I called my son while he was with his dad on Saturday. His dad answered the phone in a hushed voice telling me they were in a museum and handed the phone to Gabe. I said to Gabe..."Hi Sweetie. What kind of a museum are you in?".
He replied in a hushed and reverent tone..."a long, long time ago museum".
He continued in his 8 year old reverence..."you know about how we learn about Jesus?" and I said "yes". He said..."before that!" And then he said, responding to some exhibit with again a tone of deep reverence, "oooooh..2nd century". I think the "WOW" was implied.
I decided reverence trumped the details of history at this point; it doesn't matter that he knows that the 2nd century is actually post-Jesus. The theology lesson, for that matter, that Jesus is not only "long, long time ago" but also "present for today" also took back seat. In this moment, reverence was enough.
A momentary and second-hand experience of the museum through his eyes proved better than a visit on my own, in which surely I would've toured quickly and without much appreciation for the massive narrative of history that precedes my experience or for the curators who recreate this history on my behalf.
Being Gabe's mom teaches me reverence and joy and mindfulness. I think I realize one of the things that Gretchen Rubin misses in her "Happiness Project"; the gift of seeing the world through the eyes of children, particularly through the eyes of our own children, is a sure route to happiness and its higher spiritual virtue, joy.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Monday, January 25, 2010
Ruminations on the Happiness Project
I finished The Happiness Project, by Gretchen Rubin, yesterday, and I admit it made me happy.....happy to be done.
I picked up some interesting tidbits about happiness research, and appreciated the opportunity to ruminate on my own life. However, by the time I reached her October chapter on Paying Attention, I was mindful that this quick and dirty, one year on the road to happiness narrative was getting on my nerves. My favorite moments were her honesty and self-deprecating humor, such as when she engaged in a "Pollyanna Week" of being 100% positive and snapped at her husband before she got out of bed the first morning. That's real. I can connect with that.
My least favorite was the first of her Twelve Commandments, to "Be Gretchen", which she over-articulated. I love the Socratic principle to "Know Thyself", and appreciate its lesson, but I was really glad it wasn't my own Pollyanna week the umpteenth time she said she needed to "Be Gretchen". It distracted me from her point to be myself...doggone it I'm not Gretchen so how many times did I need to read her reminder to "Be Gretchen". I know she was referencing herself, but "being herself" would have been a better way to say it if her memoir was to ultimately reverberate with both author and reader.
Generally, I appreciated the principles of living a better life but found her continuous cycling back to her Twelve Commandments and 21 Secrets of Adulthood and her Four Splendid Truths rather tiring. Of course, this means I should probably re-read November: Keep a Contented Heart. If I were to engage her recommendation to try my own Happiness Project, maybe I should ask if there is a remedial version.
Still, I think my biggest critique isn't the manner in which the project is undertaken. She admits to having a pretty contented life, but recognizes the value in preparing for adversity which surely comes to us all. I actually take objection to Aristotle's assertion that undergirds her project: "Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence".
The meaning and purpose of life, rather, is growth,learning to love, and being a more authentic agent of God's grace. And when my propensity toward discontent rears its ugly head, it is not its detractor to happiness that is my barometer. Instead, it is the extent to which discontent blocks me and those I am called to love from experiencing God's grace that beckons me to change. And that higher aim, with its two (2...mind you...just 2) great commandments to "Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength" and "Love Neighbor as Oneself" is probably the only aim of a happiness project that makes me fully mindful.
I guess I reverberate most with Rubin's Twelfth Commandment: "There is only love". Ah, now there is one splendid truth!
I picked up some interesting tidbits about happiness research, and appreciated the opportunity to ruminate on my own life. However, by the time I reached her October chapter on Paying Attention, I was mindful that this quick and dirty, one year on the road to happiness narrative was getting on my nerves. My favorite moments were her honesty and self-deprecating humor, such as when she engaged in a "Pollyanna Week" of being 100% positive and snapped at her husband before she got out of bed the first morning. That's real. I can connect with that.
My least favorite was the first of her Twelve Commandments, to "Be Gretchen", which she over-articulated. I love the Socratic principle to "Know Thyself", and appreciate its lesson, but I was really glad it wasn't my own Pollyanna week the umpteenth time she said she needed to "Be Gretchen". It distracted me from her point to be myself...doggone it I'm not Gretchen so how many times did I need to read her reminder to "Be Gretchen". I know she was referencing herself, but "being herself" would have been a better way to say it if her memoir was to ultimately reverberate with both author and reader.
Generally, I appreciated the principles of living a better life but found her continuous cycling back to her Twelve Commandments and 21 Secrets of Adulthood and her Four Splendid Truths rather tiring. Of course, this means I should probably re-read November: Keep a Contented Heart. If I were to engage her recommendation to try my own Happiness Project, maybe I should ask if there is a remedial version.
Still, I think my biggest critique isn't the manner in which the project is undertaken. She admits to having a pretty contented life, but recognizes the value in preparing for adversity which surely comes to us all. I actually take objection to Aristotle's assertion that undergirds her project: "Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence".
The meaning and purpose of life, rather, is growth,learning to love, and being a more authentic agent of God's grace. And when my propensity toward discontent rears its ugly head, it is not its detractor to happiness that is my barometer. Instead, it is the extent to which discontent blocks me and those I am called to love from experiencing God's grace that beckons me to change. And that higher aim, with its two (2...mind you...just 2) great commandments to "Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength" and "Love Neighbor as Oneself" is probably the only aim of a happiness project that makes me fully mindful.
I guess I reverberate most with Rubin's Twelfth Commandment: "There is only love". Ah, now there is one splendid truth!
Monday, January 18, 2010
Who's Who
When I was in college, I was named to "Who's Who among American College Students". I'm sure I thought I was a big deal.
Who's Who, however, seems to have gotten out of control. Almost weekly I get notified of my "nomination" to be part of "Who's Who among Executives, Who's Who among women leaders? Who's Who among Intellectuals, Who's Who among middle-aged divorcees?"...well, you get the picture. Thankfully, I no longer think "Who's Who" is such a big deal.
Today I received an invite to "Cambridge Who's Who" which went on to describe itself as a "Registry of Distinguished Invividuals". Even if I thought Who's Who was a big deal, an even bigger deal is the ability to spell.
Anyone want to nominate me to Who's Who among Excellent Spellers?
Who's Who, however, seems to have gotten out of control. Almost weekly I get notified of my "nomination" to be part of "Who's Who among Executives, Who's Who among women leaders? Who's Who among Intellectuals, Who's Who among middle-aged divorcees?"...well, you get the picture. Thankfully, I no longer think "Who's Who" is such a big deal.
Today I received an invite to "Cambridge Who's Who" which went on to describe itself as a "Registry of Distinguished Invividuals". Even if I thought Who's Who was a big deal, an even bigger deal is the ability to spell.
Anyone want to nominate me to Who's Who among Excellent Spellers?
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Picturing God's Rescue Plan
I am a big fan of the Jesus Storybook Bible: Every Story Whispers Your Name. The premise of this children's Bible is simple; the entire biblical narrative is explicitly told as promises for God's big rescue plan in Jesus.
Gabe and I read it nightly, well almost nightly, and we have for a few years now. He knows which story is coming. He will pipe in when I read the refrain of God's "Never stopping, never giving up, unbreaking, always and forever love". I enjoy how these timeless narratives are retold to give voice to Jesus' mission on earth as God's mouthpiece to a broken world, or "everything God wanted to say to the whole world - in a person"
A few nights ago, Gabe and I read "He's here!", the Lukan nativity story. The angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, and as I read this story for the umpteenth time Gabe put his arm up to the illustration of the angel and said "he is the same color as me....cool!". Sure enough, Jago the illustrator portrayed an angel with a lovely brown skin tone. Not only does every story whisper Jesus' name, but the illustrator ensured that the biblical narrative included the story of each reader. God's never giving up always and forever love in ethnically inclusive! Cool!
Last night we read "A little girl and a poor frail lady", the story of Jairus' daughter. As Jairus ran past Jesus' helpers, Gabe queried "where are the sisters? It's all brothers". I was stumped. And rather than subject my 8 year old to the gendered context of the early church, I kept on reading reminding myself of the promise of God's rescue plan...a plan that is unfolding but not yet fulfilled: The Jairus story in this storybook concludes: "Jesus was making the sad things come untrue. He was mending God's broken world".
May our brokenness around ethnicity and gender continue to mend...may one day these sad realities indeed be untrue.
Gabe and I read it nightly, well almost nightly, and we have for a few years now. He knows which story is coming. He will pipe in when I read the refrain of God's "Never stopping, never giving up, unbreaking, always and forever love". I enjoy how these timeless narratives are retold to give voice to Jesus' mission on earth as God's mouthpiece to a broken world, or "everything God wanted to say to the whole world - in a person"
A few nights ago, Gabe and I read "He's here!", the Lukan nativity story. The angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, and as I read this story for the umpteenth time Gabe put his arm up to the illustration of the angel and said "he is the same color as me....cool!". Sure enough, Jago the illustrator portrayed an angel with a lovely brown skin tone. Not only does every story whisper Jesus' name, but the illustrator ensured that the biblical narrative included the story of each reader. God's never giving up always and forever love in ethnically inclusive! Cool!
Last night we read "A little girl and a poor frail lady", the story of Jairus' daughter. As Jairus ran past Jesus' helpers, Gabe queried "where are the sisters? It's all brothers". I was stumped. And rather than subject my 8 year old to the gendered context of the early church, I kept on reading reminding myself of the promise of God's rescue plan...a plan that is unfolding but not yet fulfilled: The Jairus story in this storybook concludes: "Jesus was making the sad things come untrue. He was mending God's broken world".
May our brokenness around ethnicity and gender continue to mend...may one day these sad realities indeed be untrue.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Generation Gap Fail
I admit it. I re-entered the world of dating via the internet. I was 41, a single mom, and a full-time employee. It's not as if I had time to attempt to meet other singles in real time. I'm way not a bar person. My church doesn't have a "singles" ministry. And, I mean I was 41 and terrified to date again anyhow. Dating from a distance felt less threatening.
It's not that I didn't think it was weird. I did. And I do. A male friend suggested that I should do it, that I'd get a lot of "hits" on Match.com. I so wasn't into having my picture viewed by perfect strangers, nor did I really want how I looked to be the primary driver for starting a relationship. I tried the 3 month eharmony trial. Actually, I did the trial twice about six months apart. Who knew that a simple change of e-address could give me two free trials? Creative frugality has its perks.
Was eharmony an adventure? You bet. I was matched with the same man in each trial. I guess he hadn't found his 23 dimensions of compatibility match. Hm. He was a skiier and asked me a lot of questions about fitness....and I mean a lot. He abruptly "closed the match" with me in "open communication" when I said I exercised but wasn't obsessed about it. I think he got defensive when I said "obsessed". I didn't get past the multiple choice and 'must have/can't stand' lists with many "matches". Three actually. Two of those I never met. One I did.
I've been dating that one for a year and a half. After a year, we introduced our children. I've met his parents. He's met my mom. We've done holidays together. And, you know what? The fact that we met on eharmony still feels weird to both of us.
I thought perhaps the weirdness of internet dating was pronounced for us mid-lifers. After all, the young adult generation has grown up with the internet. It's probably just part of their world.
I was mistaken.
I was teaching a class of first year college students recently. We were discussed "social capital" in America. One of Putnam's questions is how technology has impacted the state of community in America. I don't know how, but the class dialogue went to internet dating. Simply said, they thought it was totally weird. As I listened to their rants about how bizarre it is to meet people on-line (to which I am sympathetic mind you), I started to smirk. It's not good when a college teacher smirks. Finally, I had to come clean.
I used it as a teachable moment. I admitted that I'd been dating a wonderful man for some time that I'd met on-line. Quickly, the dialogue started to back track. "My aunt met her husband on line; her marriage is great!", etc. And I stopped them. I said, no you have asserted a thesis: "People who date on-line are weird". Now, you have to make a decision. If your thesis is correct, then I am weird. If I am not weird, then your thesis should be modified. And, of course, I affirmed that my being weird is a very real possibility.
The jury on the class thesis is still out. But even if I am weird, I am enjoying the fruits of my odd foray into on-line dating.
It's not that I didn't think it was weird. I did. And I do. A male friend suggested that I should do it, that I'd get a lot of "hits" on Match.com. I so wasn't into having my picture viewed by perfect strangers, nor did I really want how I looked to be the primary driver for starting a relationship. I tried the 3 month eharmony trial. Actually, I did the trial twice about six months apart. Who knew that a simple change of e-address could give me two free trials? Creative frugality has its perks.
Was eharmony an adventure? You bet. I was matched with the same man in each trial. I guess he hadn't found his 23 dimensions of compatibility match. Hm. He was a skiier and asked me a lot of questions about fitness....and I mean a lot. He abruptly "closed the match" with me in "open communication" when I said I exercised but wasn't obsessed about it. I think he got defensive when I said "obsessed". I didn't get past the multiple choice and 'must have/can't stand' lists with many "matches". Three actually. Two of those I never met. One I did.
I've been dating that one for a year and a half. After a year, we introduced our children. I've met his parents. He's met my mom. We've done holidays together. And, you know what? The fact that we met on eharmony still feels weird to both of us.
I thought perhaps the weirdness of internet dating was pronounced for us mid-lifers. After all, the young adult generation has grown up with the internet. It's probably just part of their world.
I was mistaken.
I was teaching a class of first year college students recently. We were discussed "social capital" in America. One of Putnam's questions is how technology has impacted the state of community in America. I don't know how, but the class dialogue went to internet dating. Simply said, they thought it was totally weird. As I listened to their rants about how bizarre it is to meet people on-line (to which I am sympathetic mind you), I started to smirk. It's not good when a college teacher smirks. Finally, I had to come clean.
I used it as a teachable moment. I admitted that I'd been dating a wonderful man for some time that I'd met on-line. Quickly, the dialogue started to back track. "My aunt met her husband on line; her marriage is great!", etc. And I stopped them. I said, no you have asserted a thesis: "People who date on-line are weird". Now, you have to make a decision. If your thesis is correct, then I am weird. If I am not weird, then your thesis should be modified. And, of course, I affirmed that my being weird is a very real possibility.
The jury on the class thesis is still out. But even if I am weird, I am enjoying the fruits of my odd foray into on-line dating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
