- OE - lists.wedgeblade.net

10/11/12, Spong: The Presidential Campaign and the Book of Judges
by Ellie Stock 11 Oct '12

11 Oct '12

HOMEPAGE MY PROFILE ESSAY ARCHIVE MESSAGE BOARDS CALENDAR The Presidential Campaign and the Book of Judges A major debate in this year’s presidential election eliciting great emotion and spirited rhetoric relates to “the size and role of the federal government.” A study of American history reveals that this theme has been part of every campaign since our nation’s founding in 1776. It has become a once every four-year ritual, complete with pious clichés that are constantly repeated. It appears, interestingly, to matter very little which party gets elected, since the size of government seems not to change from election to election. Indeed, studies indicate that the size of the federal government and the amount of the federal debt tend to grow more rapidly under the Republicans, the presumed “anti-big government” party, than they do under the Democrats, the presumed “pro-big government” party. For example, the size of the federal government and the federal debt expanded under Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush and contracted under Democratic President Bill Clinton. It expanded again under Republican President George W. Bush until it ended in economic collapse. It has been the role of Democratic President Barack Obama to begin the slow walk back to fiscal balance. A major issue in this campaign is whether or not he has done that task adequately. The facts of history simply do not uphold the political mantras that the Republicans are for small government and the Democrats are for big government. If this nation was really offered “a stark choice” in every election, as both parties always claim, then why does nothing happen to the size of government no matter who wins? Something is clearly going on in our electoral process that is apparently not rational, something we do not see or do not want to see. From where then does this false debate arise? The answer to this question became clear to me recently and it occurred in an unexpected place. During the year, I teach an adult class at my wonderful church, St. Peter’s, in Morristown, New Jersey, a congregation served by two incredibly gifted clergy. My subject matter for this year’s class is “The Rise of the Prophetic Movement in Israel,” covering 16 books in the Bible, from Isaiah to Malachi. To place the prophets into the story of the Hebrew people I introduced the class briefly to the history of Israel after the Exodus from Egypt, but before the Hebrew people moved to establish the monarchy of King David. That was a time of local government, tribal chieftains and a deep suspicion of all non-local forms of political power. All of this is reflected in the book of Judges, filled as it is with stories of tribal heroes like Deborah, Jael, Jepthah, Ehud, Gideon and Samson. As I read Judges in preparation for this class, I began to understand the nostalgic roots of my own country and indeed the way all nations have come into being. Nation states with clearly defined federal governments are a relatively recent human phenomenon. Italy and Germany did not become unified until the 19th century. In the Middle Ages, Europe was a continent of local tribes like the Goths, the Franks, the Huns, the Saxons and the Visigoths, who roamed the land with shifting boundaries, cut off from other tribes only by rivers or mountains. I look at Afghanistan today and I see a picture of pre-modern Europe. President Karzai is said to be the elected head of that nation, but the effective power outside the city of Kabul is held by local chieftains. I look at our closest ally, now called the “United Kingdom,” but it still reflects the ancient dividing lines that separated the English, the Welsh, the Scots, the Cornish and the Northumbrians just to name a few of that nation’s tribal parts. I look at my own nation, born in a revolutionary war in 1776, but unwilling to adopt a federal Constitution until 1789. No central government in history appears to have been born out of choice, but rather out of some survival necessity. There is in the hearts of human beings an almost universal fear of any external power that cannot be controlled or tempered by local desires. During the period of the Judges the Hebrew people were forced to choose a king only because the alternative was for the individual tribes to be picked off and conquered by the Moabites, the Edomites or the Philistines. Samuel, the last of the judges, warned the people about the abuses of federal power. He actually sounds like a contemporary politician. The central government (the king), he said, will draft your sons into its armies to fight its wars; it will tell you what you can plant on your farms, and it will tax you for the support of the government. When Samuel, bowing to pressure, finally named a king, he chose Saul, a member of the small and non-threatening tribe of Benjamin, who suffered from melancholia and was ultimately too weak to solidify his throne. I suspect that was a deliberate choice by Samuel. When Saul was killed in battle, his military captain, David, a powerful personality from the dominant tribe of Judah, moved immediately into the leadership vacuum and created a unified nation. King David did not end the yearning for local rule, but he and his son, Solomon, did suppress it for 80 years, after which a successful civil war localized the Hebrew people once again until their yearning for survival reestablished itself in 1948 in the modern-day state of Israel. In America, something quite similar occurred. This nation went from a successful revolutionary war against being ruled from London into a confederacy of thirteen independent colonies each with a ruling governor and a local legislature. Only through a long and difficult political debate that was focused in a series of publications known as the “Federalist Papers,” was the compelling case made for the creation of a federal union. These “Papers” were produced anonymously, but we now know they were written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. They made the familiar case that creating a united country was the only alternative to having the colonies picked off one at a time by the European powers, England, France and Spain. A Federal Union was a necessity for survival, but it was not something the people welcomed. Still fearful of federal power, the framers of our national constitution wrote protections into that document for the rights of the states. That is why we have today a balance of power between the House of Representatives and the Senate and why we elect a president through the votes of the states in an electoral college and not by the direct votes of the people. Deep in the human psyche, there is still the memory and the fear of having our freedom oppressed by some power. It was Egypt for the Hebrews, King George III for the Americans and “federal power” for many today. The negativity expressed in every national election against the federal government is rooted in this nostalgia, but the reason curbs on federal power will never be successfully implemented is that the America of today could not be governed by the local world view of our romantic past. So we will talk about it in every election, but we will never really do anything about it. Look at the contrasts between the America of 1776 and the America of today. In 1776, this country had less than 3,000,000 people. today we have 350,000,000. In 1776 people grew most of the food they ate on their own land or they killed it in the hunt with their own guns. Today, most of our citizens are separated from the farm by incredible distances, both physically and emotionally. A massive and non-personal food industry, made up of giant corporate farms, meat packing companies, automated chicken farms, canneries, fisheries and national grocery store chains are required to feed this population. None of these institutions today can be managed or have their quality and safety guaranteed locally. In 1776, people traveled by horse and buggy and seldom ventured more than 25 miles from their homes. Today, we are a nation of highways, gas stations, repair shops, auto dealers, rail lines and bus stations, and airports and air travel, none of which can be organized or governed locally. In 1776, communications were quite primitive. All newspapers were local, there were no telephones, radio stations, television channels or Internet providers. None of those modern means of communication can be organized or controlled locally. In 1776 in most homes and public buildings there was no running water, no electricity, no central heating and no garbage collection. Community needs were served rather with individual wells, outhouses, wood burning fireplaces and local garbage dumps. None of the things that we depend on so totally today like water departments, gas and oil companies, electricity providers and waste managements companies could now be organized or controlled locally. In 1776, churches, private charities and people who personally knew the poor took care of those who were in need. The care for the elderly was by and large a family responsibility. There were no hospitals or drug companies. There was no Social Security, Medicare or standardized medical procedures. All of those had to be created, maintained and governed for our well-being outside the local community. Nostalgia for local rule remains, stories of the good old days abound, but no one will finally return to that era or to those practices because none of them would work in our complex interdependent world. So in our political campaigning, we will continue to run against “big government,” but no matter who gets elected, no clock can ever turn back to the days of local rule and states rights so only the talk will go on. The reason one knows that this political debate is not real, is regularly demonstrated in that the political party most dedicated to small government is also the same party that wants the government to control the most intimate human decisions in regard to reproduction and family planning. They want no federal control in their lives except for the federal imposition of their own moral code. It does not compute. I did not understand why, however, until I began to read the book of Judges. It is amazing how powerful biblical insights can emerge once one stops pretending that the books of the Bible are the literal words of God and read them for the wisdom they impart. ~John Shelby Spong Read the essay online here. Question & Answer Lydia from Machesney, Pennsylvania writes: Question: What if it was discovered that Christ had a "near death" experience? Is it possible? What effect would it have on Christianity? Answer: Dear Lydia, I think your imagination has been working overtime! First, everything we know about Jesus is located in the four gospels that are not eye witness accounts, but the products of the second and third generations of Christians, written 40 to 70 years after the event we call the crucifixion. So they are interpretations of Jesus not factual reporting. If Jesus had had an out of body experience, all we would get to read about would be how it was interpreted 40-70 years later. Second, an out of the body experience, at least as I have read about them is a subjective experience not participated in by anyone, but the subject. I think that what people call out of body experiences can be explained quite naturally, but I know of no verifiable data of a person, who is “out of the body” making himself or herself known to other people. If I did read an account that claimed that, I would not believe it or would ascribe it to hallucination. The Jesus story is based upon a person who lived in history and with whom people had intense experiences, which they interpreted as the presence of God enabling them to transcend the normal limits of mortality. Our problem is that we have literalized those experiences and written creeds, doctrines and dogmas on the basis of those literalizations. Your question seems to me to be the result of seeking, either consciously or unconsciously, to escape these creedal structures and find a new way to interpret these experiences. I commend you for that. To walk down the road of “out of body” literature is, I believe, little more than a dead end street. ~John Shelby Spong Announcements 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 3530 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Unit 1 Portland, OR 97214 Add us to your address book

2 1

the new ICA
by Terry Bergdall 08 Oct '12

08 Oct '12

The subject line, "the old Order passing away," has been grabbing my attention for several days now as I open my email. While that is certainly a statement of fact in regard to our EI/OE/ICA community, it is far from being the whole story. During the past academic year, September-May 2012, ICA-USA had 200+ university students engaged in preparation field work for the city-wide share fair, "Accelerate 77." Then, for ten weeks during the summer, we were rocked daily with 40 interns passionately "bending history" as they completed the work. Their presence has been living proof of our 50th Anniversary slogan, "Midway in a Century of Care." The following link will give you a glimpse at what I'm talking about. You'll see Seva Gandhi, a full-time staff person of ICA-USA and a current member of the ICA-International Board of Directors, and Dylan Amlin, one of the summer interns, being interviewed about the "Sharing Approaches That Work" event on September 15: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNtJle4YfH0&feature=bf_prev&list=UUdS0glKdGe… All is good, all is received, that past is approved, the future is open. Take care, Terry

8 7

Fwd: The ICA meet(pic attached)
by Jack Gilles 08 Oct '12

08 Oct '12

Dear All, Thought you would enjoy seeing the picture of the ICA 50th event in India. What a great group of colleagues. Vinod Parekh is the one with the black hat in the back. Peace, Jack Begin forwarded message: > From: Vinod Parekh <vinodparekh(a)gmail.com> > Date: October 4, 2012 1:24:50 AM CDT > To: Jack Gilles <icabombay(a)igc.org> > Subject: The ICA meet(pic attached) > >

3 2

Memorial Service for Edith Elizondo
by jonzondo＠juno.com 08 Oct '12

08 Oct '12

Memorial Service for Edith "Ellery" Adele McKinley Elizondo Sunday October 21st at 3:00 PM The Woodlands Community Presbyterian Church 4881 West Panther Creek Drive Spring, TX 77381 (281) 363-2040 In lieu of flowers, donations can be made to the Presbyterian Church. Contact me if you need more information. Please forward this to others who know Ellery. Blessings to us all. Jon 425-205-3856 ____________________________________________________________ Woman is 57 But Looks 27 Mom publishes simple facelift trick that angered doctors... http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5072609be3ca7609b04east04vuc

1 0

Leadership call with Robertson Work OCT 8
by Janet Sanders 06 Oct '12

06 Oct '12

Dear Colleagues, The Leadership Theme group for the ICAI conference will have its second exploration this Monday at 9am Eastern time. Below is the announcement. Please join if possible. If you would also like to be part of the virtual conference from Oct 29-Nov 2 please let me know. We look forward to hearing about any of your leadership reflections. The Syllabus that Rob uses and a second paper on leadership for Sustainable Human Development have been attached. Warmest greetings, Jan Leadership Theme Meeting Summary: Robertson Work will lead an exploration of the course "Innovative Leadership for Sustainable Human Development" which he designed and teaches at New York University Wagner Graduate School of Public Service in NYC. The leadership approach in the course is primarily a blend of UNDP's Sustainable Human Development paradigm, Ken Wilber's Integral Quadrants, Jean Houston's Social Artistry and ICA's Technology of Participation We will use the sound in the Adobe Connect meeting room. If you have not used the Adobe Connect sound before, please join the call one half hour before the time below so that we can help you set up your sound system. Please use a headset for this meeting. Computer speakers disrupt the sound for everyone else. Start Time: 10/08/2012 9:00 AM New York/Toronto Daylight time Duration: 01:00 URL: http://top.adobeconnect.com/ldrtheme2012/ Cut and paste this address into your browser if it does not take you there automatically.

1 0

An Amazing Two Days at ICA Chicago-Telling Our Story & The Global Archives
by Herman Greene 04 Oct '12

04 Oct '12

I spent what for me were an amazing two days in Chicago last Thursday and Friday. I went because Jack and Judy Gilles were working on the Global Archives and were going to leave this morning, September 30. It was the only time I could get to see them. I am finding a yearning to tell our story and bring some of it forward. More particularly I miss working with people who were formed out of the same fire as I was. I work with activists, truly "Those Who Care," but something is missing for me. It's primarily an interior aspect-that "die on the march" aspect, that "live the mystery" aspect, that "the past is approved and the future is open (to be created)" aspect, that "we can get anything down that is necessary" aspect, that "we can drop everything and focus . . . and sacrifice" aspect," that "we can leave all our possessions behind" if need be aspect. One could argue that the Marines also create this kind of interior steel and discipline, but it is different. (Actually the Marines might excel in honor of country and even willingness to die, but it is still different.) I have only experienced this in the Order. I know this has made me much of what I am and I have a yearning to pass it on to others, especially as I realize my own age, 67, and see so many colleagues passing away. So while a part of me thinks its silly for grownups to be filing all the town meeting 76 event folders (and all the work that goes into that), another part of me also claws back to recover that past . . . for the future. What we were as the Order has passed away (I mean in terms of being able to re-create it as it was again), and all of those magnificent moments and events we created have passed away. Yet there is an echo in the hallway that will not stop. I will go into this more later, but what past it is that I want to pass on is difficult to grasp. Is it the Order, RSI, EI, ICA, EI and ICA, all before Joe died (or in my case before 1975 when I left the Order), all up to today including the recent history of ICA? I have some ideas, but they are not important for this email. All that's important now is that I was drawn back to Chicago to discuss, primarily with Jack, how the spirit transformation part of who we were then (and inside are now) can be transmitted to the future as we who experienced this grow older and older and pass away. The "we" I am talking about is those of us who carry a memory back of 50-55 years (other may have a different time span) when it seems to me the really creative breakthroughs occurred. I'm at the younger end of those who experienced that as adults (I was 21 when I joined the Order in 1967). Now some may have joined in 1972 or later and still have "gotten it," but what I am talking about is something that was gotten or it was not, back then. So we are a dying cohort and the question has arisen for me whether there is something we still need to do together? My answer is I think that if there is something that we still need to do together it is to transmit that legacy as a living legacy for present and future generations. Part of this is transmitting facts, part the interior narrative, but most of all it is transmitting the timeless spiritual reality we came to know and which has shaped our lives but this is not easy because it is not a simple thing. It's much more than just coming out of an RS-1, or any other short even, inspired I had many important moments of understanding this past week in Chicago and felt tremendous gratitude for what Marge Philbrook and colleagues have done on the archives, and for the work Jack has done in thinking through how this can be a living legacy. I In brief Jack and those who workshopped with him, realized that its not just a matter of preserving the past by putting facts in file cabinets and waiting for someone to want it, but it is giving people a way of understanding what's in the collection (Jack uses the term "curation" like a museum curator) and applying that material to the cutting edge issues of our time. What I especially appreciated though was the attached chart in three formats, because it gave me a way to grasp the entirety of what it is that we were/are/may need in some fashion to pass on. In a certain sense the attached chart overwhelms me because I thought there were a few key things like "contextual ethics" and the RS-1 dynamic and a few other things that might "really need to be" passed on . . . just a few key things. But now I see it was "all of it"-a giant spiritual event and happening that unfolded over many years and took many forms all of which were a single event. To recreate this would require thousands of people in summer assemblies and a new order and that is not going to happen. Yet I think there is something we can do and need to do and which no one else can do. So, in conclusion, I believe there is something we still need to do together and that is to pass on a living legacy. By distinguishing legacy from living legacy I meant this: "Legacy" is preserving the past for its own sake. "Living legacy" is recovering the past so that it might continue to transform the future. The attached Accessions chart is just a beginning. I know that Jack would like to receive your suggestions. More soon, Herman _____________________________________________ Herman Greene 2516 Winningham Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27516 919-929-4116 (h) 919-624-0579 (c) 919-942-4358 (f) Skype: hgreene-nc hfgreene(a)mindspring.com

3 4

10/04/12, Spong: "Think Different–Accept Uncertainty" Part XVIII: The Resurrection of Jesus
by Ellie Stock 04 Oct '12

04 Oct '12

HOMEPAGE MY PROFILE ESSAY ARCHIVE MESSAGE BOARDS CALENDAR "Think Different–Accept Uncertainty" Part XVIII: The Resurrection of Jesus The literal details are familiar: the third day, the empty tomb, the experience of seeing the risen Christ. These details stand at the heart of the Christian story, forming its essential climax if you will. It is celebrated annually in Easter services, normally with packed congregations. Its secular observances involve Easter parades, Easter egg hunts and the prolific Easter Bunny. It comes, at least in the northern hemisphere where Christianity was born, in the spring of the year when the doldrums of winter have been pushed aside by new shoots of green and new flowers to brighten the countryside. It captures and speaks to the deepest human anxiety, the experience of mortality and finitude. Death is a reality for every living thing, but only human beings are self-consciously aware that this destiny awaits us all. Only human beings anticipate death, plan for it, fear and dread it and seek to avoid it. Is it possible that the story of Jesus’ resurrection is an expression of human wish fulfillment? Or is there something about the story of the resurrection that is real, that is trustworthy and that is measurable inside the flow of history? The whole of Christianity seems to rest on the answer being “yes” to each of these questions. We start our examination of the resurrection of Jesus by examining the biblical texts that purport to tell us about it. The reality of resurrection is assumed in almost every verse of the New Testament, but the details that purport to describe the resurrection are consistently both confused and in many cases actually contradictory. There are five separate sources consisting of only six chapters in the entire New Testament that purport to tell us about what happened at the time of the first Easter. The first and earliest of these five sources is Paul and his account is found in I Corinthians 15. That epistle was written in the mid-fifties, or some twenty-five years after the crucifixion and about two decades before the first gospel, Mark, ever saw the light of day. Paul is, however, quite sparse in details. He gives us the first specific time reference. It happened, whatever “it” was, he says, “on the third day,” presumably following the crucifixion. When Paul talks about the resurrection of Jesus he always uses a passive verb form. Jesus did not rise in Paul’s writing, he “was raised,” presumably by God, and it was done, he says, “in accordance with the scriptures.” There being no New Testament in existence when Paul was writing, this reference was clearly to the Jewish Scriptures, which Paul, as a rabbi, knew quite well. To what particular biblical texts he was referring, however, he failed to say, leaving us only to speculate. The primary Old Testament reference, to which most scholars now believe he was alluding, seems to be II Isaiah (40-55), but there is nothing in that segment of the book of Isaiah that hints at what we now call resurrection. It does, however, talk about the indestructibility of the “servant” figure who gives his life away. Then Paul proceeds to give us a list of those to whom this raised Christ had appeared, i.e., those who have been enabled to see and thus to be called “witnesses.” To this list, however, he provides not a single narrative detail. The list includes three individuals: Peter, James and Paul and three groups of people: “the twelve,” “500 brethren at once” and “the apostles.” Note that “the twelve” and “the apostles” appear to be two different groups, which many find surprising. The “500 brethren at once” is a reference not corroborated by any other note found anywhere in the written Christian tradition. The most fascinating of these witnesses, however, is Paul himself. Most scholars, following the lead of the early 20th century church historian Adolf Harnack, date the conversion of Paul somewhere between one and six years following Jesus’ crucifixion. If whatever it was that Paul saw up to six years after the crucifixion, was, as he claims, identical with what others saw, it could hardly have been a resuscitated body that walked out of a tomb three days after being crucified. Literalists are thus confounded. Paul, the first figure in the New Testament to write about what came to be called “resurrection,” could not possibly have been referring to a physical body; yet whatever Paul’s experience was, he believed it was real and it was certainly life changing. So we have in this our earliest source in the New Testament the elements that constitute an ultimate mystery. Whatever the resurrection of Jesus was, it was real, but it was not physical. Paul gives us a hint as to what it was to which he was referring when he writes later in his letter to the Romans that “Christ being raised from the dead will never die again. Death no longer has dominion over him” (Rom. 6:9). If Paul was referring to a physically resuscitated body that returned to the life of the flesh, then presumably at some point this Jesus would have had to die again. That is the nature of all things that are living and physical. So, whatever it was that this epistle was trying to communicate, it is not about a body resuscitated and restored to the physical realm of human history. This Romans text goes on to say that “he died to sin once for all, but the life he lives, he lives to God.” The clear implication in these words is that Paul’s concept of the raising of Jesus was that he was raised into the life of God from which he “appeared to certain chosen witnesses,” among whom Paul included himself. It also means that whatever that appearance to Paul was, it would have had to have occurred somewhere between one and six years after Jesus’ death. Studying the biblical accounts of the resurrection is not quite as simple as literal-minded Christians want to make it. The interpretive task became even more complicated when the first gospel was written. The resurrected Jesus is never seen in Mark’s narrative. All Mark gives us in his Easter morning story is an announcement made to the women at the tomb in which it is stated: “He is not here, he has been raised.” This announcement was made by a messenger, Mark says, who is not yet regarded or pictured as an angel. So what do these words mean? Was Jesus raised back into the physical life of this world or was he raised into the life of God? That is a question that Mark does not answer. The messenger goes on to direct the women to go tell “Peter and the disciples” that the raised Christ will go before them into Galilee and there they will see him. If the disciples are still in Jerusalem when this announcement was first made, as this text suggests, we need to know that Galilee was a seven to ten day journey, so the promised “appearance” in Galilee of the raised Jesus would fall outside the three day time measure. So in this earliest gospel the promise of a future appearance is made, but in fact in this account the raised Christ appears to no one after the crucifixion. That is to many a startling reality, but it is also a biblical fact. When Matthew writes the second gospel a decade or so after Mark, he has Mark in front of him and he incorporates most of Mark directly into his account. He also changes, heightens and adds to Mark’s text from time to time and this happens in his account of the first Easter. First the messenger in Mark has become in Matthew a clearly identified, supernatural angel. Second the raised Christ actually does appear to the women in the garden in Matthew and in a form physical enough for them to “grasp his feet.” Matthew then adds a second appearance story designed to give content to the messenger’s promise in Mark that the disciples would see the raised Christ in Galilee. It occurred, said Matthew, on top of a mountain. The disciples presumably trudged up the mountain, but the raised Jesus came mysteriously out of the sky. Does this imply that he has come out of heaven or out of God? He is transformed and clothed in the garments of the Son of Man, who, in Jewish mythology, was to come at the end of the age. For the first time in the Bible, this resurrected figure is given words to speak. They constitute a charge: “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel,” followed by a promise: “For I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” The resurrection story is clearly growing as the years roll by. When Luke, the author of the third gospel, written about a decade after Matthew, pens his version of the story, the angelic messenger in Mark, who became an angel in Matthew, has now become two angels and the physicality of the raised Jesus has been enhanced to the place where we are told that he walks, talks, eats, offers his flesh to be felt and interprets scripture. Luke also says that all of the resurrection appearances occurred in the Jerusalem area, dropping all references to a return to Galilee. Then Luke introduces the story of Jesus’ ascension. Having made the resurrection into the physical resuscitation of a deceased body, he has to provide a way to get this physical body out of the world without dying again. The ascension was his answer. Finally, when the Fourth Gospel is written near the end of the first century (95-100), its author offers new and sometimes contradictory material. There are four apparently separate vignettes that the Fourth Gospel has woven together, sometimes rather awkwardly. The first one stars Mary Magdalene alone at the tomb and the focus of this story is that one cannot cling to the idea of Jesus as a physical body. The second vignette focuses on Peter and the “beloved disciple” coming to an empty tomb and we are told that the “beloved disciple” believes without ever seeing a physical body. The third focuses on the disciples in a secured upper room on the evening of the first day of the week and that is the time for this gospel when the disciples receive the Holy Spirit; that is, Easter is viewed in this final gospel as the Pentecost transformational experience for the disciples. The fourth episode stars Thomas and its message is “Blessed are those who do not see (a resuscitated body) and yet who still believe.” That is a brief summary of all the specific resurrection material in the New Testament. It remains now to weave this material together into a coherent form. That I will do in the next episode, which will conclude this series entitled, “Think Different–Accept Uncertainty.” ~John Shelby Spong Read the essay online here. Question & Answer Pastor Dan Sire, via the Internet, writes: Question: Your theology is intriguing but I have many questions. Two are: If Jesus Christ is not the incarnate divine one then who or what is he? If Jesus Christ is not the incarnate divine one then what is the significance of naming yourself a Christian? Answer: Dear Pastor Dan, Thank you for your questions. I fear, however, that the categories of theological understanding in which you frame your two questions are far too rigid and even dated for you to be able to hear the responses that I need to make to them. You are using the language of Greek dualism in which the creeds were hammered out in the fourth century when Christianity was in the process of being incorporated into a Greek thinking world. Incarnation is a Greek term not a biblical term. Fourth Century concepts have frozen Christianity into something neither Paul nor the gospel writers would ever have recognized. I spent over 300 pages trying to separate the Jesus experience from this creedal language in my book entitled Jesus for the Non-Religious: Discovering the Divine in the Heart of the Human. It is not an easy or simplistic task, but it means that in the way you frame your questions it is all but impossible for me to respond in a meaningful way. We Christians have made many claims for Jesus. There is general agreement even in the Bible that “God was in this Christ.” What that means and how God and Jesus came to be viewed as related to each other in a deep and even total way is not nearly as clear as the affirmation we make about him. If you go to the New Testament, you will discover that the earliest affirmation about Jesus that we have in that book is that in his humanity the presence of God has been experienced as real. “God was in Christ” was the way Paul described that experience. Since the only way first century people could understand God was in the common definition as a supernatural being who lived above the sky, the only way the debate was framed was about how this distant God could have gotten into the human Jesus. The debate is easy to follow. Paul, writing to the Romans about 58 CE, said that God lifted Jesus into the meaning of God at the Resurrection (Rom. 1:1-4). Mark, writing 12-14 years later, says that God entered the fully human Jesus at the time of his baptism. Matthew, writing somewhere between 82-85, and Luke, writing between 88-93, say that God entered Jesus at the moment of his conception. That was when the Virgin Birth stories entered the tradition. The Fourth Gospel, written between 95-100, agreed that Jesus was part of who God is, but argued that it had been so from the dawn of creation. Jesus was for him was the enfleshment of the word or logos of God that came out of God when God said: “Let there be light.” All of these explanations, conflicting as they are, are written into pages of the New Testament. It is not the explanation of how God became human that I regard as important, it is the reality of the human experience that the explanations seek to explain. In the mystical tradition, the union of the human with the divine is said to be the goal of life. Humanity is not destroyed by the presence of God, it is expanded. Divinity is not the opposite of humanity it is an expression of humanity’s fullness. Divinity does not take over our humanity or even Jesus’ humanity; it becomes the depth expression of who we are. Incarnation language is the language of the Greek world. It served the church well in the past, but it cannot be the language of the 21st century. Our task is to find a way to express the same truth that the concept of “incarnation” sought to convey, but in the language of our world. That is my goal in ministry and it is the reality of that goal that makes me a Christian. My best to you in your ministry. ~John Shelby Spong Announcements 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 3530 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Unit 1 Portland, OR 97214 Add us to your address book

1 0

Re: [Oe List ...] An Amazing Two Days at ICA Chicago-Telling OurStory & The Global Archives
by beretgriffith＠charter.net 04 Oct '12

04 Oct '12

I appreciate your comments Margaret. I feel the DEMONSTRATION section perhaps needs expansion to include Permeation and Development both of which were a huge factors in our lives together. Perhaps box #12 in Training, is Community Life, which may include work/writing about enablement, One Day Wonder and other practical marvels of living in community. This is a different slant than would be taken when looking at The Global Order, #2 Corporate Life, which would perhaps included things like the Cannonical Hours, THe Rule of the Order, the more formal structure of the community. Beret On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Margaret Helen Aiseayew wrote: Your chart is wonderful. I was wondering if Training, Inc. might not be something that fills in that empty box in training. As one who was sent to be a permeator in every location I was ever assigned, popular preaching was my forte. I think sometimes it is the most sustaining aspect of my work at the motel even today. (I had a fellow down for breakfast yesterday morning who was talking about wondering if the job he was doing made a difference. I explained to him that the difference we make is not something we are promised to know in this lifetime. Told him a little story about having something someone had appreciated revealed to me, and then mentioned letting others know their impact on us. I said it was a gratitude thing. He left the breakfast room a different person, smiling, laughing.) I didn't find the permeators guild work in the training and I was a part of the social workers that worked in Fifth City. I am certain that the teachers would have equivalent revelations to offer. There was always, through permeation and fund raising, a strong connection of our strategies to the larger world. It was like the seeds that are scattered in springtime with weeping. I guess I am suggesting that this continuous external engagement that brought data back into the community is an essential piece to the research, demonstration and training process, If I were working on triangles, I would name it a "that without which" dynamic. Forgive me in advance if this sounds like someone who wants to make the form of their engagement year after year sound more important than it was to the journey of the whole. Everyone has to have a story and this is a big part of mine and I am sticking to it. Thanks for all your efforts. Love to Judi, Margaret ----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Gilles <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('icabombay(a)igc.org')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('icabombay(a)igc.org')> To: Order Ecumenical Community <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2012 6:14 PM <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] An Amazing Two Days at ICA Chicago-Telling OurStory & The Global Archives <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> Herman, <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> It was a delight for us to have you there for two days. Your passion for our "living legacy" is indeed the same we are doing in the Archives. We are excited to be exploring with computer technologies on how we might make that a reality. I did some adjustment on the screen you have sent out. Here it is. I intend to develop a short description for each item which will be available in a week. Someone mentioned our work on Popular Preaching and I'm still trying to figure where that would go in the chart. We are interested in other areas of our work that need to be included. <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> Jack <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> ___________________________________ <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> On Sep 30, 2012, at 6:40 PM, Herman Greene wrote: <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> I spent what for me were an amazing two days in Chicago last Thursday and Friday. I went because Jack and Judy Gilles were working on the Global Archives and were going to leave this morning, September 30. It was the only time I could get to see them. I am finding a yearning to tell our story and bring some of it forward. More particularly I miss working with people who were formed out of the same fire as I was. I work with activists, truly “Those Who Care,” but something is missing for me. It’s primarily an interior aspect—that “die on the march” aspect, that “live the mystery” aspect, that “the past is approved and the future is open (to be created)” aspect, that “we can get anything down that is necessary” aspect, that “we can drop everything and focus . . . and sacrifice” aspect,” that “we can leave all our possessions behind” if need be aspect. One could argue that the Marines also create this kind of interior steel and discipline, but it is different. (Actually the Marines might excel in honor of country and even willingness to die, but it is still different.) I have only experienced this in the Order. I know this has made me much of what I am and I have a yearning to pass it on to others, especially as I realize my own age, 67, and see so many colleagues passing away. So while a part of me thinks its silly for grownups to be filing all the town meeting 76 event folders (and all the work that goes into that), another part of me also claws back to recover that past . . . for the future. What we were as the Order has passed away (I mean in terms of being able to re-create it as it was again), and all of those magnificent moments and events we created have passed away. Yet there is an echo in the hallway that will not stop. I will go into this more later, but what past it is that I want to pass on is difficult to grasp. Is it the Order, RSI, EI, ICA , EI and ICA , all before Joe died (or in my case before 1975 when I left the Order), all up to today including the recent history of ICA ? I have some ideas, but they are not important for this email. All that’s important now is that I was drawn back to Chicago to discuss, primarily with Jack, how the spirit transformation part of who we were then (and inside are now) can be transmitted to the future as we who experienced this grow older and older and pass away. The “we” I am talking about is those of us who carry a memory back of 50-55 years (other may have a different time span) when it seems to me the really creative breakthroughs occurred. I’m at the younger end of those who experienced that as adults (I was 21 when I joined the Order in 1967). Now some may have joined in 1972 or later and still have “gotten it,” but what I am talking about is something that was gotten or it was not, back then. So we are a dying cohort and the question has arisen for me whether there is something we still need to do together? My answer is I think that if there is something that we still need to do together it is to transmit that legacy as a living legacy for present and future generations. Part of this is transmitting facts, part the interior narrative, but most of all it is transmitting the timeless spiritual reality we came to know and which has shaped our lives but this is not easy because it is not a simple thing. It’s much more than just coming out of an RS-1, or any other short even, inspired I had many important moments of understanding this past week in Chicago and felt tremendous gratitude for what Marge Philbrook and colleagues have done on the archives, and for the work Jack has done in thinking through how this can be a living legacy. I In brief Jack and those who workshopped with him, realized that its not just a matter of preserving the past by putting facts in file cabinets and waiting for someone to want it, but it is giving people a way of understanding what’s in the collection (Jack uses the term “curation” like a museum curator) and applying that material to the cutting edge issues of our time. What I especially appreciated though was the attached chart in three formats, because it gave me a way to grasp the entirety of what it is that we were/are/may need in some fashion to pass on. In a certain sense the attached chart overwhelms me because I thought there were a few key things like “contextual ethics” and the RS-1 dynamic and a few other things that might “really need to be” passed on . . . just a few key things. But now I see it was “all of it”—a giant spiritual event and happening that unfolded over many years and took many forms all of which were a single event. To recreate this would require thousands of people in summer assemblies and a new order and that is not going to happen. Yet I think there is something we can do and need to do and which no one else can do. So, in conclusion, I believe there is something we still need to do together and that is to pass on a living legacy. By distinguishing legacy from living legacy I meant this: “Legacy” is preserving the past for its own sake. “Living legacy” is recovering the past so that it might continue to transform the future. The attached Accessions chart is just a beginning. I know that Jack would like to receive your suggestions. More soon, Herman _____________________________________________ Herman Greene 2516 Winningham Drive Chapel Hill , NC 27516 919-929-4116 (h) 919-624-0579 (c) 919-942-4358 (f) Skype: hgreene-nc hfgreene(a)mindspring.com <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('hfgreene(a)mindspring.com')> <Accessions Grouping.pdf> <Accessions Grouping.doc> <Accessions Grouping.xls> _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net ___________________________________ <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> Herman, It was a delight for us to have you there for two days. Your passion for our "living legacy" is indeed the same we are doing in the Archives. We are excited to be exploring with computer technologies on how we might make that a reality. I did some adjustment on the screen you have sent out. Here it is. I intend to develop a short description for each item which will be available in a week. Someone mentioned our work on Popular Preaching and I'm still trying to figure where that would go in the chart. We are interested in other areas of our work that need to be included. Jack On Sep 30, 2012, at 6:40 PM, Herman Greene wrote: > I spent what for me were an amazing two days in Chicago last > Thursday and Friday. I went because Jack and Judy Gilles were > working on the Global Archives and were going to leave this morning, > September 30. It was the only time I could get to see them. I am > finding a yearning to tell our story and bring some of it forward. > More particularly I miss working with people who were formed out of > the same fire as I was. I work with activists, truly “Those Who > Care,” but something is missing for me. It’s primarily an interior > aspect—that “die on the march” aspect, that “live the mystery” > aspect, that “the past is approved and the future is open (to be > created)” aspect, that “we can get anything down that is necessary” > aspect, that “we can drop everything and focus . . . and sacrifice” > aspect,” that “we can leave all our possessions behind” if need be > aspect. One could argue that the Marines also create this kind of > interior steel and discipline, but it is different. (Actually the > Marines might excel in honor of country and even willingness to die, > but it is still different.) I have only experienced this in the > Order. I know this has made me much of what I am and I have a yearning > to pass it on to others, especially as I realize my own age, 67, > and see so many colleagues passing away. So while a part of me > thinks its silly for grownups to be filing all the town meeting 76 > event folders (and all the work that goes into that), another part > of me also claws back to recover that past . . . for the future. > What we were as the Order has passed away (I mean in terms of being > able to re-create it as it was again), and all of those magnificent > moments and events we created have passed away. Yet there is an > echo in the hallway that will not stop. I will go into this more > later, but what past it is that I want to pass on is difficult to > grasp. Is it the Order, RSI, EI, ICA, EI and ICA, all before Joe > died (or in my case before 1975 when I left the Order), all up to > today including the recent history of ICA? I have some ideas, but > they are not important for this email. All that’s important now is > that I was drawn back to Chicago to discuss, primarily with Jack, how > the spirit transformation part of who we were then (and inside are > now) can be transmitted to the future as we who experienced this > grow older and older and pass away. The “we” I am talking about is > those of us who carry a memory back of 50-55 years (other may have > a different time span) when it seems to me the really creative > breakthroughs occurred. I’m at the younger end of those who > experienced that as adults (I was 21 when I joined the Order in > 1967). Now some may have joined in 1972 or later and still have > “gotten it,” but what I am talking about is something that was gotten > or it was not, back then. So we are a dying cohort and the > question has arisen for me whether there is something we still need to > do together? My answer is I think that if there is something that > we still need to do together it is to transmit that legacy as a > living legacy for present and future generations. Part of this is > transmitting facts, part the interior narrative, but most of all it > is transmitting the timeless spiritual reality we came to know and > which has shaped our lives but this is not easy because it is not a > simple thing. It’s much more than just coming out of an RS-1, or any > other short even, inspired I had many important moments of > understanding this past week in Chicago and felt tremendous gratitude > for what Marge Philbrook and colleagues have done on the archives, > and for the work Jack has done in thinking through how this can be > a living legacy. I In brief Jack and those who workshopped with > him, realized that its not just a matter of preserving the past by > putting facts in file cabinets and waiting for someone to want it, > but it is giving people a way of understanding what’s in the > collection (Jack uses the term “curation” like a museum curator) > and applying that material to the cutting edge issues of our time. > What I especially appreciated though was the attached chart in > three formats, because it gave me a way to grasp the entirety of what > it is that we were/are/may need in some fashion to pass on. In > a certain sense the attached chart overwhelms me because I thought > there were a few key things like “contextual ethics” and the RS-1 > dynamic and a few other things that might “really need to be” > passed on . . . just a few key things. But now I see it was “all > of it”—a giant spiritual event and happening that unfolded over > many years and took many forms all of which were a single event. To > recreate this would require thousands of people in summer > assemblies and a new order and that is not going to happen. Yet I > think there is something we can do and need to do and which no one > else can do. So, in conclusion, I believe there is something we > still need to do together and that is to pass on a living legacy. By > distinguishing legacy from living legacy I meant this: “Legacy” is > preserving the past for its own sake. “Living legacy” is recovering > the past so that it might continue to transform the future. The > attached Accessions chart is just a beginning. I know that Jack > would like to receive your suggestions. More soon, Herman > _____________________________________________ Herman Greene 2516 > Winningham Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27516 919-929-4116 (h) > 919-624-0579 (c) 919-942-4358 (f) Skype: hgreene-nc > hfgreene(a)mindspring.com <Accessions Grouping.pdf><Accessions > Grouping.doc><Accessions > Grouping.xls>_______________________________________________ OE > mailing list OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net > http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net ___________________________________ <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> <javascript:parent.wgMail.openComposeWindow('OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net')> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net> <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net>

1 0

Re: [Oe List ...] OE Digest, Vol 4, Issue 29
by David Flowers 03 Oct '12

03 Oct '12

Randy refers to Walter Brueggemann, an Old Testament scholar, with regard to scarcity and abundance - here's a link to a video of him speaking on exactly that topic as the bottom line narrative of the Bible. http://www.marquette.edu/cps/BuildingaBetterMilwaukeeBrueggemann.shtml On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:27 PM, <oe-request(a)lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: > Send OE mailing list submissions to > oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > oe-request(a)lists.wedgeblade.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > oe-owner(a)lists.wedgeblade.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of OE digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: My report on Rio+20 (Charles Hahn) > 2. The Three Moods in Christian Worship (R Williams) > 3. [Dialogue] The Three Moods in Christian Worship (George Holcombe) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 20:08:44 -0500 > From: Charles Hahn <cfhahn30(a)gmail.com> > To: Order Ecumenical Community <oe(a)lists.wedgeblade.net> > Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] My report on Rio+20 > Message-ID: > <CACA= > 4B7gLM6Oybr+omB3TJWdG_8OKUgPjFfraFMHmct7J8HnXg(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > Herman, I have been out of town, and just now reading your Rio+20 piece. > It is such a hopeful piece. Much work to do, but hope filled. Thanks so > much. > Charles Hahn > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Herman Greene <hfgreene(a)mindspring.com > >wrote: > > > ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** > > > > Here?s the report I wrote on **Rio**+20:**** > > > > ** ** > > > > ** ** > > > > *NOTES FROM RIO+20: WHY IT DIDN?T FAIL* > > > > *By Herman F. Greene* > > > > I was in Rio from June 13-22 for the UN Conference on Sustainable > > Development (**Rio**+20) and events preceding it. The prevailing > > sentiment is that **Rio**+20 was a failure. Scott Simon of NPR described > > it as the biggest UN conference ever and perhaps one of its biggest duds. > > *The New York Times *quoted a representative of CARE as saying it was > > ?nothing more than a political charade,? and a representative of > Greenpeace > > as declaring it ?a failure of epic proportions.? When the official > outcome > > document from **Rio**+20, titled ?The Future We Want,? is not rejected > > outright, tepid assessments are generally given such as ?it partially > > salvaged prior commitments, but offered little new.?**** > > > > ** ** > > > > Evaluating **Rio**+20 as a failure has consequences. For some, the > > ?failure? of **Rio**+20 underscores the weakness or the UN processes as a > > whole. Because blame for the alleged failure has largely been placed on > > ?governments,? the faith of some in the ability of governmental and > > intergovernmental organizations to address major problems has fallen. In > > the ****United States****, where the event was seldom reported, summary > > reports of failure may lead some to say, ?I didn?t know about it and it > > wasn?t important anyway.?**** > > > > ** ** > > > > My view of the conference is, however, different. I had to educate myself > > to understand the UN sustainable development process, of which **Rio**+20 > > is only the latest chapter in a 40-year long and continuing history. I > > began to engage directly in this process in October 2011 in order to > > promote formation of an International Ethics Panel on Ecological > > Civilization (IEPEC), a panel first proposed by Professor **Ryoichi > > Yamamoto** at a September 2011 conference in ****Tokyo****. Returning > > from that conference, I learned Rio+20 was the place to take this idea as > > many NGOs and some governments were emphasizing the need for new ethical > > structures in UN governance in connection with one of Rio+20?s two major > > themes, ?Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development.?**** > > > > ** ** > > > > In the course of attending three preparatory events in **New York** and > > the final **Rio**+20 conference, I have learned the UN?s sustainable > > development process is not primarily about the environment. It is about > how > > the peoples of the world, as a whole, can improve their lives and the > forms > > of development that are most appropriate for achieving this. Environment > > comes in because it must: after all Earth is the living planet and > resource > > base on which humans depend both physically and culturally. Economics > > enters because our current understanding of social development is > dominated > > by it and by certain established conventions, such as GDP, > neo-liberalism, > > globalization, and industrialization, all of which were questioned in the > > Rio+20 debates, especially in relation to the conference?s other major > > theme, ?The Green Economy in the Context of Poverty Eradication and > > Sustainable Development.**** > > > > ** ** > > > > I have learned that equity and security, in unfamiliar ways, are at the > > heart of every sustainable development debate. Small island states ask if > > it is equitable that they should be flooded due to global warming and > > rising seas attributable to the actions of others. The President of > Ecuador > > raises the question how much should his country be paid to leave > > rainforests intact in order to produce oxygen for the world. The ?Green > > Economy,? is viewed by many in the Global South (the term commonly used > in > > place of the ?**Third World**?) as a further expansion of global > > capitalism, the commodification of nature and a threat to indigenous > > people. Security becomes a question for many of whether they will have > > enough food to eat in a world, soon to be populated by 9 billion people, > > facing erosion of land, desertification and land grabs by both foreign > > governments and corporations. Subsistence farmers wonder why they must > > enter the monetary economy to become ?sustainable? or ?be lifted out of > > poverty,? and why their occupation of land for centuries does not > > constitute ?title.?**** > > > > ** ** > > > > I have learned that civil society, largely composed of nonprofit > > organizations (also called nongovernmental organizations or NGOs) and > given > > quite limited official status, by holding to ideals of the future, > > commenting on intergovernmental negotiations and making their voices > heard, > > are collectively a major force in the UN sustainable development process. > > Yet I have also learned that, now more than ever, government is the > > indispensable actor in bringing about the future we want.**** > > > > ** ** > > > > With this growing knowledge, I have come to understand **Rio**+20 as not > > being a failure. The language of outcome documents in UN conferences such > > as **Rio**+20 are arrived at by consensus. Thus, the outcome document of > * > > *Rio**+20 reflected where there was and was not a global consensus on > > future commitments. The current financial crisis (and related national > and > > regional politics) hung like a shadow over the proceedings. While > progress > > on new commitments would have been preferable, the central issue in the > > proceedings became whether governments would preserve the basic > principles > > of sustainable development adopted at the First Earth Summit in Rio in > > 1992, principles such as social equity, gender equality, common but > > differentiated responsibilities (requiring greater responsibility for > > developed countries), human rights (including, heretofore unrecognized > > rights to clean, drinkable water, basic sanitation, food security, a > > minimum standard of living, and a social protection floor), the polluter > > pays, the precautionary principle and the right to development (the right > > of all peoples to develop their own resources for their own needs, > > interests, and cultures). The reaffirmation of these principles became > the > > limited success of the governmental portion of **Rio**+20.**** > > > > ** ** > > > > The greater achievements came in the civil society portion. More than > > 30,000 civil society representatives participated in the official Rio+20 > > conference and 100,000 more in the concurrent People?s ****Summit**** and > > protest marches. There were also large concurrent business and > professional > > gatherings in **Rio**, such as Business Action for Sustainable > > Development Business Day and the World Congress on Justice, Governance > and > > Law for Environmental Sustainability. Knowing of the limitations of the > > official outcome document, activists released 14 People?s Sustainability > > Treaties and a People?s Sustainability Manifesto. President Rousseff of > ** > > Brazil** was justified in calling **Rio**+20 the most participatory > > conference in history and ?a global expression of democracy.?**** > > > > ** ** > > > > People who gathered in **Rio** knew the official results of the > > conference would be limited. They came nevertheless to network and to set > > the stage for the next phase of the UN sustainable development process, > the > > shaping of the post 2015-development agenda in which the present > Millennium > > Development Goals will be integrated into broader and more ambitious > > sustainable development goals. Those from civil society left to form a > > global citizens? movement to take action now for sustainable development > > and to develop the political will for global policy change. **Rio**+20 > > was not an end, rather it was a new beginning. **** > > > > ** ** > > > > Herman**** > > > > *_____________________________________________***** > > > > **Herman Greene****** > > > > ********************2516 Winningham Drive************************ > > > > ********************************Chapel Hill************, > ********NC******* > > * ********27516************** > > > > 919-929-4116 (h)**** > > > > 919-624-0579 (c)**** > > > > 919-942-4358 (f)**** > > > > Skype: hgreene-nc**** > > > > hfgreene(a)mindspring.com **** > > > > ** ** > > ** > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OE mailing list > > OE(a)lists.wedgeblade.net > > http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net > > > > >

2 1

NASA software developer moves on ...
by Tim Wegner 01 Oct '12

01 Oct '12

Yesterday I turned in my badges at the United Space Alliance. My NASA career started when Susan and I were re-assigned from Egypt to Houston. The only thing I knew about the Space Shuttle was what I had read in Time magazines bought on the streets in Cairo. When we arrived at the Houston House, Susan stayed "in house" and I was assigned to work. Larry Henschen helped me arrange an interview with McDonnell Douglas, a NASA contractor. I had never programmed a computer and had no qualification other than a Master's degree in mathematics and an "all-but-thesis" not-quite-a-PhD. In retrospect, those were great credentials, since the state of computer programming when I was in college was using punch cards. When I was working programming NASA's first Unix computers, I remember thinking "I wish I had studied Unix in college" - then realizing that Unix didn't exist when I was in college! But the principles and laws of mathematics and physics I learned in the late 60's have stood up very well. My career has been spent in the abstract world of mathematical models of gravity, drag, solar pressure, and accelerations - space, the final frontier. Hard to beat that. I missed the first four shuttle flights but arrived in time for STS-5. My first project was an analysis of the shuttle drag model. My supervisors weren't watching closely, so I learned FORTRAN on a UNISYS mainframe and implemented my results in a program called HOPE. (There was another program called LOVE, but not one called FAITH.) Shortly thereafter I was re-assigned as a programmer, and remained a software developer (and software project manager) for my whole career, which extended more then a year past the last Shuttle flight in July 2011. I ended up working for various NASA contractors for a bit over 30 years. Shortly after I started at NASA, Larry Henschen and I were instrumental in helping Lynn Oden, another Houston House order member, in also getting a job. For a few years Lynn and I commutred together. Lynn retired a few years ago, having had a fine career as a Shuttle Navigation Flight Controller. Susan and I never "left" the Houston House; it melted away around us as the Order transitioned away from corporate living. Conna Wilkinson was the last one to leave when she moved back to Oklahoma. So Susan and I turned out the lights of the Houston House and got an apartment, and later bought a house. I am grateful today for all the experiences we had assigned to San Franscisco, San Jose, Melbourne, Adelaide, Bayad, and finally Houston. Susan and I arrived in Houston with no assets but no debts in our mid-thirties, and are now both retired. We still have no debts, but now we have a few assets. I amazed that that was possible! I am still working with a small group of your colleagues keeping the wedgeblade.net glue connecting our far flung community alive. Retirement is, of course, just another "assignment" to new challenges. Tim Wegner

11 14