<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">

    <title type="text">Culture Making items tagged stewardship</title>
    <subtitle type="text">Culture Making:Main column content</subtitle>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.culture-making.com/author/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.culture-making.com/tag/atom/" />
    <updated>2008-11-21T22:39:26Z</updated>
    <rights>Copyright (c) 2008, Nate Barksdale</rights>
    <generator uri="http://www.pmachine.com/" version="1.6.4">ExpressionEngine</generator>
    <id>tag:culture-making.com,2008:11:21</id>


    <entry>
      <title>The more we make, the less we give</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.culture-making.com/post/the_more_we_make_the_less_we_give/" />
      <id>tag:culture-making.com,2008:author/9.1008</id>
      <published>2008-11-21T15:30:46Z</published>
      <updated>2008-11-21T22:39:26Z</updated>
      <author>
            <name>Nate Barksdale</name>
            <email>natebarksdale@gmail.com</email>
                  </author>

      <content type="html"><![CDATA[
        
						
			

					<b>Andy: </b><em>“One of the terrible paradoxes of American church life is that generosity declines (on a percentage basis) with income. The richer we become, the less we feel able or willing to give money away. There is no surer evidence that Mammon is, as Jesus suggested, more a devious demon than a neutral force. That is one of many reasons that our family gives away 10% of the gross income from our first salary (Catherine's) and my writing and speaking income, and started giving away 20% of the gross income when we added a second salary (mine). (We also save somewhat more on a percentage basis.) I have been tithing since I was 18 and am far wealthier (in assets and income, but most of all in friends and joy) than I ever imagined becoming. I mention these personal specifics because when it comes to money, as mentioned in this excerpt, American Christians are afflicted with a deadly vagueness and unhealthy notions of privacy. We need to bear public witness to just how good it is to give money away. I admit I am sometimes daunted by the amount we give—it is hard to give it effectively and it means that we forego, for example, private education for our children, which would otherwise be within our means. But it is worth it, every penny, and our goal is to give away even more.”</em><br />		
		<p>[According to the new book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0195337115/cmcom-20"><i>Passing the Plate</i></a>,] twenty percent of American Christians (19 percent of Protestants; 28 percent of Catholics) give <i>nothing</i> to the church. Among Protestants, 10 percent of evangelicals, 28 percent of mainline folk, 33 percent of fundamentalists, and 40 percent of liberal Protestants give nothing. The vast majority of American Christians give very little—the mean average is 2.9 percent. Only 12 percent of Protestants and 4 percent of Catholics tithe.</p><p>A small minority of American Christians give most of the total donated. Twenty percent of all Christians give 86.4 percent of the total. The most generous five percent give well over half (59.6 percent) of all contributions. But higher-income American Christians give less as a percentage of household income than poorer American Christians. In the course of the 20th century, as our personal disposable income <i>quadrupled</i>, the percentage donated by American Christians actually declined.</p><p>In Chapter 3, the authors evaluate nine frequently offered hypotheses to explain this modest giving. They conclude that five have substantial validity: 1) many Christians have not seriously wrestled with their own tradition’s theological teaching on giving; 2) many churches simply accept low expectations for giving and therefore provide little communal support for generosity; 3) some Christians question the reliability of the churches and organizations requesting funds; 4) because of near total privatization and lack of accountability in the area of charitable giving, there are no real consequences for stinginess; 5) most Christians give on an occasional basis when they feel like it, rather than in a disciplined, planned, structured way.
</p><hr />
<div class="author" style="font-size: -1">from "<a href="http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2008/006/5.11.html">A Lot of Lattés</a>," by Ron Sider, <a href="http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/">Books & Culture</a>, November/December 2008</div>		

	
			
			
			
		
      ]]></content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Trips that make a difference</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.culture-making.com/post/trips_that_make_a_difference/" />
      <id>tag:culture-making.com,2008:author/9.961</id>
      <published>2008-11-21T15:30:46Z</published>
      <updated>2008-11-21T22:39:26Z</updated>
      <author>
            <name>Nate Barksdale</name>
            <email>natebarksdale@gmail.com</email>
                  </author>

      <content type="html"><![CDATA[
        
						
			

					<b>Andy: </b><em>“The next big "cultural good" I'm working on, with a host of partners, is the documentary film-based curriculum <a href="http://roundtripmissions.com">ROUND TRIP</a>, which will be released in January. <i>Philanthropy Action</i>'s Tim Ogden wrote this great article based on an interview with me about the growing discontent with short-term mission trips as they are all too often practiced—something we hope ROUND TRIP will help to change.”</em><br />		
		<p>[Some doubt] whether it’s even possible to achieve the goals of a real encounter with poverty in a week to 10 days. According to Crouch it is—if the trips are radically different. He suggests three ingredients for trips to have an impact:</p><p>1. Make trips a part of a lasting, organization-level partnership: Many youth groups feel they have to go someplace new each year to interest participants. Visiting the same place year after year allows the Americans to begin building more of an understanding of local context and needs, and increases the likelihood that the “help” they offer is actually helpful.</p><p>2. Properly set expectations: The more a trip is described as a learning experience rather than an opportunity for an unskilled teenager to “help”, the more likely the trip is to have an impact.</p><p>3. Small is beautiful: if personal contact is the sine qua non of such trips, they have to be small enough to allow actual personal contact between Americans and their counterparts.</p><p>Still, Crouch doubts that one trip can make a difference:</p><p>“The trips only make sense if they are part of a comprehensive program of changing people’s attitudes and behaviors. Evidence is shockingly clear that a single trip has no impact. No matter how well you do a trip, especially when you’re talking about teenagers, they are at such a high-velocity developmental stage that I don’t think any single experience is going to have an ‘impact.’ . . . The organizations that have thought about this the most and are doing the best job are making these trips part of a much longer engagement with the issues. For instance, there’s one organization that requires a year-long commitment and the trip occurs in the middle—they meet just as often after the trip as they do preparing for it. . . . The grooves in our culture are too deep for us to escape without that level of commitment.”
</p><hr />
<div class="author" style="font-size: -1">from "<a href="http://www.philanthropyaction.com/nc/the_end_of_service_trips/">The End of Service Trips?</a>," by Tim Ogden, <a href="http://www.philanthropyaction.com/">Philanthropy Action</a>, 15 October 2008</div>		

	
			
			
			
		
      ]]></content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Even more sustainable</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.culture-making.com/post/even_more_sustainable/" />
      <id>tag:culture-making.com,2008:author/9.777</id>
      <published>2008-11-21T15:30:46Z</published>
      <updated>2008-11-21T22:39:26Z</updated>
      <author>
            <name>Nate Barksdale</name>
            <email>natebarksdale@gmail.com</email>
                  </author>

      <content type="html"><![CDATA[
        
						
			

					<b>Andy: </b><em>“Let's conclude this series of excerpts from John Stackhouse's valuable book with this gentle and hopeful rebuke to the idea that human beings are necessarily a damaging force on the earth. I am struck by his idea that our charge is to make the earth "even more . . . sustainable." Is that possible? What would it mean?”</em><br />		
		<div class="bookcover"><img src="http://culture-making.com/media/book_stackhouse.png" /></div><p>God did not want us to leave as few footprints as possible, leaving the earth alone as much as we can. He commanded us instead to spread out, over the whole globe, and bring it all under our influence, to subdue it for its own good, to make it even more fruitful, beautiful, and sustainable, under God’s guidance and by the power he invested in it. We dare not be cowed into relinquishing this role out of shame that we have performed it badly heretofore. We must take it up afresh, do the best we can, and look forward to the <i>shalom</i> that our administration will bring, in concert with Christ’s rule, in the world to come.
</p><hr />
<div class="author" style="font-size: -1">from John Stackhouse, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0195173589/cmcom-20"><em>Making the Best of It: Following Christ in the Real World</em></a>, p. 209</div>		

	
			
			
			
		
      ]]></content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>The encyclopedia of life</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.culture-making.com/post/the_encyclopedia_of_life/" />
      <id>tag:culture-making.com,2008:author/9.772</id>
      <published>2008-11-21T15:30:46Z</published>
      <updated>2008-11-21T22:39:26Z</updated>
      <author>
            <name>Nate Barksdale</name>
            <email>natebarksdale@gmail.com</email>
                  </author>

      <content type="html"><![CDATA[
        
						
			

					<b>Andy: </b><em>“As Stephen Webb observes in this short but substantive commentary, "the status of taxonomy is pretty low. . . . Why be content to describe the world when you can develop theories to explain it and, better yet, change it?" Yet being able to name and order the world is one of our distinctively human qualities. The Encyclopedia of Life is an invitation to cultivation, and to contemplation.”</em><br />		
		<p>Far from being an ancient myth with no contemporary relevance, the story of Adam’s task has inspired and shaped human endeavor throughout the centuries. Modern science got its start in the golden age of exploration, when collectors began cataloging exotic plants and animals in the hope of restoring Adam’s complete knowledge of the world. Some sixteenth-century scholars, like Benito Montano (1527–1598), gave Hebrew names to the places Columbus discovered, because they assumed that the Bible must contain all the words we need to understand the New World. Others realized that there were more things to know and to be named than they ever imagined. Francis Bacon exhorted gentlemen of means to build gardens “with rooms to stable in all rare beasts and to cage in all rare birds . . . so you may have in small compass a model of the universal nature made private.” Adam’s sin, Christians believed, not only expelled the first couple from the Garden. Plants and animals too had been dispersed, but now scholars could imagine a return to paradise by achieving universal knowledge.</p><p>If God were to bring all the animals before man today, the line would be too long. This scene could only take place on the computer, which is exactly what the new <em>Encyclopedia of Life</em> proposes. This remarkable project aims to gather descriptions of every species known to science on a single website. Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson has been the driving force behind the <em>Encyclopedia</em>, and his enthusiasm for it is unbounded. “It’s going to have everything known on it,” he said, “and everything new is going to be added as we go along.” Nearly two million species are known, but scientists estimate that ten times that many are yet to be discovered. Most of these unknown species are bacteria, fungi, and insects. We can name them because we know, or want to know, everything about them.
</p><hr />
<div class="author" style="font-size: -1">from "<a href="http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1154">Completing Adam’s Task</a>," by Stephen H. Webb, <a href="http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/">FIRST THINGS: On the Square</a>, 27 August 2008 :: via <a href="http://ayjay.tumblr.com/">Alan Jacobs</a></div>		

	
			
			
			
		
      ]]></content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>&#8220;The food here is awful!&#8221;</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.culture-making.com/post/the_food_here_is_awful/" />
      <id>tag:culture-making.com,2008:author/9.618</id>
      <published>2008-11-21T15:30:46Z</published>
      <updated>2008-11-21T22:39:26Z</updated>
      <author>
            <name>Nate Barksdale</name>
            <email>natebarksdale@gmail.com</email>
                  </author>

      <content type="html"><![CDATA[
        
						
			

					<b>Nate: </b><em>“Sudhir Venkatesh takes a millionaire on a quest for philanthropic education for a weekend in the Chicago ghettos. The challenge -- which really does sound like something out of a youth group "urban plunge" trip -- was to give the same $20 seed capital to the millionaire and Curtis, a local squatter, and see how each would use the money to get through the weekend.”</em><br />		
		<p>By 5 p.m. Curtis had made his first two purchases: frozen chicken wings and a can of beans ($4.75); a T-shirt and pair of socks from a vendor on the street ($2.00).</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Michael drove his rental car around the neighborhood. When he returned to meet us he was exasperated. “The food here is awful! No fruit, vegetables are moldy. Only meat, canned food, and soda. What do kids eat? The guy at the store told me no one would eat fruit unless it’s in a can. Is that true?”</p>
<p>Curtis shook his head. I told Michael, “When we get back to New York, I will talk with you about diet and quality of food availability in poor neighborhoods.”</p>
<p>But Michael was growing upset. “All I see are liquor stores and dollar stores and fast food. There was one guy who said he’d buy my food stamps — 50 cents for a dollar in stamps? How can people live like this?”</p>
<p>Curtis laughed. He asked Michael if he’d like some chicken and beans. Michael said, “No thank you,” and sat on the cold linoleum floor. He was silent.</p>
<p>“How much does a banana cost,” Curtis asked Michael. Michael looked embarrassed, unable to answer.</p>
<p>“You don’t know, do you!” Curtis laughed. “See fruit is expensive; raw food is too much for low income people. And we don’t always have a fridge, so you got to keep things in cans. That way it can move with you. And one thing you need to know: low income people <em>always</em> are on the move — not just squatters, all low income folks.”
<br />

</p><hr />
<div class="author" style="font-size: -1">from "<a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/06/michael-meet-curtis-philanthropy-gets-personal/">Michael, Meet Curtis: Philanthropy Gets Personal</a>", by Sudhir Venkatesh, <a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com//">NYTimes.com Freakonomics Blog</a>, 6 August 2008</div>		

	
			
			
			
		
      ]]></content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>The unspoken code of debt</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.culture-making.com/post/the_unspoken_code_of_debt/" />
      <id>tag:culture-making.com,2008:author/9.547</id>
      <published>2008-11-21T15:30:46Z</published>
      <updated>2008-11-21T22:39:26Z</updated>
      <author>
            <name>Nate Barksdale</name>
            <email>natebarksdale@gmail.com</email>
                  </author>

      <content type="html"><![CDATA[
        
						
			

					<b>Andy: </b><em>“How could I not link to a column that so eloquently describes the way that culture creates "the horizons of the possible"? Brooks is spot on. Now the culture-making question: what cultural goods could we shape or create that would change "the culture of debt"?”</em><br />		
		<p>Individuals don’t build their lives from scratch. They absorb the patterns and norms of the world around them.
<br />
</p><p>
Decision-making — whether it’s taking out a loan or deciding whom to marry — isn’t a coldly rational, self-conscious act. Instead, decision-making is a long chain of processes, most of which happen beneath the level of awareness. We absorb a way of perceiving the world from parents and neighbors. We mimic the behavior around us. Only at the end of the process is there self-conscious oversight.</p><p>
According to this view, what happened to McLeod, and the nation’s financial system, is part of a larger social story. America once had a culture of thrift. But over the past decades, that unspoken code has been silently eroded.
<br />

</p><hr />
<div class="author" style="font-size: -1">from <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/22/opinion/22brooks.html?_r=1&amp;oref=slogin&amp;partner=rssnyt&amp;emc=rss&amp;pagewanted=print">The Culture of Debt</a>, by David Brooks, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/">NYTimes.com</a>, 22 July 2008</div>		

	
			
			
			
		
      ]]></content>
    </entry>


</feed>