Mei | 2008 | inderdaad
Stof ou kennis af
Sisteemteorie (klik om hele tabel te sien):
(Mense is geneig om in ‘n krisis terug te keer na ‘n vorige sisteem.)
As ek verstaan, kan ek cope.
Mei 30, 2008 at 11:37 vm 4 Kommentaar
Ons antieke moeder
255 miljoen jaar gelede stap daar ‘n groepie dicynodonts (mamma, pappa en kindertjies?) deur modder. Toe gebeur daar iets – ons is nie presies seker wat nie, dalk ‘n vloed wat ander modder bo-oor die voetspoortjies spoel – en die voetspore word vir ons verewig. Sodat ons, 255 miljoen jaar later, op die plaas Asante Sana, in die middel van die Oos-Kaapse nêrens, vir die eerste keer leer dat hierdie diere in groepe beweeg het.
Of dalk was hulle oppad na die ark van Noag, 3000 jaar gelede, maar kon met hul kort beentjies ongelukkig nie vinnig genoeg loop nie.
Mei 29, 2008 at 1:49 nm 5 Kommentaar
Die opgewondenheid oor Bedford verwys. Die plekkie is pragtig. Gaan kuier daar.
As jy die regte vrae vir die regte mense vra, sal jy hoor dat daar 700 witmense is. 12500 swartmense. 80% van laasgenoemde is werkloos.
Dit laat my snags wakker lê. Hoe gebeur dit? Wat doen ‘n mens?
Mei 28, 2008 at 3:30 nm 1 comment
Die kat sit nie op die mat nie
Mei 27, 2008 at 8:09 vm 6 Kommentaar
As die lewe jou druk en jy lus voel om in die groot onbekende in te vaar, gaan vind “Brood, wyn en lewe” op Bedford:
Mei 24, 2008 at 12:31 nm 3 Kommentaar
Die trend om te spog met matriekafskeidrokke inspireer.
My matriekafskeidrok was pragtig. Klassieke klein swart nommertjie wat ek vandag nog met groot sukses sou kon dra as ek dit oor meer as my bobeen kon kry.
Dit was egter nie die rok wat saak gemaak het nie. Daardie jare was die mooste skoene in die mode – heerlik kreatiewe ontwerpe. My gunsteling mode was egter groot dangly oorbelle (ek kan nie my vreugde dat dit weer in die mode is, sterk genoeg uitdruk nie). Hier dus, nie ‘n prentjie van die rok nie, maar die wonderlike, massiewe oorbelle.
Mei 23, 2008 at 8:14 vm 4 Kommentaar
Zuit se vraag oor Christene wat dit nie regkry om hoop te gee nie, het my onmiddelik laat dink aan ‘n wonderlike artikel van Walter Breuggemann (my gunsteling Christelike skrywer).
Die artikel, wat eintlik ‘n paper is wat hy by ‘n forum vir “Ethics and Public Policy” gelewer het, is getiteld “Full of Truth and Hope“. (Gaan lees dit. Dis flippen awesome.)
Hy lys eers “four claims of faith” wat hy sê ons sal help fokus. (That the dramatic movement from Friday vulnerability through Saturday dread to Sunday surprise is only made by narrative particularly, not by scientific proof, not by universal truth, not by logical discourse. It is done, rather, by narrative acknowledgment that subverts a world of power, by vulnerability that exposes a world of dread, through brooding absence that rejects a world of control through surprise.)
Daarna noem hy twee reaksies op die boodskap van die profete: denail (The denial is among those who refuse to see and so imagine that Israel will not be destroyed…that the Messiah will not die.) en despair (The despair is among those who know, but cannot imagine a future, cannot discern a way out of no way; they could not believe that Messiah will be raised from the dead to new life.)
Die evangeliese “antidote” vir denial is tuth-telling: (The truth that is to be told is that the world is out of sync, that we live against the grain of God’s holiness, and that such living has immense negative consequences). Die antidote vir despair is hope-telling, waaroor Brueggemann op aangrypende wyse uitbrei.
Die gevolg van beide denial en despair is passivity en acquescence, whether it is the passivity of our illusion of moral superiority and assured triumph, or acquiescence of fatalism that cowers before an inescapable despair. Either way, the consequence of such acquiescence is abdication, a refusal to engage issues, an inability to think or act outside the box of dominant power arrangements and consensus plausibility systems. The empire does not require agreement or need approval. It requires only passive conformity among those who believe that there is no alternative.
So, wat moet ‘n arme gelowigetjie doen? Volgens Brueggemann:
1. Disengagement When I think about disengagement from common practice, I think first of all about the demands of production and consumption that are defining for the lives of many of us, and the reality of sabbath as a deep act of resistance and alternative, the refusal to have our lives defined by the lens of the market.
2. The practice of calling things by their right name and practicing the exposé of toxic euphemisms.
3. [Being] a hospitable place for hosting the profound ambiguity many people feel about these matters. On all of the great questions before our society—war, immigration, abortion, gays and lesbians—it is clear that most people are enormously ambivalent. Our society, in its dominant mode, allows no such ambivalence to be voiced and readily evoke an uncertainty that needs to be honored.
4. More than that, a safe venue of honest ambiguity is the seedbed for newness it is the place where God’s spirit can do the work of newness.
Naby aan die einde vertel hy die volgende storie:
Soon after World War II, there was a group of aging German pastors and their wives who had suffered much at the hands of the German regime. They were getting on their tour bus and there was a young man scurrying to get all their luggage on, working with great zest. Someone asked who he was; answer: “That is Martin Niemoeller, he is eighty.” Niemoeller long before had decided not to be afraid. I read that when he was a much younger man, he was in a delegation to see Hitler just after Hitler had come to power in 1933. When Niemoeller came home, his wife asked him about the meeting and what he had learned. He answered, “1 learned that Herr Hitler is a very frightened man.” It was given to Niemoeller, unlike most of us, to be unafraid. And when we are unafraid, energy is given.
Antwoord dit die Zuit se vraag? Sekerlik nie. Maar steeds. Hoendervleis.
Mei 20, 2008 at 4:48 nm 4 Kommentaar