Blog

Affluenza, the new Orthodoxy?

I have had the opportunity for discussion and to hear talks about Affluenza as well as how that relates to people in our community. A number of things concern me about this and the one that concerns me the most is, is Affluenza becoming the new orthodoxy. The reason that it concerns me is that the values that attracted me to moot seem to be increasingly left by the wayside. I left the evangelical church because it lacked the things that I valued most like acceptance, an outlet for ideas as well as affirmation and an inclusion of those that were at different stages of faith than those in the community. I feel that Affluenza perhaps is influencing some community members world view, that the world is an oppressive place and that we are doomed to live a life of soulless money-making repitition unless we adopt the (In my view fairly extreme) lifestyle that Oliver James suggests will fulfill us. I feel that the message being pu across is that unless we actively doing something about social injustice we are active participants in our “oppressive” culture as well as being less than christian. I think we must ask ourselves, who is this message aimed at? also that would we be inclusive of people with wealth, if someone of that background turned up at one of our services, would they be welcome? Anyway I think I have said all I have to say on the matter, but if that changes then you know where to look.

POSTED 09.06.08 BY: admin | Comments (5)

5 Responses to “Affluenza, the new Orthodoxy?”

  1. On June 9th, 2008 at 5:56 pm Anonymous said:

    interesting as i am reading the book, maybe it is because i am ageing (! or maybe it is because i am a recovery fan – but i guess when i read a book like this, being shame based anyway, i struggle to avoid feeling crap about myself – in recovery we say take what you like and leave the rest – this is not about pick and mixing the bits we dont want to face – as a recovering addict as well as being many other things i have to face alot of stuff of myself i dont like anyway – oliver james’s book, like all books, including my own THANK GOD, is not definitive it is a perspective. its funny if it becomes another stick to beat ourselves with – the same kind of thing i used to feel when preachers would go on about how rich we all are and how guilty we should all be blah blah – from my own experience, it is ONLY when we get – and i struggle with this right now, gods ultimate regard for us – that we can pass that regard on – in the meantime we can act ‘as if’ – and give what we can in terms of time and cash despite ourselves – i for one have just had a shopping spree, non addictive i hope and not too empty – partly i am sure as a way of revamping myself a bit after my boyf split – i have had alot of money, and i have had nothing, or very little – i have been obsessed and driven, and now am less so – but god knows all this – and i am doing the best with what i have – mindful that thro the pain, i might learn other things too plus thro the joy also – churches are never ever going to be perfect, that is a projection of all of ours as we leave one tradition and hope for our needs to be met in another – that will never happen. why? because human beings are not capable of living up to our own v high expectations – as i realise and own my own rage, greed, generosity, honesty, i can then except that in others – i do NOT want to make the’other’ wrong – moot is not perfect – for me it is several hundred shades more honest than the other traditions i have experienced, but then – they have probably moved on too – you know i am going to make myself got to HTB one service because i hold a resentment to that tradition i want to connect just once and let god have all that shit, all that resentment does is make me feel falsly superior and actually more lonely – i dont have to AGREE with that church’s emphasis, but i want to be able to live with it …..enough, have to go. this is from clare c – i always sign on as anonymous because i cant get on the sight properly due to my lack of technical expertise! xxx

  2. On June 9th, 2008 at 8:33 pm Michael Radcliffe said:

    Hi SamThanks for your posts. I, as you can imagine, have a lot of other things to think about at the moment, but I just wanted to respond briefly to you post.1) If the moot community has veered away from acceptance, and you feel that this is the case, then I apologise, and I would agree that moot has failed in a duty of care. Acceptance is a very important part of who we are, and if we ever stop being accepting, then the community can no longer exist.2) Affluenza is just a theme for the month of June, rather than the new orthodoxy, so that might be why you are hearing a lot about it at the moment. Apologies if the balance is off.3) Affluenza was never meant as a set of ideas to slavishly adhere too – rather, it was meant to start discussion about certain issues. No one expects anyone to swallow the book wholesale. That is not the way moot functions, and there are plenty of things in the book that I would disagree with – James’ outright rejection of CBT, and his deification of Danish society are just 2 examples of things that I would part company with Affluenza over.I actually think that these little blog posts are good healthy debate, and that’s the point – for us to engage with something a little intellectual and thought-provoking.4) I was drawn to it as a book because it offered a corrective and some pointers to helping us cope with addictions, compulsions, depression and anxiety. That was the principal aim. These are things that many (but clearly not everyone) in moot struggle with pastorally – internal things that people have a hard time with. The focus is not how shit or capitalist the world is, but how do we as a community enable ourselves to cope with things better, and can the thoughts in the book help us live out the Rhythm of Life better. There are many people struggling with this at the moment.5). Remember that it is not capitalism per se that James talks about, but selfish capitalism. That’s an important distinction to make.6) I know this is hard, but sometimes God (and I do mean God, not moot) does make demands on us that are tough. Asking us to do and see things in a way that may seem contrary to our nature, but are actually good for us in the long run – painful as that may be. However, it seems to me (and I may have read you wrong – feel free to correct me on this) that you see that as in opposition to acceptance.I don’t. I think the reality is a little more complicated than that – not one or the other, but both. Some things that may seem hard work on the face of it are actually important parts of acceptance. Sometimes acceptance is nothing to do with the harder demands that community and God place on us. All this is a fuzzy boundary that to some degree we are all trying to work out both individually and communally.The aim of introducing the book into discussion was to find a way to help us do that, rather than a way to pile on the guilt and shame.That’s all for now – other thoughts as i have them/think of them.

  3. On June 10th, 2008 at 10:03 am tim d said:

    hmmmm. Sam as one of the ‘architects’ of sundays service, i think i need to make some come back to all this. However…. i think mike has probably said most of what i’d want to say and far more eloquently than i could have. (and he a new father again- what a man!).One thought does occur, this being ‘acceptance’ does not, (and cannot) exclude ‘challenge’. the point is how such challenge is presented and received. hopefully the difference in this context to those other contexts you’ve been in Sam, is that you can come back on what has been said and suggested and we (as a community) can engage in this type of discussion. One last thing. apologies if sunday in anyway sounded like a closed argument, rather than a suggestion of where the truth might lie, (coloured by the opinions of those responsible for the proceedings!). Thanks for your thoughts and for presenting us with this opportunity to debate some important stuff. regardstim

  4. On June 10th, 2008 at 10:28 am Sam said:

    Thanks for all your comments, I greatly encouraged by the willingness people have to engage with my opinions. Tim, Im glad that this perhaps has provided some contrast to what we are discussing, so thanks for the comments. Mike Thanks for commenting especially when I know you are very busy. Clare your insight I found very heartening, and I hope that moot continues to provide a platform for your honesty, which I am often exceptionally awed by.

  5. On April 28th, 2011 at 3:44 am a & f said:

    Thanks for all your comments, I greatly encouraged by the willingness people have to engage with my opinions. Tim, Im glad that this perhaps has provided some contrast to what we are discussing, so thanks for the comments. Mike Thanks for commenting especially when I know you are very busy. Clare your insight I found very heartening, and I hope that moot continues to provide a platform for your honesty, which I am often exceptionally awed by.