the old videos I found this:
I have tried to find out when it is/was coming out. The latest date I could find regarding press releases was something that said it was held up because of the writers' strike. I wrote to the poster of the vid and asked when it is scheduled for release...we'll see if I hear back and I will keep you posted.
this is Ash Greyson's blog but it has not been updated in a while....(I guess a new kid could put a damper on blog time.....*shrug*.)
(I really hope I said 'writers' strike' in my note to him, not 'writers' block' -- LOL. I need more sleep!)
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
Blast from the Past
I saw on another blog some folks reliving 80's and early 90's Christian Rock. SWEET! So, I have searched the youtube and selected some of my favorites for your remembering pleasure.
The first I select because not only do I love the song, but I am pretty sure my dad edited the video when he was working at Park Road Productions in the 80's. I have great memories of being at those studious and I vague recollections of the peptobismal pink headboard in this video. The ironic thing was that years later when Forest Hill had bought the property and had remodeled the studio area into a glorified gymnasium where they held services (before they built the sanctuary) we saw Randy Stonehill in concert. I guess the world does keep turnin' round.
Here is another oldy. I remember going to Mylon & Brokenhearts concert in Ohio in 88? with my friend Lisa. She was way into the Christian music stuff then, and I was more of a newbie since in 88 I was 12 and just starting to pick out music for myself. And apparently, this is what I picked:
Remember, these were the times when popular christian eschatology was determined by "Thief in the Night" and whatever far-fetched drama Hal Lindsey was promoting. (LaHaye and Jenkins, eat your heart out!) But even more funny is the computer the guy is using and the 45" floppy...wtf? Though I remember those - we had some great video games for our Commodore 64, and don'tcha forget it!
We sang this one in youth choir. I am pretty sure that was when everyone was rocking the 3" high teased and hairsprayed bangs. I should dig up those pics.
The first I select because not only do I love the song, but I am pretty sure my dad edited the video when he was working at Park Road Productions in the 80's. I have great memories of being at those studious and I vague recollections of the peptobismal pink headboard in this video. The ironic thing was that years later when Forest Hill had bought the property and had remodeled the studio area into a glorified gymnasium where they held services (before they built the sanctuary) we saw Randy Stonehill in concert. I guess the world does keep turnin' round.
Here is another oldy. I remember going to Mylon & Brokenhearts concert in Ohio in 88? with my friend Lisa. She was way into the Christian music stuff then, and I was more of a newbie since in 88 I was 12 and just starting to pick out music for myself. And apparently, this is what I picked:
Remember, these were the times when popular christian eschatology was determined by "Thief in the Night" and whatever far-fetched drama Hal Lindsey was promoting. (LaHaye and Jenkins, eat your heart out!) But even more funny is the computer the guy is using and the 45" floppy...wtf? Though I remember those - we had some great video games for our Commodore 64, and don'tcha forget it!
We sang this one in youth choir. I am pretty sure that was when everyone was rocking the 3" high teased and hairsprayed bangs. I should dig up those pics.
And if you stuck it this long, I will leave you something a little less crunchy and more old school:
(you have to click the link and I will personally take you out to dinner and worship at your feet if you can tell me who sang it - not the band (its in the ID on the song) but who was IN the band at that time.....)
***updated to see if that link works better***
Saturday, March 8, 2008
what books tell me about who I am
i have always loved to read. I don't remember a time when reading wasn't one of my favorite things to do. It is built into my routine: i read before going to sleep every night, i read during quiet lunches at home when I can enjoy 20 minutes of solitude, i read whenever traveling, and any time i have to wait in line or can justify the gratuitous action by the obligation to some other space occupying activity. it is my escape, my alone-time carved out of time occupied by other people and responsibilities.
usually i read a mixture of classics, with sci-fi and biographies (often of a historic nature). this year, of course, i have read many textbooks spanning world history from top to bottom. lately, however, i have noticed a trend of weariness in my reading. usually i love the artsy philosophical works of fiction that define certain era's of our existence. my three most recent are: The Fountainhead (which I just finished last night), Invitation to a Beheading (which I am still trying to finish) and To Kill a Mockingbird (which I am reading with my 8th grade class). I had never read The Fountainhead before, and find Rand's characters' long speeches to be tedious and overwritten. (I might just be feeling that way because the book was 687 pages of small type). The story itself was interesting, (though I still have a hard time stomaching the rape scene no matter how symbolic it was) but the message seemed philosophically shallow to me. This is perhaps where I am disappointed. Rand's work is supposed to be this great treatise on individualism and the rightness of the aspirations of man, and even a hand-up to capitalism, but the 100% humanistic basis to me made all of ther characters lack depth. I would be interested to discuss with my friend, Suzanna, what her thoughts on the book are, since she is an avowed communist. I just cannot buy for a moment that putting the integrity of one's own selfishness above vows and sacrifice is a philosophy to be embraced - though I did appreciate the willingness of Roark's character to invalidate other's selfish criticisms in favor of maintaining his integrity. I am conflicted over this book.
Nabokov's book caught my attention when it was mentioned in "Reading Lolita in Tehran" by Azar Nafisi. Nafisi quotes Nabokov in several places and piqued my interests through her explaination of oppression and human endeavors to quench the spirit. I generally enjoy Russian literature (such as I can get my hands on in English: Tolstoy, Chekov, and Dostoyevsky to a lesser extent) and I think under other circumstances I would enjoy this book also. The sticking point for me is the change in my physical location since I read "Reading Lolita in Tehran" - I was happily and expectantly enscounced in my life in Charlotte when I read Nafisi and all of her lofty and inspiring tales of freeing the human spirit through literature and art were very appealing. Here, in my developing country circumstances, I find my brain absorbed with understanding survival skills just to inhabit my day without feeling defeated. I have less sympathy for Cincinnatus C. and his self-imposed prison. I guess what I am trying to say is that whatever part of my brain that passionately loved the intangible realm of mental calesthenics finds itself worn out by the sheer effort of existing here.
Harper Lee's work has long been one of my top 5 favorite books. She writes about big ideas simply and with colorful and real language. I sympathize with the tomboy Scout on her journey toward maturity and understanding of the prejudiced and unfair world we live in. As a history teacher reading it with my 8th grade class, I appreciate that Lee has added texture, shape, depth, sensation to the things that I have been trying to explain to my students from rather dry and biased textbooks. But, I recognize that part of the appeal for me is the familiarity of Lee's writing. Not only have I read the book at least half a dozen times, but the story takes place in a setting I am familiar with and language I am comfortable with - namely that of the South. As I travel and consider differences between cultures (not only abroad, but inside the U.S. also) I find a growing fondness for the South and the traditions it holds. To read Lee's book, rought with the struggles of Depression Era Mississippi is still to be taken back to familiar territory, not to try to wade through a mythical land of imprisonment or the pre-WWII high 'intellectual' society of NYC. I think I crave the familiar.
And this all makes sense, I suppose. Far from home. Tired and sick I want to feel comforted. The excitement which normally drives me towards books outside of my experience is also causing me to criticize their characters and the obsessions they embody. As I consider my reaction to the things I read I think I get a clearer picture of my own experiences. I want to allow these insights to soften my edges and allow the affection for home and the familiar to feed my love for my peers, family and home. I strive for the unknown, and in doing so I am often critical of the familiar. I want to be understanding of the familiar and hesitantly expectant of the unknown.
All of this is just me vomitting onto my blog in an attempt to capture some piece of the internal experience here to ponder later when the novelty of being comfortable has worn off and the weariness of the mundane has set in again.
Have I mentioned I would really like to live in Australia or New Zealand for a year?
usually i read a mixture of classics, with sci-fi and biographies (often of a historic nature). this year, of course, i have read many textbooks spanning world history from top to bottom. lately, however, i have noticed a trend of weariness in my reading. usually i love the artsy philosophical works of fiction that define certain era's of our existence. my three most recent are: The Fountainhead (which I just finished last night), Invitation to a Beheading (which I am still trying to finish) and To Kill a Mockingbird (which I am reading with my 8th grade class). I had never read The Fountainhead before, and find Rand's characters' long speeches to be tedious and overwritten. (I might just be feeling that way because the book was 687 pages of small type). The story itself was interesting, (though I still have a hard time stomaching the rape scene no matter how symbolic it was) but the message seemed philosophically shallow to me. This is perhaps where I am disappointed. Rand's work is supposed to be this great treatise on individualism and the rightness of the aspirations of man, and even a hand-up to capitalism, but the 100% humanistic basis to me made all of ther characters lack depth. I would be interested to discuss with my friend, Suzanna, what her thoughts on the book are, since she is an avowed communist. I just cannot buy for a moment that putting the integrity of one's own selfishness above vows and sacrifice is a philosophy to be embraced - though I did appreciate the willingness of Roark's character to invalidate other's selfish criticisms in favor of maintaining his integrity. I am conflicted over this book.
Nabokov's book caught my attention when it was mentioned in "Reading Lolita in Tehran" by Azar Nafisi. Nafisi quotes Nabokov in several places and piqued my interests through her explaination of oppression and human endeavors to quench the spirit. I generally enjoy Russian literature (such as I can get my hands on in English: Tolstoy, Chekov, and Dostoyevsky to a lesser extent) and I think under other circumstances I would enjoy this book also. The sticking point for me is the change in my physical location since I read "Reading Lolita in Tehran" - I was happily and expectantly enscounced in my life in Charlotte when I read Nafisi and all of her lofty and inspiring tales of freeing the human spirit through literature and art were very appealing. Here, in my developing country circumstances, I find my brain absorbed with understanding survival skills just to inhabit my day without feeling defeated. I have less sympathy for Cincinnatus C. and his self-imposed prison. I guess what I am trying to say is that whatever part of my brain that passionately loved the intangible realm of mental calesthenics finds itself worn out by the sheer effort of existing here.
Harper Lee's work has long been one of my top 5 favorite books. She writes about big ideas simply and with colorful and real language. I sympathize with the tomboy Scout on her journey toward maturity and understanding of the prejudiced and unfair world we live in. As a history teacher reading it with my 8th grade class, I appreciate that Lee has added texture, shape, depth, sensation to the things that I have been trying to explain to my students from rather dry and biased textbooks. But, I recognize that part of the appeal for me is the familiarity of Lee's writing. Not only have I read the book at least half a dozen times, but the story takes place in a setting I am familiar with and language I am comfortable with - namely that of the South. As I travel and consider differences between cultures (not only abroad, but inside the U.S. also) I find a growing fondness for the South and the traditions it holds. To read Lee's book, rought with the struggles of Depression Era Mississippi is still to be taken back to familiar territory, not to try to wade through a mythical land of imprisonment or the pre-WWII high 'intellectual' society of NYC. I think I crave the familiar.
And this all makes sense, I suppose. Far from home. Tired and sick I want to feel comforted. The excitement which normally drives me towards books outside of my experience is also causing me to criticize their characters and the obsessions they embody. As I consider my reaction to the things I read I think I get a clearer picture of my own experiences. I want to allow these insights to soften my edges and allow the affection for home and the familiar to feed my love for my peers, family and home. I strive for the unknown, and in doing so I am often critical of the familiar. I want to be understanding of the familiar and hesitantly expectant of the unknown.
All of this is just me vomitting onto my blog in an attempt to capture some piece of the internal experience here to ponder later when the novelty of being comfortable has worn off and the weariness of the mundane has set in again.
Have I mentioned I would really like to live in Australia or New Zealand for a year?
Friday, March 7, 2008
Drama at school & magnanimity
This school week has been full of drama. I write about it for two reasons:
1. so that those of you who read this can offer a prayer for the JCS staff and students that God will come and intersect our lives with His refocusing power so that the problems that distract us from eternity will fade away.
2. so that when I have left this place and am no longer burdened by these issues, that I will remember that 'this too shall pass' and that the entirely different problems I face then are just a reminder of the fact that God renews and changes both us and our circumstances.
The thing about drama is that it always seems to be about things blown way out of proportion to their real significance or severity in the course of our lives. I had a friend say to me the other week, and I think she was entirely correct, that even though I might not always 'cause' the drama, I am by nature a dramatic person. That I am sure feeds into things. Also, I realize that when I get passionate about something (which is almost always) I tend to use imperative language which offends or at the very least makes defensive those with whom I am disagreeing. Which brings me to my college-level word - magnanimity.
There are many words I have and can use to describe myself: intense, passionate, determined, opinionated, insightful, perseverant, adventurous, committed, responsible, inteligent, etc. I do not think that these are bad quailities...but I do think that while most of you read them you will agree that they are not the 'gentler' or quieter qualities. I have long since given up on being a 'quiet' person. Even when I speak very little I feel that my words are loud. So, I am praying for a new quality to be added to these: magnanimity. I want people to say, "yes, Magnanimous should be added to that list of attributes."
Dictionary.com defines magnanimous as:
1.
generous in forgiving an insult or injury; free from petty resentfulness or vindictiveness: to be magnanimous toward one's enemies.
2.
high-minded; noble: a just and magnanimous ruler.
3.
proceeding from or revealing generosity or nobility of mind, character, etc.: a magnanimous gesture of forgiveness.
I think, in my search for what is loving, that I can strive to embrace this word. I am going to write it on several sheets of paper and staple or tape it on my gradebook, my notebook, my bedroom wall, my 6th grade classroom. I want to be reminded to let my perceived injuries roll off my back, to not take people personally, to not feel the need for revenge. I want to be high-minded and noble. I want to be generous and forgiving. I want my students to look back and say, "Wow, Ms. Rich sure changed. She WAS magnanimous and fair in all her dealings." I know this might not happen in this year. I know that change is a slow process and we are all subject to set backs. having received a rather sharp reminder that my striving has yet produced perfection or even understanding I have to return again to a more simplistic attempt to pursue and convey love so today, for this week, for the month of March I want to work on magnanimity in the face of all the drama and conflict at school. I want to keep my mouth shut, my ears open, my mind willing to see another's perspective and most of all I want to be generous, kind and forgiving; selfless because I do not take things personally.
May God find my efforts humble and an offering to Him in His mighty greatness and may He be pleased to lift me up and support my ineptitude and inabilities so that HIS love might shine through me, and I might decrease.
1. so that those of you who read this can offer a prayer for the JCS staff and students that God will come and intersect our lives with His refocusing power so that the problems that distract us from eternity will fade away.
2. so that when I have left this place and am no longer burdened by these issues, that I will remember that 'this too shall pass' and that the entirely different problems I face then are just a reminder of the fact that God renews and changes both us and our circumstances.
The thing about drama is that it always seems to be about things blown way out of proportion to their real significance or severity in the course of our lives. I had a friend say to me the other week, and I think she was entirely correct, that even though I might not always 'cause' the drama, I am by nature a dramatic person. That I am sure feeds into things. Also, I realize that when I get passionate about something (which is almost always) I tend to use imperative language which offends or at the very least makes defensive those with whom I am disagreeing. Which brings me to my college-level word - magnanimity.
There are many words I have and can use to describe myself: intense, passionate, determined, opinionated, insightful, perseverant, adventurous, committed, responsible, inteligent, etc. I do not think that these are bad quailities...but I do think that while most of you read them you will agree that they are not the 'gentler' or quieter qualities. I have long since given up on being a 'quiet' person. Even when I speak very little I feel that my words are loud. So, I am praying for a new quality to be added to these: magnanimity. I want people to say, "yes, Magnanimous should be added to that list of attributes."
Dictionary.com defines magnanimous as:
1.
generous in forgiving an insult or injury; free from petty resentfulness or vindictiveness: to be magnanimous toward one's enemies.
2.
high-minded; noble: a just and magnanimous ruler.
3.
proceeding from or revealing generosity or nobility of mind, character, etc.: a magnanimous gesture of forgiveness.
I think, in my search for what is loving, that I can strive to embrace this word. I am going to write it on several sheets of paper and staple or tape it on my gradebook, my notebook, my bedroom wall, my 6th grade classroom. I want to be reminded to let my perceived injuries roll off my back, to not take people personally, to not feel the need for revenge. I want to be high-minded and noble. I want to be generous and forgiving. I want my students to look back and say, "Wow, Ms. Rich sure changed. She WAS magnanimous and fair in all her dealings." I know this might not happen in this year. I know that change is a slow process and we are all subject to set backs. having received a rather sharp reminder that my striving has yet produced perfection or even understanding I have to return again to a more simplistic attempt to pursue and convey love so today, for this week, for the month of March I want to work on magnanimity in the face of all the drama and conflict at school. I want to keep my mouth shut, my ears open, my mind willing to see another's perspective and most of all I want to be generous, kind and forgiving; selfless because I do not take things personally.
May God find my efforts humble and an offering to Him in His mighty greatness and may He be pleased to lift me up and support my ineptitude and inabilities so that HIS love might shine through me, and I might decrease.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Here is the brief synopsis of Holly’s trip from my perspective. There will be gaps, etc. but hopefully this will provide enough info to jog my memory when I start forgetting the details of our experiences. 2/22 – Holly arrived in Santiago Friday afternoon. Karen Speciale and I picked her up at the airport and brought her up to Jarabacoa. (2 cities visited) Holly, Rachel and I had dinner together at El Rancho down by the Caribe Tours station (both Holls and I had chicken crepes and they were yummiliscious.) We watched Luther that night and went to sleep to prepare for our beach trip in the morning.
2/23 – We got a late start due to my ineptness at gathering things together quickly. I am not nearly as efficient down here as I am at home (though I procrastinate and run late regardless of my geographical location) so we missed the 10 am bus to La Vega. We took a Gua-gua (sp?) from Jarabacoa to La Vega. (More about that interesting form of Dominican Transportation later.) We arrived in La Vega just after noon.
We thought there would be a bus to Sosua within 20 minutes according to the schedule, but we waited over 2 hours. Had a few miscommunications with the bus ticket person and the eventual bus driver but fought our way onto the bus and arrived in Sosua about 3 hours later where we took a taxi to Cabarete and checked into our hotel. Cabarete is on the North coast of the DR about 45 minutes from Puerto Plata. We had dinner on the beach where we ran into a few other teachers from JCS (they were kind enough to reserve our hotel room and save us some stress – Thanks Katie!)
Then we went into town and Holly went to a concery and I babysay for some friends.
Which brings us to today, 3/2, when I am blogging all of the fun and excitement. Today we went to church then I went to school this afternoon to do some work. Holly flies back tomorrow morning and I will miss her ALOT. It has been fun! Too bad about my camera though. Mourning will begin tomorrow in the morning as is appropriate. And I will teach classes for the first time in a week and try not to murder my childrens.
Hasta Luego!
2/23 – We got a late start due to my ineptness at gathering things together quickly. I am not nearly as efficient down here as I am at home (though I procrastinate and run late regardless of my geographical location) so we missed the 10 am bus to La Vega. We took a Gua-gua (sp?) from Jarabacoa to La Vega. (More about that interesting form of Dominican Transportation later.) We arrived in La Vega just after noon.
We thought there would be a bus to Sosua within 20 minutes according to the schedule, but we waited over 2 hours. Had a few miscommunications with the bus ticket person and the eventual bus driver but fought our way onto the bus and arrived in Sosua about 3 hours later where we took a taxi to Cabarete and checked into our hotel. Cabarete is on the North coast of the DR about 45 minutes from Puerto Plata. We had dinner on the beach where we ran into a few other teachers from JCS (they were kind enough to reserve our hotel room and save us some stress – Thanks Katie!)
I did not take any pictures of the hotel room we were in the first two nights, but it was nice. 2/24 - The next morning we got up and ate breakfast at a bakery called "Dick" (no 's as proper English would seem to imply - errrr..... anyway....) 
and then laid on the beach and soaked up rays. Very gratifying. Beautiful day. 
That night we went and sat at a nice little bistro and had mojito's and hummus while writing in our journals and just enjoying the warmth of the evening breeze. I like this picture of holly: 
Later we ate and Jose O'shay's where we met a guy named Mike who was enjoying a long weekend away from the snow and bustle of New York. Though neither Holly nor I had the presence of mind to take a picture of him, he did take this one of us at the end of the night. 
2/25 - We got up and bummed around for a few hours that morning. Sat by the pool and read, etc. Very nice and relaxing. Then we headed off for Sosua to see the beach down there. 
We took a gua-gua again - this time a much shorter ride and quite funny. Catching a gua-gua requires standing on the side of the road and looking expectantly at the over-packed 13 passenger vans that come barrelling down the road overflowing with people. On our 5 rides, 21 passengers was the highest denisity we experienced. 
We wandered around and ended up at (unbeknownst to us) the beach that many of my friends will be visiting in April at the Casa Marina Resort: 
These pictures do not do the beach justice. The water was so clear. It was gorgeous.
2/26 - We came back to Jarabacoa on the bus, etc. (5 cities so far) and then went to a dinner at the house of the parents of one of my 6th graders.
2/27-2/28 - I was horrendously sick and do not remember anything really other than the fever and the vomitting. UGGGGG! But Holls went to school and hung out with the kidlets.
2/29 - We went on the school field trip to Santo Domingo and visited the National Museum of Natural History, The Mercy Gate and The House of Diego Columbus (Christopher's son.) All very fun. Here are excerpts:
3/1 - We went and watched some of my 6th and 7th graders at baseball practice:
Then we went into town and Holly went to a concery and I babysay for some friends.
Which brings us to today, 3/2, when I am blogging all of the fun and excitement. Today we went to church then I went to school this afternoon to do some work. Holly flies back tomorrow morning and I will miss her ALOT. It has been fun! Too bad about my camera though. Mourning will begin tomorrow in the morning as is appropriate. And I will teach classes for the first time in a week and try not to murder my childrens.
Hasta Luego!
The Unbearable Awfulness of Being
Instead of pondering how short life is and how inconsequential (because we all know that on my darker days I can certainly go to that place) I instead offer you the truth of how easily we lose those things we value.
Friday I was on a field trip with the highschoolers in Santo Domingo. Although the day was quite nice, the museum was horrendously hot. I was carrying my bookbag, my camera and a bulletin I was using to fan myself with hopes of overcoming the nausea of stagnant air and second-rate displays. We were not allowed to tour the museum independently (though all we could have done was look since the Dominican distaste for reading extended to their displays so one probably would not have known what one was looking at anyway...except that the tour guide didn't really help answer that question either, but I digress) and the tourguide has gone down in my mind as the museum-nazi trying to enforce from her 5'4" 115 lbs stature the silence of 50 tremendously uncomfortable students who had just been cooped up on mini-vans for 3 hours. Museum-Nazi was rude if anyone even looked like they were going to make noise or move a step away (for a breath of air) from the person they were crammed next to. One of my students asked me to hold her notebook while she shifted some stuff around and in an effort to take her notebook and not drop what I was holding without awakening the dragon; I dropped my digital camera. The cord slipped right through my fingers and it his the floor with an obviously fatal smack - so far I have not been able to get it to turn on again.
Woe is me!!! I need a camera and my heart is broken into pieces inside because I can no longer send you picture and crappy videos via my blog. Please address all letters of sympathy and appropriate floral bouquets to my Dominican abode where I will be in deep mourning for at least a week (which will begin promptly as soon as Holly has taken her leave of me, for a hostess should not neglect her guest due to a loss; even one of such magnitude!)
Adios mi amor, mi cámara digital! I shall miss you!
Friday I was on a field trip with the highschoolers in Santo Domingo. Although the day was quite nice, the museum was horrendously hot. I was carrying my bookbag, my camera and a bulletin I was using to fan myself with hopes of overcoming the nausea of stagnant air and second-rate displays. We were not allowed to tour the museum independently (though all we could have done was look since the Dominican distaste for reading extended to their displays so one probably would not have known what one was looking at anyway...except that the tour guide didn't really help answer that question either, but I digress) and the tourguide has gone down in my mind as the museum-nazi trying to enforce from her 5'4" 115 lbs stature the silence of 50 tremendously uncomfortable students who had just been cooped up on mini-vans for 3 hours. Museum-Nazi was rude if anyone even looked like they were going to make noise or move a step away (for a breath of air) from the person they were crammed next to. One of my students asked me to hold her notebook while she shifted some stuff around and in an effort to take her notebook and not drop what I was holding without awakening the dragon; I dropped my digital camera. The cord slipped right through my fingers and it his the floor with an obviously fatal smack - so far I have not been able to get it to turn on again.
Woe is me!!! I need a camera and my heart is broken into pieces inside because I can no longer send you picture and crappy videos via my blog. Please address all letters of sympathy and appropriate floral bouquets to my Dominican abode where I will be in deep mourning for at least a week (which will begin promptly as soon as Holly has taken her leave of me, for a hostess should not neglect her guest due to a loss; even one of such magnitude!)
Adios mi amor, mi cámara digital! I shall miss you!
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
So much to say
I have so much that I want to update. I have pictures from trips and visits and things that I want to say and show and tell about, but all that will have to wait for the moment.
The past two weeks have been extremely busy. Right now I am teaching 7 classes, and at the moment in 4 of them I am teaching areas of history that I do not have extensive knowledge in which makes preparation more tedious and time consuming. Tutoring, entertaining and household responsibilities have filled up the remainder of my schedule. Additionally, I am very excitedly anticipating the arrive of my friend, Holly, from the states. I am so excited about the encouragement and solace I expect to find in her time here with us. Both she and I have spoken of how excited we are to spend time in the Word and in prayer for each other during her time here. I look forward to what God is planning on teaching us through our fellowship.
School politics combined with the 'letters of intent' that are due next week have most of the American teaching staff on edge. We were told in this morning's meeting that there is a MANDITORY meeting of all JCS employees (really, they mean all American teaching staff) tomorrow night. Rachel and I have had plans for tomorrow night for over two weeks now and are really struggling with the question of whether to cancel them and go to the meeting or stand our ground and insist that the Board give to the American teachers the same respect they would expect from us. I have mentioned before that teachers here are little more than children's servants, expected that for a few measley dollars a month we should subject ourselves to all forms of inconsideration and humiliation. The bottom line to the whole issue is that although we all signed on to teach at a 'Christian school' what we are really teaching at is a school with Christian teachers, but a secular board. I have really struggled with not wanting to label the Dominican board members as 'non-believers' as only God knows their hearts and the relationship which they have with Him. The problem is that people will know we are Christians by our fruit and by the love we have for each other. With few notable exceptions what I have seen from the board are a lot of nice people who are pleasant to speak with, but who have no real substance or genuine desire to seek God's will for our lives. That being stated, is it even necessary to indulge in conjecture about their spiritual inheritance? Is it not enough to recognize that they are not pursuing a program of facilitating their teachers to more effectively spread the gospel and Word of God?
In summary, please please please pray for the staff and teachers at JCS. Please pray for the Board members and the students. Please pray that God will provide wisdom and will redeem what has been the greatest struggle since we arrived in the fall - disunity and miscommunication. Students watch our example without the discernment to understand who is speaking from right motives and who is self-seeking and they don't see the reasons behind the discord, just the noise from the discord itself. Please pray for us all!
in peace,
The past two weeks have been extremely busy. Right now I am teaching 7 classes, and at the moment in 4 of them I am teaching areas of history that I do not have extensive knowledge in which makes preparation more tedious and time consuming. Tutoring, entertaining and household responsibilities have filled up the remainder of my schedule. Additionally, I am very excitedly anticipating the arrive of my friend, Holly, from the states. I am so excited about the encouragement and solace I expect to find in her time here with us. Both she and I have spoken of how excited we are to spend time in the Word and in prayer for each other during her time here. I look forward to what God is planning on teaching us through our fellowship.
School politics combined with the 'letters of intent' that are due next week have most of the American teaching staff on edge. We were told in this morning's meeting that there is a MANDITORY meeting of all JCS employees (really, they mean all American teaching staff) tomorrow night. Rachel and I have had plans for tomorrow night for over two weeks now and are really struggling with the question of whether to cancel them and go to the meeting or stand our ground and insist that the Board give to the American teachers the same respect they would expect from us. I have mentioned before that teachers here are little more than children's servants, expected that for a few measley dollars a month we should subject ourselves to all forms of inconsideration and humiliation. The bottom line to the whole issue is that although we all signed on to teach at a 'Christian school' what we are really teaching at is a school with Christian teachers, but a secular board. I have really struggled with not wanting to label the Dominican board members as 'non-believers' as only God knows their hearts and the relationship which they have with Him. The problem is that people will know we are Christians by our fruit and by the love we have for each other. With few notable exceptions what I have seen from the board are a lot of nice people who are pleasant to speak with, but who have no real substance or genuine desire to seek God's will for our lives. That being stated, is it even necessary to indulge in conjecture about their spiritual inheritance? Is it not enough to recognize that they are not pursuing a program of facilitating their teachers to more effectively spread the gospel and Word of God?
In summary, please please please pray for the staff and teachers at JCS. Please pray for the Board members and the students. Please pray that God will provide wisdom and will redeem what has been the greatest struggle since we arrived in the fall - disunity and miscommunication. Students watch our example without the discernment to understand who is speaking from right motives and who is self-seeking and they don't see the reasons behind the discord, just the noise from the discord itself. Please pray for us all!
in peace,
Sunday, February 10, 2008
More thoughts on love, and our greatest Reward
Rachel and I listened to Tim Keller's sermon on Luke 15- Keller points out that 'the prodigal' son is a misnomer because the parable is about two sons and the father's love and forgiveness of them both; the first for disobedience and the second perhaps for pride.
I have often related better to the elder son - the one who served faithfully and felt unrewarded. Many of us have 'followed the rules' and served without feeling like we have received the reward or affirmation we have earned. From the 'reward' perspective the father in the parable (and by interpretation God) seems unjust and unconcerned about obedience. I have a hard time reconciling 'what you sow you will reap' or the parable of the talents to this rewarded delinquent scenario; it seems like the younger son had his cake and ate it too! My sympathy has always been with the older brother, and from man's perspective the story isn't fair! Why doesn't the older brother receive his reward?
Keller explains that both sons were guilty of a lack of love for the father. The first through rebellion, the second through a false righteousness that sought reward not relationship. They both missed out on relationship with their father and it was that relationship which was the true reward.
Perhaps the church in Corinth was not unlike these two brothers. The church struggled with corruption and immorality not unlike the younger brother but it also contained the older brother, arguing over whose gifts were greater and worth more recognition. The Apostle John makes a case for the first son lacking love (John 5:3-4) and Paul clearly addresses the lack of love of the second in 1 Cor. 13. Both the elder and the youger as well as the church in Corinth were missing out on the blessing of obedience because obedience without love is profitless and love without obedience is false.
I also consider the older brother's motivation. One could easily imagine him to be disdainful or bitter because his compassion is not for his brother who has humiliated his family through his folly. Instead of running to embrace his brother and inquire about his well being and welcome him home; the elder immediately takes offense at the father's display of affection. Regardless of any hypothetical history between the siblings, the clear answer is that the motive of the elder was not love. Nor was his confrontation of his father in such a public and ridiculous way. Perhaps the younger did not return from a motive of love, but he did present himself with humility. The self-justification of the elder might have been justified in the harm done him, but he forfeit the reward he claimed through the very way he claimed it.
Which brings us back to the application - the ultimate reward is our relationship with the Father who has given us all good things. It seems obvious that rebellion would hinder that relationship, but less obvious to the 20th century reader is the understanding that the older brother through rightness had distanced himself as far from the father as the younger. One might speculate that because the actions of the elder were done without love he missed out on the joy of the giving, and because love was not his motive, he could not accept the goodness with which his prodigal brother was received. Myself, similarly must wrestle with the motivation of my obedience and the recognition that my bitterness toward others I deem to be less deserving of good fortune only indicates my lack of love. I am not suggesting that we will accept every slight with no pang of frustration, nor that we place ourselves in situations where our temptations toward selfishness might draw us away from love, but that we consider how similar we all are in our sinfulness and that we refocus on our relationship with the Father as our greatest reward and that we judge our opinions of deserved reward by the measure of love, not gifting or self-sacrifice, etc.
I have often related better to the elder son - the one who served faithfully and felt unrewarded. Many of us have 'followed the rules' and served without feeling like we have received the reward or affirmation we have earned. From the 'reward' perspective the father in the parable (and by interpretation God) seems unjust and unconcerned about obedience. I have a hard time reconciling 'what you sow you will reap' or the parable of the talents to this rewarded delinquent scenario; it seems like the younger son had his cake and ate it too! My sympathy has always been with the older brother, and from man's perspective the story isn't fair! Why doesn't the older brother receive his reward?
Keller explains that both sons were guilty of a lack of love for the father. The first through rebellion, the second through a false righteousness that sought reward not relationship. They both missed out on relationship with their father and it was that relationship which was the true reward.
Perhaps the church in Corinth was not unlike these two brothers. The church struggled with corruption and immorality not unlike the younger brother but it also contained the older brother, arguing over whose gifts were greater and worth more recognition. The Apostle John makes a case for the first son lacking love (John 5:3-4) and Paul clearly addresses the lack of love of the second in 1 Cor. 13. Both the elder and the youger as well as the church in Corinth were missing out on the blessing of obedience because obedience without love is profitless and love without obedience is false.
I also consider the older brother's motivation. One could easily imagine him to be disdainful or bitter because his compassion is not for his brother who has humiliated his family through his folly. Instead of running to embrace his brother and inquire about his well being and welcome him home; the elder immediately takes offense at the father's display of affection. Regardless of any hypothetical history between the siblings, the clear answer is that the motive of the elder was not love. Nor was his confrontation of his father in such a public and ridiculous way. Perhaps the younger did not return from a motive of love, but he did present himself with humility. The self-justification of the elder might have been justified in the harm done him, but he forfeit the reward he claimed through the very way he claimed it.
Which brings us back to the application - the ultimate reward is our relationship with the Father who has given us all good things. It seems obvious that rebellion would hinder that relationship, but less obvious to the 20th century reader is the understanding that the older brother through rightness had distanced himself as far from the father as the younger. One might speculate that because the actions of the elder were done without love he missed out on the joy of the giving, and because love was not his motive, he could not accept the goodness with which his prodigal brother was received. Myself, similarly must wrestle with the motivation of my obedience and the recognition that my bitterness toward others I deem to be less deserving of good fortune only indicates my lack of love. I am not suggesting that we will accept every slight with no pang of frustration, nor that we place ourselves in situations where our temptations toward selfishness might draw us away from love, but that we consider how similar we all are in our sinfulness and that we refocus on our relationship with the Father as our greatest reward and that we judge our opinions of deserved reward by the measure of love, not gifting or self-sacrifice, etc.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
what my dad said
Jay: I just got back from dinner at ryan's which reminded me of when you worked at quency's. And retail clothing, and up at wee hours to make bread, and managing million $ moves, and handling complex scheduling, and now endurng third world country conditions in an under-appreciated situation...sticking it out because you said you would. i THINK i HAVE FAILED to tell you often enough how proud I am of you and what you have done and continue to do. I love you.
that was worth more than a thousand dollar check! I think I can float through the next week now.
that was worth more than a thousand dollar check! I think I can float through the next week now.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
'the most excellent way'
It cannot be by mistake that Paul wrote the passage about the necessity of love in the middle of his explanation of spiritual gifts and their place in the body. I like the way that my NIV has the chapters sub-divided in 1 Corinthians; the passage on love starts with 1 Cor. 12:31b, "And now I will show you the most excellent way." It is a good reminder that the passage on love comes imbedded in a passage about the unity of the body of Christ and the importance of the variety of spiritual gifts. In the NASB 1 Corinthians 12:31 reads, "But earestly desire the greater gifts. And I show you still a more excellent way." The NLT says 'So you should earnestly desire the most helpful gifts. But now let me show you a way of life that is best of all."
There must be a reason that Paul sandwiched this passage about love into a larger conversation about diversity in the body of Christ and the necessity for the variety of gifts. He had just finished explaining that different gifts and roles in the church are like different parts of our physical bodies - all interconnected and necessary with those parts that look less exciting really deserving the greater praise. Paul seems to be appealing to the church in Corinth not to try to judge value or significance based upon the roles served in the church, and that regardless of the impressiveness or sacrifice of the gift, that without the perfection of love the sum total is nothing. Any gift plus love equals righteousness but any gift, no matter how great, without love is nothing.
When we start talking about love it is easy to be shallow, as ironic as that sounds. Sometimes I think it reads like a list and if we don't boast and we are appropriately compassionate when we see others hurting, then somehow we have passed the 'love' test. Obviously love is not a list of does and don'ts. I don't think that the list that Paul gives is exhaustive. I think he was trying to show that love is all encompassing and completely empty of man's sinful nature. Love is perfect. Anywhere that perfection exists, love is there. Love has no sin.
A call to live a life of love is nothing less than a call to live a life of perfection. But specifically Paul seems to speak of this most important quality in the companionship of the spiritual gifts. Some spiritual gifts seems to 'channel' love more easily. A gift of healing, for example, might seem to be imbedded with love - unseparable. But then I think of one of the most popular T.V. shows on television today about an irrascible doctor who seems concerned with everything but loving his patients, his staff members, his family. Other gifts seem to be more disposed to devalue the importance of love - gifts of discernment or wisdom or prophecy without love are fruitless. Perhaps that is why Paul gives the examples that he does,
Though I speak with the tongue of men and of angels and have not love then I am just making noise. And if I have the gift of prophecy, and understand mysteries and have inconceivable faith but I have no love then I am nothing. And if I give everything I have, every act of selflessness even to the point of death, but have no love I have gained nothing." The church at Corinth was arguing over spiritual gifts and it was like Paul was saying to them, "Stop, your arguing is pointless because you are all part of the body, and besides who cares if you are amazingly generous or think you have tremendous insight to the scriptures, if you are behaving unlovingly toward each other then your gifts are all wasted and don't matter at all!!!"
Furthermore, I would suggest that Paul is specifically speaking to the church in Corinth about how they were treating each other. It would hardly seem to matter to non-believers what spiritual gifts a member of the body of Christ claimed as their own. Those issues only matter inside the body. I can imagine Paul's letter being read and the addressees listening to his list about love and thinking of exactly the specific instances in which they were not acting lovingly toward each other. "Love is patient" (so we shouldn't fuss at each other when we don't 'get' some truth immediately?) love is kind (not vindictive), it doesn't envy (or covet another's gift), it is not proud (assuming my gift is greater than another's), it is not self-seeking (looking to have my accomplishments recognized), it keeps no record of wrongs (you mean, everytime someone else fails I am not supposed to hold it against them or justify my own poor behavior by theirs?) - instead love believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things and never runs out.
Sometimes in Christian communities we seem to be concerned about living the Christian life for the approval of others. Maybe it is a martyr complex or a desire to be found blameless in the eyes of a superior or a friend. Maybe a need for self-remonstration; an assuaging of guilt. But these all all inwardly focused and concerned with the effect of the action, not with the betterment of the object of the 'love' itself. In this line of reasoning I would separate 'acts of kindness' from true love. As mentioned before, there are things that we know we should do and so we do them - to satisfy the should; not because we are genuinely concerned with what is best for the object of the act. I think this is a very dangerous bandage because it looks so much like the real thing - like bandaids that are the color of skin so they are less noticeable to others. My acts of kindness can cover over the broken-ness in my soul and maybe then, from teh outside others cannot see how damaged I am inside. I am not in any way implying that acts of kindness are 'wrong' or that God cannot use them to genuinely benefit the receiver, but that according to Paul even if we were to give away everything we owned - including our bodies but did it outside of love then the result for us is empty and meaningless. I think these acts of kindness bottom out or souls. They cheapen our intentions and make worthless all our efforts and eventually we become discouraged and bitter that all the acts we have so 'sacrificially' done are leaving us unfulfilled and unsatisfied. We are unsatisfied because without love they profit us nothing.
I am in no way implying that all this soul searching guarantees immediate results - far from it. Our sinful flesh is by very nature self-seeking. And I think that even trying to be 'loving' can become an 'act of kindess'. (Again, I am not negating the ability God has to use these acts, but simply stating that we don't find genuine lasting satisfaction in such acts.) In really considering and praying over 1 Cor. 13 and what it needs to mean to my life, I am not even praying that God will make me loving as though I will lay aside 31 years of selfishness in one grand gesture and be pure in motive ever after. What I am praying this week, this month, this semester is that God will teach me to see my actions and motives for what they really are and to consider with heart-breaking honesty whether I am weilding my spiritual gift pointlessly for lack of love and whether the moments that i label 'love' are in fact genuinely concerned with the best for someone besides myself. When I hug that problem student in the morning am I really open for God to call me further into service to someone that grates on me? When I correct a student am I genuinely concerned for their well-being and maturity or am I trying to produce the end result of control? It shreds my gut to think of the number of times I have carried out the right action for the wrong reason (and of course the number of times I have committed the WRONG action for lack of thought!)
Anyway, I am still thinking through all of this. It is baffling, this concept of love. And, as my mother pointed out - you cannot imagine what all-forgiving love is until you have experienced it, and sometimes that experience does not preceed our call to perfection - and love is perfect. I don't know if I am getting any better at it. I can only pray that in seeking love I will find it. I think it is what God wants for me.
There must be a reason that Paul sandwiched this passage about love into a larger conversation about diversity in the body of Christ and the necessity for the variety of gifts. He had just finished explaining that different gifts and roles in the church are like different parts of our physical bodies - all interconnected and necessary with those parts that look less exciting really deserving the greater praise. Paul seems to be appealing to the church in Corinth not to try to judge value or significance based upon the roles served in the church, and that regardless of the impressiveness or sacrifice of the gift, that without the perfection of love the sum total is nothing. Any gift plus love equals righteousness but any gift, no matter how great, without love is nothing.
When we start talking about love it is easy to be shallow, as ironic as that sounds. Sometimes I think it reads like a list and if we don't boast and we are appropriately compassionate when we see others hurting, then somehow we have passed the 'love' test. Obviously love is not a list of does and don'ts. I don't think that the list that Paul gives is exhaustive. I think he was trying to show that love is all encompassing and completely empty of man's sinful nature. Love is perfect. Anywhere that perfection exists, love is there. Love has no sin.
A call to live a life of love is nothing less than a call to live a life of perfection. But specifically Paul seems to speak of this most important quality in the companionship of the spiritual gifts. Some spiritual gifts seems to 'channel' love more easily. A gift of healing, for example, might seem to be imbedded with love - unseparable. But then I think of one of the most popular T.V. shows on television today about an irrascible doctor who seems concerned with everything but loving his patients, his staff members, his family. Other gifts seem to be more disposed to devalue the importance of love - gifts of discernment or wisdom or prophecy without love are fruitless. Perhaps that is why Paul gives the examples that he does,
Though I speak with the tongue of men and of angels and have not love then I am just making noise. And if I have the gift of prophecy, and understand mysteries and have inconceivable faith but I have no love then I am nothing. And if I give everything I have, every act of selflessness even to the point of death, but have no love I have gained nothing." The church at Corinth was arguing over spiritual gifts and it was like Paul was saying to them, "Stop, your arguing is pointless because you are all part of the body, and besides who cares if you are amazingly generous or think you have tremendous insight to the scriptures, if you are behaving unlovingly toward each other then your gifts are all wasted and don't matter at all!!!"
Furthermore, I would suggest that Paul is specifically speaking to the church in Corinth about how they were treating each other. It would hardly seem to matter to non-believers what spiritual gifts a member of the body of Christ claimed as their own. Those issues only matter inside the body. I can imagine Paul's letter being read and the addressees listening to his list about love and thinking of exactly the specific instances in which they were not acting lovingly toward each other. "Love is patient" (so we shouldn't fuss at each other when we don't 'get' some truth immediately?) love is kind (not vindictive), it doesn't envy (or covet another's gift), it is not proud (assuming my gift is greater than another's), it is not self-seeking (looking to have my accomplishments recognized), it keeps no record of wrongs (you mean, everytime someone else fails I am not supposed to hold it against them or justify my own poor behavior by theirs?) - instead love believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things and never runs out.
Sometimes in Christian communities we seem to be concerned about living the Christian life for the approval of others. Maybe it is a martyr complex or a desire to be found blameless in the eyes of a superior or a friend. Maybe a need for self-remonstration; an assuaging of guilt. But these all all inwardly focused and concerned with the effect of the action, not with the betterment of the object of the 'love' itself. In this line of reasoning I would separate 'acts of kindness' from true love. As mentioned before, there are things that we know we should do and so we do them - to satisfy the should; not because we are genuinely concerned with what is best for the object of the act. I think this is a very dangerous bandage because it looks so much like the real thing - like bandaids that are the color of skin so they are less noticeable to others. My acts of kindness can cover over the broken-ness in my soul and maybe then, from teh outside others cannot see how damaged I am inside. I am not in any way implying that acts of kindness are 'wrong' or that God cannot use them to genuinely benefit the receiver, but that according to Paul even if we were to give away everything we owned - including our bodies but did it outside of love then the result for us is empty and meaningless. I think these acts of kindness bottom out or souls. They cheapen our intentions and make worthless all our efforts and eventually we become discouraged and bitter that all the acts we have so 'sacrificially' done are leaving us unfulfilled and unsatisfied. We are unsatisfied because without love they profit us nothing.
I am in no way implying that all this soul searching guarantees immediate results - far from it. Our sinful flesh is by very nature self-seeking. And I think that even trying to be 'loving' can become an 'act of kindess'. (Again, I am not negating the ability God has to use these acts, but simply stating that we don't find genuine lasting satisfaction in such acts.) In really considering and praying over 1 Cor. 13 and what it needs to mean to my life, I am not even praying that God will make me loving as though I will lay aside 31 years of selfishness in one grand gesture and be pure in motive ever after. What I am praying this week, this month, this semester is that God will teach me to see my actions and motives for what they really are and to consider with heart-breaking honesty whether I am weilding my spiritual gift pointlessly for lack of love and whether the moments that i label 'love' are in fact genuinely concerned with the best for someone besides myself. When I hug that problem student in the morning am I really open for God to call me further into service to someone that grates on me? When I correct a student am I genuinely concerned for their well-being and maturity or am I trying to produce the end result of control? It shreds my gut to think of the number of times I have carried out the right action for the wrong reason (and of course the number of times I have committed the WRONG action for lack of thought!)
Anyway, I am still thinking through all of this. It is baffling, this concept of love. And, as my mother pointed out - you cannot imagine what all-forgiving love is until you have experienced it, and sometimes that experience does not preceed our call to perfection - and love is perfect. I don't know if I am getting any better at it. I can only pray that in seeking love I will find it. I think it is what God wants for me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)