note: i wrote this blog entry july 28th. that evening i got an update that my fellow blogger and friend posted this entry: i have a dream, or do i? check suzie-k's entry out, too!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
there's a saying that goes like this:
"if you love something, set it free. if it comes back to you, it's yours. if it doesn't, it never was."
i think we often associate this with a person or a relationship. and it makes sense, especially before you exchange vows...but i'm sure doing this is painful. unrequited love must be unbearable, and i imagine letting go is scary because there are what ifs involved. the impetus would surely be to hang on, with stranglehold force, when releasing your grip is the better option. hanging on for dear life would surely create resentment for the one loved who wants freedom, but who on the other side wants to take that kind of risk? let go in hopes of getting back? what if that person never comes back? is that a chance worth taking?
well, i was thinking about this saying in relation to dreams, hopes, aspirations. don't get me wrong with my foregoing statements. i am a firm believer in fighting for what you want. if you want something badly enough, you'll make it happen...but admitedly, sometimes you can only fight so much. sometimes you have to take a step back and wait. and waiting is challenging when all you want are answers now.
i have some pretty sweet dreams. every birthday i get a card from my parents reminding me that this is my year. and every year i accept it. i am a very blessed individual, but i have unrequited dreams...dreams i've yet to see fulfilled...dreams that i believe are mine to be realized. dreams i love to dream because i believe they will eventually be realized. and i really do believe this is my year.
i don't know how much i agree with setting my dreams free...letting my dreams go and possibly never seeing them fulfilled. i know we are sometimes vicariously lived through, and become the agent for someone else's dreams coming true, but i think you have to hang on to your own dreams and pursue them. pursue relentlessly. let me interject this, for those looking for something of a spiritual nature: if your dream feels liks a burden at times, that's a little different, because the bible instructs the believer to give your burdens to God to look after. but make no mistake, i think God can look after your dreams, too. think about joseph in genesis 37-41. he had a couple of dreams as a teenager that he wouldn't see come to pass for over a decade...but eventually he would see his dreams fulfilled. between the ages of 17 and 30 he would also have the opportunity to interpret other people's dreams and see them come to pass...but for 13 years he waited to have his own realized. and he didn't let go. i think there's a lesson there.
the way i see it, martin luther king's famous speech was "i have a dream," not "i had a dream." have. present tense. what if he had let his dream go? what if joseph had let his dream go? think of any revolutionary, student, explorer, scientist, mother. what if they had let their dreams go?
don't let go of your dreams. don't let anyone steal them from you. they're yours. if you dreamed them, believe them. having to wait doesn't make them any less valid. and if they're good, and won't hurt anyone else, then trust they're from God and not just some fanciful pipedream. patiently pursue them. that might mean waiting, but as my pastor says, "wait for God's timing in your life! many things that will be a blessing to you later on can be a curse to you now if you get to them too soon." so don't lose hope; take heart and have faith. God has your dreams in His hand. He hasn't forgotten about them.
david said, "my times are in Your Hand" (psalm 31:15). i think this includes my dreams. the knowledge of that is sweet.
7/29/2011
7/27/2011
meant to be?
when you hear the expression "meant to be," what does it make you think of?
the eventful merger of 2 mediocre businesses into a dominant corporation that fortune 500 declares at the end of the first quarter "it was meant to be?"
some unique flavours that you've experimented with and decide to unveil for a dinner party, that garnishes you so many compliments that you know the menu combinations were "meant to be?"
the relationship where the pieces just seem to fall into place, where every onlooker endorses the union to be "meant to be?"
i'm no expert on any of the above. i don't follow rankings or annual business reports. my domestic skills are more in the cleaning department than the food preparation or entertaining fields. and my marital status would seem to indicate i don't have a great deal of experience in dating or securing 'the one.'
the thing is, no matter what it is, this phrase typically makes sense to the event, or experiment, or endorsement to which it's ascribed, though perhaps depending on who's doing the assigning. it's easy for someone on the outside to say something's "meant to be" when the something has time and space on its side, meaning there's a bit of history and distance and its feasibility is evident. it's also easy to say when you're the one saying it about your own event, experiment, or endorsement. of course you're going to say it was "meant to be."
basically, we say something's "meant to be" when it works. it might even defy reason and be precedent setting. it might even defy explanation. it might not even make any sense to someone on the ouside. but when you see the workability of the something that's "meant to be," you just know that it is.
if you've read any of my blogs, you'll know that the topic of being is something i address a lot. this "meant to be" expression has been knocking for days, demanding an audience. i gave it some attention today. as illustrated, while i'm no expert, i'm a firm believer that some things and some people are "meant to be." and when you know, you know. and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. i might have a hard time convincing you, and vice versa, but this doesn't diminish the "meant-to-be-ness" of something. and eventually, time and space will validate or invalidate anyway. the merger will destruct or dominate. the ingredients will combust or combine. the relationship will end or endure.
"meant to be?" well, it is a process--but it's a process whose workability and feasibility should be demonstrated eventually and regularly. i don't think it ever happens overnight, but having said that if it's "meant to be," it shouldn't be all about making it work--some days, sure. but the ebbs and flows of relationships--corporate, foods, people--should eventually yield the feeling that there is no question about whether it's meant to be. making it work? to me that implies that you're forcing it. and i feel flowing is more important that forcing. and let me just qualify my statements by saying that i doubt any relationship is always easy, so when i say it shouldn't be alllll about making it work, what i mean to acknowledge is that i know relationships take work to get them right. they are a process. but eventually and regularly you get the feeling that the unadulterated meant-to-be-ness outweighs the aggravating sense of just making it work.
about being, hamlet famously asked "to be, or not to be: that is the question." when it comes to living and being, existing and experiencing, i was meant to be. you were meant to be. i can't pair companies, or ingredients, or people, but i can say that if you are breathing you should be being. and you're a process. i know some days it's purely about surviving and keeping it together, but really, this life is about thriving and giving someone else a reason to thrive. throw yourself into living and your purpose will reveal itself. your fulfillment will come.
the way i see it, for the purposes of this entry, hamlet's question is rhetorical. you are meant to live. you are meant to be. maybe those companies, or those flavours, or those people aren't...but you are. period.
the eventful merger of 2 mediocre businesses into a dominant corporation that fortune 500 declares at the end of the first quarter "it was meant to be?"
some unique flavours that you've experimented with and decide to unveil for a dinner party, that garnishes you so many compliments that you know the menu combinations were "meant to be?"
the relationship where the pieces just seem to fall into place, where every onlooker endorses the union to be "meant to be?"
i'm no expert on any of the above. i don't follow rankings or annual business reports. my domestic skills are more in the cleaning department than the food preparation or entertaining fields. and my marital status would seem to indicate i don't have a great deal of experience in dating or securing 'the one.'
the thing is, no matter what it is, this phrase typically makes sense to the event, or experiment, or endorsement to which it's ascribed, though perhaps depending on who's doing the assigning. it's easy for someone on the outside to say something's "meant to be" when the something has time and space on its side, meaning there's a bit of history and distance and its feasibility is evident. it's also easy to say when you're the one saying it about your own event, experiment, or endorsement. of course you're going to say it was "meant to be."
basically, we say something's "meant to be" when it works. it might even defy reason and be precedent setting. it might even defy explanation. it might not even make any sense to someone on the ouside. but when you see the workability of the something that's "meant to be," you just know that it is.
if you've read any of my blogs, you'll know that the topic of being is something i address a lot. this "meant to be" expression has been knocking for days, demanding an audience. i gave it some attention today. as illustrated, while i'm no expert, i'm a firm believer that some things and some people are "meant to be." and when you know, you know. and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. i might have a hard time convincing you, and vice versa, but this doesn't diminish the "meant-to-be-ness" of something. and eventually, time and space will validate or invalidate anyway. the merger will destruct or dominate. the ingredients will combust or combine. the relationship will end or endure.
"meant to be?" well, it is a process--but it's a process whose workability and feasibility should be demonstrated eventually and regularly. i don't think it ever happens overnight, but having said that if it's "meant to be," it shouldn't be all about making it work--some days, sure. but the ebbs and flows of relationships--corporate, foods, people--should eventually yield the feeling that there is no question about whether it's meant to be. making it work? to me that implies that you're forcing it. and i feel flowing is more important that forcing. and let me just qualify my statements by saying that i doubt any relationship is always easy, so when i say it shouldn't be alllll about making it work, what i mean to acknowledge is that i know relationships take work to get them right. they are a process. but eventually and regularly you get the feeling that the unadulterated meant-to-be-ness outweighs the aggravating sense of just making it work.
about being, hamlet famously asked "to be, or not to be: that is the question." when it comes to living and being, existing and experiencing, i was meant to be. you were meant to be. i can't pair companies, or ingredients, or people, but i can say that if you are breathing you should be being. and you're a process. i know some days it's purely about surviving and keeping it together, but really, this life is about thriving and giving someone else a reason to thrive. throw yourself into living and your purpose will reveal itself. your fulfillment will come.
the way i see it, for the purposes of this entry, hamlet's question is rhetorical. you are meant to live. you are meant to be. maybe those companies, or those flavours, or those people aren't...but you are. period.
7/06/2011
pop the question
have you ever asked a question that you already knew the answer to? have you ever asked a question but didn't want the answer? have you ever not asked the question begging to be asked? have you ever asked the wrong question? have you ever asked a question and not gotten an answer? have you ever asked the question begging not to be asked?
do you love me? are you moving? i should ask how she's doing, but i can't. oh, are you expecting? are you coming? have you put on weight?
questions are curious things. as a part of speech, it is a linguistic expression that can be either interrogative or an imperative statement. whether framed as a question or a command, both of these require an answer. for instance, what did you do yesterday? or, tell me what you did yesterday.
then there's the rhetorical question, that gets asked in an effort to persuade--or possibly dissuade--where an answer is not only not expected, it's often not wanted, because it's meant to make you think...not speak.
there's another form of questioning that doesn't require a verbal answer, and it's those questions that only require an action. if i ask you what you're doing tomorrow, you can answer by shrugging your shoulders to suggest that you don't know. or if i ask you if you're coming tomorrow, you can indicate your answer by nodding or shaking your head.
by extension, there are times when you ask a question and all you get in response is a hmmph, or an ugh, or a sigh, or some other unintelligible noise, or a yawn, or an mmm hmm...not actions like i just highlighted, but neither are they answers requiring language in the sense of words.
this little foray is the result of hearing something yesterday, which propelled my mind in the direction that just solicited the foregoing statements. "language was invented to ask questions." i thought this was brilliant so i began writing this blog entry. then at exactly this juncture in my writing, i googled the quote to find out who said it. american social writer and philosopher eric hoffer did, and he continues: "answers may be given by grunts and gestures, but questions must be spoken. humanness came of age when man asked the first question. social stagnation results not from a lack of answers but from the absence of the impulse to ask questions."
i'm not going to unpack what he said anymore than i already unkowingly did in my first few paragraphs, because it's pretty self-evident, and i'm not especially interested in the latter part anyway--except to elaborate by saying that i agree with my pastor when he says it's ok to ask questions. we're only human. we don't have all the answers. we need to ask questions. i think asking questions means your head's in the game or that you at least have some interest in what's being played out. but i should qualify my statement and say that if you ask questions just to be confrontational, or antagonistic, or to play devil's advocate with no impulse to be useful or instructional, then keep quiet with your questions. please, please, please stir your pot somewhere else :-)
now if you're looking for something overtly biblical in this blog entry, here it is. think of one of the greatest questions in the bible from one who posed many. job asked, "if a man dies, will he live again?" and, if the bible says to always be prepared to give an answer for the reason for the hope i have, then it's safe to infer a question has been asked. so, my point is that asking questions is healthy. it shows you're alive and not stagnant...oh, and ps: the answer to job's question is yes :-) message me at t-lstewart@hotmail.com if you wanna know more about that! oh, and double ps: the hope i have is because i get abundant life now and eternal life later...and the whole dying and living again, and hope of eternal life is all connected. so, again, message me if you wanna know more :-)
but, it's the first 2 statements that got this ball rolling. "language was invented to ask questions. answers may be given by grunts and gestures, but questions must be spoken." i know i've taken a bit to get here, but i operate sequentially :-) and in this operation we come full circle...
the way i see it, we've all asked a question we know the answer to. we've all asked a question we didn't want the answer to. we've all not asked the question begging to be asked. we've all asked the wrong question. we've all asked a question and not gotten an answer. we've all asked the question begging not to be asked.
and we should. i won't repeat any of what i've already said, except to say that sometimes it's not necessarily the answers that are important; it's the asking. it's knowing what questions to ask. there's an expression that says "inquiring minds want to know." knowing doesn't mean always getting the answer you want, but part of the knowing is asking the question, which can be just as telling, promising, clear, constructive, instructive--and so on--as the answer.
i recently prayed a prayer. i didn't ask God for all the answers, because really, sometimes i just don't need to know, and if i knew, maybe that wouldn't good for me. but i did ask God to help me ask the right questions. and i think that's part of the answer to our foibles and faux pas. i hear parents say to their children who are learning to talk, "use your words." i think it applies here. don't assume anything; it makes an ahem out of u and me ;-) ask questions. and don't be afraid of looking stupid. really, there are no wrong questions...unless, of course, you're asking someone who's a little chunky if they're expecting :-)
so, pop the question. your asking might be the answer, even if you don't get the answer you're anticipating...
do you love me? are you moving? i should ask how she's doing, but i can't. oh, are you expecting? are you coming? have you put on weight?
questions are curious things. as a part of speech, it is a linguistic expression that can be either interrogative or an imperative statement. whether framed as a question or a command, both of these require an answer. for instance, what did you do yesterday? or, tell me what you did yesterday.
then there's the rhetorical question, that gets asked in an effort to persuade--or possibly dissuade--where an answer is not only not expected, it's often not wanted, because it's meant to make you think...not speak.
there's another form of questioning that doesn't require a verbal answer, and it's those questions that only require an action. if i ask you what you're doing tomorrow, you can answer by shrugging your shoulders to suggest that you don't know. or if i ask you if you're coming tomorrow, you can indicate your answer by nodding or shaking your head.
by extension, there are times when you ask a question and all you get in response is a hmmph, or an ugh, or a sigh, or some other unintelligible noise, or a yawn, or an mmm hmm...not actions like i just highlighted, but neither are they answers requiring language in the sense of words.
this little foray is the result of hearing something yesterday, which propelled my mind in the direction that just solicited the foregoing statements. "language was invented to ask questions." i thought this was brilliant so i began writing this blog entry. then at exactly this juncture in my writing, i googled the quote to find out who said it. american social writer and philosopher eric hoffer did, and he continues: "answers may be given by grunts and gestures, but questions must be spoken. humanness came of age when man asked the first question. social stagnation results not from a lack of answers but from the absence of the impulse to ask questions."
i'm not going to unpack what he said anymore than i already unkowingly did in my first few paragraphs, because it's pretty self-evident, and i'm not especially interested in the latter part anyway--except to elaborate by saying that i agree with my pastor when he says it's ok to ask questions. we're only human. we don't have all the answers. we need to ask questions. i think asking questions means your head's in the game or that you at least have some interest in what's being played out. but i should qualify my statement and say that if you ask questions just to be confrontational, or antagonistic, or to play devil's advocate with no impulse to be useful or instructional, then keep quiet with your questions. please, please, please stir your pot somewhere else :-)
now if you're looking for something overtly biblical in this blog entry, here it is. think of one of the greatest questions in the bible from one who posed many. job asked, "if a man dies, will he live again?" and, if the bible says to always be prepared to give an answer for the reason for the hope i have, then it's safe to infer a question has been asked. so, my point is that asking questions is healthy. it shows you're alive and not stagnant...oh, and ps: the answer to job's question is yes :-) message me at t-lstewart@hotmail.com if you wanna know more about that! oh, and double ps: the hope i have is because i get abundant life now and eternal life later...and the whole dying and living again, and hope of eternal life is all connected. so, again, message me if you wanna know more :-)
but, it's the first 2 statements that got this ball rolling. "language was invented to ask questions. answers may be given by grunts and gestures, but questions must be spoken." i know i've taken a bit to get here, but i operate sequentially :-) and in this operation we come full circle...
the way i see it, we've all asked a question we know the answer to. we've all asked a question we didn't want the answer to. we've all not asked the question begging to be asked. we've all asked the wrong question. we've all asked a question and not gotten an answer. we've all asked the question begging not to be asked.
and we should. i won't repeat any of what i've already said, except to say that sometimes it's not necessarily the answers that are important; it's the asking. it's knowing what questions to ask. there's an expression that says "inquiring minds want to know." knowing doesn't mean always getting the answer you want, but part of the knowing is asking the question, which can be just as telling, promising, clear, constructive, instructive--and so on--as the answer.
i recently prayed a prayer. i didn't ask God for all the answers, because really, sometimes i just don't need to know, and if i knew, maybe that wouldn't good for me. but i did ask God to help me ask the right questions. and i think that's part of the answer to our foibles and faux pas. i hear parents say to their children who are learning to talk, "use your words." i think it applies here. don't assume anything; it makes an ahem out of u and me ;-) ask questions. and don't be afraid of looking stupid. really, there are no wrong questions...unless, of course, you're asking someone who's a little chunky if they're expecting :-)
so, pop the question. your asking might be the answer, even if you don't get the answer you're anticipating...
6/18/2011
the art of forgiveness
there's a place in fredericton i frequent called the green. it's on the banks of the st. john river, which runs through the city, dividing the north and the south sides. a few days ago, i happened to notice on the bench beside me a note from ron to patsy. you'll notice it says "forgive me," "come home," "i love you."
ron also adds, "i need you."
on my next visit to the green i sat on a different bench, finding a similar, roughly written note. remembering the one from the other day, i decided to investigate the other benches. what follows are a series of 4 more pictures from 4 other benches...take a look...
i don't know what ron has done, what mess and hurt and pain and distrust he has caused. i don't know if patsy has forgiven him. maybe some who know the story would say ron doesn't deserve forgiveness. maybe patsy hates him for what he did. and maybe ron hates himself doesn't even believe he deserves forgiveness. it's hard to say. i'm not so much interested in how ron and patsy got to this point, but i would be curious to know where they stand today. did patsy show mercy and forgive? maybe she's not there yet, because let's be honest, knowing you need to doesn't make it any easier. and what about has ron? has he forgiven himself?
juxtaposed with my all too poignant discovery of these notes was my reading of the shack this week--a brilliant book i got for my birthday from suzie-k. people like eugene peterson (the writer of the message bible translation) are saying "this book has the potential to do for our generation what john bunyan's pilgrim's progress did for his. it's that good!" i don't want to spoil your reading of it--and while there are some passages that are 'different' to swallow (you'll see what i mean when you read it)--the overall taste is very intellectually and spiritually palatable and pleasing. without taking away from the book, but adding to this entry, there is a passage that smacks of what this world needs and needs to do more of...which is to forgive and be forgiven...i've abbreviated the section for length, and so you can't discern entirely what's happening...
"to forgive [...] is [...] to release [...] forgiveness is not about forgetting [...] it's about letting go of another person's throat [...]
so what then? i just forgive [...] and everything is okay, and we become buddies?" [...]
forgiveness is first for you, the forgiver [...] to release you from something that will eat you alive, that will destroy your joy and your ability to love fully and openly [...] take on the nature that finds more power in love and forgiveness than hate [...]
so forgiveness does not require me to pretend what he did never happened? [...] it feels like if i forgive this guy he gets off free. how do i excuse what he did? [...]
forgiveness does not excuse anything [...] the last thing this man is, is free [...] what he did was terrible [...] and anger is the right response to something that is so wrong. but don't let the anger and pain and loss you feel prevent you from forgiving him and removing your hands from around his neck [...] you may have to declare your forgiveness a hundred times the first day and the second day, but the third day will be less and each day after, until one day you realize that you have forgiven completely. and then one day you will pray for his wholeness and give him over to me so that my love will burn from his life every vestige of corruption [...]"ron's notes on the park benches are pretty rough. they kind of speak to the mess that has no doubt been created by whatever he has done. but ron has asked for forgiveness. that doesn't always happen in this day and age. or, asking for forgiveness is abused by the one forgiven who turns around and does the same thing over and over again. it's impossible to say what side of the fence--or park bench--ron's on. and it's impossible to know if patsy has released him, thereby releasing herself from the hurt he has caused her. i'd like to think she has, but maybe she's not there yet...
forgiveness is a creative work that's often messy, but the end result is a work of art in my life. think of paint colours being mixed on a palette. or a lump of wet, grey clay that hasn't been molded. it's not art in the sense of what you'd see at the louvre, or the met, or the guggenheim. it's art in the sense of the beautiful release and possible redemption it creates. forgiveness creates an opportunity to let go and move on...there's no promise that the process itself is beautiful--it can be an agonizing and exhausting process actually--but the end result always is beautiful, especially when your aesthetic sense becomes one of emotional release instead of intellectual retention...in other words, when you make the decision to let it go instead of hang on to it.
art is defined as the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance. looked at from this vantage point, ron's asking for forgiveness looks like he produced an opportunity for patsy to forgive him. the reality is that the beautiful expression will ultimately come from patsy and be extended to ron. when i forgive the one who wrongs me, this is no ordinary significance, but is that quality of creation that allows me to put it out there and walk away free. the art of forgiveness is not the messy asking by the one who did the wrong. the art of forgiveness is that the forgiver just created a beautiful and appealing and no insignificant opportunity for freedom.
so...let it go. not because it didn't hurt, or because you are able to forget the details or the pain, or because you believe it won't happen again. let it go because you will begin to see differently. and watch the work of art that's wrought by releasing your strangle hold on that person and the pain in your past...
let it go.
6/03/2011
grace-us sakes!
"and I will pour out a spirit of grace..." (zechariah 12:10, nlt).
the other morning i woke with an expression running through my head...grace us with Your presence...
it was sunday when i had this thought. on facebook and twitter i was getting people's updates about being excited to go to church, people happy it was sunday, people looking forward to the day, and so on. in church circles, people often quote verses about being glad to go into the house of the Lord, about one day with the Lord being better than a thousand elsewhere, etc., and songs get sung at the start of service inviting God to meet with us, like "welcome into this place." when we pray in a service, we invite God's presence to fill and saturate and inundate the building and our being.
in effect, we're asking God to grace us with His presence. now, make no mistake, He needs no invitation since He's everywhere present and nowhere absent, but in our limited way of expressing ourselves, we ask God to honour us with His presence...which He does...over and over again...gracious sakes, He's generous with His grace :-)
but this figure of speech struck me in a more profound way this morning, because really, it's what God does over and over again...He literally graces us with His presence. not just gracing us with His presence by merely and predictably showing up in a service or when we need Him, but by making grace available to us.
the way i see it, it's like He stands with a big bucket full of grace and it washes over us time and time again. time and time again He gives us what we don't deserve. the bible says "He gives more grace" (james 4:6). He actually graces us when we meet with Him! think about it. He applies His grace to our lives like a covering...not so that we can keep doing the same stupid things over and over again and expect to be forgiven, thereby taking His grace for granted and abusing it, but so that we'll be kept from doing the same things over and over again, all the while knowing that if we slip, He'll be there to catch us. so, while His grace is provided to us and poured out on us--just to be clear--it's not provisional in that it's a license to do whatever we want.
there's a song--which i could have googled to verify and to ensure accuracy, because c'mon, of course the internet is accurate :-)--but the verse ends with "grace flows down and covers me." it's title might even be "grace flows down," i think. and that's the point. grace flows down and covers. and one more time i'm graced by His presence.
the other morning i woke with an expression running through my head...grace us with Your presence...
it was sunday when i had this thought. on facebook and twitter i was getting people's updates about being excited to go to church, people happy it was sunday, people looking forward to the day, and so on. in church circles, people often quote verses about being glad to go into the house of the Lord, about one day with the Lord being better than a thousand elsewhere, etc., and songs get sung at the start of service inviting God to meet with us, like "welcome into this place." when we pray in a service, we invite God's presence to fill and saturate and inundate the building and our being.
in effect, we're asking God to grace us with His presence. now, make no mistake, He needs no invitation since He's everywhere present and nowhere absent, but in our limited way of expressing ourselves, we ask God to honour us with His presence...which He does...over and over again...gracious sakes, He's generous with His grace :-)
but this figure of speech struck me in a more profound way this morning, because really, it's what God does over and over again...He literally graces us with His presence. not just gracing us with His presence by merely and predictably showing up in a service or when we need Him, but by making grace available to us.
the way i see it, it's like He stands with a big bucket full of grace and it washes over us time and time again. time and time again He gives us what we don't deserve. the bible says "He gives more grace" (james 4:6). He actually graces us when we meet with Him! think about it. He applies His grace to our lives like a covering...not so that we can keep doing the same stupid things over and over again and expect to be forgiven, thereby taking His grace for granted and abusing it, but so that we'll be kept from doing the same things over and over again, all the while knowing that if we slip, He'll be there to catch us. so, while His grace is provided to us and poured out on us--just to be clear--it's not provisional in that it's a license to do whatever we want.
there's a song--which i could have googled to verify and to ensure accuracy, because c'mon, of course the internet is accurate :-)--but the verse ends with "grace flows down and covers me." it's title might even be "grace flows down," i think. and that's the point. grace flows down and covers. and one more time i'm graced by His presence.
6/01/2011
"be in this place." pt. 2: on being and becoming
"it's my life. it's now or never. i ain't gonna live forever. i just want to live while i'm alive. it's my life. don't you forget. it's my life. it never ends."
"i fly with the stars in the skies. i am no longer trying to survive. i believe that life is a prize, but to live doesn't mean you're alive."
perhaps you can identify these 2 songs that are separated by a bit more than a decade and a couple generations...if you can't it's no big deal...i just want to parse a couple sentences--or at the very least point them out to get you thinking and hopefully get you to weigh in on 'em...can you guess which ones?
i'll give you a minute to read back through...60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1...
got 'em?
i just want to live while i'm alive and to live doesn't mean you're alive.
i just want to live while i'm alive implies that being alive relates to existence, while wanting to live relates to wanting to experience life. so, i just want to experience life while i'm existing.
to live doesn't mean you're alive implies that just because you're in a state of existence in no way guarantees that you're experiencing life to its fullest. so, to be existing doesn't mean you're experiencing.
so much for not being redundant with this idea saying the same thing, said differently :-) at any rate, what both songs capture and convey is that living and being alive are existence and experience oriented. "no kidding," you're thinking...one says, in essence, i want to experience while i'm existing. the other says, existing doesn't mean you're experiencing.
eleanor roosevelt said, "life was meant to be lived, and curiosity must be kept alive. one must never, for whatever reason, turn his back on life." in other words, existence and experience go hand in hand. life was meant to be lived. life was meant to be. it was meant for being. oprah had at least one good thing worth repeating, and that's "live your best life." that kinda sums up what i've said so far...thanks, oprah :-)
there's a related idea going on here, which i've already written about in pt. 1, but here's a brief nod to part 2. the idea is that of being and becoming, and the forces of process and progress. all of these words illustrate existence and experience. the above songs could have easily been written as "i just wanna become while i am being," or "to be doesn't mean you're becoming."
new brunswick's latest initiative for encouraging population growth is the "be...in this place" campaign. the population growth secretariat's website portal provides information on immigrating and settling, living, working, studying, and doing business in new brunswick, boasting that nb is a place where you can be fulfilled, be successful, and explore your passions...where you can be yourself, celebrate your culture, and experience other cultures...where you can be part of a vibrant community and a growing economy. bottom line, it's an invitation to live, exist, and be...it's an invitation to be alive, to experience, to become...
the way i see it, life, living, and being alive are about more than just 'making the best of a situation,' or just 'dealing with the cards you've been handed.' it's not about just surviving, settling, or being resigned to a state of stationary stagnance. it's about embracing challenge as an opportunity to grow. it's about being active. it's about being dynamic, not static. it's about getting your game face on or setting your face like a flint--whatever expression you want to use--and throwing yourself into becoming your best you...your most authentic you...your most fulfilled, successful, explorative, celebratory, experiential, vibrant, growing you...your most alive you...
life is your invitation to be. to exist. it's your invitation to become. to experience. how alive you are depends on how you throw yourself into living. and how you live depends on how alive you want to be. consider life your invitation to be in this place...this place called life...
just live it.
ps: i just started sartre's being and nothingness. expect a part 3 once i work my way through the over 800 pages of dense, yet delightfully literary philosophy :-)
"i fly with the stars in the skies. i am no longer trying to survive. i believe that life is a prize, but to live doesn't mean you're alive."
perhaps you can identify these 2 songs that are separated by a bit more than a decade and a couple generations...if you can't it's no big deal...i just want to parse a couple sentences--or at the very least point them out to get you thinking and hopefully get you to weigh in on 'em...can you guess which ones?
i'll give you a minute to read back through...60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1...
got 'em?
i just want to live while i'm alive and to live doesn't mean you're alive.
i just want to live while i'm alive implies that being alive relates to existence, while wanting to live relates to wanting to experience life. so, i just want to experience life while i'm existing.
to live doesn't mean you're alive implies that just because you're in a state of existence in no way guarantees that you're experiencing life to its fullest. so, to be existing doesn't mean you're experiencing.
so much for not being redundant with this idea saying the same thing, said differently :-) at any rate, what both songs capture and convey is that living and being alive are existence and experience oriented. "no kidding," you're thinking...one says, in essence, i want to experience while i'm existing. the other says, existing doesn't mean you're experiencing.
eleanor roosevelt said, "life was meant to be lived, and curiosity must be kept alive. one must never, for whatever reason, turn his back on life." in other words, existence and experience go hand in hand. life was meant to be lived. life was meant to be. it was meant for being. oprah had at least one good thing worth repeating, and that's "live your best life." that kinda sums up what i've said so far...thanks, oprah :-)
there's a related idea going on here, which i've already written about in pt. 1, but here's a brief nod to part 2. the idea is that of being and becoming, and the forces of process and progress. all of these words illustrate existence and experience. the above songs could have easily been written as "i just wanna become while i am being," or "to be doesn't mean you're becoming."
new brunswick's latest initiative for encouraging population growth is the "be...in this place" campaign. the population growth secretariat's website portal provides information on immigrating and settling, living, working, studying, and doing business in new brunswick, boasting that nb is a place where you can be fulfilled, be successful, and explore your passions...where you can be yourself, celebrate your culture, and experience other cultures...where you can be part of a vibrant community and a growing economy. bottom line, it's an invitation to live, exist, and be...it's an invitation to be alive, to experience, to become...
the way i see it, life, living, and being alive are about more than just 'making the best of a situation,' or just 'dealing with the cards you've been handed.' it's not about just surviving, settling, or being resigned to a state of stationary stagnance. it's about embracing challenge as an opportunity to grow. it's about being active. it's about being dynamic, not static. it's about getting your game face on or setting your face like a flint--whatever expression you want to use--and throwing yourself into becoming your best you...your most authentic you...your most fulfilled, successful, explorative, celebratory, experiential, vibrant, growing you...your most alive you...
life is your invitation to be. to exist. it's your invitation to become. to experience. how alive you are depends on how you throw yourself into living. and how you live depends on how alive you want to be. consider life your invitation to be in this place...this place called life...
just live it.
ps: i just started sartre's being and nothingness. expect a part 3 once i work my way through the over 800 pages of dense, yet delightfully literary philosophy :-)
5/10/2011
love is...bind?
confession...song lyrics are not my strong suit...especially making them out in a song...one of my favourite miss-hearings has to be that of the dido song titled "white flag." i always thought she was saying "i will go down with this ship, and i will poke my eyes out and surrender. there will be no white flag above my door. i'm in love and always will be." well, she's actually saying "and i won't put my hands up and surrender." and for the record, just now as i was googling the lyrics, i see that i'm not the only one who has made this mistake. apparently i don't have to feel as dumb about this one, after seeing similar admissions from other people.
well, i did it again...maybe i should say, "oops, i did it again" :-) this time with a jesus culture song called "let it rain." this one's actually gonna be more embarrassing to admit because it will reveal how stunned i really can be, especially when i knew the title and that the song is about rain. the song starts, "let it rain, let it rain. open the floodgates of heaven. let it rain. i feel the rains of Your love. i feel the winds of Your spirit..." without delaying my embarrassment any longer, when i first heard the words i actually heard and pictured "i feel the reins of Your love."
as you recover from your laughter, let me go on to say that i eventually realized on my own what the right words are. however, every time i hear the song and it comes to that line i still hear and envision reins.
while i'm wrong as far as the song is concerned, i'm actually right where the love of God is concerned. 2 corinthians 5:14 says this: "the love of Christ constrains us." i love that verse. the word constrain, according to the oxford english dictionary, means to compel someone to follow a particular course of action--kind of like the reins i keep seeing and hearing in "let it rain." this isn't the kind of love that overlooks or ignores failures in a 'love is blind' kind of way. rather, it's the kind of love that keeps me from always failing. this kind of love is a keeping, compelling, guiding kind of love. it makes sense then to consider the word origin for constrain...middle english from old frenchconstraindre and from latinconstringere, meaning to 'bind tightly together.' yeah, the love of Christ binds...and that ain't bad :-) love is blind? blinding love? uh uh. i'm talking binding love :-p
no matter which way you look at it, there's a controlling feature about this kind of love...controlling in a good way. whether you're talking about your love for God--ie, your "love of Christ"--or God's love for you--ie, the "love of Christ" for you--there's a controlling, keeping, compelling, guiding force at work. your unadulterated love for God will stop you from doing things that would otherwise disappoint Him...like being unfaithful, for example. and God's matchless, unparalleled, always pursuing love won't relent until you know how serious He is in His love for you...like being faithful even when it's not yet reciprocated. let me just add that control is good...think workplace health and safety controls...think traffic controls...don't get all bent out of shape thinking your independence and identity will be lost...in fact, your independence and identity will be best realized through constraint. rooted and grounded in love (ephesians 3:17), you'll never be more free.
the way i see it, lately and daily i have felt the reins of His love, tugging on my affections and my desires and my passions and my focus to keep me in line...to keep me on course...to remind me "how wide, how long, how high, and how deep His love is" (ephesians 3:18) for me. with that kind of love i can agree with the last part of dido's chorus, "i'm in love and always will be." however, as for the rest, i'm totally waving the white flag of surrender as i surrender to God's binding, matchless, unparalleled, always pursuing love.
well, i did it again...maybe i should say, "oops, i did it again" :-) this time with a jesus culture song called "let it rain." this one's actually gonna be more embarrassing to admit because it will reveal how stunned i really can be, especially when i knew the title and that the song is about rain. the song starts, "let it rain, let it rain. open the floodgates of heaven. let it rain. i feel the rains of Your love. i feel the winds of Your spirit..." without delaying my embarrassment any longer, when i first heard the words i actually heard and pictured "i feel the reins of Your love."
as you recover from your laughter, let me go on to say that i eventually realized on my own what the right words are. however, every time i hear the song and it comes to that line i still hear and envision reins.
while i'm wrong as far as the song is concerned, i'm actually right where the love of God is concerned. 2 corinthians 5:14 says this: "the love of Christ constrains us." i love that verse. the word constrain, according to the oxford english dictionary, means to compel someone to follow a particular course of action--kind of like the reins i keep seeing and hearing in "let it rain." this isn't the kind of love that overlooks or ignores failures in a 'love is blind' kind of way. rather, it's the kind of love that keeps me from always failing. this kind of love is a keeping, compelling, guiding kind of love. it makes sense then to consider the word origin for constrain...middle english from old frenchconstraindre and from latinconstringere, meaning to 'bind tightly together.' yeah, the love of Christ binds...and that ain't bad :-) love is blind? blinding love? uh uh. i'm talking binding love :-p
no matter which way you look at it, there's a controlling feature about this kind of love...controlling in a good way. whether you're talking about your love for God--ie, your "love of Christ"--or God's love for you--ie, the "love of Christ" for you--there's a controlling, keeping, compelling, guiding force at work. your unadulterated love for God will stop you from doing things that would otherwise disappoint Him...like being unfaithful, for example. and God's matchless, unparalleled, always pursuing love won't relent until you know how serious He is in His love for you...like being faithful even when it's not yet reciprocated. let me just add that control is good...think workplace health and safety controls...think traffic controls...don't get all bent out of shape thinking your independence and identity will be lost...in fact, your independence and identity will be best realized through constraint. rooted and grounded in love (ephesians 3:17), you'll never be more free.
the way i see it, lately and daily i have felt the reins of His love, tugging on my affections and my desires and my passions and my focus to keep me in line...to keep me on course...to remind me "how wide, how long, how high, and how deep His love is" (ephesians 3:18) for me. with that kind of love i can agree with the last part of dido's chorus, "i'm in love and always will be." however, as for the rest, i'm totally waving the white flag of surrender as i surrender to God's binding, matchless, unparalleled, always pursuing love.
5/06/2011
the luck of the draw
"today we were unlucky, but remember we only have to be lucky once. you will have to be lucky always."
this was the ira's statement to margaret thatcher, following the failed october 1984 assassination attempt on her life, where they claimed responsibility and promised to try again.
i heard this on cnn the other night, while listening to yet another report on the recent fire fight and kill that claimed the life and secured the death of obl. as soon as i heard the quote, i knew a blog entry would follow. it was such a compelling statement on their position regarding britain's occupation of ireland. disturbing, yes; but compelling. and at first listen, i thought, "how pithy. i don't agree with terrorism, but who can argue with a statement like that? the ira made the claim that they only needed to get it right once. thatcher would have to get it right every time."
the more i thought about this, the more i thought--nay, prayed--that i would get it right every time...that i would get lucky every time...over and over and over and over again...
this isn't a deep foray into the debate between terrorism and the fight on terror, or between luck and skill, but i want to say that like the ecclesiastical writer states, "the fastest runner doesn't always win the race, and the strongest warrior doesn't always win the battle...it is all decided by chance, by being in the right place at the right time." the king james version, which turns 400 years old this year, ends the passage this way: "time and chance happens to us all" (ecclesiastes 9:11).
if chance and being lucky have everything to do with being in the right place at the right time, then unlike the ira, i don't want to just be lucky only once. i want to be lucky every time. i want chance to be on my side every time. i want to be in the right place at the right time every time. i want to be lucky always. that doesn't seem like such a bad thing, especially on the days when i'm not the fastest or the strongest.
in my simple way of thinking, chance and luck are synonyms for God if i'm following Him, because as proverbs 16:9 says, "we can make our plans, but the Lord determines our steps." while "we may throw the dice...the Lord determines how they fall" (proverbs 16:33). every time. always. while He lets me shake and roll, i want to make sure my dice are guided by Him...every time. always.
so how do we make this happen? how can we be in the right place at the right time? well, the bible indicates that our steps are ordered by the Lord and His Word (psalm 37:23 and 119:133). if i want to get it right every time, be lucky every time, have time and chance happen to me in a way that i'm not overcome by setbacks or overwhelmed by a slower pace, then i need to be immersed in His Word...i can pray and talk to God until i'm blue in the face about wanting Him to direct my steps and He might honour that request, but it's more likely to happen when i regularly let the Word of God speak to me by actually reading it and letting it read me.
the way i see it, time and chance are going to happen to me...but i can be in the right place at the right time if i'm letting God order my steps. and my stops. my steps are numbered, according to job 14:16...so He knows exactly where i am, even and especially in those times when i'm commanded to be still, or to wait, or to hold my ground...
so rank me with the iron lady. i want to be lucky always, not just once :-) the idiom "the luck of the draw" works here, which is to win something in a competition where the winner is chosen purely by chance, and not necessarily because they are the fastest or strongest. in keeping with my synonymous association and interpretation of God and chance, i've been chosen purely by God to win--not because i've been predestined as an individual, but because He has promised to guide the steps and the dice and the luck of the draw for everyone who turns to Him and trusts.
the odds are in my favour and i'm favoured to win, not just once, but always :-)
this was the ira's statement to margaret thatcher, following the failed october 1984 assassination attempt on her life, where they claimed responsibility and promised to try again.
i heard this on cnn the other night, while listening to yet another report on the recent fire fight and kill that claimed the life and secured the death of obl. as soon as i heard the quote, i knew a blog entry would follow. it was such a compelling statement on their position regarding britain's occupation of ireland. disturbing, yes; but compelling. and at first listen, i thought, "how pithy. i don't agree with terrorism, but who can argue with a statement like that? the ira made the claim that they only needed to get it right once. thatcher would have to get it right every time."
the more i thought about this, the more i thought--nay, prayed--that i would get it right every time...that i would get lucky every time...over and over and over and over again...
this isn't a deep foray into the debate between terrorism and the fight on terror, or between luck and skill, but i want to say that like the ecclesiastical writer states, "the fastest runner doesn't always win the race, and the strongest warrior doesn't always win the battle...it is all decided by chance, by being in the right place at the right time." the king james version, which turns 400 years old this year, ends the passage this way: "time and chance happens to us all" (ecclesiastes 9:11).
if chance and being lucky have everything to do with being in the right place at the right time, then unlike the ira, i don't want to just be lucky only once. i want to be lucky every time. i want chance to be on my side every time. i want to be in the right place at the right time every time. i want to be lucky always. that doesn't seem like such a bad thing, especially on the days when i'm not the fastest or the strongest.
in my simple way of thinking, chance and luck are synonyms for God if i'm following Him, because as proverbs 16:9 says, "we can make our plans, but the Lord determines our steps." while "we may throw the dice...the Lord determines how they fall" (proverbs 16:33). every time. always. while He lets me shake and roll, i want to make sure my dice are guided by Him...every time. always.
so how do we make this happen? how can we be in the right place at the right time? well, the bible indicates that our steps are ordered by the Lord and His Word (psalm 37:23 and 119:133). if i want to get it right every time, be lucky every time, have time and chance happen to me in a way that i'm not overcome by setbacks or overwhelmed by a slower pace, then i need to be immersed in His Word...i can pray and talk to God until i'm blue in the face about wanting Him to direct my steps and He might honour that request, but it's more likely to happen when i regularly let the Word of God speak to me by actually reading it and letting it read me.
the way i see it, time and chance are going to happen to me...but i can be in the right place at the right time if i'm letting God order my steps. and my stops. my steps are numbered, according to job 14:16...so He knows exactly where i am, even and especially in those times when i'm commanded to be still, or to wait, or to hold my ground...
so rank me with the iron lady. i want to be lucky always, not just once :-) the idiom "the luck of the draw" works here, which is to win something in a competition where the winner is chosen purely by chance, and not necessarily because they are the fastest or strongest. in keeping with my synonymous association and interpretation of God and chance, i've been chosen purely by God to win--not because i've been predestined as an individual, but because He has promised to guide the steps and the dice and the luck of the draw for everyone who turns to Him and trusts.
the odds are in my favour and i'm favoured to win, not just once, but always :-)
5/02/2011
a 'peace' of my mind
i read this at work the other day: peace of mind depends on strength of mind.
it made me think of this: God has given us--not a spirit of fear--but of love, power, and a sound mind.
and this: a double-minded person is unstable in all their ways.
let me share a piece of my mind...t'will be a tad tautological, but i do have a 'peace' to share :-)
to have strength of mind is to have a sound mind, and vice versa. the 2 are relatively synonymous. this refers to self-discipline, self-control, sobriety...all those words that speak of good judgment and discretion...all those words that fly in the face of desire, which is healthy when it causes us to positively act, but is all too often unheedy and over indulgent. for instance, let's consider saying one thing and doing another. i say i'm watching what i eat; what i really mean is that i watch the double cheeseburger meal get smaller on my tray as i take bite after guilty bite, all the while hoping you don't walk in mcdonald's and see me in the act of surfeit again. i said one thing and did another. that's pretty double and unsound, in my humble opinion.
now that's an incredibly reductive definition of being double minded, but still reveals that i don't have the discipline or control that i let on to you i have. i think it's safe to say having 2 minds isn't really a character trait to be proud of. one, it means i'm always speaking out of both sides of my mouth so that i'm attempting to satisfy the doubleness and play both sides of the fence; and two, it puts me in the precarious position of never being taken seriously or being thought of as a phony whose word is as good as a rotten hot dog on a hot summer day. it smacks of disingenuousness, and to be frank, that stinks :-)
so, God has given me a sound mind. this means when i'm of 2 minds, i'm not exercising my God-given reason; in fact, i've veritably forfeited it, and my rationale has been replaced with a reckless resourcefulness in that i'm using my mind in the 2-fold way that's always an option, but always a problem. believe me, it will catch up, and will result in an instability that people will pick up faster than the $20 bill you drop out of your pocket because of your misuse of money...and your mind.
the danger is that if i live like this i'll have no peace...because, like i already intimated, playing both sides of the fence and speaking out of both sides of my mouth means i'm always backtracking, covering my steps, picking up the pieces, trying to keep the story straight, etc. if i'm working the crowd from all angles, eventually it will catch up to me...not to mention the constant sickening feeling of restlessness and peacelessness (ps: i checked...that's a derivative of the adjective peaceless :-) ) over my disingenuous duplicity being found out.
ok, so the way i see it, i need to use the 1 mind i've been given in the way God intended, which means showing some restraint and making the kind of choices that don't contradict. my pastor jokingly but pointedly said yesterday morning that the brain is really a spiritual thing and people should use it more. i think that applies here. if double mindedness is bad and breeds instability, it conversely means that using the mind God gave me to exercise discretion and good judgment will result in balance...balance that doesn't leave me telling the same story a dozen different ways to half a dozen people who have already figured me out and don't respect me or take me seriously anyway.
do yourself a favour and be real the first time around. that way the second and third and fourth times around you won't have to try and remember what your story was the first time and to who. the result will be people who respect you, and an overarching peace and singularity of purpose that will make you that much more reputable in your relationships.
it made me think of this: God has given us--not a spirit of fear--but of love, power, and a sound mind.
and this: a double-minded person is unstable in all their ways.
let me share a piece of my mind...t'will be a tad tautological, but i do have a 'peace' to share :-)
to have strength of mind is to have a sound mind, and vice versa. the 2 are relatively synonymous. this refers to self-discipline, self-control, sobriety...all those words that speak of good judgment and discretion...all those words that fly in the face of desire, which is healthy when it causes us to positively act, but is all too often unheedy and over indulgent. for instance, let's consider saying one thing and doing another. i say i'm watching what i eat; what i really mean is that i watch the double cheeseburger meal get smaller on my tray as i take bite after guilty bite, all the while hoping you don't walk in mcdonald's and see me in the act of surfeit again. i said one thing and did another. that's pretty double and unsound, in my humble opinion.
now that's an incredibly reductive definition of being double minded, but still reveals that i don't have the discipline or control that i let on to you i have. i think it's safe to say having 2 minds isn't really a character trait to be proud of. one, it means i'm always speaking out of both sides of my mouth so that i'm attempting to satisfy the doubleness and play both sides of the fence; and two, it puts me in the precarious position of never being taken seriously or being thought of as a phony whose word is as good as a rotten hot dog on a hot summer day. it smacks of disingenuousness, and to be frank, that stinks :-)
so, God has given me a sound mind. this means when i'm of 2 minds, i'm not exercising my God-given reason; in fact, i've veritably forfeited it, and my rationale has been replaced with a reckless resourcefulness in that i'm using my mind in the 2-fold way that's always an option, but always a problem. believe me, it will catch up, and will result in an instability that people will pick up faster than the $20 bill you drop out of your pocket because of your misuse of money...and your mind.
the danger is that if i live like this i'll have no peace...because, like i already intimated, playing both sides of the fence and speaking out of both sides of my mouth means i'm always backtracking, covering my steps, picking up the pieces, trying to keep the story straight, etc. if i'm working the crowd from all angles, eventually it will catch up to me...not to mention the constant sickening feeling of restlessness and peacelessness (ps: i checked...that's a derivative of the adjective peaceless :-) ) over my disingenuous duplicity being found out.
ok, so the way i see it, i need to use the 1 mind i've been given in the way God intended, which means showing some restraint and making the kind of choices that don't contradict. my pastor jokingly but pointedly said yesterday morning that the brain is really a spiritual thing and people should use it more. i think that applies here. if double mindedness is bad and breeds instability, it conversely means that using the mind God gave me to exercise discretion and good judgment will result in balance...balance that doesn't leave me telling the same story a dozen different ways to half a dozen people who have already figured me out and don't respect me or take me seriously anyway.
do yourself a favour and be real the first time around. that way the second and third and fourth times around you won't have to try and remember what your story was the first time and to who. the result will be people who respect you, and an overarching peace and singularity of purpose that will make you that much more reputable in your relationships.
4/18/2011
getting connected
i went to the home going celebration for my boss's mom last week. something the officiating minister said stuck with me: "accumulations and accomplishments aren't what matter; relationships matter."
because of the way my brain works, i modified his thought: it's not about accumulations and accomplishments; it's about attachments.
stuff is nice. so's being successful. those things aren't wrong. we ought to work hard to have and achieve. but when we breathe our last breath, hopefully we'll be known for who we were in our connections with faith, family, and friends, and not for all stuff we acquired and the rungs we climbed.
as for accumulations, and having stuff, i find it interesting that a synonym is trappings. how apropos. especially in this day and age where some people have more credit cards than common sense, and their goods and their monthly statements increase simultaneously. i think our stuff has the unique ability to trap us. one of my favourite books is about a man named henry david thoreau. it's a real life account of how one man fled the busyness of mid-1800 new england society to go to walden pond. here, he was determined to overcome the desperate and materialistic obstacles of obtaining more, by becoming content with less. he had observed that people were living lives of resentment and seemingly bitter longing for the things they had not yet obtained. people were no longer asking what they needed to live, but were living hurried and wasted lives (174), all in the attempt to "get into business" and "out of debt" (110). thoreau concluded that people had become so caught up in the rat race of 'getting' that they were now doing penance for these things (108), becoming owned by the very things they were trying to own. things 'gotten' had gotten the 'getter,' leading thoreau to believe that in the end "the more you have...the poorer you are" (154).
thoreau talks at length about how people were spending the best part of their lives earning and obtaining "in order to enjoy a questionable liberty during the least part" of their lives (145). he had a keen interest in the way his neighbours were spending their lives (355), in exchange for a kind of slavery to things, understanding that the pursuit for things helped to keep civilization "poor as long as they live" (127). think about all the stuff you have. was every purchase wise? now think about your debt. can you afford to not work? probably not. our stuff owns us.
as for accomplishments, and being successful, too many people put too much stock in climbing corporate and company rungs. advancing is good, but many times these promotions are at the expense of people...the people who should matter more than the new placement or position. sometimes i think i accomplish a great deal, but get nothing done. what i mean by that is i have this checklist, and i'm really diligent at making sure i'm accomplished and successful at the end of the day, but i've done nothing to secure my position with my posse. all i'm saying is don't forget your people.
which brings me to attachments. and not to things or ambitions. i can accumulate and accomplish my life away and be so full, yet be so empty. my warehouses might be filled to the brim and i have no one to share it with because i've alienated myself from the things that really count...faith, family, friends. that's where my investments need to be. those investments are wise. my attachments should get the best of my time, talent, and treasure.
now, you'll notice that i spent the most time talking about accumulations. that's because i think that's what gets us most distracted...especially my generation...and it affects our drive to be accomplished and, in turn, our attachment (or should i say lack of attachment) to people. it's seldom that what we acquire or how far we advance ever suffers. we garner and we make great gains at the expense of, well, what actually matters in this life.
here's what the bible has to say about all of this, found in luke 12: "life doesn't consist in the abundance of things that we possess...the ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: and he thought to himself, 'what will i do, because i don't have room for all my crops?' and he said, 'here's what i'll do: i will tear down my barns and build bigger ones. then i'll have room for all my stuff. and i will say to my soul, "soul, you have lots of stuff stored for many years; now take it easy."' but God said to him, 'you fool! you will die this very night; then who will get everything you worked for?' yes, a person is a fool to store up earthly wealth but not have a rich relationship with God."
notice that the rich man 'thinks to himself' and he 'says to his soul.' not to a friend. not to a family member. maybe, just maybe, he had been so absorbed in the abundance of things that he shut people out. maybe. and even if we give him the benefit of doubt that he had people, it's telling that the man opts to build bigger barns than share with the people in his life. but then God asks him what he's going to do with all his stuff since his death is pending. if the rich man had people in his life, maybe God wouldn't be asking the question. maybe. and of course, made plain is the fact that the most important thing in life should be the attachment to God and faith. but i think there's enough implied in this passage to also suggest the importance of people, not possessing things. just a thought.
the passage--and the crux of this entry--is later explained with this verse: where your treasure is, there will your heart be.
the way i see it, i need to make sure that i'm not so absorbed with self-aggrandizement that my getting and my ground gaining has a choke hold on me. i don't want to be known by the things i did or didn't have, or the positions i did or didn't hold; i want to be known by my connections to faith, family, friends. i want to be connected to what counts in this life so that my investments are wise and get me a good return in life and in the life to come :-)
and one final point to ponder...
"wisdom [is] the principal thing; [therefore] get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding" (proverbs 4:7).
because of the way my brain works, i modified his thought: it's not about accumulations and accomplishments; it's about attachments.
stuff is nice. so's being successful. those things aren't wrong. we ought to work hard to have and achieve. but when we breathe our last breath, hopefully we'll be known for who we were in our connections with faith, family, and friends, and not for all stuff we acquired and the rungs we climbed.
as for accumulations, and having stuff, i find it interesting that a synonym is trappings. how apropos. especially in this day and age where some people have more credit cards than common sense, and their goods and their monthly statements increase simultaneously. i think our stuff has the unique ability to trap us. one of my favourite books is about a man named henry david thoreau. it's a real life account of how one man fled the busyness of mid-1800 new england society to go to walden pond. here, he was determined to overcome the desperate and materialistic obstacles of obtaining more, by becoming content with less. he had observed that people were living lives of resentment and seemingly bitter longing for the things they had not yet obtained. people were no longer asking what they needed to live, but were living hurried and wasted lives (174), all in the attempt to "get into business" and "out of debt" (110). thoreau concluded that people had become so caught up in the rat race of 'getting' that they were now doing penance for these things (108), becoming owned by the very things they were trying to own. things 'gotten' had gotten the 'getter,' leading thoreau to believe that in the end "the more you have...the poorer you are" (154).
thoreau talks at length about how people were spending the best part of their lives earning and obtaining "in order to enjoy a questionable liberty during the least part" of their lives (145). he had a keen interest in the way his neighbours were spending their lives (355), in exchange for a kind of slavery to things, understanding that the pursuit for things helped to keep civilization "poor as long as they live" (127). think about all the stuff you have. was every purchase wise? now think about your debt. can you afford to not work? probably not. our stuff owns us.
as for accomplishments, and being successful, too many people put too much stock in climbing corporate and company rungs. advancing is good, but many times these promotions are at the expense of people...the people who should matter more than the new placement or position. sometimes i think i accomplish a great deal, but get nothing done. what i mean by that is i have this checklist, and i'm really diligent at making sure i'm accomplished and successful at the end of the day, but i've done nothing to secure my position with my posse. all i'm saying is don't forget your people.
which brings me to attachments. and not to things or ambitions. i can accumulate and accomplish my life away and be so full, yet be so empty. my warehouses might be filled to the brim and i have no one to share it with because i've alienated myself from the things that really count...faith, family, friends. that's where my investments need to be. those investments are wise. my attachments should get the best of my time, talent, and treasure.
now, you'll notice that i spent the most time talking about accumulations. that's because i think that's what gets us most distracted...especially my generation...and it affects our drive to be accomplished and, in turn, our attachment (or should i say lack of attachment) to people. it's seldom that what we acquire or how far we advance ever suffers. we garner and we make great gains at the expense of, well, what actually matters in this life.
here's what the bible has to say about all of this, found in luke 12: "life doesn't consist in the abundance of things that we possess...the ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: and he thought to himself, 'what will i do, because i don't have room for all my crops?' and he said, 'here's what i'll do: i will tear down my barns and build bigger ones. then i'll have room for all my stuff. and i will say to my soul, "soul, you have lots of stuff stored for many years; now take it easy."' but God said to him, 'you fool! you will die this very night; then who will get everything you worked for?' yes, a person is a fool to store up earthly wealth but not have a rich relationship with God."
notice that the rich man 'thinks to himself' and he 'says to his soul.' not to a friend. not to a family member. maybe, just maybe, he had been so absorbed in the abundance of things that he shut people out. maybe. and even if we give him the benefit of doubt that he had people, it's telling that the man opts to build bigger barns than share with the people in his life. but then God asks him what he's going to do with all his stuff since his death is pending. if the rich man had people in his life, maybe God wouldn't be asking the question. maybe. and of course, made plain is the fact that the most important thing in life should be the attachment to God and faith. but i think there's enough implied in this passage to also suggest the importance of people, not possessing things. just a thought.
the passage--and the crux of this entry--is later explained with this verse: where your treasure is, there will your heart be.
the way i see it, i need to make sure that i'm not so absorbed with self-aggrandizement that my getting and my ground gaining has a choke hold on me. i don't want to be known by the things i did or didn't have, or the positions i did or didn't hold; i want to be known by my connections to faith, family, friends. i want to be connected to what counts in this life so that my investments are wise and get me a good return in life and in the life to come :-)
and one final point to ponder...
"wisdom [is] the principal thing; [therefore] get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding" (proverbs 4:7).
works cited
thoreau, henry david. walden and other writings. new york: bantam books, 1854.
4/11/2011
becoming a bender, not a breaker
it's a wonder i have any friends.
i don't do zoos. i don't want to go to disney world. i don't enjoy playing or watching sports. i'm not a video gamer. i won't do semi-tropical/tropical vacations that consist of anything other than sun, sand, and tanning lotion (and a bit of shopping/site seeing...but when i say 'bit,' i mean like 2 hrs worth). i don't like reality tv. i would never do karaoke alone or play charades. i always cheer for the team that no one else is cheering for. i'm noncommittal, not because i think i may get a better offer, but because i'd rather not commit than change my mind and disappoint. i also sometimes drop the ball when it comes to initiating contact and communication in relationships...but, hey, i did say sports aren't my thing :-p
and, here's the kicker...i don't know why everyone doesn't see it the way i do :-)
i love: cbc radio, npr, tie dye, birkenstocks, used book stores, classical music, used books stores that play classical music or cbc or npr, all things bollywood, hours at the library or alone, and 16 lane highways.
and if you don't, it begs the question "why in the world not?????????" :-)
i have friends because they've accepted that i'm not like them. and vice versa. we're not the same. and i've become acclimated to the fact that some of them play sports and want me to go to games and watch a ball being kicked from one end of the field to the other, and that there will probably be something sports-related on the tv when i go over...and try as i might, i can't help it if they like the stupid red sox :-) they've accepted that i don't bend easily...and i've recognized that sometimes i need to bend.
this entry comes about as a result of an interview i heard on cbc the other day about a baby monkey whose mother died. he now has a human caretaker at the zoo where he is. i thought, "i will never see a monkey in a zoo because i hate zoos. i think most of my friends have been and like." then i thought, "the monkey won't survive if he rejects what the human offers in terms of hourly feedings, a watchful eye, and any other care the human administers in the mother's absence. and the human is putting himself out for something that won't really return the favour, at least in the sense that the monkey won't look after him when he's in a senior care facility years from now. and yet his work with primates is likely very rewarding." i also thought, "both are bending in some capacity to accept something other." but neither is becoming the other. nothing is really lost in the exchange. each gets to keep his identity. the monkey is not becoming human, and the human isn't becoming a monkey.
this is how relationships work. they are give and take. you learn to bend or the relationship breaks. i probably won't ever go to a zoo, and my friends might never get my reasons...but i won't guilt my friends into not going or expect them to see it my way. i probably won't ever like reality tv, but that doesn't mean i disrespect all my bachelor/bachelorette, apprentice, cake boss, and idol loving friends even though i don't get the appeal...and relievably they don't expect me to see it their way. goodness, if that was the case, this yankee loving, person who reads newspapers at soccer games wouldn't be allowed around. ever :-)
the thing is, i'm not supposed to like and do and become in the ways you like and do and become. it's about compromise and meeting halfway. by compromise i don't mean that it's about lowering your standards or giving up your identity. the best relationships are complementary, where difference is made up by the other, and similarity is the common stomping ground where we get to explore the ways we're the same. the best relationships aren't about me expecting you to bend. that's where i go wrong. the minute i expect you to see it my way, the fracture occurs. and it's not about me being the 'bigger person,' the 'one who takes the high road,' or the martyr. it's about me getting over myself and pausing to see how you see it :-)
the way i see it...well, i've already said it. and it's the title. bend or break. and just to make my point plain: if i'm expecting you to see it my way, there's a good chance it's likely me who needs to do a bit more bending...not in terms of beliefs, or who i am as a person, or things like that...i just mean in areas of likes and dislikes, what i'm used to or how i do it versus other viable options (like the little monkey 'making do' with the human caretaker), differences and similarities, etc.
i'm no expert, but i speak from experience: bend a bit. it will surprise you how easy it can be. and how little like sacrifice or settling or 'sucking it up' it will feel. and the reward will be healthy attachments...but that's for another blog...be watching :-)
i don't do zoos. i don't want to go to disney world. i don't enjoy playing or watching sports. i'm not a video gamer. i won't do semi-tropical/tropical vacations that consist of anything other than sun, sand, and tanning lotion (and a bit of shopping/site seeing...but when i say 'bit,' i mean like 2 hrs worth). i don't like reality tv. i would never do karaoke alone or play charades. i always cheer for the team that no one else is cheering for. i'm noncommittal, not because i think i may get a better offer, but because i'd rather not commit than change my mind and disappoint. i also sometimes drop the ball when it comes to initiating contact and communication in relationships...but, hey, i did say sports aren't my thing :-p
and, here's the kicker...i don't know why everyone doesn't see it the way i do :-)
i love: cbc radio, npr, tie dye, birkenstocks, used book stores, classical music, used books stores that play classical music or cbc or npr, all things bollywood, hours at the library or alone, and 16 lane highways.
and if you don't, it begs the question "why in the world not?????????" :-)
i have friends because they've accepted that i'm not like them. and vice versa. we're not the same. and i've become acclimated to the fact that some of them play sports and want me to go to games and watch a ball being kicked from one end of the field to the other, and that there will probably be something sports-related on the tv when i go over...and try as i might, i can't help it if they like the stupid red sox :-) they've accepted that i don't bend easily...and i've recognized that sometimes i need to bend.
this entry comes about as a result of an interview i heard on cbc the other day about a baby monkey whose mother died. he now has a human caretaker at the zoo where he is. i thought, "i will never see a monkey in a zoo because i hate zoos. i think most of my friends have been and like." then i thought, "the monkey won't survive if he rejects what the human offers in terms of hourly feedings, a watchful eye, and any other care the human administers in the mother's absence. and the human is putting himself out for something that won't really return the favour, at least in the sense that the monkey won't look after him when he's in a senior care facility years from now. and yet his work with primates is likely very rewarding." i also thought, "both are bending in some capacity to accept something other." but neither is becoming the other. nothing is really lost in the exchange. each gets to keep his identity. the monkey is not becoming human, and the human isn't becoming a monkey.
this is how relationships work. they are give and take. you learn to bend or the relationship breaks. i probably won't ever go to a zoo, and my friends might never get my reasons...but i won't guilt my friends into not going or expect them to see it my way. i probably won't ever like reality tv, but that doesn't mean i disrespect all my bachelor/bachelorette, apprentice, cake boss, and idol loving friends even though i don't get the appeal...and relievably they don't expect me to see it their way. goodness, if that was the case, this yankee loving, person who reads newspapers at soccer games wouldn't be allowed around. ever :-)
the thing is, i'm not supposed to like and do and become in the ways you like and do and become. it's about compromise and meeting halfway. by compromise i don't mean that it's about lowering your standards or giving up your identity. the best relationships are complementary, where difference is made up by the other, and similarity is the common stomping ground where we get to explore the ways we're the same. the best relationships aren't about me expecting you to bend. that's where i go wrong. the minute i expect you to see it my way, the fracture occurs. and it's not about me being the 'bigger person,' the 'one who takes the high road,' or the martyr. it's about me getting over myself and pausing to see how you see it :-)
the way i see it...well, i've already said it. and it's the title. bend or break. and just to make my point plain: if i'm expecting you to see it my way, there's a good chance it's likely me who needs to do a bit more bending...not in terms of beliefs, or who i am as a person, or things like that...i just mean in areas of likes and dislikes, what i'm used to or how i do it versus other viable options (like the little monkey 'making do' with the human caretaker), differences and similarities, etc.
i'm no expert, but i speak from experience: bend a bit. it will surprise you how easy it can be. and how little like sacrifice or settling or 'sucking it up' it will feel. and the reward will be healthy attachments...but that's for another blog...be watching :-)
4/04/2011
determined enough to act
the other day i had to accomplish what seemed to be a daunting task. thinking about it the night before i knew i had to do it, and then again yesterday morning before i got started, i was mildly discouraged. how in the world was i ever going to get the job done? yes, i had all day to do it, being fortunate enough to be able to set the day aside, but i was still overwhelmed at the thought of how i was spending a large part of my saturday...a saturday that was already slated for busyness from 4:30 pm on...
all the details are neither here nor there, but for the sake of context, let me just explain that it involved needing to clean up after an event. again, let's forget the fact that the building actually wasn't a right off this time (either because the crowd was more respectful of the space, or because the various volunteers went out of their way to do more than expected). forget the fact that i managed to do what i needed to do (plus a little extra) in about 5 hours. and let's even forget that i get paid to do what i do.
removing those variables, let's just look at it for what it was: a job that needed done...
like i indicated, when i got in the building, i assessed the situation and found it to not be too bad. however, i had already accepted the fact that the job was mine to do no matter how long it took me or how bad it might be, or how unprepared or ill equipped or unable i felt i was. by the time i entered the building i had already made up my mind that it didn't matter how messy it was, or what i had to do, i was going to get it done. before getting started, while i was finishing a coffee, i tweeted and updated my facebook status to say this: "determination isn't measured by ability but activity. how badly do you want it? get to it. make. it. happen."
that's original, by the way :-) i was thinking about my approach to the situation, that changed when i decided i was determined to get going and get it done. i consider myself a clean person and a decent cleaner, but there are times when i'm faced with a mess that i don't quite know what to use, or what to do...like the time i had to clean coffee off the new carpet--what product? just water? air dry or sponge up the excess? or the time there was wax all over the pews. or the first time big bertha's 18l vacuum cleaner bag needed changed. or at my other job in a busy real estate office, encountering a new variable in a counter offer for a deal that requires filling out paperwork i've never seen, or fielding phone calls from lawyers or bankers who forget i don't know their jargon so i'm not quite sure what it is they need.
you get the point. and you know from experience what i'm talking about. you could weigh in with dozens and dozens of similar instances where you've faced a task, or a situation, or a person, and there are all these variables that make you think you aren't able to meet the demands. and let me just insert that i'm not talking about ability in the sense of talent and knowing what you're good at and concentrating your efforts in the area that matches your abilities. this isn't a blog entry on the merits of talent and ability and doing what you know you're good at and called to do because you have particular strengths.
no, this is an entry just to remind myself that there are going to be times when i'm going to be faced with dealing with an issue that i might have little experience in and possibly no ability, in the sense of aptitude, or skill, or qualification. it might even not only be in an area that's not my forté; it might be in an area of downright weakness! like the time i fixed a broken toilet by googling what to do, getting it wrong, and trying again. and again. i'm not a plumber, and i don't like toilets, but determination got the best of me, instead of the inclination to complain, do nothing, pretend i didn't see it, or pass the buck.
yesterday i learned a lesson before i even got started as i tweeted and updated my facebook status. i got the job done because i got active. my determination to get the job done had nothing to do with ability because really, anybody can wash windows and vacuum the carpet. yesterday it wasn't about being a good cleaner. it wasn't about strengths as a cleaner. it was about being faced with a job and getting active and making it happen. at the end of the 5 hours, my determination wasn't measured by my ability to clean because someone could have done a better job in less amount of time. i know that. my determination was measured by my activity, not my ability.
the way i see it, if i let ability determine my level of determination, there will be things i never attempt that i'd probably end up being pretty successful at if i'd only try. i will be the couch potato, bump on a log, and stick in the mud who critiques other people's ability and activity, who never contributes anything other than a negative commentary. i don't want to be that person.
here's an idiom that gets to the heart of what i'm saying: "where the rubber meets the road." this is the most important point for something, the moment of truth. an athlete can train all day, but the race is where the rubber meets the road. she'll never know how good she really is until she gets active and in motion...until her feet hit the ground running. it's not about how able she is to run the race if the race is never run. it's not about how able i am if i'm not determined to get up and get going. i'm not really determined if i'm not active, no matter how able i am.
i think you get the point, so i'll not labour it any longer :-) i encourage you to act. your determination to act will be met with ability. go for it.
all the details are neither here nor there, but for the sake of context, let me just explain that it involved needing to clean up after an event. again, let's forget the fact that the building actually wasn't a right off this time (either because the crowd was more respectful of the space, or because the various volunteers went out of their way to do more than expected). forget the fact that i managed to do what i needed to do (plus a little extra) in about 5 hours. and let's even forget that i get paid to do what i do.
removing those variables, let's just look at it for what it was: a job that needed done...
like i indicated, when i got in the building, i assessed the situation and found it to not be too bad. however, i had already accepted the fact that the job was mine to do no matter how long it took me or how bad it might be, or how unprepared or ill equipped or unable i felt i was. by the time i entered the building i had already made up my mind that it didn't matter how messy it was, or what i had to do, i was going to get it done. before getting started, while i was finishing a coffee, i tweeted and updated my facebook status to say this: "determination isn't measured by ability but activity. how badly do you want it? get to it. make. it. happen."
that's original, by the way :-) i was thinking about my approach to the situation, that changed when i decided i was determined to get going and get it done. i consider myself a clean person and a decent cleaner, but there are times when i'm faced with a mess that i don't quite know what to use, or what to do...like the time i had to clean coffee off the new carpet--what product? just water? air dry or sponge up the excess? or the time there was wax all over the pews. or the first time big bertha's 18l vacuum cleaner bag needed changed. or at my other job in a busy real estate office, encountering a new variable in a counter offer for a deal that requires filling out paperwork i've never seen, or fielding phone calls from lawyers or bankers who forget i don't know their jargon so i'm not quite sure what it is they need.
you get the point. and you know from experience what i'm talking about. you could weigh in with dozens and dozens of similar instances where you've faced a task, or a situation, or a person, and there are all these variables that make you think you aren't able to meet the demands. and let me just insert that i'm not talking about ability in the sense of talent and knowing what you're good at and concentrating your efforts in the area that matches your abilities. this isn't a blog entry on the merits of talent and ability and doing what you know you're good at and called to do because you have particular strengths.
no, this is an entry just to remind myself that there are going to be times when i'm going to be faced with dealing with an issue that i might have little experience in and possibly no ability, in the sense of aptitude, or skill, or qualification. it might even not only be in an area that's not my forté; it might be in an area of downright weakness! like the time i fixed a broken toilet by googling what to do, getting it wrong, and trying again. and again. i'm not a plumber, and i don't like toilets, but determination got the best of me, instead of the inclination to complain, do nothing, pretend i didn't see it, or pass the buck.
yesterday i learned a lesson before i even got started as i tweeted and updated my facebook status. i got the job done because i got active. my determination to get the job done had nothing to do with ability because really, anybody can wash windows and vacuum the carpet. yesterday it wasn't about being a good cleaner. it wasn't about strengths as a cleaner. it was about being faced with a job and getting active and making it happen. at the end of the 5 hours, my determination wasn't measured by my ability to clean because someone could have done a better job in less amount of time. i know that. my determination was measured by my activity, not my ability.
the way i see it, if i let ability determine my level of determination, there will be things i never attempt that i'd probably end up being pretty successful at if i'd only try. i will be the couch potato, bump on a log, and stick in the mud who critiques other people's ability and activity, who never contributes anything other than a negative commentary. i don't want to be that person.
here's an idiom that gets to the heart of what i'm saying: "where the rubber meets the road." this is the most important point for something, the moment of truth. an athlete can train all day, but the race is where the rubber meets the road. she'll never know how good she really is until she gets active and in motion...until her feet hit the ground running. it's not about how able she is to run the race if the race is never run. it's not about how able i am if i'm not determined to get up and get going. i'm not really determined if i'm not active, no matter how able i am.
i think you get the point, so i'll not labour it any longer :-) i encourage you to act. your determination to act will be met with ability. go for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
"stewart" suite--a bit about me
- t-lstewart
- here, there, everywhere, Canada
- blogger, cancer fighter, cbc-er, cleaner, daughter, doer, dog lover, iphone lover, ipod updater, leukemia fighter, listener, loner, organizer, reader, road tripper, sharer, singer, sister, surfer, texter, thinker, watcher, writer, worker