Jesus Took the Child in His Arms

Then they left that place and were passing through Galilee. Jesus didn't want anyone to know it, for he was teaching his disciples and saying to them, "The Son of Man will be betrayed into human hands. They will kill him, but after being dead for three days he will be raised." They didn't understand what this statement meant, and were afraid to ask him.

Then they came to Capernaum. While Jesus was at home, he asked the disciples, "What were you arguing about on the road?" But they kept silent, for on the road they had argued with one another about who was the greatest.

So he sat down and called the twelve. He told them, "If anyone wants to be first he must be last of all and servant of all." Then he took a little child and had him stand among them. He took him in his arms and said to them, "Whoever welcomes a child like this in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

Q: What did John the Baptist, Atilla the Hun and Alexander the Great all have in common?
A: They all had the same unusual middle name - 'the'.

It's not a common middle name any more ('the'), and neither is Alexander's surname ('great'), though it's not hard to come up with a goodly number of 'great' historical figures: 'Herod the Great', 'Peter the Great', 'Alfred the Great' and a host of other 'great' men (and perhaps some women).

Perhaps there are some who stil aspire to the name, for the truth is that deep down all of us, even if we don't aspire to the title, would nonetheless like to be 'great'. And not just great at what we do, but 'great' in the sense of perceived as being great, in the same way the disciples in today' Gospel reading wanted to be 'great'. It's sorta natural.

Sigmund Freud was a brilliant man. I know he doesn't get a lot of good press in church circles, but as R.D. Laing said of Freud, "no one went down further, stayed down longer, or came up dirtier than he did".

Freud, as you may know, believed that the lust for pleasure was at the basis of all human behaviour. Human beings naturally move towards pleasure and away from pain, and this is the basis of all human behaviour, said Freud. And I'm sure that there is indeed a great degree of truth in Freud's analysis.

Alfred Adler though, who came somewhat after Freud, suggested that there was an even more fundamental driving force at work in the human psyche - greater still than our natural desure for pleasure, and it is the lust for power!

We human beings want to be significant. We want to be 'somebodies'. None of us wants to live his or her life as a 'nobody' and die in obscurity and be remember for nothing. No, we want to be 'somebodies'. We want our life to count for something. We want to achieve something, and ultimately, get the recognition and authority and greatness that comes with being a somebody. In the end we want to be powerful. This, Adler suggests, is the fundamental driving, motivating force behind all human behaviour.

Now it's not my place to promote the teachings of Freud or Adler of course, and yet I think we do well to recognise that there is a great degree of truth in both analyses, and perhaps especially in Adler's recognition of the role our individual yearning for significance (or lust for power) plays in our behaviour.

We want to be great. We would like to be the greatest. And so we hang out with important people. We aim at securing big jobs for ourselves so that we can earn big salaries and live in big houses, because we want to be big!

And that's not just true for us, but has been true for every human being throughout human history which is why it should not surprise us to find Jesus' disciples (even in the midst of a discussion about their masters impending suffering and death) discussing amongst themselves which one of them was to be the greatest.

And how does Jesus respond to this? He presents a child to them and says, "Whoever welcomes a child like this in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

What an odd thing to do! Why a child? Was Jesus trying to break their concentration by focussing them on something cute? That's probably not it..

Was He wanting to offer the child as an example to them? He does that elsewhere ("Unless you become like little children, you cannot enter the Kingdom of God" - Matthew 18:3). But the exhortation here is not to be like little children but to accept them - not to emulate them but to be open to them.

For the whole point of the child is that the child is not great - not in the society in which Jesus was teaching especially. Children are weak, vulnerable, needy, and they contribute nothing to the social process.

In the society of Jesus' day children were not worth very much. Infant mortality rates were high, and children were always the first to suffer from famine, disease, war and dislocation. According to one study I read, up to 60 per cent of children in those regions did not make it to their 16th birthday! Hence a minor was on par with a slave, and only after achieving maturity could they become a full human being and inherit the family estate.

Yet Jesus says 'this is the person I identify with. This is the person you need to be spending time with. She is the one who needs you. She is the one you need to receive and welcome, for when you receive her you receive me (and when you receive me, you receive not only me but Him who sent me!).

We want to be powerful. We want to be significant. But Jesus' bias is always towards the marginalised, the powerless, the vulnerable and the insignificant.

"When you do something for the least of these, my brethren", says Jesus, "you do it for me" (Matthew 25:31ff) and when you receive one of these you receive me.

Here we are, wanting to be great and engage ourselves in important things and hang with great and important people, while Jesus urges us to hang with the weak and the vulnerable, and tell us that "If anyone wants to be first he must be last of all and servant of all."

And Jesus, of course, doesn't just teach us this in words. He modelled it. And the proof of that is the fact that He was able to produce a child at all!

I don't know how you envisage the scene. We're told at the beginning of the passage that Jesus had been travelling with his disciples and that he didn't want everybody knowing where they were, as He was spending some private time with them, and yet, in the middle of His teaching them something, he suddenly produces a child!

Where does the child come from? Does he produce the child like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat? No! Evidently there were children there. Even when the multitudes had gone home and it was just Jesus and his closest group of followers with Him, there were evidently still children in the group, (and women no doubt).

Only the twelve get an explicit mention by the Gospel writer, but evidently it went without saying that wherever Jesus was there would always be children and women, and any number of other persons that society would not have deemed worthy of mention, but who were in fact the very persons that Jesus most identified Himself with!

Now, I appreciate that some pieces of Scripture are difficult to understand. This piece of Scripture is NOT one of them, is it, and yet we somehow continue to fail to get the message!

Salvador Dali said, "At the age of six I wanted to be a cook. At seven I wanted to be Napoleon. And my ambition has been growing steadily ever since!"

We want to be faithful to Jesus, but we want to be great too - to be successful, to be significant, to be winners - to move in the winners circle, hang with the great ones, and be remembered as somebody who was really somebody. It's only natural! The only problem is that this is not compatible with the Gospel. In fact it is something more akin to Nazism!

Now I know 'Nazism' is a provocative term, and I know when we hear the world 'Nazi' we think of murder and violence, the people who tried to kill my grandfather and perhaps, most especially, the horrors of the holocaust.

What we are prone to forget though, I think, is that before Nazism developed into a worldwide machinery of death, it was, in essence, a simple philosophy that, exulted the strong and despised the weak.

Beware! Exulting human strength and despising the weak - this is the path of Nazism, and the road to the cross runs in exactly the opposite direction.

Those of us who would follow Jesus down that road must disavow worldly ambition and the lust for power, and instead we must open our hearts and our homes to the weak and the vulnerable, recognising that when we open ourselves to these little ones, we receive Jesus in the process!

For the first will be last and the last will be first, for He is bringing down the mighty from their thrones and lifting up the lowly! And so "If anyone wants to be first he must be last of all and servant of all."

Interior Design and Human Behavior

A science or an art

Do you think of interior design as a science or an art? Well, it might be a quiet difficult question; but in fact a combination of both. Interior design can be defined as an applied art where creativity skills and technical knowledge provide solutions. These solutions are applied to achieve a more convenient habitat.

Interior design provides answers that are both functional and attractive and enhance the quality of life. Interior design reflects and interacts with the cultural background and traditional heritage of the occupants.

The design process itself runs through a systematic and interactive methodology to create an innovative and functional design solution whereby the needs and resources of the occupants are satisfied.

To achieve a well designed environment many elements contribute together thus innovating the overall theme e.g. color, light, texture...etc. interior design provides solutions for residential, commercial, educational, healthcare, office and hospitality projects consequently affecting our daily way of living or in other words; our behavior.

However interior design leans on our cultural heritage, yet it still can directly or indirectly shape our behavior and definitely it influences our reactions. For instance a room painted in red feels warm than another painted in blue! However it's the same environment but the color which is an important design element has altered our behavior and way of thinking. The same color itself can trigger different emotions depending on its reference to either symbolic or psychological functions considering the linkages that vary with time, place and cultural background. While white color is worn at weddings and may represent purity, sterility, virginity and peace for some nations, it was the color worn at funerals for others during certain periods in history.

Another noteworthy proof of how interior design can affect our behavior is light! It has to be customized according to the function performed by the occupants. That major element can ensure and highlight a certain frame of mind! For example in a work environment an inadequate light amount would cause annoyance and discomfort. On the contrary you would enjoy a nice dinner or a romantic movie on a dimmed light.

I do believe that the relation between mass and space creates the greatest impact on human behavior. Minimalism where the work is stripped down to its most fundamental features and the subject is reduced to its necessary elements was an approach for better living environments. A cluttered habitat is definitely irritating while fine organized minimal but yet function environments promote serenity and comfort. A good design coordinating mass and space can elevate the sense of creativity and innovation.

Again cultural variations transform occupant's vision to surrounding space. For instance a minimal designed interior seems less and for some nations less reflects poverty.

The influence of interior design on human behavior is apparent while working for instance on educational projects like nurseries where children experience a phase of mind shaping. Color, light and texture integrate together to encourage creativity. Safety is another dimension that could be enhanced.

From my point of view a global standard design code for interior environments is not applicable since occupants respond in a different way in accordance with several factors such as cultural background, social heritage or climate conditions. Interior design could effectively develop the quality of life in accordance with formerly mentioned factors; focusing on the basics of creating an ideal habitat for living.

The Human Behavior in Organizations

The worker's activities are activities of humans and are therefore an essential part of humanity.

These activities have at least five dimensions, on the main aspects that must be considered in the analysis of work, and all the employee needs to be entrepreneur and feel accomplished for production:

a) Technical aspects - involves issues relating to place of work and adjustment physiological and sociological.

b) Physiological aspects - is the degree of adaptation man - place of work - Physical environment and the problem of fatigue - the human being is not a machine and does not work like a machine.

c) Moral aspect - considers the skills, the motivation, the degree of awareness, satisfaction and the intimate relationship between work activity and personality - the work is an extension of personality, is how a person measures his worth and his humanity.

d) Social aspect - considers the specific issues in the working environment and external factors such as family, social class, etc..

e) Economic aspect - as the production of wealth - the work is a way of life.

Businesses is evaluated by the following requirements:

1) Environment of the business - credibility, respect, fairness, pride and camaraderie;

2) Profile of the company - benefits, compensation, ethics and citizenship, professional development and balancing work and personal life

"There is ways that discover and adopts measures of how to maximize the work efficiency.

- Every person is influenced exclusively by rewards wage, economic and material, not considering the needs of staff achievement and promotion.

The humanism considers the improvement of development, welfare and dignity as the ultimate objective of all human thought and action - above ideals and values of religious, ideological or national.

The commitment to humanism defends the adoption of the following three fundamental principles:

a) Philosophical, consisting in the design of humans - men and women - as be autonomous and rational and respect fundamental to all human beings while endowed with free will, rationality, moral awareness, capacity imaginative and creative.

b) Social policy, which consists of a universal ethic of equality, reciprocity and human solidarity and a policy of pluralistic democracy, fair and human.

c) Educational, consisting of the commitment to help all individuals in implementation and improvement of its potential.

So, with the humanistic approach, "the concern with the machine, the working method, with the formal organization and the principles of administration applicable to organizational aspects give priorities to the concern with man and his social group: the technical aspects for the formal psychological and sociological aspects.

The school of human relations was born from the need of reducing the dehumanization of work and at the same time, increasing the efficiency in business.

The informal groups can communicate with ease, and find supportive environment for the majority of their problems. The formal organization is the organizational structure - organs, functions, hierarchical levels and functional relationships - and informal organization is the set of interactions and relationships that are established between the workers - uses and customs, traditions and social norms.

The informal organization is reflected by attitudes and provisions based on the opinion and sentiment. The expression of the need to 'join up' and do not change quickly or make the logic: relate to the sense of values, the lifestyles and the acquisition of social life that a person strives to preserve and defend of which is willing to fight and resist.

The social man, which is based on the following aspects:

a) Employees are complex social creatures, with their feelings, desires and fears. The behavior at work - as the behavior in any place - is a consequence of many motivational factors.

b) People are motivated by human needs and achieve their satisfaction through social groups with whom they interact. Difficult to participate and connect with the group cause elevation of turnover of people, lowering of moral, psychological fatigue, reduced levels of performance,

c) The behavior of social groups can be manipulated by an appropriate style of supervision and leadership (human abilities).

d) The social norms of the group act as regulatory mechanisms of the behavior of members. The levels of production are controlled by the rules of the informal group. This social control takes both positive sanctions (stimulation, social acceptance, etc..) And negative (mockery, isolation from the group, etc.).. The employee is seen as a being creative and thinking, and issues such as integration, social behavior and participation in decisions.

The theory of bureaucracy was born from the work of Max Weber, in the 1940s, he studied the organization as part of a social context, influenced by changing social, economic and religious.

The bureaucratic model is proposed as an efficient administrative structure for complex organizations, governed by the rules and inflexible hierarchy. Bureaucracy is a form of human organization that is based on rationality.

The characteristics of bureaucracy are:

a) Legal nature of the rules and regulations: it is an organization bound by rules and regulations established in writing in advance.

b) Formal communications: they are recorded in writing by forms, so that the bureaucracy is a formally organized to a social structure.

c) Rational: division of labor, where the tasks are set for each participant.

d) Impersonal: relationship in terms of positions, not people.

e) Hierarchy: each post below is under the supervision of the superior officer.

f) Routine: the employee must do what is the boss bureaucracy, he is not independent.

g) Meritocracy: the choice of people is based on merit and technique competence.

h) Administration of expertise: separation between ownership and management.

i) Professional.

j) Predictability: assumes that the behavior of all members is perfectly predictable.

As the concept of informal organization is not rational, it is not accepted by the bureaucracy, so the worker is seen only as occupier of a position that needs to respond by the set of tasks that are under its responsibility.
To stimulate the work discipline, the bureaucrat's official life is planned for him in terms of career, promotions, pensions and wages, and in exchange, it is expected that he adapts his thoughts, feelings and actions to the needs of the organization.

However, these factors increase the conformism and lead to exaggeration in the strict observation of rules, which results in conservatism and technicality. In the bureaucracy are considered the goals of the organization and not the people.

This means that the more bureaucratic an organization is, more people are parts of the bureaucratic machinery, settled for their purposes, without creativity, initiative, and resistant to changes in their routines.

To be successful in all organizations, the organizational man must have the following characteristics of personality:

a) Flexibility, given the constant changes that occur in modern life, and the diversity of roles in various organizations, which can get a reversal, the sudden shutdown of organizations and new relationships.

b) Tolerance to frustration, to avoid the emotional distress arising from the conflict between organizational needs and individual needs, the mediation is done by rational rules, written and comprehensive, seeking involve the entire organization.

c) Ability to rewards and compensate the routine work on the organization, accordingly personal preferences and vocations, and other types of work.

d) Standing desire to achieve, to ensure compliance and cooperation with the rules that control and provide access to the career positions within the organization, providing social rewards and sanctions and materials.

These characteristics of personality vary in degree depending on the organization and position held.