[Oe List ...] Perverted Vision, Perverted Ethics
Shelley Hahn
shahn at iquest.net
Thu Aug 23 19:48:43 EDT 2007
As someone who was very young in the Order, I'm not sure I ever really
understood what secondary integrity was about, and I'm pretty sure I don't
understand it much more now. Also, I'm not the most brilliant nor educated
nor articulate among this group, so I'm somewhat hesitant to even enter the
discussion ... but I feel compelled to.
I don't know about primary or secondary integrity ... I feel like I just know
about integrity without any descriptors attached. I suppose "primary
integrity" at it's worst is legalistic, moralistic and unforgiving. And I
suppose "secondary integrity" at its worst is nothing more than rationalized
dishonesty. I've seen people operate with "primary integrity" to the
exclusion of compassion and wisdom. I've seem even more instances where I
know people would think themselves to be operating out of "secondary
integrity" when all they're doing it presenting whatever story they feel is
necessary to get their way. And in my book, there are few things worse than
being railroaded, not allowed to make my own decision based on complete and
accurate information. (Now, I have good friends who would argue that there's
no such thing as reality, only story, but that's another discussion.)
I liked Marilyn's use of the word discernment. In my experience, there are
some black and white situations in life, and in those, decisions of integrity
are often clear cut. But there's a whole lot of gray in life as well, and I
agree that prayerful discernment is what's required in those situations.
Making decisions in that mode to me is living in integrity--primary, secondary
or otherwise.
I know when I'm living in integrity. There is something in my faith-filled
being that just knows. More importantly, I know when I'm not living with
integrity, and that's a crappy place to be. I know when my "higher self" is
present and when it's not. For me, that is the most important thing where
integrity is concerned.
My humble offerings ...
Shelley Hahn
Quoting "W. J." <synergi at yahoo.com>:
> Having been compared to Karl Rove, I am very aware that there was (and is) a
> major difference between Us and Them. The Order:Ecumenical wasn't really
> about screwing the world and the environment for the short term gain of a few
> corporate capitalists.
>
>
> Despite the reality of 'unintended consequences', the process of discerning
> and articulating a vision of global inclusion and participation, and rolling
> out an army of volunteers to facilitate a process of comprehensive
> socio-economic village development can't be compared to the invasion of the
> Bushies.
>
> But it was an 'invasion' by an 'elite' with a 'vision' and a 'model' for
> 'bending history' (Stalin's model of social change). And when you destabilize
> the status quo and induce social and economic change, you're very vulnerable
> to getting shot down.
>
> It's also a very privileged position. You're just out there, and it feels
> like an 'Oh shit!' moment. All the time.
>
> Then there's that damned consensus-making. I mean it's like moving an Army.
> The whole Army's on the move, and the direction is set. And you're either
> part of it, or you're not.
>
> Secondary Integrity is like being in the Army. It's the integrity of a
> global enterprise, of historical change, of being on the Long March of Care.
> And sometimes your Primary Integrity feels like screaming, 'Hey, wait a
> minute!' or 'I didn't vote for that!'
>
> But finally your Primary Integrity gets expended--fizzled, if you
> will--like air rushing out of a balloon. That's just the way it is. And when
> your fizzle is done, either your expenditure has participated in a great
> moment of bending history, or you've maybe done something else.
>
> If we're lucky (and blessed) we may get to participate in a great
> historical movement of Secondary Integrity. And in that expenditure our
> Primary Integrity gets busted flat and hung out to dry. But experiencing
> Secondary Integrity is being one's being in relation to a very mysterious
> reality. It's like dancing with the Mystery itself.
>
> Karl Rove, on the other hand, got to dance with a President.
>
> Marshall Jones
>
> BTW, Randy, I also filmed the well in Bayad. The water was real. No slick
> tricks. No smoke and mirrors.
>
>
> R Williams <rcwmbw at yahoo.com> wrote:
> No disrespect intended for Marshall, but his reasoning regarding the well
> in Maliwada makes him a prime candidate to be Karl Rove's successor. I too
> was a part of the "sell the well" activity, in my case the well in Bayad, not
> Maliwada. The practical problem with that is, in the face of short term
> gain, the funding sources sooner or later discover you have no integrity,
> i.e. you do not do what you say you will do, the funding dries up, and the
> reputation follows you around the world.
>
> But the moral problem is in the assumption that appears to be behind a
> group of elites believing they know what's good for everyone. "You don't
> have the ??? (big picture, vocational commitment, spiritual depth, or
> whatever) to know what's needed, but I do, and I'll tell you whatever I must
> to get you to do what I've decided you need to do. I'm a 'spirit person' and
> you're an ass, the 'donkey on the bridge,' an 'infidel.'" From this kind of
> "elitism," the approach becomes coercion and manipulation from a "subject" to
> an "object," an "I and it," rather than persuasion between two "subjects," an
> "I and Thou." (Buber) In time this infects your internal relations as well
> (elitism within the Order) and the whole system becomes corrupt as in Nazi
> Germany or what this country begins to look like after nearly eight years of
> Bush's thinking the American people don't have the sense (or whatever) to be
> trusted with the basic freedoms afforded under the Constitution.
>
> I think Marilyn is onto something when she compares primary and secondary
> integrity to Bonhoeffer's understanding of responsibility. For Bonhoeffer,
> responsibility was not a choice between to be free OR to be obedient, but to
> stand in the tension between the two. When you collapsed obedience and stood
> only on the freedom pole you were the "irresponsible genius."
>
> So with intergrity--it is not a choice between primary OR secondary, but to
> stand in the tension between the two. When you abandon primary integrity for
> a perverted version of secondary integrity, you become Bonhoeffer's
> "irresponsible genius." Maybe it plays out this way. If I have decided that
> digging a well in Bayad (or Maliwada) is the "necessary deed" and I can't
> persuade you to see it that way so that you provide the funding (primary
> integrity), then I don't become "dissuaded" by your argument and end my
> quest. Instead, if I believe it's really necessary, I go find someone else
> who will see it my way and commit to pay for it (secondary integrity.)
> History will decide if it was indeed necessary.
>
> I agree with Dick. I have pondered for a long time that we did often
> operate from a perverted understanding of secondary integrity and that it did
> hurt our effectiveness externally and our morale internally as an Order. I'm
> glad we're talking about it now. Perhaps some more "fools" will "rush in" to
> participate in this conversation.
>
> Randy Williams
>
> Marilyn R Crocker <marilyncrocker at juno.com> wrote:
>
> To: dialogue at wedgeblade.net
> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:07:58 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Dialogue] {Disarmed} Re: Secondary Ethics
>
> Dick et al,
>
> My understanding of "secondary" integrity (as opposed to the rules, regs
> and legalisms that,for me, represent "primary" integrity) is that which
> guides one's actions in accord with the "necessary deed" -- the freely
> responsible action (cf Bonhoeffer) which I've never found is a simplistic cop
> out, but rather the result of complex, prayer filled discernment.
>
> I would be interested to know more about your thinking, Dick, that led you
> to conclude this was our movement's most serious perversion.
>
> With appreciation for the resources you bring to our "virtual" collegium
> room table,
>
> Marilyn
>
> Marilyn R. Crocker, Ed.D
> Crocker & Associates, Inc.
> 123 Sanborn Road
> West Newfield, ME 04095
> (207) 793-3711
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:23:34 EDT KroegerD at aol.com writes:
>
>
> Here is a link to the subject not from the spirit movement.
>
> http://ezinearticles.com/?A-Model-of-Ethics-for-Womens-Development&id=654252
>
> On golden pathways a google search delivered only a speech by Mathews in
> Korea. ( below )
>
> good luck with that!!
>
> In my words, secondary integrity means doing whatever is necessary, telling
> story ( even if it is totally untrue) in order to ger 'er done. In my
> opinion, it was our movement's most serious perversion, and ultimately did in
> the spirit movement as an organization.
>
> Dick Kroeger
>
> Global Priors Council e all-new MailScanner has detected a possible
> fraud attempt from "discover.aol.com" claiming to be AOL.com.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dialogue mailing list
> Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who
> knows.
> Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
> _______________________________________________
> Dialogue mailing list
> Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
>
>
>
--
More information about the OE
mailing list