[Springboard] Some Reflections

Tue Dec 4 13:13:42 EST 2007

Thanks John

I think we all have to answer the question "Why get up every morning?" other
than it is a habit. Great reflections.

I rings well with JAS comment that the 21st century is not like the 20th.

George

4240 Sandy Shores Dr

Lutz, FL 33558

USA

Tel: 813-948-7267

Mob: 913-505-9041

Fax: 813-948-4167

Em: m.george.walters at verizon.net

  _____  

From: springboard-bounces at wedgeblade.net
[mailto:springboard-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of jlepps at pc.jaring.my
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 15:35
To: Springboard Dialogue
Subject: [Springboard] Some Reflections

Dear Colleagues:

It was good to "be with you" via Skype at Junaluska. Sorry not to have
gotten these reflections in prior to the meeting, but maybe they're not too
late.

Reflections for Springboard

The question from the Springboard group was, "What's laying a claim on us
personally regarding the future?" and it's a good question that deserves
serious consideration. First answers are usually the most reliable in terms
of revealing ones inner consciousness, but I have to admit that not much
came to mind.

Of course I could name the numerous clients that are literally badgering us
to facilitate for them and to teach them facilitation skills. Something is
clearly going on that has not gone on before. Is it really getting through
that the role of facilitation is important if groups are to work together
successfully? Somehow that particular trend is welcome and something I've
worked on for many years. But these days it doesn't ring my bells. Ann is
handling that with skill and panache, and I am more than willing to help and
to participate where possible. It's fun to facilitate and to see groups come
alive. I seem at this moment, however, to be in the mode of "handing over"
this particular mission.

 Then I could name the online graduate courses I am teaching. There is
plenty to do there, both in the sense of learning and teaching. And, of
course, using the computer to do increasingly complex tasks is fun.
"Meeting" students places me in touch with a huge variety of personalities
and life-events without having to actually meet people f-2-f. Courses need
tweaking and polishing to get them "right" and students need a bit of
personal guidance from time to time that I find gratifying to provide.  It's
good work and it makes a contribution. Still, the bells don't ring.

 Writing is still a hobby that I enjoy. The last thing I wrote that was
pretty good was a witness in June entitled "Sometimes a Hug" about
confronting (my) death. There are now 8 bound volumes of my writings in KL
that need to be sorted by topic and put into publishable form. But since
they are more like journal entries and reflections on experiences, it's hard
to see any publishable value. Going through them would be a great memory
trip, but I don't yet see their futuric thrust. My interior glockenspiel
remains undisturbed.

 There are groups that are important, worthy, and a joy to work with: IAF,
the Denver ICA team, and the KL conference committee. I've played a helpful
(minor) role in 2 of the three. But even the best of groups has dynamics
that bring out the "been there, done that" interior response. Somehow the
prospect of getting seriously involved in making things happen effectively
in a group keeps my chimes thoroughly muffled.

 I have been able in the past to discern the "mood of the times" with some
accuracy, and that's a role I don't mind continuing. But analysis is not
strategy and what to do with the insights that emerge is not something about
which I have much expertise. But here are a few insights: Authentic
spirituality comes in the midst of intensified knowing and doing. Any other
approach is off target. We've often said that the great gift of the OE was
doing theology first -- knowing the religious basis on which everything else
must be built. We first built a complex mental model and then did a series
of social demonstrations. And throughout those efforts, continual reflection
on the spirit yielded wonders.

 So maybe one task of Springboard now is clarification of current theology.
The times are not now the 60s. And the immediate issue may not be the
existential one, though that's what will eventually have to be addressed.
But suppose we're back to a time of ontology. Suppose the insights of
quantum physics and string theory have so disrupted the common worldview
that even the idea "God" is unintelligible. It's more likely that the
technology springing from physics has created the change rather than the
actual theoretical physics about which most of us remain blissfully unaware.
There's also this younger generation and their technological expertise that
embodies a new type of consciousness. One presenter at the IAF Europe
conference mentioned that his son often had nine interactive screens open at
the same time on his computer and was carrying out interactions with each of
the nine simultaneously. That's a type of consciousness that is more foreign
to my way of thinking than the mindsets of Malaysians. It's not just chaos
theory and fancy physics that's creating the new context: it's technology
that is providing a new consciousness. 

 People aren't against religion; they're more like Tony Blair's press
secretary's response when asked about Tony's church habits: "We're not into
God." If you base it on church attendance, you could also say I'm "not into
God," at least in the ways of organized religion. But I am deeply committed
to the proposition that life is 2-dimensional, and at the dimension of depth
reside those realities spoken of in religious poetry. Looking at the
perversions that fundamentalists have inflicted on religion in the past
decade, it is no wonder that sensitive and responsive people often give
religion a miss. But that's to view life as one-dimensional. As Niebuhr once
said, life has two dimensions, and whenever either one is negated, something
goes seriously wrong. Maybe the starting point for our work on theology
might be "Towards a New Otherworldliness" from H. Richard Niebuhr's 1942
article. But we mustn't simply use it to justify our own work on the Other
World. That may still serve as a springboard, but it's a bit too subjective;
we need to get at its ontological basis. Maybe there is a way to talk about
the two dimensions of life without getting into the "supernatural." It would
be momentous (literally) to produce a world view that was scientifically
credible and accounted for the dimension of depth that religious poetry
expresses. Tillich never quite accomplished that, though he tried. Maybe we
could give it a go. Then we have a chance to address lives, i.e. to expose
the existential gap between reality and ourselves.

There seems to be a faint jingling in the distance. Anyone else hear it?

Now here are a few thoughts about bells. What rings my bells is not
necessarily the primary value to determine how I spend my time. For me the
bells indicate an emerging concern that I would like to pursue, but it is
not necessarily a priority unless it is related to practical needs. So the
identification of primary societal contradictions at a deep level may be the
task before us now that will disclose the necessary deeds. 

                                    --John Epps 3 December 2007

LENS International (M) Sdn Bhd
5th Fl, Tower 1 Wisma MCIS
Jalan Barat
46200 Petaling Jaya, Selangor
Malaysia
on the web at <www.lensinternational.com <http://www.lensinternational.com/>
> 
email: <jlepps at pc.jaring.my> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/springboard_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20071204/9afcfeb9/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: M. George Walters (m.george.walters at verizon.net).vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 204 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/springboard_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20071204/9afcfeb9/attachment-0001.vcf 