In the Readings
1) The idea of 'Economy of Communion model' is a fascinating one. It is remarkable to see that we have accepted businesses as part of the solution of poverty not just the problem of poverty. The way it works is these businesses operate, employing people, then take the profits and put them into community improvements and education enhancements in the community.

2) The second thing that stood out to me was the sense of reflection that managers in the communion model had. Many of the valid points of maintaining relationships develop from the reflection of managers so they did not make harsh decisions. I think this trait of the Communion model is something we have to take away to other areas of business.

My Perspective
1) This model is something that I believe is the answer domestically and internationally. The model of good willed companies. In high school I was exposed to a book called "Begging for Change." The story explains a man in DC named Robert Egger. He saw realized that there was a big hole in DC and decided to fill it. He started a for business catering company that also operated as a soup kitchen. Homeless men and women in DC could come and train for 6 months with him. He would require them to be drug and alcohol free during that time, and would give them a stipend. The more experienced trainees would be carter events for law firms and other organizations in DC. Then at the end of 6 months of training they would get a certificate saying they graduated a program, and then they are assisted in finding jobs at restaurants in the area. Egger's point is that business can help people, and it often does better than non profits. He believes that private businesses can use money more effectively to help people when it is in a business setting as opposed to a nonprofit helping oriented group.

2) In two examples reflection maintained and actually enhanced relationships that would have otherwise been terminated. The first was when the cleaning product company received defective products. The manager wanted to cut off business with them but after reflection went and fixed the problem, enhancing the relationship. A second scenario in the same company dealt with an employee who did something that the manager wanted to fire him for. After reflection (as it was suggested he do) the manager healed the wound and made the relationship better than at the start. I think this is something corporate America can learn from. We should not we so quick to find some other supplier or employee as we can just find a way to better the relationship. This way we can get over the hurdle, which will happen with another company eventually. So you might as well solve the issue now and save the money by not dealing with transition cost and keep the current supplier or employee.

Text 1:
"Those who receive help are not considered 'assisted' or 'beneficiaries.' Rather they are regarded as active participants in the project, all part of the same community, whol also live the culture of giving. The emphasis is not on philanthropy, but on sharing, in that each person gives and receives with equal dignity."

Response 1:
I like this idea that this project is not charity work. The poor are treated as equal participants within the project. It allows them to gain a sense of dignity and not feel as if they are helpless and need to rely on outside help. It reminded of one of the stories in the pamphlet on fair trade we read earlier, where the artisans were able to give their prophets to Hurricane Katrina victims. It allowed them to switch roles from being the ones receiving help to becoming the ones helping. Each party has something different to offer, the privileged have material things to share while the poor have intangible things to offer, such as love. The quote, "It is moving to see how many share the help they receive with others whose needs is greater, gestures which often set off a chain of solidarity," reminded me of the movie 'Pay It Forward' where a child started a good-will movement in which he helps three individuals and in turn each of those people help three others, and so on. I hope that this project is able to create a similar lasting effect.

Text 2:
Glimpses of the Market as a Place of Communion

Response 2:
This section was a bold statement to current economic practices. Most people who want to bring the 'role of love' within economics mostly must do so by functioning outside of traditional business. They form non-profits, charities, or foundations. However, the Economy of Communion is able to function within the normal economy market while still implementing the role of love. It is able to take control of the market and change it for the better, rather than having the market take control of a business with the potential of corrupting it. Instead of competition, they promote the idea of cooperation. It proves that the market is not rigid and fixed, but molded to fit different ideas and movements. This opened my eyes to the potential that the Economy of Communion, Fair Trade, and other good-will movements posses.

Text 1: One of the most salient points that stuck out to me was the quote "The businesses foster communion with employees by paying particular attention to their health, well-being, and development."

Response: This is an amazing statement. I mean just look at a lot of the companies around the world today. A plethora of them do not care for their employees at all. Especially companies that have mechanized their production of intermediate goods. This just means that employees are easily replaceable and new ones can be hired almost immediately. Some companies have even been known to smuggle illegal immigrants into the US just so they can have cheap labor. It's pretty disgusting and is extremely degrading as well as life threatening because the working condition of some of these companies are dreadful. I believe that more companies should try to be like Google, where facilities and employees are cared for. Just look at Google's exponential growth and how it is a global business giant. Although it isn't just simple tasks, the way Google treats its employees is amazing. They have free meals, cars they can use, and much more. If more companies followed this example the world would truly be a better place.

Text 2: “A manager was ready to fire an employee until one of the chemists suggested that he should first listen to the employee with greater attention." This quote also struck me because I plan to go into the management field and it was surprising to see how some people actually react within companies.

Response: Although I expected a lot of managers to act this way, i never would have expected that people can be so ignorant to do such things. I guess I've been privileged enough to live a life where ignorance has not really been a problem for me. Besides that point i believe management is all about your underlings. A lot of managers believe that they are in a seat of power, but that is completely wrong in my book. A manager is a shepherd, there to guide and help his underlings become successful while completing the goal tasked to the manager by his higher ups. Furthermore, i believe management should never be clouded by power because the only thing that can cause is problems for both the manager and the underlings.

-This article in sections talks about the connection and relationships the Brazilian employers and employees have with one another. One scenario talks about when a manager was going to fire an employee, but then the suggestion of listening to the employee more was brought up. The manager then states that the employee’s work, and their relationship improved.
-I liked this part for a few reasons. I thought examining the relationship between the two men was great, and that the manager considered suggestions. I mostly liked how the manager was able to take a step back, evaluate the situation and make the best decision. This is hard for many people in the workforce to do, so for this to be able to be accomplished in this company is a great thing. I think this is something that most companies need, and would be a lot more successful if it was done.
-There is another paragraph that describes friendship. It talks about how people in a commercial society choose friends, and the forms of friendship. Friendship is something that requires freedom and always has. It then goes on talking about the market and the relationships in it. The article states that economic theorists describe the market in a symmetrical rather than hierarchical relationship.
-These few paragraphs I thought made decent points, but were a little vague. About regular friendships I would agree that having one requires freedom, and that people are going to be friends with people they like rather than people that they need around them. A majority of the time the people that you choose to have around because you like them wind up being people that you need around, so I find that to be not fully explained. I also felt the thought of the market relationship as “symmetrical or horizontal” to be incorrect. I definitely think there is a system and levels of authority in the market and in any business.

Text #1: "The businesses foster communion with employees by paying particular attention to their health, well-being, and development. Communion with consumers and the public is achieved through concern for product safety, and respect for the environment." (P. 8-9)

Response #1: Employers may think that everything is about money and that they should just disregard their employees for whatever the reason. However, employers with this mindset are missing out on the opportunity to get to know their employees and in turn possibly increase their output. Showing a lack of care for others can never get one far because it leads to greed and selfishness, especially in the business world.

I remember reading in my Ground Floor textbook that companies who have and share values are more likely to succeed because everyone in the company is following those values. With that in their mindset, employees are less likely to commit crimes, such as fraud, money laundering, and extortion because they're now a team player. What they do will not only impact them but everyone they work with and the reputation of the company. Once consumers judge a company, it is very hard for that company to get back to the standing that they were once at because their ethical values have been tarnished.

Right after the quote I chose, there was the following example of how caring about an employee can benefit:
"In another incident at the Brazilian cleaning products company, a manager was ready to fire an employee until one of the chemists suggested to the manager that he should first listen to the employee with greater attention. The manager reflected: "From that moment on, not only did our relationship improve, but his work did as well. It was a lesson for me not to jump at the obvious decision based on professionalism, or the market, or stress, but to recognize the importance of personal relations."

Text #2: "Consumers are ever more sensitive to ethical values, respect for the natural and social environment, and especially in places where civil society is most mature, they expect businesses to conform with these values; and if not, they express their preferences by boycotting their products." (p.19)

Response #2: As I said before, consumers are very judgment of the firms and businesses. However, I would not say that consumers are there to slander the reputation of companies nor do I say that companies are or should be perfect because in reality, nothing is perfect; perfection does not exist.

The main goal of companies is to make a profit and many companies tend to not care how they do it, which is a problem for the environment. Waste from companies are not being disposed of properly and consumers see that. As a result, consumers try to get that company to change how they produce their product. As consumers become more aware of what's going on around them, they expect producers to do the same.

Text #1: "The businesses foster communion with employees by paying particular attention to their health, well-being, and development."

Response #1: This is a strategy more American companies should follow. Many European and Asian companies pride themselves on caring for, respecting and developing their employees as a part of their culture. This makes employees more productive and improves their self worth. American corporations however belittle and misuse their employees and often pit them against each other in a greed fueled attempt at short term profits.

Text #2: "If this is how human beings really are, than the basis for a common life cannot be love, but fear"

Response #2: I believe that fear of consequences is the driving force behind the cohesion of society. The author is basically saying communities come about because people are forced to work together under some kind of threat, and I agree. Even in today's society a lot of financial agencies and corporations work together simply because they have to in order to increase profits and stay within the bounds of law, if their is no regulation than their is no point in trade or community because it becomes survival of the fittest.

Text #1: In "The Wound and the Blessing," I was struck by Aristotle's association of a happy life with tragedy. Aristotle says that communitas carries the mark of suffering within itself. He says that the other person is a blessing but that he or she is the one who wounds me and whom I wound in turn, since the wounding and blessing are reciprocal in nature.

Response #1: This follows Tzvetan Todorov's theory that interpersonal relationships are a necessary evil. Machiavelli states that the social life was not a blessing but a curse and a wound. He further states that "the good life, the blessing, then depends on others who can hurt me." I agree with this to a certain extent. In order to truly reap the benefits of a happy life, one must be vulnerable to the different friendships that life has. It is through our most difficult trials that true happiness can emerge, and this often times occurs with friendships and relationships. In order to experience life lessons, one must interact with others and risk the chance of being emotionally wounded. The one who wounds and the one who is wounded are experiencing a reciprocity that is unlike any other and is the essential backbone of a relationship. The ability to overcome trials and tribulations are the making of a true relationship that Aristotle intended, given man's nature.

Text #2: In "Religious Values and Corporate Decision Making: The Economy of Communion Project," I was very moved by the focus on interpersonal relationships. The Economy of Communion Project is based on equal consideration for all. Those who receive help are not considered "assisted" or "beneficiaries," but as active participants in the project.

Response #2: I love this attitude towards communal participation. This places the focus from the philanthropic actions to the actual shared gifts that each member of the community brings to the table. This article goes on to explain how it is not always about the material gift, because the gift of self is the most precious gift of all. Those who cannot contribute material gifts are not considered a burden, but rather a means for the community to understand how to stand in solidarity with its members. This theory emphasizes the initial mission of the Focolare Movement, which was to "Love one another as I have loved you," which was Jesus' most important call. The equal distribution, the dignity given to all, and generosity to the community represent an understanding of this exact teaching.

In The Economy of Communion Project, one phrase that really stood out to me was “the core of our being, our deepest fulfillment is found in a life of communion, in loving, in giving.” This reading seemed to be the exact opposite of our second reading which stressed that establishing relationships with others was setting ourselves up to be wounded. I felt I could relate to the Economy of Communion Project much easier because it seemed more like, a jar half full attitude rather than a jar half empty.

“The Core of our being, our deepest fulfillment is found in a life of communion, in loving, in giving.” This is a really powerful statement that caused me to reflect on how often I make time to both love and give to others. Often, 24 hours in a day just never seem like enough time to get everything on our to-do lists finished none the less add in trying to make time for others. Over the past few months, I’ve been making an effort to give my full attention to others when I am with them after being told that I always seem like I am in a rush and thinking about something else. While it was really hard to hear this, when I took the time to really think about it, it is 100% true. It feels better to have good relationships with those around me; it’s energizing.

“We want our doctors to take good care of us not only because they are executing a contract, or because they want to keep us alive so that we will be a source of future business, but also because they are genuinely concerned with our well-being…similarly, we hope that teachers discipline or praise our children not only for the salary, but also because they are genuinely interest in the growth of our children. Normal relations in the market require something more, beyond contractual relations.”

This statement could not have summed up the feelings and beliefs of society more perfectly. We always want teachers and doctors to go beyond the bare minimum and when we do not feel like they are, we simply replace them with someone who will. Businesses that perform a service are held to higher standards than those that supply a product, they are charged with building a solid reputation and being able to impress and meet the standards of the public. I feel this article makes really solid points when it comes to society expecting more than just social responsibility, we simply always expect more.

Text #1: "If this is how human beings really are, than the basis for a common life cannot be love, but fear"

Response #1: The author makes a bold statement by saying this. He suggests that the relationship of fear is stronger than that of love. He claims that the bond of love is broken at many opportunities especially when one tries to better themselves. However, the bond of fear is hardly ever broken due to the nature of this type of relationship. When one fears another person, the individual becomes inferior or permissive to the dominant counterpart. Fear enables control. I believe that love enables control as well. The author does not mention this in his writing. When love is present in a relationship, an individual gives up a vulnerability, giving control to the other person. The author says, "fear presents a punishment that never fails" but he forgets that love presents a commitment that never fails. Love has its own consequences.

Text #2: “A manager was ready to fire an employee until one of the chemists suggested that he should first listen to the employee with greater attention."

Response #2: When people think of a manager they often limit their definition to a person in charge. However, a manager is much more than a person in charge. A manager makes decisions, delegates work and the like, but what people forget is that a manager must earn trust from his or her employees. This quote shows a manager that did not listen and truly understand his employees. Management is largely a relationship with subordinates, a relationship that works in two directions as opposed to the manager being the only one who has a say. When there are positive relationships within a business, the business works more efficiently due to a positive work environment. This good morale is derived from relationships, most importantly the relationships between layers of managers.

Text 1:

Another striking aspect of the Economy of Communion project is the way in which everyone involved is given equal consideration. Those who receive help are not considered “assisted” or “beneficiaries.” Rather they are regarded as active participants in the project, all part of
the same community, who also live the culture of giving. The emphasis is not on philanthropy, but on sharing, in that each person gives and receives with equal dignity.

Response 1:

I don’t have much to say to this other than about how striking this was to me. It is stated so simply that it makes me think about how non-prejudice it is. To turn giving and taking into simply participating is a totally new way to look at the process, and I believe it’s a much healthier and productive thing. I also found the statement “that each person gives and receives with equal dignity” to be extremely powerful. There is so much baggage that typically comes with this process: guilt in receiving, feeling as though you “owe” or “are owed” something depending on your position, feeling like you are “better” because you give, rather than giving because you should. I love that they position this as sharing, because to me, sharing is something that we are all expected to do, starting in pre-school. Why can’t we continue to do so forever?

Text 2:

Businesses are beginning to take care of aspects of social life, which up until a few years ago, were considered within the ambit of the state, religious institutions, or civil society.

Response 2:

This transformation is huge, and certainly shows a trend that we as people who are passionate about fair trade hope to continue. If businesses are holding themselves accountable for social responsibility, rather than it being the norm that government, etc. take care of it, then the movement towards fair trade is getting closer and closer. It seems as though this shift has occurred as technology has progressed, partially due to the ability of passionate groups of people exposing injustices publicly to a much wider audience. As technology progresses, especially in the third world countries where much of the injustice is occurring, I predict that businesses will have to take increasing care of social issues.

Actual Text: #1
“Economy of Communion businesses commit themselves to following management principles that enable them to bring Gospel values to bear on their day-to-day decisions while working within market structures”… “A manager was ready to fire an employee until one of the chemists suggested that he should first listen to the employee with greater attention. From that moment on, not only did our relationship improve, but his work did as well.”

Response: #1

I think that this is very eye opening. Management and being able to make relationship with your employees is key to the success of any organization. If you cannot work together and have good communication, you will not get anywhere. I was pleased to see the boss using these practices to step back, reflect, and reproach the situation in a more beneficial and effective way. Not only did he feel good about his actions of handling the situation, but his worker felt respected and understood. As a result, he worked harder after the discussion. A little goes a long way, if you show people that you respect them and try to see a situation from more than your own perspective.

Actual Text: #2

The Economics of Communication also touch the notion of happiness. Here the operative word is public because it highlights the reciprocal nature of happiness, as distinct from wealth: I can be rich by myself, but to be happy I need others.

Response: #2

This is very important, “the reciprocal nature of happiness”. If you treat others right, you will receive the same. Smiling at someone or doing something nice, not for a reward, but to help others, can improve someone’s day tremendously. Sometimes people forget that the world only goes round when we are all working together. Putting down other people or performing unjust acts, for your own personal success, will not leave you as happy as public happiness. Everyone should follow Kant’s idea of the “greater good for the greater amount of people”. It is positive and constructive to build relationships with people because you never know if you may need something later on down the road, and you don't want to be wishing you were a bit nicer to that person.

From the Documentary:

1. When Romero asked his peers if they agreed with his appeal (the night before he gave the homily), and one man responded, “I’m not a theological expert, but ethically yes”

2. When one interviewee said they were not afraid of death. Instead, “they shared a Christian conviction of the need to give your life to others.”

Responses:

1. Overall, this documentary was a very emotional experience. The interviews of the older women discussing their memories of the brutal killings combined with the graphic imagery made me extremely upset. While these images were difficult to see, I’m glad they were included in the documentary. They were necessary in explaining just how disgusting these mass murders were.

When Romero asked his associates if they supported and agreed with his appeal, I was surprised that the one man felt obligated to give his legal opinion. What about the law is relevant in a state of corruption? Everyone knew that the government and laws were corrupt so why did he feel the need to honor them? I can understand that he was hesitant to support Romero’s homily because he knew what would ultimately happen to the archbishop and quite possibly himself, but seriously? This reminded me of the distinction between god’s law and man’s law. The bible commands people to follow the law of man, but only if it is in union with the law of God. Colossians 2:8 (King James Version) reads, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.”

2. My favorite interview was the woman who explained the strength of the oppressed people. Even though the revolution and war caused the deaths of over 80,000 people, this woman explained that her people were not afraid of death. She said that they “shared a Christian conviction of the need to give their lives to others.” Through this conviction, they were able to work together and ultimately stay sane. I found this statement so powerful and a testament to her inner strength. I was completely inspired by her willingness to be hopeful and fearless in a time of death and disaster.

Text 1:
In the documentary, it was mentioned that the rich were used to having power over the church.

Response 1:
When I heard this mentioned in the movie I was very shocked. It showed how the Church can be corrupted by the powerful and wealthy. It made me wonder about the relationship between the Church and the poor before the arrival Monsenor Oscar Romero. Did the Church turn their back to the social injustices? I was also surprised at how much the support of the Church meant to the people, and how the rich felt threatened when Monsenor began to side with the poor.

Text 2:
The scene where they discussed how Father Grande introduced the Gospel in a new way to the people.

Response 2:
This scene reminded me how just a little knowledge can empower a whole group of people. I forgot that the bible used to be only read in Latin and that most people could not understand the readings. I really liked how Father Grande read the bible to the peasants in their native language and how he applied the teachings to their actual lives. I really enjoyed how he compared the story of Exodus to what they were going through and how they were essentially slaves to the rich. It also opened their eyes to the reasons of why the injustices were taking place; it wasn't because God was punishing them it was because of the corrupt government. This just further showed how the Church was corrupt and was blinding the people from the truth, that is until people like Father Grande and Monsenor Romero took action.

Text #1: Archbishop Oscar Romero was called a theologian of the Beatitudes, who not only practiced and lived them every single day, but also made them real for the people of El Salvador.

Text #2: The second point that stood out to me was his urgent appeal for the soldiers to disobey their orders to kill from their superiors.

Response #1: Oscar Romero was called a theologian of the Beatitudes because he defended the rights of the poor and made them human rights. In the opening scene of the movie, the viewer can overhear Archbishop Romero saying "Whose pastor am I? Am I the pastor of a people that suffers or oppresses?" These questions are indicative of the type of leader he was. From the start, he aligned himself with the teachings of the Church and made it his mission to comfort the poor and have them treated with the dignity that Jesus would have showed them. With the death of his dear from Father Rutilio Grande, Oscar Romero demanded that there be no further participation in the government's function until his death was investigated, he closed all Catholic schools so they could study the "national reality," and he declared Misa Unica, so that the people could worship together. Romero was a man of his word and God's Word, and he made it clear that he would not tolerate injustice, so he took direct action through nonviolent action.

Response #2: With his urgent appeal in his final homily to disobey orders to kill, Archbishop Romero essentially wrote his own death sentence. However, he never spoke of his own death and never wanted protection for his life. Insubordination is considered a military crime so this appeal was not supported by the military whatsoever. Romero was accused of being a terrorist and a communist who was planning to overthrow the government. Throughout the accusations and his entire time in El Salvador, Romero remained focused on the Law of God as the ultimate power. The Law of God was missing through the 80,000 deaths and 500,000 misplaced citizens. Romero insisted that God's message be present on earth amidst utter chaos, and he was going to have this happen even if it meant he would die.

Text from Video
1) At one point early on there was a comment made that Romero was not practicing liberation theology but instead was practicing the beatitudes. Meaning he was not looking to free the people of El Salvador but instead he was trying to get people to practice the beatitudes such as give food to the hugry, give drink to the thirsty and comfort the poor and oppressed
2) Something that was interesting and mentioned only for a minute was the involvement of the United States in the conflict.

Response to Video
1) The first point was about the Liberation Theology and beatitudes. I believe that Romero was about liberation theology but did it through the lens of the beatitudes. He wanted the hungry to be feed and thirsty to be given a drink, but the root of every speech and sermon was about the disappearance of the poor civilians. People were disappearing because there was an oppressive force that captured those who wanted to challenge that authority. His true message, given what I understand, was liberation. It was not the traditional liberation theology that other South American countries used but this was his version. He wanted to liberate the oppressed by using the beatitudes (theology). So in my eyes he was using liberation theology to free the oppressed in El Salvador.

2) I am not going to go ahead and bash the US for its apparent involvement in the oppression in El Salvador. I just think that it is remarkable to see the relationship between the United States, our home, and the Jesuits, our educators. In this circumstance the American government supported those doing the oppressing in order to maintain an ally in Central America during the crisis with Cuba. Both sides were trying to protect their contingencies- the US with its population and watching Cuba from El Salvador, and the Jesuits looking after the poor in EL Salvador not worrying about Cuba and the US. Although it is difficult I believe that problems like this can be resolved if both sides take a higher level view at the problem and realize that they are harming each other and each others innocent constituents as they do not work together.