As Jesus said in Mark 7:14, “The poor will be with you always.” Indeed, it is the church’s mission not only to fulfill the needs of its own members, but to reach out to the rest of the world, city, neighborhood and block. Too often the church gets caught up in feeding its own and forgets about the outside world. To some, church is just that- a safe haven away from the sins and ugliness of the rest of “them” where they can ignore what’s outside the doors and focus on their own spiritual well-being. Christ wasn’t put on this earth to walk around and be fed spiritually from others. He was here to serve as an example of what a Christian should strive to be- not only living a pure and holy life but to help those in need. Matthew 20:28 says “just as the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.”
Not only does God call us to serve, but he calls us to serve the poor. This is a group of people who are routinely cast aside in life, even by Christians. They are looked at as a problem that needs solving and charity and not as a group of people who need love and care. It is not uncommon for a church to raise thousands of dollars to help starving children in Africa or tsunami victims in Indonesia but will balk at the thought of paying for a homeless shelter in the city less than 20 minutes away. It is almost as if the poor in our town are not looked at as real people, but rather as “cases”. God commands us in Proverbs 31:8 to “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.”
And to serve to the poor, we must go to where they live- urban areas. Cities. The modern world city has changed drastically in the past century, due to advances in technology, better healthcare and communication and increasing trends caused by globalization. Since the end of the Cold War, the world and everyone in it, like it or not, has been affected by globalization- and quickly. It has taken over politics, commerce, and international relations within virtually every country in the world. Those who have not been fast enough to keep up with the pace of globalization have been left behind, feeling bitter and isolated. Some countries have chosen to remain that way, feeling that globalization is actually “Americanization” in disguise and denouncing it. The book entitled The Lexus and the Olive Tree, by Thomas Friedman, explains how globalization “became the dominant international system” (page xx) and examines how this system shapes the lives of people around the world today. Friedman argues that “if you want to understand [the world] you have to start by understanding…globalization” (page xxi). It is no longer enough to just understand the culture and history of a country in order to communicate with them, you have to also look at the world around them and how they react to it to understand their future.
The world has done a 180. What was once the old way of operating for decades, is now obsolete within two months. You can either chose to adapt to the new, fast-paced world, or be left behind. This new international system, globalization, has improved the standard of living for millions of people around the world. But it has also left dangerous people feeling alienated and angry, ready to attack the leaders in the forefront of globalization, mainly the United States. Friedman writes, “Globalization is not just some economic fad and it is not a passing trend” (page 7). Where did this system come from and where is it headed? In order to understand the true meaning of globalization, you must look at its beginnings.
The Wall. This simple word had a lot more meanings than just a cement barrier separating two ideals from two parts of the world. The Berlin Wall represented a divided world, one where Communism was feared and the side you were on represented your beliefs and allies. Before, we were a world of friends and enemies. Today, we are “competitors.” The world is no longer divided by a wall; instead we are connected in ways we never could have imagined. The things that run the world- money and the global markets, have become so closely integrated with technology so that it is possible to access anyone any where, any time. A person in Japan can communicate with someone in England in mere seconds and has access to an unlimited supply of information that was once not available to them. Anyone with a connection to the Internet can become a freelancer. Gone are the days when countries could block the outside world from their people and keep them in the dark about modern life.
The Information Revolution drastically lowered the costs and barriers for new entrants into the business world. In turn, it increased the competition and speed of the way business moved (page 80). This is great news for the consumer, as products and services are more readily available, but bad news for the supplier and manufacturer, as they must constantly be innovating and improving their service. If not, a competitor will quickly take over and leave them in the dust.
Only the competitive survive in the capitalistic economy and the more open a country is to free trade and competition, the more an economy will flourish (page 9). The more an economy grows, the more the politics and government minimizes. Unfortunately, the countries that are not connected, the third world countries with fundamentalist leadership, are not growing at the same rates as the open market countries. Friedman uses the illustration of a Lexus and an olive tree to show the dynamics of the emerging world and the clash of cultures and beliefs from the old world. The Lexus represents the modern, capitalistic world in which people strive for a better standard of living. They realize that if they attach on to the ways of globalization, they can compete with the rest of the world in finding their place in the market. Unfortunately, in doing so, they begin to lose a sense of their identity- their culture and values. Since the big players in the globalization game are the Supermarket powers (Tokyo, New York, Paris, London, etc), those players are the ones whose culture and lifestyles get integrated into the world view. Everyone wants to be like Mike. Or in this case, Uncle Sam. But too often, people feel that they are being forced into becoming something other than what they are and they cling desperately to their “olive tree”- their identity. When these people feel like it is being taken away from them without their permission, they get resentful and lash out against the system. The “challenge of globalization is to find a healthy balance between preserving a sense of identity and doing what it takes to survive in the system” (page 42).
But how do countries find a healthy balance of identity and continue to compete in the global market? It seems like every time a country opens their doors to free trade and foreign investing, along comes a McDonald’s and a Taco Bell to boot. The streets in downtown Jerusalem begin to look the same as Orlando. Leaders in these countries need to have a plan to filter out the cultural differences that could easily take over their country and turn their historic, unique cities into Anywhere, USA. For every McDonald’s that is built, a Mom and Pop store goes out of business and that piece of culture is lost. Healthy globalization is defined by Friedman as “the ability of a culture, when it encounters other strong cultures, to absorb influences that naturally fit into and can enrich that culture” (page 295). Unfortunately, at the rate globalization moves and takes over a country, it is almost impossible for a city to develop a good plan to preserve their culture before it is too late.
Because of this, the backlash against globalization is huge. Advances in technology are constantly developing new ways to eliminate costs- usually eliminating jobs in the process. In order for a worker to be seen as valuable by their employer, they must have multiple skills and be learning new ones all the time. This puts enormous pressure on people who are not used to this new system. They fall behind and are replaced, with nowhere to go. America’s society is all about empowering the individual and creating choices and with the Internet, many choices are readily available to us. Other countries are not used to this sort of thinking. The group is more important than the individual and they look at globalization as dividing their country apart, as a threat. It is no wonder that they are apprehensive to join in with the rest of the world.
On page 301, Friedman describes how to up the standard of living so that cities are not paved over and all cultural differences are lost. He writes “The more inner cities are reclaimed, the less pressure for more urban sprawl into green areas.” What he forgets about here are the people who are already living in the inner city and how if that section is reclaimed and renovated, most likely they will lose their homes. A developer will turn the neighborhood into an attractive, high-rent district and the poor will be forced to move elsewhere, causing the same outcomes in a different location. He writes earlier that what developing countries do not need is aid; instead they need the tools to assimilate into the global marketplace. The same can be said for people living in poverty in urban cities. They don’t need a new park built over their old apartment building- they need to be shown how to better their jobs, homes and families and come together as a community to improve their neighborhoods. If they aren’t taught this, they will constantly be moved from place to place and never have a sense of identity and roots in a city and therefore will not care about being productive members of society.
During our residency week, we discussed why we felt called to urban issues and ministry and some of the ways that we can make an impact on the neighborhoods in our cities that need the most help. When I told my boss that I was starting in the Urban Studies program at Eastern with the hopes of working in a non-profit organization, the first thing he told me was that I wasn’t “going to make any money.” I bit my tongue with the urge to say, “Well sir, that’s the difference between you and me.” Because obviously one doesn’t go into this line of work or ministry with the intention of making lots of money. There is a specific moment when you realize that there is more to life than working in the corporate world, making a pile of loot and retiring to Florida at age 55. Working with greedy and corrupt people in the daily rat race is no longer desirable and you realize that in order to find greatness in God’s kingdom, “the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like the one who serves” (Luke 22:26).
We’re all unique, each with our own individual mission and meaning for life. While the majority of leaders are outspoken and charismatic spitters, (i.e. Tony Campolo) there are plenty of people behind the scenes doing just as much. If the world was full of outgoing, talkative leaders then there wouldn’t be anyone to listen. If everyone decided that urban ministry was their call, then there wouldn’t be anyone to help in rural areas. There’s a reason why we’re all different and that’s so we can balance each other out, feed off of each other and learn from one another. With so many distinct calls and missions, the possibilities really are endless (Spitzer, Lee).
I’ve always felt out of place in my hometown and that I was born in the wrong setting. More comfortable in the city than in the suburbs, I looked to different cultures that surrounded me to satisfy my curiosity for the outside world when traveling was not economically feasible. I grew to feel a passion for not only at-risk youth in my own city, but realized that there was a whole world with these problems, most ignored by the general population. A fan of documentaries and social journalism, I tutored myself on the poverty-stricken favelas of Brazil, the orphanages of the Ukraine and the street-children of Russia. My heart was broken again and again as I longed for a way to be able to reach out and affect even one life.
As a journalism student, I thought that my voice could only be factual and unbiased. Realizing that there are former journalists and filmmakers out there making an impact through research, travel and writing has inspired me to continue my education to include urban studies, so that when I write for socio-political reasons, I understand the people in which I write about. I see myself in research and communication with NGOs, churches and government, along with writing social commentary and producing documentaries to spread knowledge of the world’s crisis situations. The good in this world is worth the risk, fight and criticism one must expect to face in this ministry and to let the public hear the voices of those in need.
No comments:
Post a Comment