Secularism filling in holes in religion

Alain de Botton gave a TEDTalk called Atheism 2.0 and I commented just briefly on why you should see this talk just over a year ago. 

If you have not seen this talk, or if you do not remember what this talk is about, Botton has the thesis that the world is secularizing poorly and that secularism has holes in it. He goes on to argue that, of all sources, religion provides models for the secular world on filling in these holes. 

Imagine that. A secularist is looking at religion to help fill in the holes of the secular worldview. This is fantastic because he understands that every worldview has holes in it - including religious worldviews. Botton's humility to reach across the chasm (that has been created by fundamentalists on both sides) and incorporate some things from the "other" side is what we need more of. 

My question to us religious folk, can we do the same thing? Are we humble enough to recognize the holes in our worldview and look to models in secularism to fill in these holes? 

The next post (or 2) I will submit some thoughts. Leave some comments if you have anything to add!

The one superpower of pastors

Don't tell anyone I told you this, but pastors have a superpower. When we are ordained there is a whole "pastor's code" we have to sign that demands we not tell anyone about this superpower so few pastors will talk about what I am about to tell you as their superpower. But do not be fooled. Pastors have one superpower and it is our bread and butter. 

Listening. 

Were you expecting something cooler? Water to wine? Walking on water? Ability to find quarters behind people's ears? Sorry, nothing like that. But that does not mean that listening is not one of the most super of superpowers. 

Everyone needs someone to listen to them. Everyone. Even the hermits of our day talk to themselves or to God or to a volleyball (as science shows). 

Which is why when you come into contact with someone who will listen, you are drawn to them. You find something about them that is "warm" or "helpful" or "holy".  The power of listening is a very powerful power. Do not underestimate it. 

Recently I heard this TED Talk by Julian Treasure about listening. At the end he gives an acronym to remind people how to listen. I tweaked his acronym a bit because I think that listening is like exploring, which is why when I listen to others I work like NASA.

Nod, Affirm, Summarize and Ask.

Nodding your head goes a long way. Not like a bobble head. Just nod.

Affirm. Just say 'yes'.

Summarize what you have just heard - "so what I hear you saying is..."

Ask - Ask a question. Even if it is just in the ballpark of the conversation is good enough.

Stuff you should know any why - pt. 7 (final)

The Doubt Essential to Faith - TED Talk by Lesley Hazelton

You should know this not only because this Jewish woman writes a bio about Muhammad but because her overall point on why being without doubt is being a fundamentalist. 

I also wonder if there is much rage in the Muslim world toward this Hazelton in the same way there was in the Christian world toward Reza Aslan and his book Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth? Even though it is clear that what Hazelton expresses is that Muhammad had A LOT of doubt about his experience - which is counter to the dominate narrative about Muhammad and the faith of Islam on the whole, no? 

Enjoy! 

Stuff you should know and why - pt. 4

The way we think about charity is dead wrong - TED Talk by Dan Pallotta

And if you do not take the eighteen minutes to listen to Pallotta at least hear these three quotes:

We have a visceral reaction to the idea that anyone would make very much money helping other people.Interesting that we don't have a visceral reaction to the notion that people would make a lot of money not helping other people.You know, you want to make 50 million dollars selling violent video games to kids, go for it. We'll put you on the cover of Wired magazine. But you want to make half a million dollars trying to cure kids of malaria,and you're considered a parasite yourself.

Connected to this quote above, there is a great little bit Pallotta has about rich people getting the title "philanthropist" when they give $100,000. It might be worth noting that the title "philanthropist" is not given to the directors, leaders or paid staff of a non-profit. 

Now a little bit on the curse of "overhead":

So we've all been taught that charities should spend as little as possible on overhead things like fundraising under the theory that, well, the less money you spend on fundraising,the more money there is available for the cause.Well, that's true if it's a depressing world in which this pie cannot be made any bigger. But if it's a logical world in which investment in fundraising actually raises more funds and makes the pie bigger,then we have it precisely backwards, and we should be investing more money, not less,in fundraising, because fundraising is the one thing that has the potential to multiply the amount of money available for the cause that we care about so deeply.

And finally, 

So the next time you're looking at a charity, don't ask about the rate of their overhead. Ask about the scale of their dreams,their Apple-, Google-, Amazon-scale dreams, how they measure their progress toward those dreams,and what resources they need to make them come true regardless of what the overhead is. Who cares what the overhead is if these problems are actually getting solved? 

The final quote is a reason why I connect to the global church known as the United Methodist Church which has four "Amazon-scale" dreams.