•

A woman of my age, a single mom...it is usually assumed that I'm divorced.

Why do I simply say "single"?  The answer is complicated, and yet simple.

Since being single, I have discovered being one of the "second class citizens" of the church.  And even among that class, there are some that are lower than others.

I choose to let others assume a "divorce" because in doing that I have gained such humility and understanding for those who are not accepted because of their divorce.

I am not a member of the "I've lived a better life than you" club, nor am I assumed to be.

I am reminded every time somebody "assumes" before they act that I also should not assume before I act.  Many times I fail.

I wrote about a couple of my experiences (one woman scolded me for not sending my kids to see their dad..."their dad is in heaven with Jesus...I would do hard time for sending them there...")

I have been ignored by a particular woman at work who thought I was divorced...until somebody told her otherwise.

Being divorced is not a sin.  Sometimes the reason for the divorce is, but that is not to be assumed.  Grace asks us to assume otherwise.   My silence of the issue of my own singleness reminded me of that grace.

(comments are moderated: you can comment, it just needs to be approved_

• 2 Comments

•

From "Howdie's Theories":

Some people believe that intelligence is innate. You are either gifted or you aren’t. Smart is a property of who you are. Others believe intelligence is malleable.

The first crowd is scared of tasks that cause hard work because expending effort implies you are dumb. If your intelligence is innate, and you want to be intelligent, then you will tempted to be defensive about the state of your intelligence. Not only will you tend to avoid tasks from which you could learn (because the effort expended might make you look/feel dumb) but you may also handicap yourself from success by purposely not putting forth all of your effort. If you tried and failed, but didn’t really care, then you cannot be faulted for being dumb.

I've always thought of it like this:

"Intelligence" is what you have; "smarts" is how you use it.

A person can have a very high IQ, score high in standardized tests, but have so little skill at applying that brain power that he/she ends up being not-very-smart.

on the other hand...

A person can have a very average IQ, hate standardized testing, but have so much "common sense" that she/he grows to be  one of the wisest people around.

It's not what you've got...it's how you use it.

This being Independence Day...

The British military was the pride of the king.  One of the most feared on earth.  Well trained, well supplied...and up against the colonies.

Admittedly they were far from home...but they were fighting a "home-grown" militia.

The minute-men.

Well-trained and skilled members of the military up against farmers who would grab their hunting rifles in a minutes notice.

The "red-coats", using time-honored military "intelligence"

The "militia", using ad-hoc "sneaky" techniques.

It's not what you've got, it's how you use it.
(This post is set for all comments to be moderated until I return from vacation)

• 18 Comments

•

(something to the effect of):  but if the head of the wife is the husband, then how can Christ be her head?  She'll have two bosses?!?!?  How can this be?

Who do you work for?

- My lead teacher is Terri

No...who do you work for?

- The principal of my school is Karen

NO!  Who do you work for?

- My school is overseen by the intermediate school district.

NO!!! WHO DO YOU WORK FOR?

- GRPS.

THANK YOU!!!

~~~~~~

Who is your head at church?

- my group leader is Laura.

No, who is your head at church?

- my pastor is Ken.

No, who is your head at church?

- the board consists of...

NO!   WHO IS YOUR HEAD AT CHURCH?

- Christ.

THANK YOU!!!

~~~~~~

Point being that having a group leader does not keep Christ from being "head", any more than having a lead teacher prevent GRPS from being my employer.

At the same time, my principal is an authority figure - with real authority - who also works for GRPS.

~~~~~~

Likewise, complementarians teach that the husband is the head of the wife; a wife is to submit to her husband as the church submits to Christ.

The husband is an authority figure - but they both "work" for Christ.

(This post is set for all comments to be moderated until I return from vacation...July...something...you can comment, it just needs to be approved.)

•

Leaders of the Presbyterian Church (USA) overturned a long-standing ban on the ordination of gays and lesbians Friday, providing yet the latest example of a religious denomination struggling with how, and whether, to incorporate homosexuality into church life.(...)

I feel proud of my church today," said Lisa Larges, national coordinator for That All May Freely Serve, an organization that advocates for gay equality in the Presbyterian church.

Larges, who lives in San Francisco and attended seminary there, has fought unsuccessfully for more than two decades to become a Presbyterian minister.

"I think a generational shift is what we are witnessing," she said Friday. "There is a whole generation coming of age for whom acceptance is a given. The church is beginning to experience that sea change."

No...no slippery slope at all...

And no generational shift, either.

•

This is sparked by a gender debate, but it became a philosophical question for me all on its own, with its own personal application.

There are three words (alphabetically):

  • authority
  • desire
  • will

Authority simply is the means by which to carry out desire or will (or both).

My question ended up being:  what is the difference between a "will" and a "desire"  (I will put "will" in quotes to distinguish which will I will be writing about:  My "will" will win over my desire for chocolate.)

A desire is that which I want.  Carnal urges.  Feeling of "need" for that which is not a "need".

"Will" is the resolve to follow a path, whether or not that path is that which I desire.

Within a church body (my own experience), the board has a "will" that decides the direction of a church.  A congregation member (me) also has a will that believes the church should be heading in a different direction.

The board "wills" that this particular church has no need for a singles ministry.  The congregation member's "will" (a belief that the church should have a singles ministry conflicts with the board's decision.  Who wins?  After examining self, the congregation members sees that the "will" to have a singles ministry is (in reality) a desire, not a need.  The board's "will" will carry the day.  And that's a good thing.

Another...

The same church board "wills" that a variety of speakers come into the church for special events - including Sunday morning service.  The same congregation member (me) "wills" that she be in a church where the speakers are in agreement with denominational beliefs.  After examining the speakers and topics, the congregation member discovers that roughly half of the speakers are anti-Trinitarian, Oneness Pentecostals and Kansas City Revival members.  Decides that this is not a mere "desire", said congregation member confronts church leaders.  Getting nowhere, brings the matter to a higher authority (denomination leadership).

The first example is a "desire" for a singles ministry, the second is a "resolve" to see Biblical teaching in the church.

Could this have been different?  Sure, it was tempting to push (against the board) for a singles ministry and it would have been easier to cave in on the speaker issue.

Both of these issue illustrate the "will" within a hierarchy (church government)
How to apply this to on a more personal level?

I can apply it to my health journey in two (and opposite) ways.

I have a desire (want) to be more healthy.  The question becomes, do I have the "will" (resolve) to do what I need to do in order to have that desire met?

In the negative...I have a desire for (want) chocolate.  Snickers to be precise.  The question becomes, do I have the "will" to put down the candy bar and eat in a more healthy way?

Both of these  illustrate a struggle within one's self.

Simply put, my "desire" conflicts with my "will".  That which I should do, vs. that which I want to do.

A "feeling of I-want-to-have-that" vs. a lasting resolve to make it happen.

Within a couple?

I believe that Scripture gives a pattern of male leadership within the church and home.

Desires?  Each member of the couple should put the desires of the other in front of their own.  Desires are like preferences - a desire for chocolate cake vs. strawberry.  Vanilla cone vs. a twist.  Blue carpet vs. green.

"Will"?  A lasting resolve for the direction?  That (in a complementarian vs. egalitarian world), is stickier.  In a godly marriage, both spouses will study together and the direction of the home will be supplied by Scripture.  There are times when this will conflict.  Baptist vs. Methodist.  Infant baptism vs. not.
Slightly bigger, but not insurmountable...Pentecostal vs. cessation.   Reformed vs. Arminian.

These (although with great understanding) I believe that a wife can safely submit to her husband as the church submits to Christ (with limits:  I would not follow a husband to a One-ness church or to an Exclusive Psalmsidy  church.)

Larger issues:

  • A spouse that converts to another religion - I would put this under the second illustration of the church board and me.
  • A husband who wishes the wife to fall into sin.  If there is a difference of opinion of "sin", call the pastor.
  • An abusive situation (no matter which spouse and no matter who is being abused).  There is never a reason for abuse and every excuse is a bad one.

Does the husband have the right to "impose" his "will".

The jury is out.  I tend to think "not" - for the following reasons.

  • to have to impose his "will" means the wife is not being submissive in the first place.  If he is not leading into sin, then the wife is in sin.  If he is leading into sin, then the wife has every right to oppose him.
  • Either way, the path is not open warfare...it is Matthew 18.  And counselors.
  • If the "will" is abuse.  No excuse.  Get out.  Now.  Don't wait.  Not for a ride, not for the kids to grow up, not for another day.

This will not solve any debate; it's about definitions...

(This post is not moderated, but the entire blog is set for all comments to be moderated until I am back from vacation.)

•

* Exported from MasterCook *

couscous banana pudding - 5 points, CORE

Amount  Measure       Ingredient -- Preparation Method
--------  ------------  --------------------------------
1                cup  skim milk
1/2                jello fat-free, sugar-free banana cream instant pudding mix (3 1/2 ounces) (info is for 1/4 of a package)
1             medium  banana
1         tablespoon  couscous -- whole grain

boil 2 Tbsp . water in a microwave safe container, add couscous and cover.  Meanwhile, mix the 1/2 package of pudding with the skim milk.  When the couscous has absorbed the water add to the pudding mix.

Slice the banana and layer pudding mix and banana slices in bowl or pretty glass.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Per Serving (excluding unknown items): 285 Calories; 1g Fat (3.3% calories from fat); 11g Protein; 60g Carbohydrate; 3g Dietary Fiber; 4mg Cholesterol; 748mg Sodium.  Exchanges: 1/2 Grain(Starch); 2 Fruit; 1 Non-Fat Milk.

NOTES : This WAS lunch.

Nutr. Assoc. : 0 0 0 0

•

Man injured after run-in with a bear.

literally.

Tim Egan, 53, was riding on Old Stage Road Tuesday afternoon when suddenly a bear appeared in front of him. Egan hit the bear and ended up skidding across the road.

"This bear looked at me with a look of terror on his face and sort of made a noise," said Egan. "I looked at him with a look of terror and we went, 'aaaahhhhh.'"

~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~

Jail visits lead to more time locked up

AUGUSTA -- As soon as an inmate from Vassalboro had a visitor at the Kennebec County jail in Augusta, he was violating a court order.

Marshall Crandall IV, of Vassalboro, was sentenced to serve nine months in jail Tuesday at a Kennebec County Superior Court hearing after he pleaded guilty to three counts of violating conditions of release for having contact with the visitor...the same woman who visited him at the jail.

The violations occurred April 5, 10 and 15, when the woman named as the assault victim visited Crandall, according to jail records.

The woman told the judge on Tuesday the domestic assault was mutual, and that she could have been charged with the same offense in the incident.

"I picked him up three or four times and slammed him on the ground," she said.

~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~

•

It's a frame of mind.  "Thin Within" doesn't refer to "losing weight".  They call it "releasing weight".  The thought being that if you "lose" something, you might find it again.  (And I HAVE found my lost weight again).

When you lose your keys, it means a lack of attention, carelessness.  The object of your search may be right under your nose, waiting for you to pick it up again.

When you "release" something, you let it go.

I'm thinking of those kids' movies where a baby wild thing is found by a family and raised to adulthood and released back into the wild, where it is supposed to be.   You don't expect (or want) those released animals to return to you.

When you "release" a brake, it's so the car can go.  Move forward.  Controlled, yes.  But no longer at a standstill because of what was holding it back.

Both of those thoughts about "release" can be applied to the health journey.

If I "release" my extra poundage into the wild blue yonder, it need to be with the expectation that they will not return to me.  I am purposefully behaving in a way that will send them away.  I am not searching for them.

I am also "releasing" my body from the extra weight.  I move better, feel better, act better.  I am no longer at a standstill because of the extra weight I carry around.

"Losing" weight is a diet, a burden.   It's work.

"Releasing" weight is freedom.  Will it require an effort?  Oh, yes!  But so does backpacking, hiking on a mountain, riding a bike...those are all "freedom" words to me.

From now on, I am not "losing weight"...I am "releasing" it.