created the world and then let it go, then he is irrelevant in day to day life. If God is perceived as interested in the poor then all our responsibility is to help them out.

Last night I made a comment that brought sharp focus to a perception that I really needed to change, even though the situation reiterated the perception.

Contradictions

The postmodern world is littered with contradictions and people are happy to hold two conflicting views at the same time. This idea is called cognitive dissonance and I promise this will be my last post on a big word for a little while.

A classic example of cognitive dissonance is the idea that a smoker who knows that smoking is bad for their health yet wants to live a long and fulfilling life. The problem is that we all hold these contradicting views. We only become aware of them when through an experience we are forced to realise that we hold contradicting views.

There is also frequently a dissonance between our words and our actions. We could think of these as our 'head theology' and our 'theology in practice'. An example of this is someone who says "I believe that God heals people supernaturally, we just have to ask" but then this person gets the flu and goes to see their doctor.

I don't think that this dissonance is necessarily a bad thing, in fact I think it has the potential to be a very positive thing. If we come to a situation where we realise that we have a dissonance we are forced to do one of three things.

1) Make our actions match our belief

2) Make our belief match our actions

3) Find a new way of belief and action

Sadly, most Christians when faced with this dissonance resort to the easiest application of the second option. "Jesus said sell everything and give to the poor. What he really meant was don't become attached to my possessions." All three options are potentials for growth. For me a key aspect of discipleship is to work through the areas of our life where our actions and our beliefs don't align.

What about you?

Constructivism

I thought today, after a long break, I would tackle the idea of constructivism. Constructivism is a theory of how people learn and construct meaning. I think it is an important aspect for us to understand because it conceptualises how we learn new ideas and concepts.

The basic tenet of constructivism is that when we encounter new knowledge or experiences we do one of two things. We assimilate that knowledge or we accommodate that knowledge.

When we assimilate knowledge or an experience we take it onboard within our existing framework of understanding without altering our framework. This can also mean that we 'miss' information or experiences because they do not fit within our existing framework.

When we are faced with knowledge or an experience that doesn't fit our existing framework, we accommodate it. We are forced to change our framework to meet this new knowledge or experience.

So why is this important for faith, discipleship and community development?

The idea of constructivism is that each person's knowledge is based on their experience. This is the idea that 'truth' is a relative concept. This contrasts with a positivist approach which suggests that there is one 'truth' to be known.

A constructivist approach to faith suggests that everyone's belief framework is based on their experience. I would suggest that this means that everyone's belief framework is incomplete. It needs to be shared with others in a faith community to break us out of our individual frameworks. When I read my bible and pray by myself I work from within my existing framework. When I am open to sharing with people who have a different framework I am forced to critique my existing framework. I think that this communal sharing is integral to both personal and communal growth.

What are your thoughts?

Poverty

Yet another huge topic, but one that I think is a bit easier to explore in 300 words.

I think the standard definition of poverty as a lack of material wealth is one of the grossest understatements of all time.

One of the best explorations of poverty that I have come across is Bryant Myers' book 'Walking with the Poor'. In the book he outlines some ways poverty has been described. They are as follows:

- Poverty as deficit. This is a lack of something, clean water, money, education, etc.

- Poverty as entanglement. This is the idea of a poverty trap including: material poverty, vulnerability, physical weakness, isolation and spiritual poverty.

- Poverty as lack of access to social power. The poor are excluded and need to be empowered. There are a number of spheres of exclusion, the state, civil society, political community and corporate economy.

- Poverty as disempowerment. This idea builds on the previous two ideas and adds a spiritual dimension. The idea of poverty as a set of disempowering systems. The systems are worth highlighting. Cultural system, eg. Karma where the social structure is set before birth. Social system, the God complexes of the non-poor - using power systems to control the poor. Spiritual system, the idea that there is an evil force in the world that sustains poverty. Biophysical system - mind, body and spirit - undernourished bodies are unable to work. The personal system, poverty results in a marred identity.

- Poverty as a lack of freedom to grow. The poor are trapped in a series of limitations: mental, social, spiritual and physical.

I think all these are really helpful to our understanding of poverty. My working definition of poverty is:

"All that prevents people from achieving their potential as humans created in the image of God."

Faith

Faith is another of these huge subjects and today I want to focus specifically on two aspects of faith.

1) Faith is a belief beyond all evidence.

Faith cannot be compelled upon anybody, either by explanation, witnessing a miracle, scientific argument or any other means. If you can 'prove' to someone that God exists or Jesus died for them, etc. then it is no longer a matter of faith.

That is not to say that faith doesn't require reason or evidence. The Bible tells us that we are to love the Lord with all our hearts, minds and strength. We are not to check our brains at the door. There are many rational arguments that point people towards faith. We can also understand our faith and beliefs in a rational and systematic way. This however is not faith.

2) Faith is a verb.

One problem with English is that the word faith is a noun. A noun is a describing word, it describes a state of being. I have faith.

In Greek the word for faith is a verb. It is a 'doing word'. You don't have faith, you do faith.

Faith is therefore not something you have because you believe a doctrinal statement or you pray a specific prayer. Faith is when you decide that you want to tell your friends that you believe in following Jesus, even though they will think you are stupid. Faith is deciding to give some of your income back to God because you recognise that all gifts come from God.

Faith is not an act of works. We can't 'do our faith' into heaven. But we also can't 'have faith' our way into heaven. The bible is quite clear that God will judge us by our works not by our having of faith.

What do you think?

Discipleship

Discipleship is a key framework through which I understand both my spiritual journey and that of those around me.

Discipleship in a Christian sense means being a follower of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ was a Jewish guy who's birthday we celebrate in a week and a bits time (who knows why its the 25th of December). We have a gospel record of his life, which is a topic for a whole series of blog posts. But my point is to suggest that discipleship is about following a specific way, rather than a general meandering through life.

I would suggest that Christian discipleship is a journey that every person is on. I don't mean to suggest that in an arrogant or patriarchal sense. Just that every person I have ever met has had some thoughts about God, the world around them and belief in something beyond them.

I think that every discipleship journey is marked by a number of significant points. Not everyone reaches them in the same order. Not everyone reaches them all. Not everyone reaches any of them. People may reach some and then later change their mind. But from my observations and experience some of the key points that I see in Christian discipleship are:

- belief in a higher power/supreme being/creator of the physical universe

- belief in the need for a relationship/system of belief to connect to the above

- belief in Jesus Christ as outline in the New Testament (Son of God, saviour, etc)

- commitment to orientate one's life towards the values of God displayed through Jesus

- commitment to Christian Community

- commitment to sacrificial mission/ministry/work

- complete re-evaluation of one's worldview and values against the example of Jesus and acting upon that.

That is by no means exhaustive. Got anything to add or other thoughts?

Community Development

Firstly, when I said I would add blogging to my daily routine I meant weekdays.

I thought that I would resume my blogging journey by looking at some of the building blocks of the framework that shapes my world view.

The first one I want to touch on is Community Development.

Community Development at its most basic is the process of allowing a community define its own goals and then work towards achieving those goals. Secular CD practitioners would suggest that it is the responsibility of the community to define the destination it aims to reach. They would hold to the fundamental ideals of equal access, democratic decision making and the sharing of resources.

Now I am happy with that definition and am quite happy to work towards that ideal, however I think that it isn't a complete understanding of community development. As a Christian I believe that the goal of community development is the kingdom of God. That is to say the ideals of God's kingdom being enacted in the here and now. I think that the ideals outlined by the secular community development practitioners are beginning points. Added to them I would suggest the following ideals:

- a commitment to eliminating poverty in all its forms

- community built upon shared interests and resources rather than self interest

- a commitment to diversity and learning from each other's viewpoint

I do not see Christian community development as relating exclusively to the Christian community. It is what Christians can bring to the table of our wider communities, recognising that it comes as one voice amongst many. However I believe that if we are able to articulate our vision and back it up with self sacrificing commitment then it will become an attractive vision for our communities.

What do you think?

What's in a name?

So why did I choose 'In Darkest Australia' as a title for my new blog?

It is an allusion to William Booth's book titled "In Darkest England and the Way Out". It is a seminal book for the Salvation Army, which sadly most Salvationists have never read. In it Booth (or perhaps more correctly WT Stead and James Barker) set out a plan for dealing with the social and spiritual poverty of London at the turn of the 20th Century. The culmination of the plan was the creation of "Colonies over the Sea" where people would be able to move to find a new life of employment and prosperity. It was a very Victorian Era plan but it aimed to deal with the problems of a society on a societal level.

It is also an allusion to Gary Bishop's book titled "In Darkest England and the way back in!" Bishop's book is itself an illusion to Booth's work. But Barker is interested in calling Christians back into the darkest neighbourhoods in England to live and minister amongst the poorest and most marginalised in English society.

Both are great books and well worth the read. I am not wanting to suggest that this blog will be as interesting or as useful as either of those two books. I am however interested in asking the hard questions and dealing with the big issues that Christians, and specifically Salvationists, in Australia in the 21st century face. Both of those books were born out of a specific context and in Australia we need to be asking specific questions regarding our unique context. Hopefully that is where my thinking will be heading, I hope you come along for the ride.

A new beginning

My wife sent me an email with a link to Simon Holt's blog post titled 'It's time' and I think she was hinting at me. So I have decided to begin blogging again. If you want to know why, check out Simon's blog because what he says resonates with me. Except for the bit about feelings because that isn't my personality type.

I hope to build blogging into my daily routine and disciplines. I am going to keep my posts to 300 words. My aim is to blog for myself, but I would love to have a discussion with anyone who passes by. My aim is not to preach or to whinge but to put some structure to my thoughts and open them for discussion.

Just a couple of house keeping points:

1) I will moderate all comments as I want to avoid spam and keep them on the topic of discussion.

2) If you would like to know automatically when I update my blog click on the 'Subscribe to' button on the top left of the blog page.