Hey Everyone,
I am well aware that I have taken a quite long break from writing on my blog. Through a combination of a crashed computer, a 15 page paper, and a week long trip into the jungle of central america (more on that too), I was left with not much blogging time. But, finally, things are wrapping up, and I'm left with some time.
I decided I will publish the paper that I had to write for my last class. The paper was really important to my understanding of what development is and what it means live as a Christian in a global world, so I figured it belonged on the website dedicated to my thoughts on things of the like. Because it ended up being so long, im going to publish in 3 parts, so stay tuned my faithful readers.
Also, we are down to 46 days until I am in grand rapids (but who's really counting), so I can say that I look forward to seeing you soon.
The Recognition of Human Dignity in the Practice of Development
Jake Baker
April 4, 2010
The origin of “develop” comes from the French verb “développer,” meaning “to fold or unfurl.”[1] When considering development work, this origin gives meaningful distinctions about the nature of what development actually is and how it ought to be done. If to develop is to unfurl, the act of development is not transplanting a new system into a place, but rather to mature and advance what already is present. To develop is to begin to appreciate what something was meant to be and to work toward its maturation. To use the imagery provided by the French verb, for a sailboat to cross the sea, the sail must développer and unfurl to catch the wind. Installing sturdy oars all along the side of the sailboat would not only be a much more laborious task, but would never allow the sailboat to sail in the way that it was designed to sail.
When we seek to do development work, we must understand what exactly it is that needs to be developed. People have grasped at market economics, institutional stability, and public service improvements as the fundamental units of a country or area that need to be developed. Although these areas are important to the fulfillment of development and have their individual merits, they are really the superficial means to achieve development. The actual aim of development lies in a deeper and more complete purpose. Development must view the rights inherent in all of humanity as the motive for change and the very sail that needs to be unfurled.
It’s difficult to develop a comprehensive list of rights that humans must be allowed in order for development to be complete. The United States Bill of Rights provides a list of rights, including the right to a speedy and public trial, the right of assembly, and right to security of persons and properties.[2] This list includes many crucial human rights that must be in place for development to occur and to support justice; however, it also fails to address the critical reason why these rights ought to exist.
In a recent seminar in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, Nicholas Wolterstorff defined justice as the fulfillment of our right to be treated with our inherent dignity. This dignity of all humanity is central to the understanding of what our rights as humans are, and how we are required to treat all others. The Bill of Rights doesn’t state the right to food, but when faced with a starving family, it is quite logical to assert they ought not die, and should they die, it would be an injustice; a refusal to recognize their dignity as human beings.[3] Peter Uvin writes, “It makes sense to conceive of a certain social minimum we all guarantee nobody should be without.”[4],[5] This “social minimum” that he speaks of must be the work of development, in order to bring realization and protection of human dignity.
Although this understanding of humanity is central and inseparable from the work of development, it can only be effective when applied in concrete and functional ways. Wendell Berry recognizes this concept in terms of economics when he writes, “If there is no denying our dependence on the Great Economy, there is also no denying our need for a little economy-a narrow circle within which things are manageable by the use of our wits.”[6] In order to bring to fruition this all-encompassing respect of human dignity, systems need to exist to both attain and protect development. To bring the development described above requires the establishment of sound economy, societal infrastructure, and rule of law.
A good example of the need for sound economy comes from the observance of the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Although created under the claim of bringing economic equality to all, the ideology fell apart as the economy was unable to support or recognize the rights of each person. Even the most pure and honest intentions to bring food, shelter, or healthcare to an area will fail without the economic stability to support such an effort.
At the beginning of the 20th century, the economies of the urban United States were expanding rapidly. However, despite the economic stability, this time period was also when the Red Cross, Salvation Army, and YMCA emerged in order to meet the existing needs of such a large part of the population. A sound economy had not brought development to the United States, and societal infrastructure was needed to protect the rights of the people. Education and health systems need to be well established to bring the rights of education and health care, and a police system is necessary if justice and order are to exist. In order to respect the dignity of all society, public services must be well founded and available to all who require them.
However, the establishment of a sound economy and societal infrastructures remains meaningless if they are not accompanied by rule of law. That is, if the laws and procedures that define the economy and infrastructure of an area are not consistently applied, still there will be no development. If the police force of an area is well funded and trained, and yet the court system decides it more pertinent to serve personal interests than to follow the law, rights will not be protected. Without rule of law, neither economies nor societal structures can function smoothly or efficiently, and corruption will constantly lead to the violation of rights.
The final piece necessary to bringing development to an area is sustainability. The recognition of rights in the present should not be at the expense of the future; instead, development ought to be done in a way that guarantees the longevity of both economy and societal structures. A large piece of this is environmental sustainability, as the ramifications of environmental degradation have serious implications for the ability to develop an area. Food production that causes massive soil erosion or loss of fertility is not development, nor are lumber businesses justified by the short term economic growth when they deforest the mountainsides. The ends never justify the means, and it is important to approach development cautiously, considering whether the proposed economy or infrastructure is something that can be maintained for generations to come.[7]
So what is development? Development is the fulfillment and protection of the dignity of all humanity, accomplished through sound economy, societal infrastructure, and rule of law, in a manner that ensures its own sustainability.[8]
Recognizing the dignity of humanity is not limited to the Christian tradition; as Peter Uvin writes, “We are all in this together.”[9] As Christians, we must move beyond this recognition, especially in light of God’s view on the very issue. The Old Testament is very clear about God’s heart for the oppressed, for those that have not been shown the justice their dignity requires:
For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality and accepts no bribes. He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien, giving him food and clothing. And you are to love those who are aliens, for you yourselves were aliens in Egypt.[10]
Over and over through the prophets, God pleads the case of these oppressed. He cries out, “Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow.”[11] When He commands, “The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt,”[12] we see him imploring us to treat each other with the equality and love with which he created us.
Beyond commands, God’s call to care for the oppressed is a spiritual discipline by which to know God. He makes this very clear through the prophet Isaiah:
“Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter-when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?”[13]
God is constantly reminding us that if we want to know him, we must seek justice and defend the cause of the oppressed, and through this we will begin to understand his heart.
God’s concern with justice, for this reverence of our dignity, continues through the ministry of Jesus. When Jesus quotes the prophet Isaiah, he is recognizing that his life has the purpose of bringing justice to those that have been denied their human dignity:
"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
The “year of the Lord’s favor is indicative of the Hebrew concept of Jubilee, and Christ is declaring that he has come to complete this jubilee recognition of human dignity.[14]
In Matthew 25, when Jesus talks of the final judgment, the criteria by which the sheep and the goats are separated is not the clear cut “grace alone, faith alone” distinction so championed by Luther.[15] Rather, the distinction is who has fed the hungry, given a drink to the thirsty, given shelter to the stranger, clothed the naked, cared for the sick, and visited the imprisoned. Even if we completely ignore the fact that Jesus used this as the deciding factor for eternal life or damnation, our treatment of the “least of these” is still our treatment of our God and Savior, and our actions speak clearly about the faith we truly have.
Given the consistent and thorough concern that God places on caring for the oppressed and realizing the dignity of humanity, we have the duty and command to live in a way that this development permeates our actions. We can know that a change is good when it creates a further recognition and fulfillment of human rights, and when this change happens, we can know that God is pleased to see justice bring peace.
[1] New Oxford American Dictionary.
[2] United States Bill of Rights. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
[3] The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), written in 1948, provides a sound foundation for this understanding of rights. The preamble begins, “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.”
[4] Peter Uvin. Human Rights in the Practice of Development. p. 201
[5] Article 25 of the UDHR states, “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.” This is the sort of human rights that becomes central to the work of development.
[6] Berry, Wendell. Two Economies. p. 57
[7] While traveling in El Salvador, I met a backpacker from Winnipeg, Canada. Amidst our conversations, he made the point that prior to making any large decision, the aboriginals native to his town would consider the 10 generations behind them and the 10 generations to come in the future, trying to decide how their decision would affect each of them. This is the kind of prudence toward sustainability that our Western culture lacks and yet is so vital to development.
[8] In my definition of development, I have failed to overtly include the Hebrew concept of Shalom, as other development theorists have tried to incorporate into development. Wendell Berry explains his incorporation of Shalom, or the Kingdom of God, by saying, “The Great Economy, like the Tao or the Kingdom of God, is both known and unknown, visible and invisible, comprehensible and mysterious.” In an effort to make the concept of Shalom understandable, Berry has made it a cognate to other traditions like the Tao or an Economy. According to one Hebrew concordance, “Shalom includes everything given by God in all areas of life,” and it seems nearly impossible to maintain this complete significance when applying a concept so dependent on a true understanding of God to the secular arena.
Furthermore, the danger of assuming that the work of development would be to bring Shalom is seen in Judges 6:24: “Yahweh is Shalom.” The presence of Shalom is utterly and completely dependent on the presence of God. This can also be seen in the benediction found in Num. 6:24, where the blessing is that Yahweh may grant Shalom. This connection is so strong that Shalom “approximates closely to the idea of salvation.” The arrival of Shalom in an area is not the work of development, but rather the grace of God and His Spirit. (Quotes from Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Volume 2. p. 776-779)
[9] Peter Uvin p.201
[10] Deut. 10:17-19
[11] Isaiah 1:17
[12] Leviticus 19:33
[13] Isaiah 58:6-7
[14] Christ fulfills this justice, with grace, through the cross, and decisively portrays just how much value we have as His creation when he died for us. This sacrifice for the sake of humanity gives a pure image of what it means to “take up your cross” (Mark 8:34) in a world that has so despised human dignity.
[15] I am not suggesting that Luther was mistaken when he said we are saved by Grace alone by Faith alone; however, this passage seems to indicate what sort of faith and grace it is that saves us, and is another strong reminder not to submit ourselves to the “cheap grace” that fits so easily into our American culture, and that the Bible and writers like Dietrich Bonheoffer have deplored.
No comments:
Post a Comment