Video
Twitter
RSS Feed
A religious view of 'development'
FAITH IN ACTION
By Katherine Marshall
As a development practitioner who also teaches about development, I have tended to take the term for granted. But it's far from simple to define. Universities, non-profit agencies, and churches call fund-raising people "development officers" and the word crops up with other meanings in virtually every discipline.
But there's a pretty specific international development community built around the term. The label "development" is attached to a vast array of institutions, including the World Bank (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development), NEPAD (New Economic Partnership for African Development) and the non-profit I head (the World Faiths Development Dialogue, or WFDD). At its simplest, development can be understood as the path to a more prosperous life.
A visit to Cambodia last summer inspired me to rethink the term. The WFDD has embarked on a year-long exploration of development and faith in Cambodia, to paint as full a picture as we can of faith-inspired efforts to advance development. Two wonderful fellows from the Princeton in Asia Program (somewhat akin to the Peace Corps) are based in Phnom Penh to "map" what is happening and draw lessons from it. The purpose is to understand and build bridges among worlds that are separated by language and preconceptions, and thus achieve better development results.
We knew that we would face questions about how we defined faith. The answer is: broadly, the beliefs and institutions that focus on God, a higher power, or the spiritual dimensions of humankind. But we were surprised at the variety of responses to what constitutes development. As we did our first round of interviews it became clear that everyone had a different notion. In some cases, everything went into the development basket. Sex trafficking? Absolutely, it's a central development question. Concerns about land grabs? Of course. Traffic snarls in the city? Tuberculosis? Corruption? A new radio station? Climate change? Domestic violence? Pre-school education? Every single issue rightly belongs on the development agenda. (For an intriguing concept of development, listen to Swedish health specialist Hans Rosling on TED, the website that features Ideas Worth Spreading. He debunks the idea of a world divided into developed and developing countries).
This question of where development begins and ends is not abstract because it points to fundamental shifts in world realities that are not fully reflected in the way we talk and think about world affairs. Bringing faith and religion into the mix poses a raft of new questions, but the responses offer countless new insights. That's partly because people inspired by faith can approach development matters from a different perspective. Religion is so much at the core of people's lives that it offers a reality check on whether development addresses what people truly want. My mentor and former World Bank President Jim Wolfensohn was fond of saying that faith leaders and communities have no monopoly on ethics. I agree, but ethical thinking is part of their mandate and they are often more skilled than lay counterparts in articulating ethical choices. We need them beside us as we address the issues.
Our team is asking everyone we interview--Buddhist monks, Muslim leaders, Catholic nuns, World Vision officers, Latter-day Saints Elders, orphanage founders, government officials--what development means to them. We also ask what motivates them, why they care. Their answers are a goldmine of insight. But there's a strong common theme: development is above all about having choices, about being able to take ownership and determine what one thinks is best. And that leads to a passion for educating children, lifting the burden of discrimination against women, building roads so farmers can sell their crops and buy what they need, saving the forests from illegal cutting so future generations can enjoy them, and so on.
Searching the Declaration of Universal Human Rights for the word "development," I was interested to see the word coupled in the few cases where it appears with "of the human personality". That speaks to the same idea, of allowing each individual to flourish.
Development is not about a single path, nor is it about material prosperity. Nor is it a separate segment of endeavor that applies only to certain countries. Today's development enterprise is about making it possible for all people everywhere to thrive. And it's about keeping ethics at the center as we navigate turbulent waters, where the fate of people far away affects us and our actions affect them, and where we recognize that development is not for the poorest people but for us all.
Katherine Marshall is a senior fellow at Georgetown's Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs, a Visiting Professor, and a senior adviser for the World Bank.
By Katherine Marshall |
October 26, 2009; 12:38 AM ET
| Category:
Faith in Action
Save & Share:
Previous: Unveiling anonymous comments |
Next: Vatican welcoming only the right?
Posted by: ccnl1 | October 26, 2009 3:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
The one question that needs/needed to be asked is whether said individual believed in angels (aka "pretty, wingie, talking, flying thingies"/fairies/tinkerbells) and devils (aka "demons of the demented".)
Odd question you say?? Not so since major religions have relied on these mythical beings as part of their basic theological foundations e.g. Islam makes belief in angels a major tenet. Without said belief, there is no Gabriel and therefore no connection of Mohammed to god/heaven thereby invalidating Islam as a religion.
Ditto for the Mormons and their Moroni/Joe Smith connection.
Semi-ditto for Christianity and Judaism- no visits by angels to Mary and Joseph i.e. no Annunciation , no choirs in heaven, no singing over Bethlehem and no archangel Michael reeking hell all over Revelation.
From Wikipedia:
"Michael (Hebrew: מִיכָאֵל, Micha'el or Mîkhā'ēl; Greek: Μιχαήλ, Mikhaḗl; Latin: Michael or Míchaël; Arabic: میکائیل, Mikā'īl) is an archangel in Jewish, Christian and Islamic tradition. He is viewed as the field commander of the Army of God. He is mentioned by name in the Book of Daniel,[1] the Book of Jude[2] and the Book of Revelation.[3] In the book of Daniel, Michael appears as "one of the chief princes"[1] who in Daniel's vision comes to the angel Gabriel's aid in his contest with the angel of Persia (Dobiel), and is also described there as the advocate of Israel and "great prince who stands up for the children of your [Daniel's] people".[4]
The Talmudic tradition rendered Michael's name as meaning "Who is like El?" ("Who is like God?"), As a question, it is understood as being rhetorical, implying the answer, "No one is like God."[5][6][7][8][9][10] [11] [12][13][14][15][16][17][18]
Much of the late Midrashic detail about Michael was transmitted to Christianity through the Book of Enoch, whence it was taken up and further elaborated. In late medieval Christianity, Michael, together with Saint George, became the patron saint of chivalry, and of the first chivalric order of France, the Order of Saint Michael of 1469. In the British honours system, a chivalric order founded in 1818 is also named for these two saints, the Order of St Michael and St George. St Michael is also considered in many Christian circles as the patron saint of the warrior. Police officers and soldiers, particularly paratroopers and fighter pilots, regard him as their patron. He is also a patron of Germany[19] and of the City of Brussels.[20]
Roman Catholics refer to him as Saint Michael the Archangel and also simply as Saint Michael. Orthodox Christians refer to him as the Taxiarch Archangel Michael or simply Archangel Michael. The New Thought Movement refers to Michael as Christ Michael.[21]"