July 2012 - Dialogue - lists.wedgeblade.net

7/19/12, Spong: The Penn State Tragedy Highlights the Catholic Church's Failure
by Ellie Stock 19 Jul '12

19 Jul '12

HOMEPAGE MY PROFILE ESSAY ARCHIVE MESSAGE BOARDS CALENDAR The Penn State Tragedy Highlights the Catholic Church's Failure At first the details sounded painfully familiar. It was, the defendants said, a matter of misplaced loyalties, of valuing the reputation of the institution above all other considerations. This institution had a long history of service and respect. Many people identified themselves with it. It raised enormous amounts of money in both gifts and revenues and did much good work with it. Then, however, there was a dramatic shift in the story line. This was not the Catholic Church still under attack, but Penn State University, whose football team attracted 100,000 people to each home game. Every business in State College, Pa. was dependent on that for its economic well-being. Coach Joe Paterno was bigger than life. His name was a household word across America. His teams regularly competed for the NCAA title. High profile bowl games were an annual expectation. Protecting and saving all that from the taint of scandal seemed to those in charge to be more important than addressing a reality about which all of its top leaders seemed to have been aware. The fact was that a pedophile lived in their midst. He had been there for at least thirty years. He was good in his role of defensive coach. Paterno depended on him. They had worked well together. He would be hard to replace. Keeping both the football program and University’s reputation intact outweighed all other values. The long-running presence of this crime has now, however, been overwhelmingly demonstrated by indisputable, written data. The sexual abuse of young boys in the showers of Penn State by defensive coach Jerry Sandusky had been both known and tolerated, indeed protected for at least fourteen years and quite probably for far longer than that. Documented evidence reveals that Coach Paterno knew it. Thomas Harmon, the university police chief, knew it. Tim Curley, the athletic director, knew it. Gary Schultz, the university vice president, knew it. Graham B. Spanier, the university president, knew it. It is now clear that no one in the Penn State community encouraged disclosure. The Board of Trustees helped to set that culture. This culture permeated the entire university town of State College. Even janitors and laborers were aware of this scandal, but were not willing to risk incurring the wrath of the university leaders by reporting it. Every level of the university’s life participated in this cultural sickness. A gigantic elephant was in the room that everyone refused to see, pretended that it did not exist and repressed rumors about its presence whenever they arose. Finally, the dyke built to protect the abuser broke. Violated boys made accusations. Irate parents demanded investigation. The first line of institutional defense was denial. All the top officials, whose names I have just mentioned, circled their wagons, covered up, lied and tried to maintain the fiction that these charges were at best only the imagination of a disturbed boy or, at worst, just one or two isolated events, not a regular and ongoing reality. Ignorance was claimed or feigned. The barn doors were locked and no one wanted to look for the horses. It was business as usual. In time Mr. Sandusky was allowed to retire with honor. Those who knew about his proclivity, named him “coach emeritus.” They provided him with the ongoing use of the university’s athletic facilities, in which his activity of abuse could go on. He was even given a “retirement bonus” just short of $200,000. His crimes continued. When it became the public scandal that they all dreaded, the board finally acted. The president, the vice president, the athletic director and the coach, who was the icon of the university, were all dismissed. The police chief had previously retired. This was the first step and a necessary one, but that was not to be the last. The new leaders then appointed and empowered Louis J. Freeh, a man of impeccable credentials, a former judge and the former head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to make a thorough investigation and to report his findings publicly to the board. The cover-up had ended. Neither the members of the board nor the officials of the university made any attempts to hinder the investigation, to conceal data or to control his access to it. They were finally no longer willing to protect the institution or even the reputations of key officials. It took Mr. Freeh seven months to complete his work, but when he released his report, there were no longer myths, excuses or rationalizations behind which the guilty could hide. No one was spared, from the board of trustees who formulated and participated in building the culture of Penn State, to the top university officials and the top athletic officials who knew about these crimes and took no action, to the university’s maintenance staff who also knew what was going on, but who were silenced by the power of intimidation. Now the fallout from the report was strewn like debris all over Central Pennsylvania. No, the facts are not yet all in. They never will be. In time more kids will inevitably come forth to tell their painful stories. There will be continuing lawsuits for years that will have severe repercussions on the university and on the state of Pennsylvania. There will undoubtedly be criminal indictments. Mr. Sandusky, already convicted, will not be the only official of that university to face incarceration. There may well be penalties imposed on the university’s athletic program. It could even be shut down for a period of time. If not shut down, the program will surely be penalized, perhaps crippled, with punitive restrictions on scholarships and recruiting. Lots of people will be hurt. Innocent football players will have their college careers aborted and their future hopes of playing professional football compromised. Merchants who make their living in State College will have their incomes dramatically lowered. Potential students will have to decide whether this will be the campus to which they want to matriculate. Alumni giving to the university will drop precipitously. Many will pay the price for the behavior of the few. That is the way it always is in an interdependent world. To the credit of the university officials, we need to note that, even if it was belated, when they were faced with undoubted and incontrovertible evidence of wrong-doing, they acted. The Freeh report spared no one. It let the chips fall where the evidence led. It forced Penn State University to be honest, to admit its duplicity. It shattered carefully crafted reputations. It risked enormous liability exposure, but it was honest, painfully honest. This report broadcast Penn State’s willingness to pay the price it takes to restore integrity, a process that will not be accomplished in a month, perhaps not even in a decade or in a generation, but it did what had to be done to make it possible for integrity to be recovered in time. No other solution would address the cancer at the heart of this institution. Tarnished reputations are never restored by allowing suspicion to remain uninvestigated and the lack of transparency to continue. Healing begins only when honesty replaces duplicity, rationalization and lies. I cannot help but compare the Penn State tragedy with the tragedy that has engulfed the Roman Catholic Church in the last twenty plus years over the abuse of children by priests and the overt cover-up by the bishops and the cardinals. There are obvious similarities: the desire to protect the institution from scandal was present in both cases. The widespread presence of guilt caused an almost identical first response of the leaders. Both institutions circled their wagons to defend the accused. Both institutions practiced denial. The leaders of the church first denied any wrong doing; then they denied that they knew; then they denied that they had acted to protect the reputation of the church, not the lives of its victims; then they denied that these behaviors were widespread; then they denied the fact that these behaviors could only be widespread if a culture of support was in place, a culture that cannot be created in a short period of time; then they denied that they had in the past and still do transfer abusing priests to other jurisdictions, even sending Bernard Law to the Vatican to avoid the specter of this obviously guilty man having to testify under oath before a grand jury. Cardinal Law is a major symbol of an institution’s unwillingness to be honest and as long as he remains a high Vatican official the cover-up is obviously continuing. The fallout of this pattern of denial did not stop at the edges of the Catholic Church, it tarnished the Christ they claimed to serve, it violated the integrity of all Christians and it embarrassed the cause of honesty. They have not yet been honest. If guilt and hiding go all the way to the front door of the Vatican, then that reality needs to be revealed by that Church. The presence of abuse in this church in almost every nation of the world screams out the fact that this is a systemic sickness that tries to hide crimes under piety. This is not the action of a few bad priests, but a signature reality of the whole Catholic Church. This scandalous behavior of abuse and the even more scandalous behavior of hierarchical cover up, denial and continuing attempts to stop the investigation in an effort to protect the church’s reputation, I believe, sounds the death knell for this Church and perhaps for Christianity as well. The coin of the Church’s realm is trust and once trust is lost the decline will be swift and total. Can we imagine anyone listening to the moral pronouncements of this church on any topic when no one believes their honesty is intact on this issue? Rampant dishonesty always trumps a pious witness. Penn State is guilty, but Penn State will recover, because it did what it had to do and it did it at great cost. The Catholic Church is guilty, but it has not yet begun to recover because it has not yet faced its problem and by not facing it, it is admitting quite publicly that this problem is so deep and so pervasive that they are not able to deal with it. Cover-up is always fatal. Honesty is painful, but it gives hope that there will be a future. Penn State finally acted properly. The Catholic Church still has yet to do so. ~John Shelby Spong Read the essay online here. Question & Answer Chaplain Timothy Stover of the United Campus Ministry of Oregon State University in Corvallis, Oregon, writes: Question: That “accessory” that hangs around your neck is called a cross. What meaning does that symbol hold for you at this point in your life? Answer: Dear Tim, I wear a cross when I am lecturing or functioning liturgically. I feel quite incomplete without it. It represents, not a habit, but a conscious decision to claim this ancient symbol for my understanding of Christianity. It has nothing to do with the all but universal mantra that comes out of Protestant Christianity, which proclaims that “Jesus died for my sins.” Nor am I enamored of that Catholic mantra that describes the Eucharist as “the sacrifice of the Mass.” I do not see the crucifixion of Jesus as the moment when salvation came by having Jesus pay the debt for my sinfulness. I regard that as little more than a guilt-producing expression of a bankrupt theology of atonement. The sooner we can abandon atonement theology, I believe, the better and healthier Christianity will be. This atonement theology turns God into an unforgiving monster; it turns Jesus into a chronic, perhaps even a masochistic, victim, and it turns Christians like you and me into being guilt-filled Christ killers. Besides that it is based on an assessment of human origins that no longer has credibility in scientific or academic circles. By that I mean that we know now that there was no original perfection from which human life has fallen. That is an incorrect religious attempt to account for the presence of evil. There is instead an ongoing and unfinished evolutionary process of becoming. If there was no original perfection, there could not have been a fall from that perfection, so the old concept of “original sin” becomes inoperative and must be jettisoned. If there was no fall into sin from our original perfection, there is no need to be “saved” from our sinfulness, redeemed from our fall or to be rescued from our lostness. So the traditional way we tell the Jesus story becomes inoperative. The cross is not the moment when the price of our sins was paid by Jesus and the idea that “Jesus died for my sins” becomes nonsensical. To the degree that the cross is a symbol of this theology, it would be a symbol I would not want to use. That, however, is not my conclusion. Instead of abandoning the symbol of the cross, I choose to abandon the traditional theology that focused on a particular interpretation of the cross. I see in Jesus one whose humanity transcended the survival mentality that not only defines our humanity, but also opens this Jesus into being a channel for that quality that we have tended to use the word “divine” to describe. It is in his ability to love beyond the limits of his definitive boundaries and in his ability to live into a new dimension of what it means to be human that we come to discern that which we call God in him. It was in his ability to give his life away, to love those who abused him that I see his divinity. That is what the cross means to me. Jesus is not a sacrifice that God required to enable God to forgive and restore me to oneness with God. That idea is repulsive to me. Jesus is the life so whole, so full and so free that he could give himself away and in that free giving I now see the presence of God. So the cross is for me a symbol of the fullness of humanity in which the meaning of God can be and is met and experienced. I want to claim the cross for this understanding and to rescue it from the barbarity to which atonement theology has reduced it. I cannot do this by allowing the cross to be claimed for that previous understanding. So I choose to wear the cross because it is for me a symbol of what life can become. I hope that is helpful for you. ~John Shelby Spong Announcements Read what Bishop Spong has to say about A Joyful Path Progressive Christian Spiritual Curriculum for Young Hearts and Minds: "The great need in the Christian church is for a Sunday school curriculum for children that does not equate faith with having a pre-modern mind. The Center for Progressive Christianity has produced just that. Teachers can now teach children in Sunday school without crossing their fingers. I endorse it wholeheartedly. Subscribers, please remember that your subscription is automatically renewed. You can unsubscribe at any time. Simply login to access your profile page and cancel your account. Login to be able to comment directly on the website. Join in the discussion! Look for Bishop Spong on Facebook and LIKE the Facebook page for ProgressiveChristianity.org You can also follow Bishop Spong on Twitter. Thank you for taking this journey with us! Any questions or concerns, please contact us at support(a)johnshelbyspong.com or 503-236-3545. Copyright © 2012 ProgressiveChristianity.org, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you have a membership at our website. Our mailing address is: ProgressiveChristianity.org 4916 Pt Fosdick Dr, NW #148 Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Add us to your address book

1 0

Re: [Dialogue] The right question, continued
by Ken Fisher 19 Jul '12

19 Jul '12

Dear Randy, We need to get together for another long talk. I want to comment on your recent comments. See CAPS below. Gene RANDY: Regarding contradiction B2, I believe there is at least one partial alternative vision emerging as articulated by Jeremy Rifkin in The Third Industrial Revolution. In a nutshell, it involves a kind of energy/ecological democracy. Rifkin names 5 sources of alternative energy; solar, wind, hydro, bio-mass and geo-thermal. Every home, factory and office building has proximity to at least one of those and can therefore produce energy for its own use and to spare at its own locale. The surplus can be stored using hydrogen technology and distributed via an energy network modeled after the internet. GENE: YES, I AGREE THAT THIS IS PART OF THE ALTERNATIVE VISION, A THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION BEGINNING WITH ENERGY. HYDROGEN IS CLEARLY VERY IMPORTANT. ACCORDING TO DAVID SANBORN SCOTT, HYDROGEN AND ELECTRICTY CAN BE AND NEED TO BECOME THE TWO MAIN MEANS (CURRENCIES) FOR DELIVERING ENERGY TO THE USER. RANDY: If you're familiar with Rifkin's work, he also insists that the "third industrial revolution" is not the final destination, but rather a stepping stone on the way to an "empathic (serving) civilization." GENE: YES, I READ PART OF RIFKIN'S EMPATHY BOOK. JOYCE READ IT ALL AND REVIEWED IT IN OUR JOURNAL. IT MAY BE WE WILL NEED AN EMPHATIC POST-CIVILIZATION TO EXTRICATE OURSELVES FROM INDUSTRIAL CIVILIZATION AND COMPLETE THE NEXT INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. RANDY: Just two points from what John has said that I would highlight or expound on. One is that complexity need not be chaotic or exasperating. It can be seen as an opportunity borne of abundance. Certainly John does not say otherwise. GENE: YES, I THINK COMPLEXITY NEED NOT BE EXASPERATING. AND THE PLANET SURELY HAS ABUNDANCE FOR FOUR OR FIVE BILLION PEOPLE. THAT ABUNDANCE IS CURRENTLY GOING TO A FEW PEOPLE. THE EQUITY REVOLUTION BEING VOICED BY THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT IS, I BELIEVE THE PRIOR ISSUE TO FINDING THE NEW ABUNDANCE. RANDY: Second, it would be interesting if it were possible to map out all the interdependent pieces and entities within our universe and somehow depict the interactions and their influence and effects. That would perhaps help answer the question of who is the "we" that must learn to be together. GENE: THE "WE," AS I SEE IT, IS WHAT WE USED TO CALL THE TRANSESTABLISHMENT AS THE INTEGRATING FORCE THAT GIVES GUIDANCE TO PART OF THE PROESTABLISHMENT AND PART OF THE DISESTABLISHMENT. I SPELL THIS OUT IN DETAIL IN CHAPTER 22 OF THE ROAD FROM EMPIRE TO ECO-DEMOCRACY. DAVID KORTEN CITED THIS AS ONE THE GREAT CHAPTERS OF THAT BOOK.

2 1

Can Christianity, Religion Be Saved? By Whom in the Next Generation?
by steve har 19 Jul '12

19 Jul '12

Considering Ross Douthat;s Conservative "culture war" question about liberals: [NYTimes}] "Can Liberal Christianity Be Saved?" in which he?asserted that manifestations of liberal Christianity, like the Episcopal Church, are facing imminent death. ---and--- Randy Williams Asks a Q about survival of Christian movements and institutions The question could perhaps be taken to yet another level by asking, "Can religion be saved?" Or perhaps even more relevant, using our language and concerns from the 60s and 70s, is the question, "Can movemental Christianity survive and thrive, without the institutional church?" ---- James Wiegel's question aout what past models might be useful Perhaps, though, the question is wrong. Maybe the question is, how are we as a human species, going to generate a level of courage, wisdom, care and creativity that is more than adequate to meet the challenges of this new century? The Ecumenical Institute tried for the local congregation, the Institute of Cultural Affairs tried for the local community. Gloria Steinem and many others tried for empowered women, ---- David Fitch asserts that in national gridlock, the only place to move is in the localis and suggests local churches get over their own ideology. https://docs.google.com/document/d/14tq6zJYgj-AtqWvpK_50G2X_09thefMc2OfB5Ab… It might be the only place to move in the twilight of 2 elites http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/17/twilight_of_the_elites_chris_hayes Where is a place to stand again, and who is going to stand there? Sounds like it is time to dust off Sarte's paper on cultural revolution in CS1. Another question: who would lead this in the next generation?

4 4

Can Christianity Be Saved? Can Religion Be Saved?
by R Williams 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

Last week New York Times columnist Ross Douthat wrote an article asking "Can Liberal Christianity Be Saved?" in which he asserted that manifestations of liberal Christianity, like the Episcopal Church, are facing imminent death. Diana Butler Ross, author of the recent book Christianity After Religion, responded to Douthat this week in the HuffPost, suggesting that conservative churches as well as liberal ones are declining. She broadens the question to, "Can Christianity Be Saved?" She ultimately asks, can liberal churches save Christianity? She refers to isolated instances of local churches that are experiencing renewal, but suggests "the denominational structures have yet to adjust their institutions to the recovery of practical wisdom that is remaking local congregations." You may access Bass's article at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diana-butler-bass/can-christianity-be-saved-1… The question could perhaps be taken to yet another level by asking, "Can religion be saved?" Or perhaps even more relevant, using our language and concerns from the 60s and 70s, is the question, "Can movemental Christianity survive and thrive without the institutional church?" Randy "Listen to what is emerging from yourself to the course of being in the world; not to be supported by it, but to bring it to reality as it desires." -Martin Buber (adapted)

5 5

Re: [Dialogue] Any ICA Academy Deans Still Alive?
by Del Morril 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

I deaned Tioga-Nicetown; don't remember the dates exactly but it was when Mt St. Helens blew and we had ash from it in Philadelphia! Sorry, no photos - had no camera at the time. Del _____ From: dialogue-bounces(a)lists.wedgeblade.net [mailto:dialogue-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Evelyn Kurihara Philbrook Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:23 AM To: Colleague Dialogue Subject: Re: [Dialogue] Any ICA Academy Deans Still Alive? Jim Troxel, the Bishops, and Carol Pierce all had time on the Academy staff, as did I for one spring. And many others we are forgetting. Evelyn Kurihara Philbrook

5 5

"Interdependent Pieces and Entities"
by LAURELCG＠aol.com 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

Randy, this gives me an excuse to share this poem, from her book, The Magical Approach by Jane Roberts: "Magic is public as the air, so obvious and clear that it appears invisible. And we look through it at the world, which rises up about us everywhere. When we wake up in the morning, the world is always there waiting. We never catch it coming or going, and no smallest part of it disappears before our eyes, but stays intact. But all of that implies just too much precision to happen all by itself, a whole world mysteriously appearing out of nowhere, putting itself together just right without instructions or previous experience. Such a masterly production makes me think instead that there are clues we've overlooked. We like to think that chance alone collected the pieces of the world, stitching together the continents, turning the dumb elements into fish and fowl, and you and me, finally. Of Master Magicians whose conjurings feature the amazing tricks of space and time, produced so skillfully and fast that we're dazzled with the effects, and miss the magical slights of hand beneath the flashy gestures of the days and nights, Producing from its magical bag of tricks, one marvelous form of life after another, fish, bird, monkey, man (not just one dove or rabbit) with a skill and swiftness so astute that our wise men think one turns into the other! Juggling a million million atoms all at once, spinning them into twirling cells of men and whales, tricky, spinning solid mountains from thin air, with fish transformed into flying birds -- Now that's a Magic Show!" (I took liberty with the spacing. The poem has 3 -4 words to a line; takes up 3 pages in the book.) How many libraries would your map fill, Randy? I wonder. Blessings, Jann McGuire In a message dated 7/18/2012 9:34:20 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, rcwmbw(a)yahoo.com writes: it would be interesting if it were possible to map out all the interdependent pieces and entities within our universe and somehow depict the interactions and their influence and effects. That would perhaps help answer the question of who is the "we" that must learn to be together.

1 0

The right question, continued
by KarenBueno＠aol.com 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

Maybe Jim got it said (below) In a message dated 7/16/2012 6:50:19 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, jfwiegel(a)yahoo.com writes: Maybe the question is, how are we as a human species, going to generate a level of courage, wisdom, care and creativity that is more than adequate to meet the challenges of this new century? Because it deals with the human dimension, which is what, as EI and ICA, that is what we have recognized. Karen Bueno

4 3

Re: [Dialogue] The right question, continued
by Ken Fisher 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

From Gene Dear Colleagues, John Epp's summaries below reveal some great questions. And clearly the revolutionary "We" needs to face such questions. But questions are not all that we have. We have a number of answers that are coming together in the very midst of this swirl of ever more baffling questions. One of these coming togethers is the priority of the ecological crisis, especially the coming together of climate science and the clear, but shocking, implications of this imperative. I will not document the truth of this imperative except to say that oil companies and other opponents typically minimize its importance. Some are now saying that global warming is real, but we can adapt to it. "Humans have always adapted before. They will adapt again. Therefore, we can continue to expand fossil fuel use and adapt to the consequences." A beautiful theory for oil company power and profits, but exceedingly short on facts. The truth is that the easiest and cheapest adaption is to phase out fossil fuels with all deliberate speed. The other adaptation is extremely costly: such as losing altogether a number of Pacific islands, a huge chunk of Bangladesh and Florida. It might entail things like moving the whole city of New Orleans a hundred miles or so. Even harder may be moving varies growing areas for crops. Is this what these oil company blow hards mean by "adaptation." There was a spectacularly wonderful pull together in the CCPA Monitor* on the contradictions (or "barriers" they call them) to dealing fully with the global warming imperative. Here is the list: Barrier 1: Inequality undermines trust that we are all in this together. B2: A lack of a clear alternative vision. B3: Individuals cannot do it alone. That is, social and governmental organization is required. B4: An economic (and political) system that is captive to the oil and gas industry and its insatiable hunger for growth and profit. That is, government agencies will have to manage the long-run phasing out of fossil fuels because these companies consider that last barrel of profit making goo their right. B5: Climate change is not merely an environmental problem for environments adherents. It is the problem for every institution in society. B6: People need hope, agency, and voice. It is now the case that people feel powerless. We need to see ourselves as the U-Turn generation on this topic. We need to experience stopping the expansion of the problem and experience instead an accelerating momentum of transition. Here is the conclusion of that article: "The urgent immediate task is to prepare for ... tipping points. To lay the policy groundwork. To seed the public discourse with bold ideas, in anticipation of these moments -- and they are coming -- when the seemingly impossible is suddenly inescapable. "There will be a transformation -- an effective response to the climate crisis -- though whether it occurs in a manner that is just and fair or unjust and repressive remains an open question. Past industrial revolutions have cast aside whole populations on the scrapheap of history. Another revolution is coming. Our challenge is to ensure that this one unfolds more equitably, democratically, and humanely." A similar perspective we pulled together in our book The Road from Empire to Eco-Democracy. My point here is that a consensus is emerging among the awakening forces of the planet. That consensus and obeying its implications is more important than the sea of questions that a hundred years will not finish answering. We will have to live with unanswered questions while we obey the answers that are becoming shockingly clear. For a viable and flourishing humanity on planet Earth, Gene *The Monitor | Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives www.policyalternatives.ca/monitor/index.php On Jul 17, 2012, at 6:03 PM, Ken Fisher wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "jlepps(a)pc.jaring.my" <jlepps(a)pc.jaring.my> > Date: July 17, 2012 6:42:59 PM EDT > To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue(a)lists.wedgeblade.net> > Subject: Re: [Dialogue] The right question, continued > Reply-To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue(a)lists.wedgeblade.net> > > Here's another take on the "right" question for our time: > > The function of technology is to expand human potential. Current research and inventions seem to offer undreamed of possibilities. Virtual meetings, satellite radio, microwave meals, robotic surgery, online shopping with digital assistants, self-driving automobiles, self-diagnosing body parts, space travel – even avatar immortality – are all either currently available or in pilot stages. The interior crisis occasioned by all this possibility is bewildering potential. We face a paralyzing complexity of possibility. Clearly the old structures are past their usefulness as we saw in the past decade. Now we are bewildered by pure potential for creating a new functioning civilization. Technology is no longer a constraint: we can do even more than we can imagine. Our imaginations, however, seem constrained by established images of systems and structures that no longer work. We don’t know how to think in new categories, or even what those categories might be. People often speak of this as a digital generation gap, and to be sure there is one. But I suspect even the brightest young geeks haven’t set themselves to thinking of new ways to operate as a global society. Pure potential is an abyss – a gap with no place to stand, no security, and no certainty. That’s the situation in which we find ourselves. > > Our existential question is “How can we operate?” that is, “How can we be in this world together?” and even the “we” is not clear. At one time it could refer to the family or our network of friends or colleagues or the community or the state or party or nation or race or even in our more generous moments, humanity as an inclusive whole. Now even that seems inadequate. The environmentalists have expanded our horizons. All flora and fauna now seem to have a claim on us. Even the mineral resources which we’ve extracted and manipulated with abandon seem to be crying for attention. Neither our economic, political nor cultural systems are equipped to address those cries. > > John Epps > > > At 09:38 AM 7/17/2012, you wrote: >> Maybe Jim got it said (below) >> >> In a message dated 7/16/2012 6:50:19 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, jfwiegel(a)yahoo.com writes: >> Maybe the question is, how are we as a human species, going to generate a level of courage, wisdom, care and creativity that is more than adequate to meet the challenges of this new century? >> >> Because it deals with the human dimension, which is what, as EI and ICA, that is what we have recognized. >> >> Karen Bueno >> _______________________________________________ >> Dialogue mailing list >> Dialogue(a)lists.wedgeblade.net >> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net > _______________________________________________ > Dialogue mailing list > Dialogue(a)lists.wedgeblade.net > http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net >

2 1

Annie Leonard's new movie: The Story of Change
by Ellie Stock 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

Dear Elinor, Our new movie -- The Story of Change -- has just been released. Please watch it and take the Personality Quiz following the movie to find out what kind of changemaker you are. Then be sure to share it with everyone you know! We made The Story of Change to inspire our viewers, Community members and others to step out of the consumer mindset and into our full power as citizens to build a better future. That's because too often, when faced with daunting environmental and social problems (say, disruption of the global climate) many of us instinctively flex our power in the only way we know how: as consumers. Plastic garbage choking the oceans? Carry our own shopping bag. Formaldehyde in baby shampoo? Buy the brand with the green seal. Warming planet? Change our lightbulbs. Without a doubt, those are all good things to do. But the fact is, better shopping isn't going to change the world. If we really want to build a better future, we have to move beyond voting with our dollars and come together to demand rules that work. That's the lesson we learned when we looked back at a series of effective movements for change, from the U.S. civil rights movement to the environmental victories of the 1970s. They didn't just pester people to perfect their daily choices; they said we will work together until the problem is solved. That's not simple, and it won't be easy. We'll have to aim high and act boldly. But we're convinced that history is on our side. So let's get to work and make the kind of change we know is possible. Sincerely, Annie, Michael, Allison, Christina, Renee, Naomi, Bill and Toni The Story of Stuff Project team P.S. Along with the movie we've launched the Changemaker Challenge, a platform for Story of Stuff Community members to share their action ideas and commitments. Post yours today! -- Socialize with us! Forward to a Friend This email was sent to: elliestock(a)aol.com This email was sent by: Story of Stuff 1442 A Walnut Street, #272, Berkeley, CA, 94709, We respect your right to privacy - view our policy Update Profile and Subscription Preferences | Unsubscribe From All Emails

1 0

Can Christianity Be Saved--correction to the link to Bass's article
by R Williams 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

You can access the article by Diana Butler Bass, referred to in the previous email, directly through this corrected link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diana-butler-bass/can-christianity-be-saved_1… "Listen to what is emerging from yourself to the course of being in the world; not to be supported by it, but to bring it to reality as it desires." -Martin Buber (adapted)

6 8