- Children remember kindness. Being kind to them is one of the few things you can do that lasts.
- Children learn a few things from you.
- Whether or not to smoke.
- Whether or not to drink.
- Whether or not to be kind to others.
- -- your example matters.
- Parents who do not obsess are happier and their children are happier and just as successful or more successful than obsessive parents children.
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
On raising children -- what economists have to say
I was listening to http://freakonomics.com/2011/08/17/new-freakonomics-radio-podcast-the-economists-guide-to-parenting/ and paid attention to the take-aways.
Sunday, August 18, 2013
The Secret
My mother was a professional cake decorator for much of the time I was growing up, through graduate school and beyond. For a time, when they were working in Saudi, my parents saved everything my dad made and lived off my mother's revenue from cake decorating.
In Khamis, 7,000 feet about sea level, she had a thriving business. Her cakes were much better cakes than her major competitor, who constantly strove to find my mother's baking secret. Every time she asked, my mom told her, and every time she told the other woman, she was not believed.
Finally, the day came that my parents left Khamis. The other woman came to her and asked my mom to finally share the secret. My mother told her and the other woman responded with profanity and abuse, refusing to believe that she had been told.
The secret? "Follow the directions on the box." My mom followed the high altitude directions on the cake mix boxes, down to beating the mix for the recommended period of time. The other woman refused to believe that following the directions was either the secret or would work.
But so often, following the directions is the secret.
I thought of that this morning as I made a bundt cake for the high priest's group and I followed the directions.
In Khamis, 7,000 feet about sea level, she had a thriving business. Her cakes were much better cakes than her major competitor, who constantly strove to find my mother's baking secret. Every time she asked, my mom told her, and every time she told the other woman, she was not believed.
Finally, the day came that my parents left Khamis. The other woman came to her and asked my mom to finally share the secret. My mother told her and the other woman responded with profanity and abuse, refusing to believe that she had been told.
The secret? "Follow the directions on the box." My mom followed the high altitude directions on the cake mix boxes, down to beating the mix for the recommended period of time. The other woman refused to believe that following the directions was either the secret or would work.
But so often, following the directions is the secret.
I thought of that this morning as I made a bundt cake for the high priest's group and I followed the directions.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Addiction Recovery and the Twelve Steps
Elder Mathew Cowley of
the quorum of the twelve apostles in 1954.
http://addictionrecovery.lds.org/?lang=eng
"Sometimes our own people get the idea that AA is a religion. That if you join AA you may be taken out of your own church. Oh, no. No, when a Mormon joins AA, he becomes the best Mormon he has been for many years...I've learned from these men that there isn't a man living who isn't greater than his sins, who isn't greater than his weaknesses. I like to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. They do a great work. If we can just work these programs out right, we can accomplish almost anything. I am one of their head members. They bring into my heart a spirit of humility and a spirit of sincerity."
http://addictionrecovery.lds.org/?lang=eng
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
But what have you done?
My mother-in-law tells the story of her first ward after she was married.
The bishop had her in for a "get to know you" interview and asked her to tell him about herself.
She started with family that survived winter quarters, founded towns in Nevada, a grandmother who found the church through a vision that directed her to meet the missionaries on a bridge and ...
The bishop said "it is nice to hear about your family, but I wanted to know about you and what you had done."
She says she learned then that what was important was not where the past had been, but what she made of the future, what she was going to do. So when she looks at herself, she asks the question, "what have I done, and what am I doing now."
There are often seminal questions we ask ourselves:
The bishop had her in for a "get to know you" interview and asked her to tell him about herself.
She started with family that survived winter quarters, founded towns in Nevada, a grandmother who found the church through a vision that directed her to meet the missionaries on a bridge and ...
The bishop said "it is nice to hear about your family, but I wanted to know about you and what you had done."
She says she learned then that what was important was not where the past had been, but what she made of the future, what she was going to do. So when she looks at herself, she asks the question, "what have I done, and what am I doing now."
There are often seminal questions we ask ourselves:
- What do I really want to be?
- What am I doing and where does it take me?
- What have I, not my family or my friends, done to make the world a better place?
- What do I care about and who?
Wednesday, March 06, 2013
Asking Questions: What should I expect from this lesson?
In the Lorenzo Snow manual there is a sub-heading (on page 25) "Ministering to Individuals." It talks about leaders ministering to individuals and not letting their leadership callings get in the way.
The example they give is an event in 1891 where Lorenzo Snow raised a child from the dead.
I read the example and I asked myself both what I am expect to expect of myself, and what it is fair to expect from leaders based on this story.
If I experience great sorrow, should I expect an Apostle to come and comfort me? Do I have the right to expect them to raise the dead if I have a child die?
If not, what is the point of the example?
I ask myself questions like that.
Since this is the sole time that Elder Snow raised the dead I don't think that (that I should expect the dead to be raised) is a fair expectation. Since during times of great loss I ended up without even a home teacher until God sent us Alan Black. I don't think it is probable that I should expect more.
But what should I learn to expect from myself then? What do I learn from that story if not what to expect from leaders? Taking the story deeper than the surface, what should I do in likening that example to myself in doing what I should do?
What do you think?
The example they give is an event in 1891 where Lorenzo Snow raised a child from the dead.
I read the example and I asked myself both what I am expect to expect of myself, and what it is fair to expect from leaders based on this story.
If I experience great sorrow, should I expect an Apostle to come and comfort me? Do I have the right to expect them to raise the dead if I have a child die?
If not, what is the point of the example?
I ask myself questions like that.
Since this is the sole time that Elder Snow raised the dead I don't think that (that I should expect the dead to be raised) is a fair expectation. Since during times of great loss I ended up without even a home teacher until God sent us Alan Black. I don't think it is probable that I should expect more.
But what should I learn to expect from myself then? What do I learn from that story if not what to expect from leaders? Taking the story deeper than the surface, what should I do in likening that example to myself in doing what I should do?
What do you think?
- What is important to pay attention to.
- What are we to care about and to do first?
- What should we expect of others?
- What should we expect of ourselves?
- How do we expect the things we should expect?
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
On diet supplements and vitamins
My mother got a free subscription to a nutrition magazine that mostly wrote about various supplements you could take for better health. But she cancelled it in disgust after they had a special article about one of their doctors.


He took calcium with vitamin D (a standard calcium formulation) and fish oil (which you can get at SAMS or Costco). That was it.
Rather than being inspired to take what he took, in the more expensive brands, she realized that this guy might design and sell expensive custom supplements, but he wasn't using any of them. What he was using you could buy cheaply at any big box store -- and they were both things that she was already taking.
The truth is that most people do not get enough sunlight on their skin. The good to that is that they do not wrinkle or get skin cancers. The bad is that they are short of vitamin D. Do they need expensive prescribed supplements (the new wave of value added services that many doctors are offering)? No.
Other than that, calcium and fish oil (if you have high triglycerides or cholesterol problems) and you are good to go. On the fish oil, the Wall Street Journal has run some interesting articles, since trying to turn fish oil into money has proven very hard. Expensive formulations and other approaches have failed to provide any better result than inexpensive bulk sources. The same is pretty much true of calcium, though a little vitamin C, a little vitamin D and your body makes better use of it.
There are many things that in small amounts, or in specific limited areas, are very valuable. But in more esoteric or more expensive approaches they offer little additional benefit or value, or none at all, just like vitamin and other nutritional supplements.
It is a useful lesson.
Sunday, February 03, 2013
Women in the Military, women in combat
There has been a lot of discussion over the years about women in the military.Specifically, women in combat. Four things came together to make it happen.
First, women find themselves in combat in the current military in our country and in other countries. A Woman Soldier's Own Story is an example of that. They are on patrol, in dog fights, getting ambushed while driving trucks. They end up in combat over and over again, they just do not get jobs that say "combat" in them.
Consider Hesitation Kills: A Female Marine Officer's Combat Experience in Iraq.
Second, the equipment changed. An M-1 or an M-14 did not lend itself to either women or children in combat. With M-16s we have child soldiers the world over. Female fighter pilots are found the world over now. Upper body strength matters in some settings, but no where near what it did. For gear worn on the body, it requires trunk and leg strength where women are equivalent to men.
Third, there are career issues, both in the military and in civilian life. I still remember realizing that if I got a perfect score applying for the post office, a guy who had "combat role" on his resume (even if he never made it off a flight line) could get what was otherwise a failing score and get more points than I could applying for one of those jobs.
The same is basically true for a woman who has actually been in combat but who is not credited with a job that is a combat role.
Fourth and finally, they have started taking a better approach -- everyone has to pass the same physical requirements for a job. Notice the Marine Corp recently washing out its first two female candidates (both of whom looked very good) just like they wash out many men.
Compare the way it used to go, time after time, in similar efforts. For example, in my dad's MO, his military job,, there was a strength requirement. A female general got it into her head that the field would be good for women and as a part of that, changed the requirement for women. Err, the people work as four person teams. The strength requirement was the ability to lift 1/4th of the weight of the missiles that were being worked on.
Any time you got two of the new recruits into the field on the same team, the missiles could not be lifted or moved.
Those sorts of waivers have gone away. Everyone competes on an even footing.
Anyway, that is what is going on with women in combat, four streams coming together at the same time.
Sunday, January 27, 2013
"This conspiracy of silence was partially my fault because, as is typical and understandable of those battling with the huge physiological and psychological demands of acute grief, I simply did not have it in me to coach others on how to reach me."
Well said. It is a country where none of us have been, and no one knows the customs. It leads to a conspiracy of silence because no one knows how to lead the way.
That is from a blog that has a huge number of comments and followers, a huge audience, and deserves it.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
More tiny house news

Ella and
Tumbleweed: A Perfect Combination
Ella Jenkins, has recently joined The Tumbleweed Tiny House Company. Ella
will be presenting at our workshops. She will also be writing stories about
living in Little Yellow inspiring everyone to simplify your life leading by
example.
"I chose the name Little Yellow (Buidhe Bheag) because to me, yellow means sunshine, daffodils and California. In Scottish Gaelic, the colour yellow (buidhe) is often used as a positive emphasis symbolizing happiness, luck or beauty. A person who is "pretty, yellow" (brèagha, buidhe) is very pretty indeed and The phrase "I am yellow" (tha mi buidhe) means that one is well, happy or satisfied." More
A Letter from
Jay Shafer
Dear Friends,
After 12 great years, I have left Tumbleweed Tiny House Company, which I
founded, to form Four Lights Tiny House Company.
I'm excited to share that I've just made three new tiny house designs
available at Four Lights Houses. All three can be mounted on wheels or a
foundation and, in response to popular demand, two have beds downstairs.
I've also been busily refining my tiny house building workshops into a
visual and interactive curriculum that's great for all levels of experience. New
demonstrations and models ensure an exciting learning experience for all.
Read about why the first workshop is particularly dear to me, get an update
on my tiny house village project, and more HERE.
Viva la Tiny Revolution!
|
Saturday, January 19, 2013
Living with Grief
When Jessica first died, I had sent to me a quote from David O. McKay's wife about how, in her 80s, she and another lady talked about how the grief of losing a child, having them die before you, never really pases.
It is one thing to read about that sort of thing, another to experience it as life goes on.
I also read, from time to time, of the grief rituals that people and their extended family have. Families that gather around a date involving the death of a child. Then I think of my family, where we are scattered across states rather than across a few towns or a metroplex area. And multiple deaths.
At times it seems surreal. Sorry. I'm not ready to be someone with a tragic backstory. Especially someone who seems so normal, so pedestrian. I look at my wife and think, sometimes, but you are too gorgeous, too level headed, too professional to have a multiple incident tragic backstory. Sorry, it just doesn't fit.
I know, it is the season.
I know, unexpected triggers. Watched the wrong television show and was overwhelmed at the end. Posted to facebook without thinking. First comment was ... "spoilers" ... so I deleted the comment after I got over crying.
I hadn't thought. Then I was abashed that after all this time coping with grief, I could still be overwhelmed enough to slip.
Time to go back to sleep. I've a meeting at 7:00 to go to. It is going to be a full day.
It is one thing to read about that sort of thing, another to experience it as life goes on.
I also read, from time to time, of the grief rituals that people and their extended family have. Families that gather around a date involving the death of a child. Then I think of my family, where we are scattered across states rather than across a few towns or a metroplex area. And multiple deaths.
At times it seems surreal. Sorry. I'm not ready to be someone with a tragic backstory. Especially someone who seems so normal, so pedestrian. I look at my wife and think, sometimes, but you are too gorgeous, too level headed, too professional to have a multiple incident tragic backstory. Sorry, it just doesn't fit.
I know, it is the season.
I know, unexpected triggers. Watched the wrong television show and was overwhelmed at the end. Posted to facebook without thinking. First comment was ... "spoilers" ... so I deleted the comment after I got over crying.
I hadn't thought. Then I was abashed that after all this time coping with grief, I could still be overwhelmed enough to slip.
Time to go back to sleep. I've a meeting at 7:00 to go to. It is going to be a full day.
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Escaping the lies
The
reason people believe the second lie seems obvious. It allows them to
seek what they want. It is also what makes escaping the second lie so
hard.
As for the first lie, there are several variations. "God can't love me because I was abused" is often the theme that afflicts some people who have been sexually assaulted and who blame themselves for someone else's act of violence. The same is true of people who blame themselves for mental illness issues that they have no control over or who feel that some other status renders them to be someone who God can not love.
The second group of people to believe the first lie are those who basically are denying the power of repentance. The "God can love you, but he will never love me because of my abortion" meme is a well established one. The call to believe in God's love and the power of repentance is the most common answer that seems to work for escaping that lie.
The third group of people to believe the first lie are a combination of those two groups, such as alcoholics. There is a large volume of literature in twelve step programs basically dealing with the fact that a power higher than yourself can help you even if you have been afflicted by an addition and even if you have done some terrible things while under its influence.
The entire "you did not cause it, you can't control it, it is not your fault and God can help you like he helped me" approach of twelve step programs seems to be the answer for the third group (obviously) as well as the first group.
As for the second lie, I'm not sure of a good way to help people escape from it. Maybe someone can give me suggestions in the comments?
As for the first lie, there are several variations. "God can't love me because I was abused" is often the theme that afflicts some people who have been sexually assaulted and who blame themselves for someone else's act of violence. The same is true of people who blame themselves for mental illness issues that they have no control over or who feel that some other status renders them to be someone who God can not love.
The second group of people to believe the first lie are those who basically are denying the power of repentance. The "God can love you, but he will never love me because of my abortion" meme is a well established one. The call to believe in God's love and the power of repentance is the most common answer that seems to work for escaping that lie.
The third group of people to believe the first lie are a combination of those two groups, such as alcoholics. There is a large volume of literature in twelve step programs basically dealing with the fact that a power higher than yourself can help you even if you have been afflicted by an addition and even if you have done some terrible things while under its influence.
The entire "you did not cause it, you can't control it, it is not your fault and God can help you like he helped me" approach of twelve step programs seems to be the answer for the third group (obviously) as well as the first group.
As for the second lie, I'm not sure of a good way to help people escape from it. Maybe someone can give me suggestions in the comments?
Monday, January 14, 2013
Lies that separate us from God
Preface
There are many lies that can keep us away from God. Most commonly, lies keep us from God by turning us deaf to the Spirit. I thought I'd write about two of them, ones that are usually had by two completely different groups of people.
Introduction
This post is about two lies. They are very different from each other, and by no means are they the only cause of distance between God and man.
First, the lie that leads us to believe that God can not and will not love and accept the real person that someone is.
Second, is the lie that sins, especially exploitative sins, are acceptable to God.
The First Lie
The first lie causes us not to hear God. It causes people to believe that not only can they not repent, but that inherent qualities render them forever severed from God. That belief causes people to be blinded to the love of God.
The great truth is that God so loved the world, and God so loves you, that he gave everything, including his only begotten son, to save the authentic you. It does not matter if you are poor, or blind or deaf or afflicted.
The belief that God can not or will not love someone can form a barrier between them and God.
The Second Lie
The second lie was preached about by Brigham Young when he despaired of those who would cheat a widow out of her cow and then go home, drop to their knees, and thank God for such a great blessing.
Before I read that part of his sermon I thought of such people as those who believe that they do not need to make a choice between God and Mammon. Worship God and he will deliver Mammon.
For such people, you worship God so that he will reward you by giving you the opportunity to exploit and cheat others.
Those who fall prey to that lie, that exploitative sine is not only acceptable, but a gift from God, are substituting listening to their own lusts over listening to God. They may hear something, but it is not the Holy One.
Closing
The first lie causes us not to hear God because it blinds us to the message of the love of God.
The second lie causes us not to hear God because we hear our own voices instead.
Together they seem to take the opposite ends of a spectrum, one one that cuts us off from the truth either way.
Questions
There are many lies that can keep us away from God. Most commonly, lies keep us from God by turning us deaf to the Spirit. I thought I'd write about two of them, ones that are usually had by two completely different groups of people.
Introduction
This post is about two lies. They are very different from each other, and by no means are they the only cause of distance between God and man.
First, the lie that leads us to believe that God can not and will not love and accept the real person that someone is.
Second, is the lie that sins, especially exploitative sins, are acceptable to God.
The First Lie
The first lie causes us not to hear God. It causes people to believe that not only can they not repent, but that inherent qualities render them forever severed from God. That belief causes people to be blinded to the love of God.
The great truth is that God so loved the world, and God so loves you, that he gave everything, including his only begotten son, to save the authentic you. It does not matter if you are poor, or blind or deaf or afflicted.
The belief that God can not or will not love someone can form a barrier between them and God.
The Second Lie
The second lie was preached about by Brigham Young when he despaired of those who would cheat a widow out of her cow and then go home, drop to their knees, and thank God for such a great blessing.
Before I read that part of his sermon I thought of such people as those who believe that they do not need to make a choice between God and Mammon. Worship God and he will deliver Mammon.
For such people, you worship God so that he will reward you by giving you the opportunity to exploit and cheat others.
Those who fall prey to that lie, that exploitative sine is not only acceptable, but a gift from God, are substituting listening to their own lusts over listening to God. They may hear something, but it is not the Holy One.
Closing
The first lie causes us not to hear God because it blinds us to the message of the love of God.
The second lie causes us not to hear God because we hear our own voices instead.
Together they seem to take the opposite ends of a spectrum, one one that cuts us off from the truth either way.
Questions
- How hard is it for you to accept that God really loves you. Not only that God could love you, but that God does love you?
- If you did not cause it, if you can't control it, how can it be your fault (speaking of mental illness and other inherent conditions that people blame themselves for)?
- When you isolate yourself from other people, does that isolate you from yourself? From God?
- Do you think God ever rewards us by allowing us to take advantage of other people? What do you think about Abraham refusing to accept any of the spoils of the Battle of Siddim?
Saturday, January 05, 2013
Doomed, yet we try anyway ...
So much truth in this one.And, should it need to be said, nominate and vote Schlock Mercenary for the Hugo this year.
The nomination period for the 2013 Hugo Awards is now open! If you're a member of the 2012, 2013, or 2014 World Science Fiction Convention, you can nominate things for the 2013 ballot. Details are here.
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
More on Tiny Houses
I am receiving no compensation or inducements to share this material, I'm just doing it because I think what they are doing is neat.
| |||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
|
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Saying foolish things
Based on personal experience, I can tell you that people saying foolish things to those who are grieving, saying things that make it worse or that cause pain, is something that is much too common.
There are a number of reasons that happens.
* the speaker is feeling confusion caused by pain and shock at what has happened to you. This appears, to me, to be the biggest reason people say things that are confused, cause pain or don't make sense. If you are suffering from terrible tragedy and someone says something foolish, that hurts, I would suggest that the best starting place for thinking about what they've just said is that they are confused and in pain on your behalf.
* the speaker suffers from shallowness and lack of knowledge and perspective and the lack of self discipline to stay silent. I have always tried to be grateful that they have not had the experiences that would have taught them better.
* the speaker suffers from self absorption and the desire to put the other person out of the speaker's misery by saying something that comforts the speaker and allows them to move on in their bubble.
* the speaker suffers from narcissist behavior and the need to re-assert their central place in the world. Your pain has interrupted that and they are trying to re-establish what they believe to the proper order of things. I was always glad I wasn't the speaker. When someone says "you just buried a child? That is nothing compared to my suffering" and then proceeded to tell me about the hang nail they just had, or something similar, I would remind myself to be grateful I did not suffer from the mental and spiritual illness the speaker had.
* the speaker suffers from utter fecklessness and a willingness to harm others for some benefit to the speaker. So, your child was murdered and someone starts trying to sell bullet proof vests for children using the tragedy (or to make any political or other point at their expense -- especially ones you do not agree with). /Sigh. People can't help themselves. Some really think they are helping others as well.
However, all of that said, I would like to emphasize that as we hear what people say about the tragedies that others experience I would suggest that it is better to assume confusion and pain than fecklessness and sociopathy.
So, what should you say?
It is easy to say, "I'm so sorry. I don't know what to say, but I'm so sorry for your loss." That is always the safe thing to say.
"Tell me about ...." is also good, if you are willing to just listen.
Those are two starting places, two good places, in all the other things people say and do and speak.
There are a number of reasons that happens.
* the speaker is feeling confusion caused by pain and shock at what has happened to you. This appears, to me, to be the biggest reason people say things that are confused, cause pain or don't make sense. If you are suffering from terrible tragedy and someone says something foolish, that hurts, I would suggest that the best starting place for thinking about what they've just said is that they are confused and in pain on your behalf.
* the speaker suffers from shallowness and lack of knowledge and perspective and the lack of self discipline to stay silent. I have always tried to be grateful that they have not had the experiences that would have taught them better.
* the speaker suffers from self absorption and the desire to put the other person out of the speaker's misery by saying something that comforts the speaker and allows them to move on in their bubble.
* the speaker suffers from narcissist behavior and the need to re-assert their central place in the world. Your pain has interrupted that and they are trying to re-establish what they believe to the proper order of things. I was always glad I wasn't the speaker. When someone says "you just buried a child? That is nothing compared to my suffering" and then proceeded to tell me about the hang nail they just had, or something similar, I would remind myself to be grateful I did not suffer from the mental and spiritual illness the speaker had.
* the speaker suffers from utter fecklessness and a willingness to harm others for some benefit to the speaker. So, your child was murdered and someone starts trying to sell bullet proof vests for children using the tragedy (or to make any political or other point at their expense -- especially ones you do not agree with). /Sigh. People can't help themselves. Some really think they are helping others as well.
However, all of that said, I would like to emphasize that as we hear what people say about the tragedies that others experience I would suggest that it is better to assume confusion and pain than fecklessness and sociopathy.
So, what should you say?
It is easy to say, "I'm so sorry. I don't know what to say, but I'm so sorry for your loss." That is always the safe thing to say.
"Tell me about ...." is also good, if you are willing to just listen.
Those are two starting places, two good places, in all the other things people say and do and speak.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Ethical Climates and Religion
One growing area of study in experimental ethics is the effect of what are often called climates.
It started with noticing that beggars outside of a bakery are more likely to receive charity than those near a sewer. But it has expanded into realizing that many cultures have an ethical environment.
To read scripture, moralizing and philosophy it helps to appreciate that there are huge differences in different times and places as to what is important ethically and what is not.
Those differences can often be observed as a spectrum of competing virtues. It also helps to look at yourself.
What is more important to you?
Rights .......... Social Good?
Which personal state of justice or harmony do you feel is core to spirituality?
Resignation
Renunciation
Detachment
Knowledge
Self Knowledge
Obedience
How important is duty? Is it essential or meaningless?
How significant are private vices? Total or none whatsoever?
Is a person always the same person or is transformation a real force (e.g. is the model of Nephi or Mormon more significant to you than the model of Alma and Alma the Younger)?
Often conflicts between groups in the Church consist of vast differences in what we consider important. Does the first and greatest commandment, to love the Lord your God mean that you should obey God? Does it mean that you should "do your duty."
Or is it a means to self knowledge and enlightenment?
Is obedience to every jot and tittle of the law more important than charity? Or should we encompass both?
What do you think? How does your answer to these questions affect how you interact at Church?
I got to thinking about this again when someone said it was nonsense that anyone would think God valued loyalty. "The first and great commandment is to Love God with all your heart, mind, and might" did not mean that one was loyal to God, they saw absolutely no connection between loving God with everything and being loyal.
Nor did they see obedience as having anything to do with what Christ said was the greatest commandment.
It struck me, suddenly, that the person talking did not value loyalty or obedience at all.
Then I had another conversation where the other person saw loyalty to leaders as paramount, but felt leaders owed no loyalty whatsoever to the οἱ πολλοί, hoi polloi. That struck me. To him, loyalty was a one way street.
Made me think that other people's experiences with the climates and environments, and the values behind them, might be interesting (not to mention, different historical eras often have a set of values that are accepted by the majority in that era and that set a framework for writing, reason and thought).
It started with noticing that beggars outside of a bakery are more likely to receive charity than those near a sewer. But it has expanded into realizing that many cultures have an ethical environment.
To read scripture, moralizing and philosophy it helps to appreciate that there are huge differences in different times and places as to what is important ethically and what is not.
Those differences can often be observed as a spectrum of competing virtues. It also helps to look at yourself.
What is more important to you?
Rights .......... Social Good?
Which personal state of justice or harmony do you feel is core to spirituality?
Resignation
Renunciation
Detachment
Knowledge
Self Knowledge
Obedience
How important is duty? Is it essential or meaningless?
How significant are private vices? Total or none whatsoever?
Is a person always the same person or is transformation a real force (e.g. is the model of Nephi or Mormon more significant to you than the model of Alma and Alma the Younger)?
Often conflicts between groups in the Church consist of vast differences in what we consider important. Does the first and greatest commandment, to love the Lord your God mean that you should obey God? Does it mean that you should "do your duty."
Or is it a means to self knowledge and enlightenment?
Is obedience to every jot and tittle of the law more important than charity? Or should we encompass both?
What do you think? How does your answer to these questions affect how you interact at Church?
I got to thinking about this again when someone said it was nonsense that anyone would think God valued loyalty. "The first and great commandment is to Love God with all your heart, mind, and might" did not mean that one was loyal to God, they saw absolutely no connection between loving God with everything and being loyal.
Nor did they see obedience as having anything to do with what Christ said was the greatest commandment.
It struck me, suddenly, that the person talking did not value loyalty or obedience at all.
Then I had another conversation where the other person saw loyalty to leaders as paramount, but felt leaders owed no loyalty whatsoever to the οἱ πολλοί, hoi polloi. That struck me. To him, loyalty was a one way street.
Made me think that other people's experiences with the climates and environments, and the values behind them, might be interesting (not to mention, different historical eras often have a set of values that are accepted by the majority in that era and that set a framework for writing, reason and thought).
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Baptism -- Guest Post
I think it is very fitting that the anniversary when I
became a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is near
Thanksgiving. November 21st,
2012, marks the 25th anniversary of my baptism. I remember anticipating that day with such
excitement. I was 19 and that is an age when people like to forge identities.
Yet, I did not take such a decision casually.
I originally resisted
attempts by my friend in my Composition class at the University of Nebraska at
Omaha to give me a copy of the Book of Mormon during my first semester. I was
just barely 18 and the warnings about people out in the world trying to convert
Catholics by the nun who taught my last religion class at my Catholic high
school were very vivid in my mind.
A history teacher had also made me fully
cognizant of any cult activity where groups of people would try to gain my
favor, show me love, and fill me lots of carbs and little protein making me wary of my over-zealous friend. Many members are not
nearly so zealous. I later learned that he felt prompted to share the Gospel
with me. However, many may have made just a feeble, half-hearted attempt while
he continued to share. As we sat in the classroom, he shared about the
persecution of the Saints in Missouri. I replied that they would have
persecuted Donnie and Marie. I knew a few adults who were members but did not
know anything about their religion other their abstaining from alcohol and
members giving money to their Church.
As disinterested as I was, I do recall opening the
encyclopedia to review the First Vision by Joseph Smith after my friend shared
this story with me. Still, I would not
accept a copy of the Book of Mormon. I was a good conformist growing up and was
at that point a very content Catholic. While I wasn’t the best on observing
Holy Days of Obligation, I was faithfully attending the nearby Catholic Church
on a weekly basis.
I was no longer in class with my friend when I shared a
religious dream with with him when I crossed paths on campus because I thought of him as someone that I could
discuss religion. He was very animated
as he marched to his car and offered me a copy of the Book of Mormon again. I
accepted with the intention of waiting until finals were over to read from the
work. How surprised my friend was when I called him that Summer letting him
know that I had received an answer to my prayers. I started attending the scripture study
program known as Institute prior to starting my missionary lessons
During the period
that I took the lessons, I felt the influence of the Holy Spirit quite often.
As I became more aware of what the Holy Spirit felt like, I could recall times
in my youth when I had felt the Holy Spirit. Latter Day Saint Doctrine does
believe that all people are born with the light of Christ and that people may
have the influence of the Holy Spirit at times.
To have the constant
companionship of the Holy Ghost, a person needs to be confirmed by someone who
holds the proper Priesthood and live worthily. I have had a Bishop who I think
was using the gift of discernment when he said that I was receptive to
recognizing the presence of the Holy Spirit. However, this was not during my
most spiritual period, which was prior to my mission. I felt very prepared to
serve a mission and felt the love of God
so much at that time that I knew I could never repay the debt. My
nonmember family was protective and concerned about my going on a mission.
Fortunate for them and their peace of mind, I was called to serve in the United
States in the Pennsylvania Harrisburg Mission.
I have reexamined my convictions from time to time and have
had periods of renewal such as reading the Book of Mormon during the period
that President Gordon B. Hinckley, one of the Prophets of the Latter Day
Saint Church told members that there
would be special blessings if we finished by the end of the year.
At times, I have longed to be more connected with my roots
in the Catholic Faith and also the roots with the Lutheran Faith on my mother’s
side of the family. I am connected to many people from my Catholic Schools and
have appreciated their support. Latter Day Saints do not believe you have to be
a Latter Day Saint during this life to be in Heaven. We also respect all major religions, which
raise the moral compass of the people. While we encourage people to learn about
our religion, we respect people to worship according to the dictates of their
conscience.
I have become increasingly
interested in learning more about all religions through the years. Latter Day
Saints do not feel we have a corner on righteousness and I am continually
humbled by good examples of other faiths.
I do feel the faith of my youth has prepared me in many ways to be a
good Latter Day Saints. President
Hinckley encouraged people to bring the good with them from other religions. I
have done that. I have not been without my trials. And I don’t know what
blessings would have been mine if I took a different path.
Even the blessings
we have are often beyond our comprehension. I do know that I have had many
blessings in my 44 years of life and the 25 years as a Latter Day Saint have
been particularly rich in so many ways even when times were hard.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Autobiography
My biography makes for bad
fiction.
My paternal grandfather, Robert
Henry Marsh finished his career as a cultural attaché transitioning from the
Austria to the
Jordan desk. My maternal
grandfather, George Emmanuel Mylonas, was an
archeologist.
My father finished his career as a
tech sergeant in the USAF. My mother, who dropped out of college to marry him,
is currently a widow and between missions. Before his death from advanced
Parkinson’s, they served missions in Kenya, Washington,
D.C., the Philippines and Korea. The
stories about people he knew on my blog are really about him, drawn from his
personnel file which someone in the military was gracious enough to let my
family have brief access to before it was redacted. I miss him
still.
I grew up moving around, mostly in
trailer parks. I graduated in applied economics from Cal. State Los Angeles and
then from law school at BYU’s law school. I’m married to Winifred Lenora
Wallace-Marsh (she goes by “Win”), we’ve been through eight pregnancies, five
children, three funerals and have two surviving children. Win is a CRNA and an
inspiring speaker.
I began blogging (as in journaling
and essays, chronologically arrayed) in 1997. I was a supporter of FARMS when
it was a desk in Dr Welch’s office and I was on the founding board of FAIR. I’ve
spoken (once) at Sunstone, and a number of times at conferences and conventions
that would bore most people, including myself.
You can find me at http://adrr.com/ where you
can learn more about me than even I would care to know. I’m also on Facebook.
Currently I serve as assistant ward librarian and as a home
teacher.
Sunday, November 04, 2012
Understanding commandments (rough draft)
A rough draft of a submission to Real Intent
Too often commandments look like a crazy quilt of random historical accidents with a few that make sense to us. This essay is about the different types of commandments, how they fit together and how they make sense, even if it doesn’t seem that they make sense to us right now as we look at them.
Too often commandments look like a crazy quilt of random historical accidents with a few that make sense to us. This essay is about the different types of commandments, how they fit together and how they make sense, even if it doesn’t seem that they make sense to us right now as we look at them.
Commandments
do not exist in isolation and they are almost always a sub-set of available
commandments that would accomplish much of the same thing.
Introduction.
I am going to start with a list of types of commandments, and then revisit the list with explanations.
- Boundary marker commandments. Sewing blue threads into the hem of your clothing is a good example of this type of commandments.
- Message commandments. These exist to send us a message and help us with reminders.
- Negative boundary marker commandments (avoiding the other side's boundary markers -- in our culture, not wearing a gang's colors when you are not part of a gang might be one of those).
- Sacrificial thresholds -- commitment commandments.
- Improvement commandments -- ones aimed at having someone do better than the culture they start with, such as rules about slaves.
- Guidance commandments -- the changed emphasis on not using tobacco that began to be emphasized by the Church at about the time cigarettes were dramatically changed is a good example.
- Core commandments, but not immediately essential ones (e.g. any ordinance you can receive vicariously).
- Core which you can not avoid (e.g. not blaspheming against the Holy Ghost).
Before I begin with more I need to note that many commandments overlap. Not eating pork is a boundary marker as eating pork at one time connected a person with the worship of particular gods. Not eating pork was also a guidance commandment as certain pork born diseases were common, dangerous and incurable at one time. Circumcision is both a boundary marker (a sign of the Abrahamic covenant) and a sacrifice threshold (a cost to belong) when applied to grown men.
Boundary marker commandments.
These
exist to allow a group to identify who is a part of it, who is not, to mark the
boundary between a group and those outside of the group. Cultures create these
if they do not have other rules, because in order to be a group, a group needs
some sort of marker of who belongs and who does not. The blue thread
commandment I started with, above, is a good example.
The commandment comes as a part of the law of Moses. The Torah states in Numbers 15:38: "Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them, that they shall make themselves fringes on the corners of their garments throughout their generations, and they shall put on the corner fringe a blue (tekhelet) thread." Wearing the tzitzit is also commanded in Deuteronomy 22:12: "You shall make yourself twisted threads, on the four corners of your garment with which you cover yourself." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzitzit
Formal clothing, the showing of respect, often is a part of a boundary marker, and the marker changes across cultures. Our culture and the modern LDS Church does not use blue thread to allow people to easily determine who is a member and who is not. It uses other markers instead.
Message commandments.
These are often also combined with boundary markers. They are commandments that send a message or help us to remember things. "Do this to remember that" is often the pattern such a commandment has. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tefillin or phylacteries are a good example from the law of Moses. Wearing Tefillin or binding them on the door posts marks your person or your home as a part of the group. In addition, they are commanded to be worn as a sign or a reminder of things God has done. They send a message of things to remember.
Negative boundary marker commandments.
These are often part of admonitions not to send the wrong message, but they are commandments to avoid marking yourself as part of another group. I've given the example of not wearing gang colors when you do not belong to a gang as the sort of thing that we might have for our day. The New Testament issue of "meat sacrificed to idols" was another one of these commandments that they debated. All of the discussion about modesty is tied up, in part, with the issue of communicating which group you belong to as well. These commandments exist to keep us from marking ourselves as part of the wrong group just as boundary marker commandments to help us mark ourselves as belonging to God.
Sacrificial thresholds.
When people sacrifice or have a price for commitment, they have a greater level of commitment and a greater satisfaction in the commitments they make. It is one of the reasons that people who do not live together before marriage tend to be happier in marriage. Some commandments appear to have, among other purposes, creating a threshold that improves our satisfaction in life and our commitment to God. They usually have other meanings as well.
Circumcision
in the Old Testament was a sacrifice, a price for entry. It also was intended
to remind people that they were part of a covenant. It combined both
purposes.
Another good example of an overlapping sacrifice and other commandment is the one of premarital chastity. Couples who do not have sex before marriage are more committed, happier and less likely to be divorced than those who do not, and one of the reasons is that the level of sacrifice is increased. Sacrifice and commitment has the psychological effect of making people happier and more committed to the choices they make. I believe chastiy has other benefits as well, but it makes a good example because of the amount of statistical evidence that supports pre-marital chastity in spite of all the arguments for the contrary positions.
Improvement commandments.
The easiest example of these are the laws on slavery in the Old Testament. For example, if a slave escaped and reached one of the forty cities in Israel, they were entitled to live free and not be forced back into bondage or discriminated against because they were escaped slaves. The net effect was that almost every slave in Israel was only ten miles or so from freedom. Rather than endorsing slavery, such commandments appear to be aimed at improving the way the culture interacted with slaves.
Christ was clear about some of these commandments, for example when he said ".It was said unto you of old times, thou shalt not kill, but I say unto you that he who is angry" or "...thou shalt not commit adultery, but I say unto you he that lusts in his heart" he is pointing out that the earlier commandment is an improvement commandment, not the final resting place of the disciple of Christ.
“Thou shall not kill” is an improvement over the current status. Looking back, it seems like an awfully low bar. But many, many commandments and rules are that sort of rule that exist to raise the bar, not to set the target.
Indeed,
it seems that much of what Christ addressed was the mistake of improvement
commandments for privilege or the final goal. Any time the Lord starts with
"because of the hardness of your hearts ..." that is not a good sign in terms of
seeing the commandment given as anything but an improvement
commandment.
Guidance commandments.
In the ancient world, wine was generally about as strong as weak beer. The guidance in the Old Testament is just to not drink wine all day. Why, well, to quote:
To consume the amount of alcohol that is in two martinis by drinking wine containing three parts water to one part wine, one would have to drink over twenty-two glasses. That is, in the Old Testament world, drinking wine as they drank it, you would have to drink a lot (twenty-two glasses) to get the effect a modern person might experience in a couple of modern drinks.
More recent guidance, in an environment where wine is both cheap and much stronger, and not needed to make drinking water safe, is to just avoid it as the opportunity for addiction and other problems. With stronger wine, the incidence of such problems is so much greater and the need for wine (in order to make drinking water safe) is much less. The guidance for our times is different than the guidance for other times.
Another good example of a guidance commandment is the Word of Wisdom. It became much more important and focused on as a commandment when the way tobacco was cured changed, in a way that made it much more addictive -- especially as to cigarettes (the acidity change meant that nicotine could be absorbed through the lungs rather than having to be dissolved in the saliva).
Guidance commandments give us guidance that is appropriate to our times, and generally move us towards where we should be. They may or may not also be improvement commandments.
Core,
but not essential.
Belief in Christ is essential to salvation. Baptism is essential to salvation. Yet if someone dies without ever hearing of Christ or without being baptized, they can be saved. Proxy ordinances (e.g., baptism for the dead) allow vicarious compliance with such commandments.
These commandments are core to the gospel, but not essential in this life. Think about the implications for the laws and commandments God might give some people in some times. There are commandments and rules that are core to salvation, but not essential for this life.
Thoughts.
It is important to realize that many commandments have their value in that they are a commandment. A boundary marker is useful only if it marks a boundary because all believers obey it. Which boundary marker God commands is not so important as the existence of the marker and obedience. If a boundary marker is ignored by enough people, it ceases to mark a boundary, and everyone is hurt, even if the specific boundary marker is not that significant.
The tzitzit (the blue thread in the hem of the garment in the Old Testament) -- ask yourself: what if God had commanded red thread instead? The tzitzit in red would not have been any less useful than it was with blue thread or it would have been with brown thread -- as long as everyone still followed the commandment. The color choice is not as important as that there was a choice of colors and that everyone obeyed it.
Not wearing wool mixed with linen clothing loses its effectiveness as a boundary marker if only those who can not afford such clothes do not wear them. It also loses its value as a reminder if people are not reminded of its meaning. The flip side, of negative boundary markers, is also important. Consider men who quit wearing their wedding rings. They send a message about which group they belong to. On the other hand, avoiding a pagan butcher has no meaning at all for us in our time.
When Paul writes of the law as a "schoolmaster to lead us to Christ" he is also referring to the value of the law of Moses in keeping the Jewish people from assimilation so that the beliefs could be preserved in order to have the right community for the Christ to be born into. He is speaking of laws that created and helped them maintain a community.
The importance of commandments qua commandments is hard to overstate sometimes. It doesn’t matter that much if you drive on the right side of the road or the left. What matters is that we have picked a side of the road to drive on and that everyone has the same side. Does it matter if we worship on Sunday (as we do in the United States) or on Thursday (as members do in Saudia)? No, but it does matter that we all pick the same day to gather together. If we all show up, willy-nilly at the chapel, on different days of the week, we are much less likely to be able to all worship together.
Message
commandments are important as well, especially the message part of them
(otherwise they become good luck charms or affectations). We have our own
reminders that are easily forgotten as reminders. After all, how many people
remember to think of Christ during the sacrament and how many spend the time
thinking about other things?
Thresholds
and sacrifice are significant, both for the sacrifice and as a marker of who is
truly part of the group. Avoiding them causes us to avoid commitment. Avoiding
commitment distances us from God. Often these commandments are tied other
things or important life events (being faithful in marriage is a threshold, it
also has a host of other factors as a part of it). Seeing only one part of them
causes us to miss the broader meaning.
The
Word of Wisdom is a good example. It has costs and it causes us to give things
up. It is a boundary marker. It is guidance for our times. It has broader
meanings and purposes than just one part or just another.
All commandments are important, and each has reasons -- and most could be replaced by a different set of commandments -- if everyone made the same change at the same time -- and each loses value for all of us for each person who does not abide by them.
The bottom line is that commandments gain importance from obeying them as part of a group that obeys them and they gain in importance in the context of the commandments given in this time and place to us for our good. They gain in value as they are obeyed, for everyone in the Church, as a group as well as individually.
Next time you see a commandment, or even a social more in the church, ask yourself what category it fits into and what is weakened by a lack of obedience to that commandment. Ask yourself, if you like Paul, keep the commandment if for no other reason so as to avoid offending others because of your love for them through Christ. As yourself also the following questions:
- What commandments have proven useful to you?
- Which commandments seem to make no sense?
- How often have you looked at something in the Old Testament and wondered how could God tell someone to do that -- but if you look back you realize that it was an improvement on what they had been doing before?
- How fast do you think commandments and rules can change?
- When Nephi talks about the Iron Rod and the Mists of Darkness, do you think he really means that each of us will have times when we do not understand what good the commandments we have are doing for us?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)








