Jeff’s blog

A friend of mine and I are putting on a neat Christmas gig that will be anything but your average ‘Christmas fare’.  We’re calling it ENCARNA (Spanish for ‘incarnation’) and our hope is that it will serve as a catalyst for something–anything–fresh and uninhibited.

As a Christmas worship installation, I guess ENCARNA in some ways will fit into the category of a ‘postmodern’ event, but I prefer to think of it as a progressive expression of a different kind of sensitivity. 

I like the word ’sensitivity’ rather than ones like ‘worldview.’  ‘Sensitivity’ seems to leave a bridge open to dialogue.  It seems to me that two different worldviews (ie modern and postmodern) by definition cannot overlap in common values, and simply create strangers.  But there can be a healthy co-existence between people holding to modern and postmodern sensitivities, leading to value overlaps where strangers can become friends (however awkward that friendship may be at times).

FYI, ENCARNA will be held at St. James United church in Waterdown on Dec. 21st and 22nd from 7-9pm both nights.  There is no cost for this event. 

Deconstruction of modernism + emotional maturity + systemic revisioning = post-modernism

Deconstruction of modernism + emotional immaturity + stylistic revisioning = pop-modernism

 Postmodernism:  A reaction to the work of Modern philosophers, most of whom created vast systems of meaning founded upon one central concept. In many religions, the central and beginning premise is some supreme being or concept. The postmodernist critique removes that central concept, it “decenters” the system of meaning. Postmodernism points out that all systems of meaning are in constant negotiation and flux, therefore claims of transcendant morality are suspect.

Furthermore, postmodernism critiques all claims of “objective” truth by revealing that human subjectivity always exists in every truth proposition. Due to the pervasive effects of subjectivity, postmodernist critiques are critical of all sweeping claims concerning social policy, truth, justice, morality, and ethics.

Finally, postmodernism is a school of thought which examines the traditional “either/or” dichotomies in modern philosophy, and reveals that these supposedly neutral dichotomies actually favor one side over the other. (Good/Evil, Above/Below, Male/Female)

 Pop-modernism: The fervent belief that everything is relative, and that the world has to revolve around oneself and one’s own feelings. Cultural manifestations include guests of Oprah whining about their “horrible” lives and jaded adults in coffee shops participating in intellectual masturbation.

A rabid, anti-Christian movement that was imported from France in the sixies. Characterized by repetition of lots of vague words like “space” and “texts”, as well as countless other invented terms.

When it makes sense, it boils down to the following: Everything is relative, ice is fire is milk is rubber is soda. It all depends on how one feels. Christianity is the only absolute evil. Otherwise, morals do not exist.

This month’s Time magazine’s cover story is “The Secrets of Ambition”, which was very interesting and timely for me since the topic of ambition has been haunting me for a little over 8 months now.

At a spring gathering of emerging leaders within our church association, one of the speakers threw out a question almost matter-of-factly, one which seemed to glance off the audience but stuck to me.  There was no discussion of it amongst the group but it is the only element of the gathering that I remember to this day.  His question was straightforward:  what is the role of ambition in post-modern leadership?

I’ve thought about that question almost weekly since it was presented to me.

Ambition, one of the hallmark characteristics of leadership within the modern era, has quickly fallen out of favour for those holding post-modern sensitivities.  The dominating and conquering emphases implicit to ambition have created a back-lash–from Coldplay to Greenpeace–that has caused me to analyze the validity of ambition in the emerging culture of leadership.

I’m sensing an increase in the presence of a “too cool to care” disposition within my peer group.  One which I can only assume is directly correlated to an increasing suspicion of ambition’s fruits, but also one that, if I am honest…is not entirely reassuring to me. 

Surely not all forms of ambition are evil, are they?  I haven’t answered that for myself yet, but what is undeniable is that within my peer group, ambition has definitely fallen out of favour to say the least.  I hear fewer and fewer people dreaming–dreaming big–and fewer and fewer people speaking passionately about their vocation and personal sense of calling.  A hear less and less from people undertaking big risks and daring leaps of faith. 

I wonder if we are going to be a generation that longed to walk on water, but was unwilling to step out of the boat.

Is ambition–and its associated characteristics of passion and drive–a destabilizing and unhealthy trait that impedes effective post-modern leadership?  Or is our conception of ambition changing, morphing, into a form that can catylize health (personal and communal)?  If so, what were the elements of ambition that were breeding unhealth for us personally, communally and societally?

So it looks like the people at blog.com have gotten their act together, so maybe a more secure server will allow all of us to enjoy a hassle-free blog experience.  Either way I’ll start posting again and we’ll see how long it lasts.