For the Love of Jimmy

Before I can remember, my family has not been shy about our near obsession with President and Mrs. Carter. (So you're going to have to forgive my assumption that the entire world also thinks everything the man writes is genius!) My grandparents proudly display a photo of themselves with Rosalynn and Jimmy on the front porch of Maranatha Baptist Church, Plains, GA in their family room. My mother has been drafting a personal letter to him for over three years now in an attempt to share her admiration and his positive influence in our lives. She just can't seem to fully convey all that's there...so I think it's been laying dormant on her computer for a while. And well, let's be honest, while Tyler and I were dating, I gave him a Jimmy Carter bobblehead. The exhilaration with which he received the gift was added confirmation that surely our marriage was meant to be. (Here is a picture in case you don't believe me.) Jimmy watches our goings-on from the bookshelf in our living room. And well, we named our first born son after him, Jude Carter Mayfield. We like the Carters. When we met him at a book signing at Vroman's here in Pasadena last year, as he hurriedly signed my book and the publishers literally pushed me out of the way I said, "You're awesome!" He looked up and smiled.

Most of the information in that paragraph was useless to the overall point of this post; I just want you to know that we really admire their work both in and beyond the White House. I mean, he's eradicated diseases! Enough you say, on with it. Well, in his book (no, not the controversial Palestinian one), the I'm-the-smartest-man-ever-so-let-me-tell-you-how-to-change-the-world-from-my-perfect-perspective-one, Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis, he closes with a chapter that underscores the most severe crisis to yet hit all of us: poverty. More specifically, Carter warns, "With little doubt, the greatest challenge we face is the growing chasm between the rich and poor people on the earth." 

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees that all persons deserve a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of themselves and their families. Carter writes in the book, "In my speech at the beginning of the new millennium, I outlined a few proposals for meeting this standard [no big deal, right, wait, it gets better], including increased development assistance with fewer strings, forgiveness of foreign debts of the poorest nations, seeking peaceful solutions when there are known threats to peace, getting to know the poor, giving people authority and responsibility over their own affairs, enhancing cooperations among donors, and recognizing the inevitable impact of abject poverty on human rights, violence, and susceptibility to recruitment for violent acts."

Here's the kicker statement, "Our Center's programs have shown that with wise use of even limited resources, extremely poor people demonstrate remarkable intelligence, innovation, and effectiveness." A few pages later he concludes that when rich people grant impoverished people the chance to respond to their lack of resources and poor condition, they improve their lives. That's for all you skeptics out there thinking that poverty is the mere result of laziness or greed.

One glaring element that is contributing to this disparaging assessment about the rich-poor divide is the fact that so few rich do not even know the name of a single poor person. While we all may not be called to establish an organization like Habitat for Humanity in order to heal this unsightly wound, surely we can stick a much needed band-aid on it by shaking hands with the next person we see who is in need, right? Review with me a few verbs Carter used in his surgical procedure --oops, I mean proposal from the quote above: 

1) increase assistance

2) forgive

3) seek peace

4) get to know 

5) give authority and responsibility

6) enhance

7) recognize

Is it just me, or is this solution based on one heck of a definition of what it means to be poor!? It seems he's really viewing poverty as a result of basic human rights violations. And this, my friends, is a huge infringement on social justice. From here, Carter cracks down on our present White House administration, which may dismay a few of you, but when confronted with the startling LOW figures in America's foreign aide budget, one can't help but note our lack of generosity as a nation. It's a problem, folks. On a national level, Carter doesn't let Bush and his posse of the hook either. Enumerating just how many decisions have been made, bills passed, and dollars lobbied on behalf of the wealthy, the chapter becomes difficult to finish. But he ends strong.

"We [America] should be seen as the unswerving champion of freedom and human rights, both among our own citizens and within the global community. America should be the focal point around which other nations of all kinds could marshal to combat threats to security and to enhance the quality of our common environment. We should be in the forefront of providing humane assistance to people in need, willing to lead other industrialized nations in sharing some of our great wealth with those who are destitute...There would be no real sacrifice in exemplifying these traits. Instead, our own well-being would be enhance by restoring the trust, admiration, and friendship that our nation formerly enjoyed among other peoples. At the same time, all Americans could be united at home in a common commitment to revive and nourish the religious faith and historic political and moral values that we have espoused and for which we have struggled during the past 230 years."

I couldn't have said it better myself. In fact, I'm not nearly this patriotic, nor do I care to be. But one thing is certain, the path our country is now walking does not seem centered enough on generosity, forgiveness, or peace. I have to claim security then, not in my American heritage, but in another kingdom that surpasses even the potential goodness of America. A kingdom to which Jimmy, too, first claims allegiance. (The End.)

Sondra Wheeler Writes,

"Bluntly put, there must be some idea that a commitment to Christ might take the form of being called upon to do something concrete and distinctive, rather than (for example) simply to believe something, or to live a conventionally decent life. Without the idea of a call to be obeyed, poverty cannot be of instrumental value, as welath cannot serve as a practical obstacle...The text can (and does) operate in this way in the present time across a great diversity of circumstances for those who understand their situation as one of sacrifices made for the gospel. What is crucial is the self-understanding of the community."

With no agenda or rhetorical finesse, I sincerely ask in response, is this self-communal-awareness possible in an American suburb? or in an American suburban church?

Blessed are the Poor, Damned are the Rich

Jesus began his Sermon on the Mount with an audacious statement, "Blessed are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." I like Luke's version better. Matthew waters it down a bit in my opinion when he says, "poor in spirit." Speculation thinks Matthew may have been writing to a more middle-class Jewish audience who was currently in the midst of their divorce from the synagogue, or in the early stages of grief and recovery following the divorce. Where as, Luke is in touch with his poverty-stricken brothers and sisters a bit more and already finished with life in the synagogue. Luke, feeling a bit more free in what he can and cannot say, chops off "poor in spirit," and also truncates Matthew's desire to keep this beatitude more focused on attitude and posture. Luke's spirituality, then, seems to veer down a different path than Matthew's right from the get-go.

Oddly enough, then, Matthew doesn't shy away from the story of the rich young ruler which is fully disclosed in chapter 19. "if you wish to be perfect," so reads the NRSV, "go, sell you possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me." yikes. This pericope is present in all the synoptics. double yikes. Mark 10's reading of the rich young ruler highlights ongoing structural and social sin going on the culture. So we see Jesus loving the rich young ruler more fully and the young man greatly grieved at what he has been challenged to do. Does this show a great divide between the haves and the have nots of Jesus' days in Palestine? Did the rich young ruler acquire his possessions and stature by exploiting others, cheating people in the market place, or not offering full health benefits to his employees? 

This seems to make sense with my reading of the text right now, and I'm also following West's ideas in his book, "The Academy of the Poor" which is listed on the right hand column of the blog. Until the young man makes restitution for his earnings and success, in other words, his contributions toward the social and structural sins of his society, he cannot earn enough merit to store any of his treasures in heaven. He was missing the entire point of the law.

So too, don't we miss the entire point of the beatitude when Jesus said, "blessed are the poor?" I don't think he meant blessed are you when you live on student loans, have only a mediocre paying job, or just generally don't feel vibrant and enthusiastic about life these days. Albeit, I think we are all stilled blessed, but the point I'm making is that the poor, and well, those darn camels going through the needle eye too, have an easier time getting into heaven than the rich because God's heart is with them. God loves societal outcasts. Jesus' attention and ministry was repeatedly to those who were lacking stature, monetary comforts, and the disenfranchised (women, children, and immigrants). And with those qualifications, I don't think any of us reading this blog qualify as poor. So, again, blessed are the losers, the societal outcasts, (dare I say it, the illegal Mexican immigrants) because God loves and cares for them because they need God and they need access to more resources for better quality in living. The rich young ruler, not so much. He just wanted to be sure to get a golden ticket into paradise. Too bad God never had a chocolate bar ticket voucher campaign. 

When will we be more willing to admit that our practices contribute to structural sins in society? (I don't even like the word sin much anymore, but there doesn't seem to be an adequate synonym for it in this context.) Better yet, will we ever be willing to sell the aspects of our lifestyles that on a daily basis, depending on how honest we're really being, contribute to social and structural sins that degrade, exploit, and hurt those that God works to save? No wonder the ruler left grieving. Following Jesus is not for pansies.

Am I wrong?   

 

The 11th Hour

This is a trailer for the film, The 11th Hour, which was released sometime in late 2007. Did anyone see it? Granted, the writing behind it is a bit cheesy at points, but the message 

is clear. It's narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio and speaks to the environmental horrors that are left in the wake of our environmental and cultural footprints. However, I want to see this film because it looks like it speaks well to the idea of our need for new and creative design in all aspects. We need new technologies to save us from dependence on oil, over consumption 

of all natural resources, among other travesties. What is more, the film addresses the possible 

massive quantities of environmental refugees the world can expect to encounter if we do not 

begin changing our ways and living less excessively. Again, I think good design can help us see 

this more clearly, along with films such as this. If we are going to completely change this world,

and I would like to argue, save this world, like the film claims our generation has the power to do, 

first we need to acknowledge and embrace all of the issues that are currently at stake, and then 

we need to begin accepting all of the new designs that will enable us to either heal the damage 

or begin treading along new and uncharted paths of responsible living (read: caring more for 

others and consuming less junk in the meantime).



I'm still trying to figure my way around this website, but it looks fascinating. It's about

normal and professional designers working together to create dialgue about how and why

we should call upon design to begin changing the world for the better.

Developing Nations Skipping Modernity?--Rant #2

A fascinating comment made by one of my favorite professors in a class a few quarters back was on the nature of the third world and their apparent cursory regard for the modern era (the Enlightenment up through the mid-twentieth century?). Did Indonesia skip the onset of rantionalism, and India the quest for absolute Truth? I'm not claiming this happened fully and completely, but it is curious that teenage shepherd boys isolated in the middle of a Bengali field are often carrying cell phones. Regardless of whether or not the signal is alive and working, the fact of the matter remains, new businesses are emerging throughout developing countries that insinuate there is a growing use of technology that is providing many the opportunity to work and earn a living.

This article published in the NY Times a few days ago highlights such a concept. It discusses Jan Chipchases' job as a marketing researcher for Nokia, a Finnish cell phone company. He travels the world taking pictures of where and how people are using their phones. Consider this bit from the article: 

Last summer, Chipchase sat through a monsoon-season downpour inside the one-room home of a shoe salesman and his family, who live in the sprawling Dharavi slum of Mumbai. Using an interpreter who spoke Tamil, he quizzed them about the food they ate, the money they had, where they got their water and their power and whom they kept in touch with and why. He was particularly interested in the fact that the family owned a cellphone, purchased several months earlier so that the father, who made the equivalent of $88 a month, could run errands more efficiently for his boss at the shoe shop. The father also occasionally called his wife, ringing her at a pay phone that sat 15 yards from their house. Chipchase noted that not only did the father carry his phone inside a plastic bag to keep it safe in the pummeling seasonal rains but that they also had to hang their belongings on the wall in part because of a lack of floor space and to protect them from the monsoon water and raw sewage that sometimes got tracked inside. He took some 800 photographs of the salesman and his family over about eight hours and later, back at his hotel, dumped them all onto a hard drive for use back inside the corporate mother ship. Maybe the family’s next cellphone, he mused, should have some sort of hook as an accessory so it, like everything else in the home, could be suspended above the floor.

How intriguing is this? I love design and I especially love to celebrate it. I am beginning to think it is an essential part of unearthing enough stamina to continue living joyfully in such a degraded and haphazard world sometimes. God called us to be co-creators. But when is the line crossed that demarcates creating useful products to help ease the hardship of life verses selling more crap to people who cant' afford new crap by making them think that they need new crap in order to live a less crap-filled existance? Not that people in Mumbai live crappy lives, that's not the point. The point is, does this guy really need a phone that hangs on a hook? If so, by all means I want to be the first to praise Nokia for their anthropolgical astuteness and willingness to go to the corners of the earth to help ease the trouble of poverty. But, pardon my skepticism, I just don't think that's their goal. So what is to be done then? 

Because I do think it's cool that this is creating business ventures and other opportunities for "success" outside of any materialism it may or may not be promoting.  The article reports that 80% of the world's population lives within cellphone range, and 68% of worldwide cellphone subscriptions are in the developing world. 

“You don’t even need to own a cellphone to benefit from one,” says Paul Polak, author of “Out of Poverty: What Works When Traditional Approaches Fail” and former president of International Development Enterprises, a nonprofit company specializing in training and technology for small-plot farmers in developing countries. Part of I.D.E.’s work included setting up farm cooperatives in Nepal, where farmers would bring their vegetables to a local person with a mobile phone, who then acted as a commissioned sales agent, using the phone to check market prices and arranging for the most profitable sale. “People making a dollar a day can’t afford a cellphone, but if they start making more profit in their farming, you can bet they’ll buy a phone as a next step,” Polak says.

So this highlights a different point. Technology designed to boost our convenience levels in life can actually be life-saving devices for people who need more efficient ways to acquire knowledge and information in other places on our planet. So if this is the end result of Nokia and other companies--more power to 'em! This can serve as a great example of business truly helping consumer, and of that, I am a fan.

Here's an example to finish the post.  

A “just in time” moment afforded by a cellphone looks a lot different to a mother in Uganda who needs to carry a child with malaria three hours to visit the nearest doctor but who would like to know first whether that doctor is even in town. It looks different, too, to the rural Ugandan doctor who, faced with an emergency, is able to request information via text message from a hospital in Kampala.

Go here to donate your old cell phone(s). If it doesn't work anymore, they will donate a cash equivalent to the phone's current value. Cool!

Dabbling and Babbling

"Forgive me father for I have sinned..."

Well, maybe not really, but I do have a confession. Each time I begin a post for this weblog I can't help but feel a bit queasy just before hitting the "publish post" icon. The little devil on my should raises his pitchfork in triumph shouting, "You are working really hard here to make everyone think you know what you're talking about. You sure are painting a big picture like you care about all this." Then the voice gets a little sarcastic, "You even think you're doing your part now, caring for the poor and all on your blog." Then the little halo-ringed character opposes from across my neck, and while I won't continue the mock conversation, lest you think I've really flipped my schizophrenic lid, I will say I disagree with the little red man on this one. 

While my contact with the poor right now is limited, which is something that honestly keeps me awake at night as I try to figure out how to let that change, my intentions here are not a result of me thinking I've got the problems of global hunger or absolute poverty solved, or that I even understand all of them. That's why I am taking a class exploring what Jesus has to say about all of this. In fact, in the short time I've been posting here, God is transforming me from the inside out on the issue. I'm understanding better the historical implications behind poverty in the first century, along with political implications surrounding poverty in the twenty-first century. And surprisingly, the causes aren't all that different, but that's an entirely different conversation and beside the point. My point, then, is that if you're feeling a bit reticent as well to click that "publish comment" icon at the bottom of the page, I challenge you to go ahead and share yourself a bit. I invite you to contribute to this conversation. I find that's how I learn best these days, anyway. Know that I will work to continue to keep posting as well, espcially on the days I remember to take my psychotropic drugs, only kidding. 

And with that, my sins of arrogance and fear have been absolved. (Since I'm feeling a connection with my Catholic brothers and sisters today, I think I'll still do a few hail mary's nonetheless. Blame it on the nearness of the pope.)

Religion--An Opium for the People?

There is a new website in the cyber world  that once discovered leaves little time for other daily chores as a result of its highly addictive content and presentation. Consider that a warning, especially if contemporary forms of spirituality peak your interest. Dear God is an interdenominational, interreligious, already global site dedicated to God's people who wish to share needs, confessions, and desires in an online prayer format. It's amazing! Plus, the art associated with each prayer, which can be addressed to any diety (one prayer calls upon Oprah for help), can induce worship in and of itself; the images are beautiful. The prayer accompanying this one is moving:

Dear God,

Every feast of the Nazarene in a place here called Quiapo, thousands of people trample each other just to touch the statue of you being paraded outside the church thinking it will bring them luck or cure their ailments. Many do die in this event. During holy week they flagellate and crucify themselves to atone for their sins.People flock to masses when the lottery hits the high marks, praying for signs of what the winning combination will be. In this country where most people live below the poverty line, most people turn to you during their suffering. So much so that they do nothing for themselves and solely depend on you.

I don’t blame you God. But I wonder why you created religion when it just serves as an opium of the people and as a vehicle for violence?

Karen, Philippines

What do you think about her final question in the prayer? Based on reading almost every posting on the site, it seems like it is quite easy for us (I use that term in the most collective sense possiblt) to blur the line demarcating that which God creates and that which comes from humanity's hands. As a whole, I would lump poverty and homelessness into this fuzzy category of confusion.

Rocks to Rockstars

In his book, Irresistible Revolution, New Monastic leader Shane Claiborne offers somewhat of a play on words in regards to the rocks crying out at the triumphal entry if the people were not to shout Hosanna! He is discussing the importance of the local church getting involved in charitable work as a means of contributing and living out the social Gospel. As he notes that (evangelical) churches have been mysteriously absent from this type of Jesus-following work, he conjectures that perhaps instead of rocks crying out, the Rock Stars must. This stuck with me. When the church misses its mission, God doesn't forgo the mission; God goes elsewhere to accomplish what needs to be done. So, why not the rockstars? People like and listen to them.

Bono

Simon Cowell

What are some others that are hot on social agendas?

Oh, Brangelina and Madonna, how could I forget them?

Then I found this post today on the world hunger awareness blog, which is listed on my blogroll. Who knew that stars were auctioning off self-designed lunch boxes with the proceeds going to local charities? Cool! Can anyone afford to bid on one for me, preferably Mike Myers? Thanks.

This all tracks back to marketing and consumerism in our country. What's up with that? We even have to buy our contributions to charity. Interesting. I'm not sure how I feel about this right now. It's like guilt-free shopping. (My kids wear Red Campaign clothes from the Gap). It gets people involved and caring, but is that too teleological? 

By the by, The New Monastics deserve their own post, which I'll do later.

Rising Food Costs and the Farm Bill

These charts display the rising cost of Food in the United States from 1998-2000. Notice how the red, 2007 line on the left graph is rising exponentially and is significantly higher than the yellow 2006 line. 

This is a brief video of Bill Moyer interviewing David Beckmann, President of Bread for the World about the pending Farm Bill revisions. If you take the time to watch you will be shocked at how Congress is falling desperately short on the issue of caring for America's hungry. Bread and others are lobbying Congress to vote for a change. Currently large and wealthy land/farm owners receive healthy subsidies from Congress (our tax dollars at work), while smaller and more rural farmers are falling into financial destitution due to financial neglect and a lack of other resources. In addition, the working poor are suffering the consequences of rising food costs on general American products such as corn, grains, and dairy. So that, not only are farmers suffering as a result of the current state of this bill, so are the poor, working poor, and food banks who are struggling to keep a 'healthy' supply of food on their shelves. By healthy I mean both a general portion to serve those in need and also the quality of food that is being served.  

In the interview Beckmann projects a giant solution: If Congress will redirect the funds that are currently going to giant farms, who don't really even need the funds, and instead send them by way of federal assistance programs, like the Food Stamp program, the nation can cut the hunger population in half within a year! There are currently 2.5 million people on food stamps, the highest amount since the program began in the 1960's and the population of users is increasing daily. So why doesn't congress just vote in favor of the working class on this one? Watch the video out find out.

In the same PBS special, Moyer's reporters interview several working poor citizens who cannot earn enough money working full-time at their minimum-wage paying jobs to feed themselves or their families. Also highlighted are disability recipients, individuals living off of their social security payments, and other families with more than one worker in the home who still cannot make ends meet. It's strong evidence that the chasm between the rich and the poor is quickly approaching an insurmountable divide. The presentation is compelling to say the least.

What does God have to say about this? What is to be said of the people in this country who are working diligently to support themselves and their children but to no avail. What does God especially have to say about our government favoring the rich, while turning a cold shoulder to the poor (not to be confused with turning the other cheek)! Do we really even wanna know?

Those of you reading who are from Nebraska, Alabama, or other states with as much dependence on agriculture production as the two mentioned, you may be interested in checking out this video that specifically addresses the subsidies that the government offers the giant land owners. It helps to explain abandoned rice and corn mills, as well as cotton gins. 

One last note, Bill Moyer quickly notes at the close of one of the videos that Kentucky's Senator, Mitch McConnell is asking for tax breaks in regards to the farm bill for KY's horse owners, some of the wealthiest land owners in the state! In a quick comparison, Moyer links this to the attitude and disregard of the infamous, Marie Antoinette. ha, I guess. 

P.S. In addition to the Moyer videos, for more information about the farm bill, you can check out several articles from top news sources about the debate right here. Till next time...

Skid Row

These videos on LA's Major Homeless District speak for themselves. I will post a few of them. One thing they do highlight is the importance of your working definition of poverty. It does not seem to me that arresting those who urinate in public or those who are intoxicated is going to fix this probelm of LA's 40,000 homeless! Perhaps our city officials need a new working definition. Better yet, why don't we begin addressing the problem of the wealthy who live only blocks away?

Video I. Introduction/Health

Video 2. Kids/Education

Video 5. Afterward: "embrace them, include them"

(Video 3. Culture/Drugs and Video 4. God)

Wealth, Acquisitions, and God

Although our class is centered on the New Testament news about wealth and poverty, we are working to situate the conversation in the context and historicity of the Old Testament, so we can better know from where Jesus is coming, among other things. One aspect of Scripture that I love the most is the fact that it contradicts itself. I mean, has anyone read the book of Ecclesiastes in the last ten years...hello! What is that about?

I digress. Taking a quick survey of major books in the OT lets us know that clearly the Hebrew people were working through this issue called wealth themselves. On one hand, your blessedness is measured in the abundance of land and possessions (cf. Solomon's works and Proverbs--not prosperity theologians); while on the other, cursed are those who hang their hopes on material goods for their calamity awaits, so say Isaiah, Ezekiel, Micah, and Amos. It is a difficult task to not read the OT through the lens of Jesus. So ignoring for the moment any Christocentric stuff, what in the world does this all mean?

For one, I think it means that wealth can serve specific functions. It is the symbol of our affection (idolatry), it is a goal for which we are willing to malign others (injustice), yet it is a tool for service (worship), and it is the payment for hard work (reward). Let us be aware, however, that in recognizing the beauty of Scripture's contradictions, we are then required to also consider all points of view in Scripture. To highlight one view of the OT's view on wealth paints an incomplete picture. 

For example, "Ah, you...who write oppressive statutes to turn aside the need from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be your spoil, and that you may make the orphans your prey! What will you do on the day of punishment, in the calamity that will come from far away? To whom will you flee for help, and where will you leave your wealth?" (Isa. 10:1-3)

Yet later, in third Isa. we see the prophet with a vision of glory for Jerusalem. "For in my wrath I struck you down, but in my favor I have had mercy on you...so that nations shall bring you their wealth, with their kings led in procession. For the nation and kingdom that will not serve you shall perish...Instead of bronze I will bring gold, instead of iron I will bring silver; instead of wood, bronze; instead of stones, iron." (Isa. 60:10b-12a, 17).  

What a contrast! I glean from this that whether we have wealth and abundant possessions or not, one thing is certain, we better not be hoarding them or acquiring them through evil, neglatory means. Also, I have to believe that those who do not have monetary wealth, are no less blessed or loved by God, perhaps I would argue that they are more blessed. (cf. the Beatitudes.) Forgive me for going back to Jesus, but Jesus' heart, which represents the Father's heart, is with the outcasts and marginalized.

Let us open our tight fists, soften our hard hearts, realize our abundance, and experience the blessing of paying forward God's blessing.  

   

 

Poverty Porn

Caution--I am passionate about this! One of my really good friends, Holly, and I have been talking quite a bit the past few days about the objectification of the poor, especially those in the developing world, especially those in Africa, especially the children. She coined a term that I am adopting and incorporating into my vocabulary in reference to this issue--poverty porn! 

I mean, where do we find permission either in our affluence or religion to travel to those "poor places" and "love" everyone out of their poverty? You know what I'm talking about, we all hear about Somalian refugees, or we see commercials on tv that make us feel guilty, or we run across the occasional movie trailer on the Internet for a non-prof that is doing "special work" that we all need to know about. And instead of sharing the goodness of their work or the need that is present or recruiting volunteers on a factual level, instead people are objectified, children are portrayed void of human contact making them look like caged zoo animals, and the casual observer is left to mourn the atrocity of the human condition alone with no outlet to grieve properly. It is all about emotion, desperation, and guilt. Maybe, that's a bit extreme, but you get the point.

Now, hear me out. I want you to read this as less of an accusation and more of a question...

(And I'm not including in this post those organizations and non-profits that do a GREAT job of communicating such difficult news and needs without the objectification factor.)

What are appropriate ways to relay the direness of the developing world's message of need and appropriate assistance from first world citizens? Surely we can do better at preserving the worth of the individual who is in need.  Would it not be better to recruit volunteers and financial offerings from a sense of urgency and a willingness to contribute to the growth of humanity rather than from a sense of guilt or shame? Is it fair to even try to separate the two? Again, how can this best be done, and who is already doing it well? I just don't think Jesus was about the business of making us feel bad about ourselves for doing wrong or neglecting important matters. He was more interested in the problem itself, right? Please, I invite you to share your insights.

The image is a portrayal of guilt. It makes me ask the question, maybe we all need a little bit of guilt in order to help us get off our rumps and up working for some justice. Then again, let's not confuse guilt with conviction and the motivating force behind each of those emotions. Finally, maybe I'm just a bit too emotional for my own good and the only one who feels this way...am I overreacting?

--Maybe a better title for this post is Rant #1!

Consumption's Contributions to Poverty and Wealth

Click here for video access.

For the record, I post this fully loving my ipod and trendy high heels. 

It's All in the Definition

We spent a bulk of our initial class meeting discovering the importance of a good and working definition of poverty. What, really, does it mean to live in poverty? Our definitions shape what we think to be the causes of poverty, and consequently, how it can be resolved. 

Consider with me the World Bank's definition published in the 1990's. They said that a person is living in poverty if they live on less than $1 per day. An individual is moderately poor if they live on less than $2 per day. That means more than 3.6 billion people in the world today fall within these parameters. Since their definition is purely economic, guess what causes poverty? Yep, not having enough money. (duh.) What is the solution then? Their website says it best, "[the world bank's] primary focus is on helping the poorest people and the poorest countries. It uses its financial resources, its staff, and extensive experience to help developing countries, reduce poverty, increase economic growth, and improve their quality of life." Yet, isn't it more than a lack of funds? Doesn't this negate major issues like colonialism, corrupt governments, evil corporations, to name just a few?

We then briefly examined the World Summit's leading definition as it was put forth in the early 21st century. Moving beyond economic limitations, the new definition focuses on severe deprivation in a myriad of categories: education, health care, food supply, knowledge sources, shelter, water, sanitation facilities, etc. These additional vulnerabilities seem to more fully encapsulate the plight of what it means to be poor. Clearly the poor in developing countries and those who are impoverished in our own country are major victims of human rights violations. 

Therefore, to see poverty as the result of a lack of social justice throughout the entire world certainly complicates the ways in which it can be resolved. Under this scope, monetary goods and financial donations simply won't correct all that needs fixing. 

What is more, let's throw in the spiritual component. Not only do we need to start responding to this lack of human rights because it makes sense to do this as able, wealthy, caring Westerners, and because its resolution is going to require more than just writing a few checks every now and then, but shouldn't we be responding because it's the right thing to do? 

Why? Why is caring for the poor right? Because Jesus cared for the poor? Why? Because God cares for the poor. Why? Because God creates people in God's likeness. God created humankind and saw that it was very good. Therefore, all humans, rich or poor, have intrinsic value and worth by the mere fact/miracle that we are God's children created in God's likeness! To deny people of this truth in their livelihood excuses us from the Kingdom of God. yikes.

So let's together embrace our need to care for the poor on micro and macro levels, for this is where God resides, among the people who need God most--the absolutely poor. And let us not shy away from a definition that encompasses all of the varying causes of world poverty. We need to directly face all that it will require to resolve such a monstrous issue and join in where God is leading us to participate.

My Purpose Here

This blog is going to serve many purposes. First, it is a response to a class assignment. I am currently taking a class entitled Wealth and Poverty in the New Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary. One of our assignments offers us the opportunity to interact with our community in an effort to serve and/or inform them about issues of faith and service. We are to amalgamate our cerebral classroom experiences with human interaction regarding issues of wealth and poverty in our consumeristic era. This blog will serve as a platform for dialogue regarding such issues. Please feel free to comment liberally in an effort to keep the conversation alive and moving forward.

Second, I hope to offer you resources. There are so many opportunities to give and places to serve locally, nationally, and internationally. I hope to call your attention to various avenues of service that you may have not known about previously.

Third, (and consider this a warning) I will rant. For those of you that know me well, here I will vent, implore, seek council, and describe various encounters I have with anything that is pertinent to the overall discussion of this blog. I will not filter my emotional or intellectual responses to what I am learning in class and how that relates to what we see on the streets.

Fourth, we will together engage Scripture as we seek to better understand what it meant to be poor in the ancient world, as well as Jesus' concern for the poor and the wealthy. How does this concern affect us and our interactions with the poor today? This blog element will be at times pedagogical, while at others, more devotional and inquisitive.