"Let him trust in the name of the Lord, and rely upon his God."

10. Who among you fears the LORD and obeys the word of his servant? Let the one who walks in the dark, who has no light, trust in the name of the LORD and rely on their God.
11. Behold, all you that kindle a fire, that encircle yourselves with sparks: walk in the light of your fire, and in the sparks that you have kindled. This shall you have of my hand; you shall lie down in sorrow.
Isaiah 50:10-11  

Matthew Henry was a Presbyterian minister (1662-1714) born in Wales.

His comments on this passage:

Those that truly fear God, obey the voice of Christ. A sincere servant of God may for a long time be without views of eternal happiness. What is likely to be an effectual cure in this sad case? Let him trust in the name of the Lord; and let him stay himself upon the promises of the covenant, and build his hopes on them. 
Let him trust in Christ, trust in that name of his, The Lord our Righteousness; stay himself upon God as his God, in and through a Mediator.
Presuming sinners are warned not to trust in themselves. Their own merit and sufficiency are light and heat to them. Creature-comforts are as sparks, short-lived, and soon gone; yet the children of this world, while they  last, seek to warm themselves by them, and walk with pride and pleasure in the light of them. Those that make the world their comfort, and their own righteousness their confidence, will certainly meet with bitterness in the end. A godly man's way may be dark, but his end shall be peace and everlasting light. 

It seems that Isaiah understands something that we sometimes forget; that following God does not necessarily mean that we should expect to feel that we are walking in light while we do so.  Sometimes following God feels like walking in darkness.  The whole chapter is written from a perspective of "this discipleship is hard" and "the Lord will not abandon me" and "this will take true grit to get through."  Which is understandable, given what we know about Isaiah and his circumstances.

The warning in verse 11 is a warning against manufacturing a substitute light (be that a belief, or a method of feeling validated, or a way of measuring, or whatever) which we may make on our own, trying to beat back the darkness and gain a sense of progress.  The light we or others create in such situations may feel like it is making our path easier to see or more positive, but Isaiah's pretty sure that living by such light will, eventually, lead to more sorrow than joy.

What is interesting to me is that, in the version in Isaiah, the warning seems to be aimed at those who do not fear the Lord and obey his servant, which might make a believer feel smug and safe. Certainly, Matthew Henry switches pronouns, using the pronouns "they" and "them" when he talks about those "presuming sinners" addressed in verse 11.

However, in the version in 2nd Nephi (chapter 7), those verses are worded so that verse 10 makes it so that verse 11 is clearly aimed at those who do fear the Lord and obey his servant. 

"Who is among you that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth his servant, that walketh in darkness and hath no light...that compass yourselves with sparks..which ye have kindled"    

It's not "them", it's "us", the ones who do fear the Lord and are trying to obey his servants, that the warning to not self-manufacture light amidst the darkness we experience is aimed at. And considering that the rest of that chapter talks about how tough and daunting discipleship can be, that makes some pretty good sense to me.

Lehi, Opposites, and Nihilism, 2 Nephi 2: 1-13

It occurred to me, while reading 2 Ne. 2: 1-13, that "opposition" here does not mean conflict between good and evil as much as it means "the existence of opposites" and the existence of meaning in reality at large.

I think this part of Lehi's instruction to Jacob is not a discussion of "how God set up the world" but, rather, a discourse on the very nature of reality, and, in  sum, how that relates to the reality of God.

Lehi's "God ceases to be God" and if "God is not then we are not" statement there reminded me of Nihilism.  It's been ages since I've read nihilistic literature, so I did a quick review and discovered that there are varieties of it.

So, in more modern philosophical jargon, this discourse of Lehi's would well fit into a discussion on the philosophies of  Nihilist Romanticism and Metaphysical Nihilism and how the adoption of those philosophies affect a person's life experience and disbelief in the idea or existence of God.

(Lehi does not address Fundamental Nihilism, but then  Nietzsche  pointed out Fundamental Nihilism's inherent inconsistencies that make it pretty impossible for anyone to put it into actual practice, so I'm not surprised.)

For further elucidation on the subject of Nihilist Romanticism, Metaphysical Nihilism, Nihilism as a form of religion and other variations on the theme, try this post written by a self-defined ethical skeptic.  (To find out what an ethical skeptic is, read through the contents of the right sidebar on the site--pretty interesting.)  And see if 2 Ne. seems to be related to that to you too.

   http://theethicalskeptic.com/2015/01/07/no-you-are-not-an-atheist-you-are-a-nihilist/

Virtues

So today I read a 100 hour board query in which the questioner said about a decision to get drunk recently:

"It was somewhat impulsive but also not, because I did think about it and chose to do it anyways. ... I obviously feel guilty, but probably not as guilty as I should because I want to do it again. It felt good to do something "wrong," since I've been this rule follower my whole life. Not that it's an excuse for me breaking the word of wisdom. I will probably drink more because I honestly feel like I need to get this urge out of my system. ... I still believe in the church and I know it's true. Honestly. but I couldn't fight the urge to drink anymore. Doesn't help that I liked it, either. Such a confusing feeling right now."

The questioner's main question was about how that would affect his standing in the church, but that's not what I was interested in when I read the question.  What struck me was his relationship with the principle of obedience.

"It felt good to do something wrong."  

"I've been this rule follower my whole life."  

Obedience is such a tricky principle.  It can prevent a lot of sorrow and regret by preventing us from doing things that bring sorrow and regret.  But, at the same time, it can become poison when we make it the virtue we live and identify ourselves with.  

Obedience for the sake of obedience is simply conscious, determined self-control for the sake of self-control.   The virtue goes out of a virtue when it becomes a source of self-identity or pride or a way of being able to see oneself as acceptable.  And when a virtue loses the qualities that make it virtuous, and instead, ever so unconsciously to us, it becomes an idol or a standard that we worship as we proximate it's outward characteristics in our actions, it becomes a prison rather than a liberation. 

A virtue lived and loved because of a comprehension of an understanding of the divine nature of that virtue and a deep respect and gratitude for the light and love and peace that comes from incorporating that virtue into your life will free you.  

A virtue lived and loved because it makes you feel competent, "good" or admirable, and which is maintained by sheer will-power or by the desire for respect from others will eventually feel like a strangle hold.

Some respond to that sense of strangling by abandoning that virtue.   And then they are confused by the fact that they enjoyed that abandonment.  Not having learned the light, love and peace that comes from living a virtue, but only understanding the sense of mastery or self-worth or pride that may come by living the outward patterns of it, they are confused.  They are confused by the fact that feeling less strangled feels good.  Isn't this virtue they've been practicing supposed to feel better than abandoning it?

"Honestly. but I couldn't fight the urge to drink anymore. Doesn't help that I liked it, either. Such a confusing feeling right now."

The truth is, if my embracing of a virtue is simply a deliberate, determined, self-focused practice of self-mastery, then yes, abandonment of it will likely feel like a liberation.

Others will respond to that sense of strangling, not by abandoning, but by denigrating others who they think do not live that virtue, thereby propping up the sense of being worthy of the self-respect or respect of others that they so desire as they try to focus on that in order to mask their sense of restriction. You probably know people who do that too.

And then this:

I still believe in the church and I know it's true.

But spiritual confirmation of a question posed is not what brings light and freedom.  Just obeying for the sake of obedience doesn't either.  Neither does alms-giving for the sake of giving alms, or testifying for the sake of testifying, or any number of freely given spiritual gifts, practiced for the sake of practicing them.  

It reminds me of the parenting mantra that L. and I learned

"The purpose of the task is to strengthen the relationship."

Loving relationships are, ultimately, what make life most worthwhile, free, and light-filled.  

So, the purpose of living virtues is not to make us have the self-control or sense of positive self-identity involved in living a virtuous life.  The purpose of living virtues is to strengthen our relationship.

The relationship with whom?

I have found that if you wish to find freedom, light and peace in virtues, you will need to establish a relationship of love, understanding and communication with the source of those virtues, however you understand that source. 

It seems that simply living by the standards of a virtue while focusing on the virtue and yourself, instead of your relationship with the source, will likely hinder you, usually in ways that you will sense but not understand. And whether you understand why or not, will lead to real frustration or confusion or anger or alienation from others at some point down the road.

So how to teach the relationship with the source of the virtue as opposed to the rightness of the virtue itself in order to help people enjoy that light and freedom?  A good question for me to consider.

What E. said when she was writing about what N. said and what she thought about that.

“He said that while consequences always have to play out and we don’t always get rescued from them, and it may take time and work for us to change our behaviors, it does not take any additional time or energy for the atonement to cover our sins.

“They are already paid.

“We don’t need to shout out the behaviors or choices of others or ourselves, and lose our voices screaming the cost of it all.

“Because it’s already paid.

“We can’t disappoint God, because he already knows us perfectly.

“It means, though, that [we really should not be devastated by] disappoint[ment in ourselves], because what we thought was disappointment is really an opportunity to see ourselves more clearly and more accurately.

“C.S. Lewis said that because God knows all (which is not the same as causing all), our experience of the present moment is like God’s experience of the past, present, and future all at once.  The more we live in the present, rather than lost in the past or worried about the future, the more accurately we will learn to see ourselves the way God see[s] us.”

What manner of men (or women) ought ye to be?

I am thinking about how very blessed so very many of us are.

And I am thinking how often our emotional wounds, due to rejection, derision, threats, false friends, loneliness in the midst of crowds, being deeply and caustically misunderstood or disenchanted, and having family members that oppose us or believe we are tragically deluded, haunt us to such a degree that what gratitude we may feel for the blessings we have received is deeply overshadowed by a belief that we will only be at peace if those wounding experiences are removed not only from our lives but the lives of everyone else we care about.

And I am thinking about Jesus, who spent much of his ministry with his person and his teaching consistently rejected, derided, threatened, misrepresented and ultimately heart-wrenchingly betrayed. He experienced feeling alone and caustically or ignorantly misunderstood, having beloved family members thinking he was all wrong and without a family home to welcome him. And he also knew (and said) that many of the people he dearly loved, who sought to live the kind of life he demonstrated, faced the same and would experience the same throughout their own lives as well.

“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.  For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.”

And yet he faced those experiences and that knowledge with calm, immovable, love and hope, both for those who suffered and for those who on purpose, or inadvertently, caused suffering. He knew and lived peace. 

“Peace I leave with you. My peace I give unto you...Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.”

He spoke calmly, and immovably for what he believed was right when others, both the powerful and the weak, derided both him and his ideas. And having said it, usually calmly, and occasionally very, very unmistakably clearly, he let it be and focused on blessing those at hand who were in need. He taught and spoke without needing for others to agree or “see his point of view”. He did not fear the hurtful results of others failing to heed his words. And he did not anguish over not making everything right and fair and good and “the way it should be”, right now.  I think it is because he truly understood mercy and grace.

He spoke the truth without monitoring how it was received and without losing hope when it was not heeded. And he did not ostracize or fear to encounter those who rejected what he said (unless, of course, they were setting about to stone him, and even then it was a calm quiet, “passing out of their midst”). In the synagogue and in the temple and on the side of the hill overlooking the sea and everywhere else he was the Prince of Peace. He was hope for us and trust in God personified. He just WAS.

Or, you might say, He just IS.

Paul and Barnabas in Antioch--Clarity, Trust and Equanimity in Missionary Work

My respect for the clarity, trust and equanimity of these two struck me this morning.

Paul speaking in the synagogue in Antioch:
Acts, chapter 13

"'Therefore, brothers and sisters, know this: Through Jesus we proclaimed forgiveness of sins to you. From all those sins from which a person couldn’t be put in right relationship with God through Moses’ Law,  through Jesus that person who believes is put in right relationship with God. Take care that the prophets’ words don’t apply to you:

 Look, you scoffers,
    marvel and die.
I’m going to do work in your day —
    a work you won’t believe
    even if someone told you.”[Hab. 1:5]

" As Paul and Barnabas were leaving the synagogue, the people urged them to speak about these things again on the next Sabbath. When the people in the synagogue were dismissed, many Jews and devout converts to Judaism accompanied Paul and Barnabas, who urged them to remain faithful to the message of God’s grace.  

"On the next Sabbath, almost everyone in the city gathered to hear the Lord’s word. When the Jews saw the crowds, they were overcome with jealousy. They argued against what Paul was saying by slandering him.  Speaking courageously, Paul and Barnabas said, “We had to speak God’s word to you first. Since you reject it and show that you are unworthy to receive eternal life, we will turn to the Gentiles. This is what the Lord commanded us:

"I have made you a light for the Gentiles,

so that you could bring salvation to the end of the earth.”[Isaiah 49:6]

 "When the Gentiles heard this, they rejoiced and honored the Lord’s word. Everyone who was appointed for eternal life believed,  and the Lord’s word was broadcast throughout the entire region.  However, the Jews provoked the prominent women, as well as the city’s leaders. They instigated others to harass Paul and Barnabas, and threw them out of their district.  Paul and Barnabas shook the dust from their feet and went to Iconium.  Because of the abundant presence of the Holy Spirit in their lives, the disciples were overflowing with happiness."

As an aside, I have heard many conjectures about what exactly "shake the dust of your feet" means. Some of them were less charitable than others. I think the one I've pasted below makes sense.  It reminds me of the patient comment of a friend whose beloved husband was making stupid choices that she could not change. 

"I hand him up to God", she smiled.  

No rancor, no holier-than-thou, just a recognition that she had done that which she could, that she would continue to love, and that she could also gratefully trust God to do healing and teaching beyond what she was able to do in their committed relationship. 

Shaking off the dust:  "There are situations in our lives where God calls us to stand firm, proclaim truth, and give patient testimony. Sometimes we need to continue until we see the results of that testimony. Other times God gives us the freedom to... figuratively “shake the dust off our feet” when, under the Holy Spirit’s direction, we surrender those people to the Lord."

I trust God with that.

Brother Durrant's talk.

I learned something listening to Brother Durrant’s talk at General Conference, which I got to hear this past weekend.

What I learned: that it is never wise to choose a topic to speak on in church based upon 1) a practice that you feel you are very good at or 2) a practice that you created and used with energy and enthusiasm in a previous calling. His was a talk built on a framework of favorite behaviors, not gospel preaching. Yes there was some gospel, but the framework was behaviors. And an effective sermon must have gospel as its framework and it must be spoken with a keen sense of one’s own inadequacies, not one’s sense of success.

Brother Durrant did both numbers 1 and 2. He spoke about finances and saving (his professional field, in which, I gather, he as been successful) and about the “ponderize” plan that he implemented with great enthusiasm as a mission president in Texas.

As a result, like all talks of that type, the talk simply did not carry the weight and power that a conference talk can when it is simply very thoughtful, inspired, humble explanations of essential truths and divine inspiration.

The enthusiastic merchandising by his son only pointed out again that “ponderizing” was a family tradition, a practice enthusiastically embraced and enjoyed and found to be helpful by an LDS family. And simply that.

And I think that the merchandising plan put together by his son shows a concerning combining of capitalism and gospel that, if it were my son, would get the thorough kibosh from me.

Ultimately, I feel sorry for Brother Durrant.  If he has not learned what he needed to learn from the experience, I feel sorry for him for that. If he has or does learn what he needs to from this experience, it will be a heavy and troubling load for to him to carry as he serves in his new calling, knowing that it was likely the only opportunity he will have to speak in that forum, and that he had fallen short of the mark to serve it as wisely as he could have.

So probably my wisest response will be to pray for him.

Pondering a Mystery--I got asked a question yesterday

So this post is just to write down and sort through my understanding after a friend asked me yesterday what I thought about the phrase "calling and election made sure" (CAEMS), 2nd Peter 1:10,.and what that involves.

Much of CAEMS speculation has been influenced by some statements made by Bruce McConkie in his 3 volume set of “Doctrinal New Testament Commentary” and which are cited in the “Life and Teachings of Jesus and His Apostles” CES textbook. In light of the fact that on the cover page of that three volume set is written “The views expressed herein are the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the position of the Church or of Deseret Book”, and that CES textbooks are definitely not scripture, I feel no compunction to automatically consider what is written there as truth. And my personal study which I did in response to the calling to teach the scriptures in seminary has led me to a different understanding.

What I have found:

2^nd Peter 1:

CAEMS is closely tied to

Knowing God the Father and Jesus Christ (“Epignosis” is the word used for “knowledge” in this passage. See http://biblehub.com/greek/1922.htm for an analysis of what that word means.) (vs.2)

Which “epignosis” multiplies your experience with grace and peace. (vs.2)

That opens the door for us to “partake of the divine nature” and be disinclined to selfishness, self-indulgence and lust. (vs 4)

Peter also says that cultivating diligence, faith, virtue, knowledge (epignosis), temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity is essential to coming to and remaining in a knowledge (epignosis) of Christ because, without cultivating those attributes in our lives,

1. we are unfruitful or barren in our knowledge (epignosis) of Christ.
2. we become short-sighted instead of seeing the eternal perspective
3. we forget our repentance and that we received forgiveness
4. we fall
   (vs 5-10)

The “calling” is a calling to “glory and virtue” (vs. 3)

What is glory? It is working to “bring to pass the immortality and eternal life” of others, not yourself. (Moses 1:39)

What is virtue? It is a high standard of moral goodness in all aspects of life.

Cliff note version: Knowing God in an “epignosis” way increases your experience with divine grace and peace and, by its nature and course of effect in your life, creates a calling and election (as in I'm calling you and choosing you to do something). In other words, an epignosis-based (knowing in a way that is more than just summarily “knowing about”), discipleship-based relationship with the Father and the Son brings a renewed personal divine invitation and appointment, a calling and election, to participate more fully in the work of bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of your fellow men and to continue to humbly and diligently seek to nurture in yourself the attributes of Christ in order to do so. We make it “sure” by responding to that call and doing that work with Him and continuing in grace and godly character.

What confuses some people:

I think what confuses people are the following:

1. They think that what they are supposed to seek is the promise of having “made it into the celestial kingdom”. Instead it is that we are to seek to know, experience and love God, embrace and incorporate his virtues in their lives and with that, respond to a personal, divine call and appointment to work with God for the salvation of others. (See Cliff notes above.)
2. They read the words of Joseph Smith “I should think that all faithful Latter-day Saints would want that more sure word of prophecy, that they were sealed in the heavens and had the promise of eternal life in the kingdom of God." (History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 5:388) And they think that that refers to a done deal. There were lots of debates and discussion about this being a done deal and what the parameters of that "doneness" were.
   Well, it seems that sealings are not a done deal when they are pronounced. (Though there are people who hope that this one is the exception to that rule and early church members thought it might.) Blessings sealed upon individuals are not done deals. They are dependent upon faithfulness in discipleship in all godly ways. They are not “you've made it, don't worry” or “you will get X, don't worry”. Rather they are profound, personal messages from God that say “I'm real, I'm with you, continue faithful and work with me, and light and love and glory will be possible” and those divine messages change us and move us to seek Him and work with Him more.
3. They read Joseph Smith's words “When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 150) and and "After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands) ... then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted.” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,, p. 150) and they think that God is talking about a done deal based on merit
   But a calling and election made sure is not a guarantee (see #2) nor is it a merit-based decree. A calling and election is a profound experience of being called, and being designated to DO AND BE  (or continue to do and be) something (and not necessarily a specific calling in the church either). It is not a calling to receive a reward. We rise to that calling to do and be, ie: we “make it sure”, as we work to serve the Lord and as we seek to become like him as we do that work and with his grace and mercy become more one with Him.  
   (The word "sure" has many different meanings.  I believe the closest definition here is "act with unfailing dependability" or "constancy".  We make a calling to do and be "sure" when we we act in it with devoted dependability and constancy.)
   Determination to serve God may start with a personal decision but I believe it moves from simple self-mastery to “real” determination as a result of epignosis of God and, with his grace, developing godly attributes and then encountering that personal divine testimony of the absolute reality of God and God's personal invitation/calling to serve. It part of the process of becoming like Him.  And when we are like Him, through his grace and mercy, we may live with Him.
4. They read Doctrine and Covenants 131:5-6 and think that sealed up means done deal. It's not a done deal. See #2 above. Also, 131:5-6 is not an exposition on the nature of the "more sure word of prophecy" but is actually an answer to a question about that phrase in 2nd Peter. The question was, "Can a man be have 'the more sure word of prophecy' without knowing that he does?".  And the answer is in verse 6, no, he cannot.  If you have experienced that sealing experience you would know you had.

Of course, since such an experience of “calling and election” and the process of “making sure”are, by their very nature and due to the nature of the one who experiences them (think “humble and loving and respectful of that which is sacred”) of a personally sacred nature, practically speaking, the ones who have experienced or are experiencing these, generally don't talk about it much. . Unfortunately that leads to lots of imaginative speculation and rumor. I expect that, since it is such a personal experience, it is likely that each experience would be different, and not exactly the same for each person.

I find no compelling reason to believe that it is only experienced in rooms in temples (one of the speculations I encounter every once in a while).  Though that might happen for some. There are rarely, if ever, reports or discussions of "second annointings" (which were considered the highest temple ordinance and connected to CAEMS and oft discussed and, on occasion performed in the early LDS church) these days and the understanding of what they are has changed from what people thought they were and how they related to "calling and election made sure" in early church history.  Reading the quotes from J.S. above or the words of Peter, it seems clear that this process of CAEMS is meant to involve solemn interaction with God, but I don't see enough there to state that it requires certain rites, though, who knows, some may feel like it should and for all I know, God may use that medium with them should they need or hope for that.  He is, after all, a very personal God in spite of all of us humans constantly trying to institutionalize his work and reduce it to formulas.

Reading the history of early church "second annointings" in Nauvoo and Utah it seems that for many decades people felt like such rites were required for it CAEMS to happen, but it seems that as understanding of what "calling and election made sure" means changed and the problematical nature of discernment as to the best time for it to happen in a person's life (always a problem with rite that gets institutionalized) grew, second annointings were slowly reduced, leaving the CAEMS process the opportunity to be recognized in personal lives in more personal ways..  And, given the deeply personal nature of that a CAEMS experience, I think that general deinstitutionalization was wise.  I have no problem with temple rites changing.  Usually they change for the better.

Since those who do know from personal experience what a CAEMS process in ones life is like also, understandably,  generally tend not to jump into conversations on the subject to share their experiences, we can all continue to believe what we believe about the experience just fine, whether we agree or not.

In the end, hopefully, we all will eventually, in this life or the life to come, find out for ourselves.

Bids and Responses and Scanning

This morning I woke up thinking of three things.  

1. The challenge of talking about thought processes in order to facilitate coordination between people who are working together.  For example, two people work on a project together, a change in timing or resources occurs, both think of responses to those changes and act on them, but fail to actually talk about or discuss the responses they have to those changes or the changes they are planning to implement, resulting in mild confusion and/or jumping to unverified conclusions. 

2. The principle of "the purpose of the task is to strengthen the relationship", ie. no matter what task you are involved in, a primary and essential element of that task is the strengthening of the relationships of those involved in it. For example, washing the dishes with your daughter:  The purpose is not so much getting the dishes perfectly clean, but rather to strengthen your relationship as you work together.

3. The practice of responding to "bids".  It goes like this.  Throughout the day, partners make requests for connection, what John Gottman calls “bids.” and which he explains as follows in an article here:  http://www.businessinsider.com/lasting-relationships-rely-on-2-traits-2014-11

For example, say that the husband is a bird enthusiast and notices a goldfinch fly across the yard. He might say to his wife, “Look at that beautiful bird outside!” He’s not just commenting on the bird here: he’s requesting a response from his wife — a sign of interest or support — hoping they’ll connect, however momentarily, over the bird.

The wife now has a choice. She can respond by either “turning toward” or “turning away” from her husband, as Gottman puts it. Though the bird-bid might seem minor and silly, it can actually reveal a lot about the health of the relationship. The husband thought the bird was important enough to bring it up in conversation and the question is whether his wife recognizes and respects that.

People who turned toward their partners in the study responded by engaging the bidder, showing interest and support in the bid. Those who didn’t — those who turned away — would not respond or respond minimally and continue doing whatever they were doing, like watching TV or reading the paper. Sometimes they would respond with overt hostility, saying something like, “Stop interrupting me, I’m reading.”

These bidding interactions had profound effects on marital well-being. Couples who had divorced after a six-year follow up had “turn-toward bids” 33 percent of the time. Only three in ten of their bids for emotional connection were met with intimacy. The couples who were still together after six years had “turn-toward bids” 87 percent of the time. Nine times out of ten, they were meeting their partner’s emotional needs.

“There’s a habit of mind that the masters have,” Gottman explained in an interview, “which is this: they are scanning social environment for things they can appreciate and say thank you for. They are building this culture of respect and appreciation very purposefully. ...

“It’s not just scanning environment,” chimed in Julie Gottman. “It’s scanning the partner for what the partner is doing right..." 

My decision this morning: work on those three.

And, in light of number 1, talk to L. about that decision.

Fortitude, Humility, Kindness, Gratitude and Love Unfeigned...and Yoga

Kindness in words creates confidence. 
Kindness in thinking creates profoundness. 
Kindness in giving creates love. 

~~Lao Tsu


Never assume you have figured anyone or anything out. 
Never boil someone down to a cliché and certainly not to an epithet. 
Never assume that because you discover a hard question, the answer is an exit rather than renewed perspective. 
Even if the answer IS an exit, be sure it is done with respect and gratitude, not with anger and insults. 
Anger serves no one well and hurts many. If anger [or insults, be they sarcastic, snide or epithetic, voiced or unspoken] is your default response to discomfort in any relationship (including your relationship to faith or to the sacred), take up yoga. At least for starters.

~~Margaret Young
Interview with Stephen Marsh, September 4, 2015

...ye shall have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation, but be of.....

I have decided that there is a difference between "choosing to be happy" and being of good cheer. One cannot nor should not always choose to be happy. If so, we would never mourn with those who mourn, we would never experience the sobering, tutoring process of loss, and we would not experience empathy for those who struggle or who suffer pain or injustice or abuse.

On the other hand, to me being of good cheer as found in the 16th chapter of the book of John means possessing a grounded, calm sense of peace, laced with hope, that is pretty constant in both times of celebration as well as times of deep sorrow, fear, confusion, anger or suffering. It enables us to act positively and calmly and effectively to navigate those struggles in our own lives and to assist others with more open eyes and hearts.

Good cheer dwells comfortably with and deals peaceably and carefully with the reality of a far from perfect existence and the loss of dreams. Choosing to be happy too often tries to pretend that those imperfections and losses should be ignored or glossed over, which, I believe, can actually prevent our spiritual growth.

So, with the grace of God, I will not "choose to be happy" but I do hope to be "of good cheer".

Just because it seems like a good idea here doesn't mean it makes sense there.

“For Americans in particular, life in a global Church means realizing that just because something seems a no-brainer here doesn’t mean it plays out that way everywhere.”

~John J. Allen, Jr., associate editor of the Catholic journal "Crux", at the end of his interesting article about current catholic debates in India.

True about my church too.

The sentence above is towards the end of the second part of the interesting article that you can find HERE.

Taking a Nap

Luke 8:
22
"Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went into a ship with his disciples...
23
But as they sailed he fell asleep..."

Drawing by Ali Wright, shared with permission.  Thanks, Ali.

Good for me to remember at times when a nap is needful but my North American culturalized brain objects to my taking one.

On writing fiction. From William Faulkner's 1950 Nobel Speech in Stockholm

...the young man or woman writing today has forgotten the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself which alone can make good writing because only that is worth writing about, worth the agony and the sweat.

He must learn them again. He must teach himself that the basest of all things is to be afraid; and, teaching himself that, forget it forever, leaving no room in his workshop for anything but the old verities and truths of the heart, the old universal truths lacking which any story is ephemeral and doomed - love and honor and pity and pride and compassion and sacrifice. Until he does so, he labors under a curse. He writes not of love but of lust, of defeats in which nobody loses anything of value, of victories without hope and, worst of all, without pity or compassion. His griefs grieve on no universal bones, leaving no scars. He writes not of the heart but of the glands.

Until he relearns these things, he will write as though he stood among and watched the end of man. I decline to accept the end of man. It is easy enough to say that man is immortal simply because he will endure: that when the last dingdong of doom has clanged and faded from the last worthless rock hanging tideless in the last red and dying evening, that even then there will still be one more sound: that of his puny inexhaustible voice, still talking.

I refuse to accept this. I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal, not because he alone among creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance. The poet's, the writer's, duty is to write about these things. It is his privilege to help man endure by lifting his heart, by reminding him of the courage and honor and hope and pride and compassion and pity and sacrifice which have been the glory of his past. The poet's voice need not merely be the record of man, it can be one of the props, the pillars to help him endure and prevail.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1949/faulkner-speech.html

Welcome, Finnegan.

Speaking Under the Stars

I've been reading the last chapters of the book of John.

I noticed Jesus' words at the end of chapter 14:  "Arise, let us go hence."

Then chapters 15-17 continue the discourse that he began as he and his disciples sat together at the passover feast and the end of that (chapter 17) is his wonderful intercessory prayer.

So I imagined that these chapters may have been a message to his disciples, spoken out of doors, beneath a night sky, somewhere between the upper room in Jerusalem and the Gethsemane garden.

Cloudy or clear, given the general absence of light pollution, the sky would have been magnificent.

And I imagine, under that night sky, these phrases:

"All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you."

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace."

"O Father...I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from the, and they have believed that thou didst send me. I pray for them."

"They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.  Sanctify them through thy truth."

"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us;"

John 16 Jesus' message to his 12.

There will come a time when people will see you as dangerous and will think that killing you and your message is a service to God.

When someone thinks like that, it is a sure indication that they do not know God.

When such times come, do not be taken by surprise.  I'm telling you ahead of time so that it will not throw you off.

When I am no longer physically with you, be assured that I will send the Comforter to be with you.

He will show where right and wrong judgment lie by showing and testifying that I have gone to be with the Father.  And he will convince people of the reality of divine judgment by showing that the prince of this world is judged.

When the Holy Spirit comes he will guide you, speaking the word of God, alerting you as to what will come and testifying of the glory given to me.  All things of the Father are mine and the Holy Spirit will receive of that from me and share what he receives with you.

There will be times of deep sorrow and difficulty ahead.  But, be assured, the magnitude of the joy that will follow will make that sorrow seem like simply an instructive, challenging, new experience.

There will be sad times, but I will see you again and your hearts will rejoice with a kind of joy that no person's actions or words can ever stop.

When you need something, ask in my name.  But ask directly of the Father yourself.  You do not need for me to pray for you.  You can pray directly to Him.  He loves you.  He loves that you love me and that you understand that I came from Him.  Ask Him directly, and experience the joy of receiving communication and instruction and help from Him.

Shortly things will become so scary that you will scatter and leave me alone.  But I am not alone. The Father is with me.

Why have I told you all this? So that you may understand that, as you stay connected with me, you will have access to what you need in order to feel peace in your heart.

Tribulation is part of life and you will experience it.  However, be hopeful and of good cheer. Continue to do good. The reality is that because of who I am and  what I do  I  am able to undo and overpower the effects of anything bad, wicked, catastrophic,  tragic, unfair, unjust, sinful, horribly misguided or destructive that this life or the people in it did, does or will inflict upon you and anyone else.

"Both Feet Forward"

My friend J. shared the audio of Scott Swofford's Devotional Address with me.  Honesty, humility, interested listening, real appreciation and love in our discipleship vs.our tendency to point out the virtues of what we know and what we hope we are.   Well worth the 25 minutes of listening.

I'm leaving links here so that I can find and review it again.

http://www.byutv.org/watch/b6ed3495-be74-42ae-850c-a43f5beaf34f/byu-devotional-address-scott-swofford-111114

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6GB9uv2S58

Interpreting Reactions

"As a psychotherapist, one of the themes I constantly talk about with my clients is that perception is critical. Some expats view any anxiety about their life abroad as a sign of how exciting their new life is, and thus thrive upon it. Others, however, feel their worry is a tell tale sign that they have made a mistake, and start to panic. How you interpret not only your new environment, but your reactions to it, is critical."  ~~ Joshua Wood

It strikes me that this applies well to me right now.

Good to remember.  How I interpret my own automatic or initial emotional or physical reactions to my situation is critical to my perception of my situation and therefore what I assume will follow.

And though one cannot usually choose one's own immediate physical or emotional reaction to a new geographic, cognizant or situational  reality, one can choose how one interprets that reaction.

L. tends to interpret the emotions brought about by new situations as manifestations of the arrival of new and exciting challenges and so he gets antsy to get going and doing.  I tend to interpret emotions experienced in new situations as a message that I should carefully, slowly and methodically explore and figure out stuff in order to avoid making really stupid decisions.  

I wonder how much of that difference between us is personality and how much of it is the fact that one of us is a foot taller, twice as strong and about 100 lbs heavier than the other.

Fortunately, we're used to each other's automatic initial reaction interpretations.

One of the benefits of arriving here in June

Mangosteens are still in season!

There is nothing quite like a chilled mangosteen for dessert on a hot day.

Truly marvelous.

(And the mangoes are good too!)