The two best services of the year are last night's and tonight's.
Behold the life-giving cross,
on which hung the salvation of the whole world.
Oh, come, let us worship Him.
Oh, how wonderful and beyond all telling
is Your mercy toward us, O God,
that to redeem a slave
You gave Your Son.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Friday, April 06, 2007
Forgiveness of Sins
Some of my friends say that justification not all-important. They think there are other things we need to talk about; they seem to agree with the paper Art Just presented at the 2006 symposium (which can be found at the seminary's website.) While working at church last week, I found some Lenten sermon series that Dr Korby was involved with during his years at Valparaiso. The sermon preached by David G Truemper on 4 April 1979 (Wednesday of Lent 6) was the last in a series of sermons on the Six Chief Parts. One of the concluding paragraphs follows.
Recently a fellow theologian took me to task for making so much of the forgiveness of sins. "There's just more to it than that!" he insisted. He had pretty good sense, for it would be a terrible oversimplification to see the Lord's Supper as the forgiveness of sins -- unless we can come to see that the forgiveness of sin IS the whole of the Christian life. And that is precisely what we may come to see. The mystery of our redemption is that our sin is forgiven, our enmity with God is changed to peace and love. The presence of Christ, crucified and risen, is the confirmation of His word, "Cheer up! Your sin is forgiven!" The communion in His body and blood is our share in what He gave His body for, in what He shed His blood for -- "for you, for the forgiveness of sins." The Eucharist or thanksgiving is the celebration of thanks for our redemption. The sacrifice is always only His, in us and through us and for us. As Luther put it, we offer Christ when we plead His merits as the grounds for the Father's forgiveness, and thus when He offers us to His Father as those washed clean in the blood of the Lamb. All is forgiveness, and forgiveness is all.
Recently a fellow theologian took me to task for making so much of the forgiveness of sins. "There's just more to it than that!" he insisted. He had pretty good sense, for it would be a terrible oversimplification to see the Lord's Supper as the forgiveness of sins -- unless we can come to see that the forgiveness of sin IS the whole of the Christian life. And that is precisely what we may come to see. The mystery of our redemption is that our sin is forgiven, our enmity with God is changed to peace and love. The presence of Christ, crucified and risen, is the confirmation of His word, "Cheer up! Your sin is forgiven!" The communion in His body and blood is our share in what He gave His body for, in what He shed His blood for -- "for you, for the forgiveness of sins." The Eucharist or thanksgiving is the celebration of thanks for our redemption. The sacrifice is always only His, in us and through us and for us. As Luther put it, we offer Christ when we plead His merits as the grounds for the Father's forgiveness, and thus when He offers us to His Father as those washed clean in the blood of the Lamb. All is forgiveness, and forgiveness is all.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Fasting
A lot of confessional folks advocate fasting for Lent. Sounds like a nice idea in theory. But I can't imagine how it would play out in real life for a family. When a huge part of a mommy's time is spent in meal preparation for growing children, how does that work for fasting? I know that according to the "rules," children and pregnant women are not to fast. But when you've got bottomless pits to fill (aka: teenage boys), a lot of time is spent cooking. Maybe I'm just hopelessly short on self-discipline, but I cannot imagine chopping and cooking and stewing and baking, and smelling those delicious smells wafting through the house, setting food before my family, and then not eating it.
I had to do that last week one day because the doctor needed me to fast for some tests. That was awful to have to do my job of cooking and then walk away.
But even if I could do that, then what becomes of family mealtime during times of fasting? If you're not eating, then the family is not gathering at the table to talk each day either. I guess I just can't picture how this would work unless it were a situation where a person (or maybe a couple) normally ate alone, so there was not so much family "fellowship" to forego.
I had to do that last week one day because the doctor needed me to fast for some tests. That was awful to have to do my job of cooking and then walk away.
But even if I could do that, then what becomes of family mealtime during times of fasting? If you're not eating, then the family is not gathering at the table to talk each day either. I guess I just can't picture how this would work unless it were a situation where a person (or maybe a couple) normally ate alone, so there was not so much family "fellowship" to forego.
A New Commandment
This morning at Matins, we were reading and discussing tonight's Gospel (John 13). Kantor wondered why Jesus said it was a "new" command that we should love one another. After all, even in the Old Testament the law was summarized by loving God and loving the neighbor.
Pastor responded that the newness is in the fulfillment of the law. All the things in the Old Testament pointed forward to Christ's death on the cross. In His death is where all things are made new.
We wondered too if the newness had something to do with the pastors no longer sacrificing sheep and goats as in the Old Testament, but instead being willing to sacrifice themselves, laying down their lives as their bore the burden of preaching about the One who laid down His life for atonement for sin. Pastor was not opposed to that thought either. But mostly he wanted to make the connection of the "New Commandment" tonight to tomorrow's epistle (the end of 2 Corinthians 5).
Pastor responded that the newness is in the fulfillment of the law. All the things in the Old Testament pointed forward to Christ's death on the cross. In His death is where all things are made new.
We wondered too if the newness had something to do with the pastors no longer sacrificing sheep and goats as in the Old Testament, but instead being willing to sacrifice themselves, laying down their lives as their bore the burden of preaching about the One who laid down His life for atonement for sin. Pastor was not opposed to that thought either. But mostly he wanted to make the connection of the "New Commandment" tonight to tomorrow's epistle (the end of 2 Corinthians 5).
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Spring
When I was in kindergarten I learned:
Summer is when it's hot, things are growing in your garden, and you get to go swimming.
Fall is when it's no longer so hot, leaves are falling from the trees, and when we pick apples and carve jack-o-lanterns.
Winter is when it's cold, and we go sledding in the snow.
Spring is when it's warm, and the flowers are blooming, and the birds sing and build nests and have baby birds.
Either the people who write these books live in California and Tennessee, or they hibernate through March and April, only to awake to see the part of spring that occurs in May.
Real spring is mud in prelude to green grass. Real spring is crazy weather changes. Forty degree fluctuations in temperature during winter will take you from -15 to +25, all of it cold. Forty degree fluctuations in temperature during summer will take you from 60 to 100, all of it warm. But forty degree fluctuations in spring takes you from 35-degree coat weather to 75-degrees for t-shirts and shorts.
Real spring means enjoying a 70-degree Monday and putting pork chops on the grill, enjoying a 60-degree Tuesday and putting hamburgers on the grill, and then going out on Wednesday to jog in snow flurries while the windchill makes it feel like 5 degrees outside.
Can't wait till May.
Can't wait till May.
Can't wait till May.
At least the sun is up for more than 12 hours a day!
Summer is when it's hot, things are growing in your garden, and you get to go swimming.
Fall is when it's no longer so hot, leaves are falling from the trees, and when we pick apples and carve jack-o-lanterns.
Winter is when it's cold, and we go sledding in the snow.
Spring is when it's warm, and the flowers are blooming, and the birds sing and build nests and have baby birds.
Either the people who write these books live in California and Tennessee, or they hibernate through March and April, only to awake to see the part of spring that occurs in May.
Real spring is mud in prelude to green grass. Real spring is crazy weather changes. Forty degree fluctuations in temperature during winter will take you from -15 to +25, all of it cold. Forty degree fluctuations in temperature during summer will take you from 60 to 100, all of it warm. But forty degree fluctuations in spring takes you from 35-degree coat weather to 75-degrees for t-shirts and shorts.
Real spring means enjoying a 70-degree Monday and putting pork chops on the grill, enjoying a 60-degree Tuesday and putting hamburgers on the grill, and then going out on Wednesday to jog in snow flurries while the windchill makes it feel like 5 degrees outside.
Can't wait till May.
Can't wait till May.
Can't wait till May.
At least the sun is up for more than 12 hours a day!
Day Care Study
Probably lots of us heard the big news from last week about the study on day care. The story reported: "Youngsters who had quality child care before kindergarten had better vocabulary scores by fifth grade, but the more time they spent in child care, the more likely their sixth grade teachers were to report problem behaviors." The media takes care to report that the behavior problems are not large, and they are not anything for parents to worry about.
But did you notice what was considered day care? The article mentions, "In the study, child care was defined as care by anyone other than the child's mother who was regularly scheduled for at least 10 hours per week." Anyone other than the child's mother? Even for 10 or 12 hours a week? That means if Grandma is scheduled to watch the child for 2-3 hours a day, that's considered day care. If DADDY is with his kids for 2-3 hours a day on a regularly scheduled basis, that counts as "day care" in this study.
Interestingly enough, Saturday's follow-up article mentioned that "the study’s lead author, Jay Belsky, is no stranger to controversy. He says he was vilified for an article he wrote in 1986, saying there was 'slow and steady' evidence that non-parental child care, no matter the quality, could lead to developmental problems. Critics called him an ideologue."
When you do sociological research, you have a whole bunch of raw data. What does all that data mean? How can it be put together to make sense to anyone, to show trends, to show differences between groups? First thing to do is to make the groupings, to decide which individual pieces of information are lumped into a "group."
The study's author chose to call it "day care" when anyone other than the mom watched the kids. And still the study showed a difference in behavior!
What would've been the results of the study had the researchers lumped together kids who were A) cared for by a close relative, versus B) kids who were cared for by non-family? In other words, if Munchkin stays with Dad while Mom works, that wouldn't have been considered daycare. Likewise if Munchkin stayed with Grandma.
What would've been the results of the study had the researchers lumped together kids in A) family settings such as a child with a neighbor who watches only the kids from that one family, versus B) a day-care center where there are several babysitters and many many children coming and going throughout the day?
The lead author of the study took his lumps twenty years ago when he released information which indicated that day-care was bad for kids. Now he's sitting there again with a pile of data which shows how harmful day-care is to kids. But he doesn't want to be vilified again. Parents don't want to hear the results of a study that show day-care is bad for kids. Big corporations and the government don't want evidence that day-care is bad for kids. So what to do? What to do? Ah ha! I know what to do! We'll rig the groupings in this research. If we include in the "Day Care Group"
-- the kids who have stay-at-home dads,
-- the kids who stay with Aunt Susie two days a week,
-- the kids who stay with Daddy two evenings a week while Mom waitresses,
-- the kids who stay with Grandma while Mom works full-time, and
-- the kids who stay with the nice neighbor lady who doesn't watch anybody else's kids,
THEN
the "Day Care Group" won't really represent the kids in day-care. Any negative characteristics of that group will be toned down by the fact that a lot of kids in the "Day Care Group" weren't really in day care.
So the really big news of this study is NOT that there was a slight difference in behavior between the kids who were in day-care and those who weren't. The big news should be that even with their incredibly restrictive definition of what it means to NOT be in day-care, there was still a difference in behavior between the two groups of kids. The study results would have been vastly different if they had grouped
-- kids at home with family members, versus
-- kids in small home-like day-care settings, versus
-- kids in day-care centers.
That would not have been popular news!
But did you notice what was considered day care? The article mentions, "In the study, child care was defined as care by anyone other than the child's mother who was regularly scheduled for at least 10 hours per week." Anyone other than the child's mother? Even for 10 or 12 hours a week? That means if Grandma is scheduled to watch the child for 2-3 hours a day, that's considered day care. If DADDY is with his kids for 2-3 hours a day on a regularly scheduled basis, that counts as "day care" in this study.
Interestingly enough, Saturday's follow-up article mentioned that "the study’s lead author, Jay Belsky, is no stranger to controversy. He says he was vilified for an article he wrote in 1986, saying there was 'slow and steady' evidence that non-parental child care, no matter the quality, could lead to developmental problems. Critics called him an ideologue."
When you do sociological research, you have a whole bunch of raw data. What does all that data mean? How can it be put together to make sense to anyone, to show trends, to show differences between groups? First thing to do is to make the groupings, to decide which individual pieces of information are lumped into a "group."
The study's author chose to call it "day care" when anyone other than the mom watched the kids. And still the study showed a difference in behavior!
What would've been the results of the study had the researchers lumped together kids who were A) cared for by a close relative, versus B) kids who were cared for by non-family? In other words, if Munchkin stays with Dad while Mom works, that wouldn't have been considered daycare. Likewise if Munchkin stayed with Grandma.
What would've been the results of the study had the researchers lumped together kids in A) family settings such as a child with a neighbor who watches only the kids from that one family, versus B) a day-care center where there are several babysitters and many many children coming and going throughout the day?
The lead author of the study took his lumps twenty years ago when he released information which indicated that day-care was bad for kids. Now he's sitting there again with a pile of data which shows how harmful day-care is to kids. But he doesn't want to be vilified again. Parents don't want to hear the results of a study that show day-care is bad for kids. Big corporations and the government don't want evidence that day-care is bad for kids. So what to do? What to do? Ah ha! I know what to do! We'll rig the groupings in this research. If we include in the "Day Care Group"
-- the kids who have stay-at-home dads,
-- the kids who stay with Aunt Susie two days a week,
-- the kids who stay with Daddy two evenings a week while Mom waitresses,
-- the kids who stay with Grandma while Mom works full-time, and
-- the kids who stay with the nice neighbor lady who doesn't watch anybody else's kids,
THEN
the "Day Care Group" won't really represent the kids in day-care. Any negative characteristics of that group will be toned down by the fact that a lot of kids in the "Day Care Group" weren't really in day care.
So the really big news of this study is NOT that there was a slight difference in behavior between the kids who were in day-care and those who weren't. The big news should be that even with their incredibly restrictive definition of what it means to NOT be in day-care, there was still a difference in behavior between the two groups of kids. The study results would have been vastly different if they had grouped
-- kids at home with family members, versus
-- kids in small home-like day-care settings, versus
-- kids in day-care centers.
That would not have been popular news!
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
The Streets of Rome
Bible class ended late that Sunday 18 years ago.
As it so happens, there must've been something going on in the congregation that I was unaware of. Pastor Wieting had been talking about closed communion a lot, making a case for it. One of the things he'd discussed a few weeks previous was the difference between "closed communion" and "close communion." The term "closed" came from the early church when the pastor would say, "Deacon, the doors! The doors!" That was the time in the Divine Service when all the not-yet-confirmed members would be required to leave. They could not be present for the sacred mysteries found in the Lord's Supper. The doors were closed behind them. They were welcome for the preaching, but shut out of the building during the Eucharist, until they had been baptized and received into membership.
Also, as it so happens, in recent weeks there had been a child abduction less than an hour away. A stranger abduction, not a family quarrel. A little girl nabbed off her bike in the daylight, less than 1/4 mile from home. In a Mayberry-like town not far from our own Mayberry-like village.
As I said, Bible class went a little long that Sunday. I came upstairs to find the doors of the church open, and my children nowhere to be seen. They weren't in their Sunday School rooms. They weren't in the narthex. They weren't in the nursery. And the outside doors were standing wide open. My three children, aged 2-7, were not in the building. Panic grabbed my heart. I soon found them, playing outdoors on a gorgeous sunny morning, unharmed, and unaware of any reason for Mommy to be having the conniptions fits that ensued.
Wait a minute! What did those mommies do in the early church? After all, the non-communicants were put outside the doors of the church during the communion service. The streets of Rome were decidedly less safe than the streets of small-town central Wisconsin ... even with a child-nabber was on the loose. Did they have church-nurseries in Corinth and Ephesus? If so, who was skipping the Lord's Supper to babysit? How did that work? This just didn't make sense.
Within a week or so, we saw friends, one of whom really knows his church history. I asked Pr Eckardt about it. His response was shocking. He told me that the children weren't sent out in the streets unattended, and they weren't sent to the nursery with a babysitter. They were IN there, partaking of the Sacrament with the adults. (Now, don't anybody tell me that Eckardt is in favor of infant communion. He ain't. And back then he wasn't even real keen on the idea of kids younger than 8th grade communing. So this is not a fellow who was revising history to suit his viewpoint.)
This week Pr Weedon's blog included a quote from St Augustine:
Those who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are denying that Christ is Jesus for all believing infants. Those, I repeat, who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are saying nothing else than that for believing infants, infants that is who have been baptized in Christ, Christ the Lord is not Jesus. After all, what is Jesus? Jesus means Savior. Jesus is the Savior. Those whom he doesn't save, having nothing to save in them, well for them he isn't Jesus. Well now, if you can tolerate the idea that Christ is not Jesus for some persons who have been baptized, then I'm not sure your faith can be recognized as according with the sound rule. Yes, they're infants, but they are his members. They're infants, but they receive his sacraments. They are infants, but they share in his table, in order to have life in themselves. (The Works of Saint Augustine, Part III-Sermons 5:261.)
I've been told that, although it is true that infants were sometimes communed in the early church, it was an unusual thing, a rare thing, something that happened only in certain pockets of heterodox practice. But this quote is from Augustine, for crying out loud. Even Augustine says the babies receive the sacraments. Not just the sacrament of baptism. But sacraments, in the plural. The infants "share in His table."
Is it really so hard to recognize that, through most of church history, wee children were communed when they were baptized? I mean, if people want to argue that what they did for 1200 years of church history in the West (and 2000 years in the East) is wrong, that's one thing. But to argue that it didn't happen?
As it so happens, there must've been something going on in the congregation that I was unaware of. Pastor Wieting had been talking about closed communion a lot, making a case for it. One of the things he'd discussed a few weeks previous was the difference between "closed communion" and "close communion." The term "closed" came from the early church when the pastor would say, "Deacon, the doors! The doors!" That was the time in the Divine Service when all the not-yet-confirmed members would be required to leave. They could not be present for the sacred mysteries found in the Lord's Supper. The doors were closed behind them. They were welcome for the preaching, but shut out of the building during the Eucharist, until they had been baptized and received into membership.
Also, as it so happens, in recent weeks there had been a child abduction less than an hour away. A stranger abduction, not a family quarrel. A little girl nabbed off her bike in the daylight, less than 1/4 mile from home. In a Mayberry-like town not far from our own Mayberry-like village.
As I said, Bible class went a little long that Sunday. I came upstairs to find the doors of the church open, and my children nowhere to be seen. They weren't in their Sunday School rooms. They weren't in the narthex. They weren't in the nursery. And the outside doors were standing wide open. My three children, aged 2-7, were not in the building. Panic grabbed my heart. I soon found them, playing outdoors on a gorgeous sunny morning, unharmed, and unaware of any reason for Mommy to be having the conniptions fits that ensued.
Wait a minute! What did those mommies do in the early church? After all, the non-communicants were put outside the doors of the church during the communion service. The streets of Rome were decidedly less safe than the streets of small-town central Wisconsin ... even with a child-nabber was on the loose. Did they have church-nurseries in Corinth and Ephesus? If so, who was skipping the Lord's Supper to babysit? How did that work? This just didn't make sense.
Within a week or so, we saw friends, one of whom really knows his church history. I asked Pr Eckardt about it. His response was shocking. He told me that the children weren't sent out in the streets unattended, and they weren't sent to the nursery with a babysitter. They were IN there, partaking of the Sacrament with the adults. (Now, don't anybody tell me that Eckardt is in favor of infant communion. He ain't. And back then he wasn't even real keen on the idea of kids younger than 8th grade communing. So this is not a fellow who was revising history to suit his viewpoint.)
This week Pr Weedon's blog included a quote from St Augustine:
Those who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are denying that Christ is Jesus for all believing infants. Those, I repeat, who say that infancy has nothing in it for Jesus to save, are saying nothing else than that for believing infants, infants that is who have been baptized in Christ, Christ the Lord is not Jesus. After all, what is Jesus? Jesus means Savior. Jesus is the Savior. Those whom he doesn't save, having nothing to save in them, well for them he isn't Jesus. Well now, if you can tolerate the idea that Christ is not Jesus for some persons who have been baptized, then I'm not sure your faith can be recognized as according with the sound rule. Yes, they're infants, but they are his members. They're infants, but they receive his sacraments. They are infants, but they share in his table, in order to have life in themselves. (The Works of Saint Augustine, Part III-Sermons 5:261.)
I've been told that, although it is true that infants were sometimes communed in the early church, it was an unusual thing, a rare thing, something that happened only in certain pockets of heterodox practice. But this quote is from Augustine, for crying out loud. Even Augustine says the babies receive the sacraments. Not just the sacrament of baptism. But sacraments, in the plural. The infants "share in His table."
Is it really so hard to recognize that, through most of church history, wee children were communed when they were baptized? I mean, if people want to argue that what they did for 1200 years of church history in the West (and 2000 years in the East) is wrong, that's one thing. But to argue that it didn't happen?
Monday, April 02, 2007
Vista
My computer is nearly five years old, and when I bought it, it wasn't a state-of-the-art machine, but one of the el-cheapo models. It's slow. And it's been in the basement, down there in the dark. I've been considering getting a laptop so I can work outside in the sun, or maybe take it to church with me to catalog stuff in the file cabinet. We had figured we'd stop at a computer store while we were in the city yesterday, and look at some possibilities.
But then we heard about Nathan's computer woes while installing Vista. Add that to my aversion to learning anything new on the computer, and my total clutziness and forgetfulness with regard to cyberthings. When I recalled that all the new PCs have Vista, I decided pretty quickly that I was not interested in computer shopping for quite a while yet!
So today my men disassembled my computer components and took them upstairs to the living room. The computer with the educational programs (spelling drill, math drill, typing tutor, etc) was relegated to the basement. Now I can do some of my work up here where there's sunlight and less frigid temperatures.
But it does seem very very weird to go downstairs with a load of clothes for the wash machine, or go put something away in the pantry, and NOT stop to hit "download mail" on the computer as I go past. If I can't expect to learn Vista without significant brain exertion, why should I expect to get used to checking email in a different location without likewise taxing the brain cells?
But then we heard about Nathan's computer woes while installing Vista. Add that to my aversion to learning anything new on the computer, and my total clutziness and forgetfulness with regard to cyberthings. When I recalled that all the new PCs have Vista, I decided pretty quickly that I was not interested in computer shopping for quite a while yet!
So today my men disassembled my computer components and took them upstairs to the living room. The computer with the educational programs (spelling drill, math drill, typing tutor, etc) was relegated to the basement. Now I can do some of my work up here where there's sunlight and less frigid temperatures.
But it does seem very very weird to go downstairs with a load of clothes for the wash machine, or go put something away in the pantry, and NOT stop to hit "download mail" on the computer as I go past. If I can't expect to learn Vista without significant brain exertion, why should I expect to get used to checking email in a different location without likewise taxing the brain cells?
Sunday, April 01, 2007
Dinner Today
Courtesy of our parents who sent checks for Gary's birthday presents, we went out to dinner today with the family. Yummy! Red Lobster! Thanks, Moms and Dads!
We felt really bad about the miscommunication with Katie. We thought we said we'd be leaving home at 12:00, but she thought she was supposed to meet us at the restaurant at 12. She had a very very long wait. And she had to wait by herself because Nathan was unable to attend. (I don't think Nathan could possibly have come up with a better way to put the final nail in the coffin with regard to the phrase "Nathan's not invited???") Cassie and Paul were also unable to attend, so we had only nine of us. But it was a fun group of people. And we had a really fun waiter too.
We set off the bug-bombs before we vacated the house for the afternoon. Came home to find the floors relatively clean of insect corpses. I fear that is not good. Will bug bombs work when the critters are all in hiding due to cold weather? On the first warm day, will we be overrun again?
We felt really bad about the miscommunication with Katie. We thought we said we'd be leaving home at 12:00, but she thought she was supposed to meet us at the restaurant at 12. She had a very very long wait. And she had to wait by herself because Nathan was unable to attend. (I don't think Nathan could possibly have come up with a better way to put the final nail in the coffin with regard to the phrase "Nathan's not invited???") Cassie and Paul were also unable to attend, so we had only nine of us. But it was a fun group of people. And we had a really fun waiter too.
We set off the bug-bombs before we vacated the house for the afternoon. Came home to find the floors relatively clean of insect corpses. I fear that is not good. Will bug bombs work when the critters are all in hiding due to cold weather? On the first warm day, will we be overrun again?
On a Clear Day
Gary picked up another movie last night. He prevailed upon me to watch for a bit. The kids and I needed to do some schoolwork, but one of my victims students was in the shower. So while we waited for the victim child to arrive in the living room, we figured we could catch the opening scenes and setting of On a Clear Day.
We couldn't stop for something like a mere history book on the Dust Bowl.
It was a good movie. The basic plot was about a man who'd lost his job and didn't know what to do with himself. He decided to swim the English Channel. There were amusing parts and touching parts. At one point in the movie, I just laughed because I wanted to bop several characters upside the head and say, "You people are NOT being as sneaky as you think you are." (Sneaky about leaving a present. Or sneaky about a private dream/goal.) There were parts about dealing with grief and loss, and parts about restoring strained relationships, and parts about forgiveness, and parts about male friendships.
On the whole, I thought it was just a really nice wholesome, sweet movie. I was surprised when Gary pointed out that it's rated PG-13. Then Philip pointed out that there was some "language." I guess he's right. But it's the kind of profanity that has to do with bodily functions, and not the kind that breaks the second commandment. So it didn't register in my brain as the Truly Offensive kind of profanity.
To justify myself with regard to skipping the book on the Dust Bowl, we developed questions and found answers about
- how far it is across the English Channel,
- why there had to be an official observer in the boat,
- where Dover and Calais are,
- why you ought not eat before swimming,
and other things.
We couldn't stop for something like a mere history book on the Dust Bowl.
It was a good movie. The basic plot was about a man who'd lost his job and didn't know what to do with himself. He decided to swim the English Channel. There were amusing parts and touching parts. At one point in the movie, I just laughed because I wanted to bop several characters upside the head and say, "You people are NOT being as sneaky as you think you are." (Sneaky about leaving a present. Or sneaky about a private dream/goal.) There were parts about dealing with grief and loss, and parts about restoring strained relationships, and parts about forgiveness, and parts about male friendships.
On the whole, I thought it was just a really nice wholesome, sweet movie. I was surprised when Gary pointed out that it's rated PG-13. Then Philip pointed out that there was some "language." I guess he's right. But it's the kind of profanity that has to do with bodily functions, and not the kind that breaks the second commandment. So it didn't register in my brain as the Truly Offensive kind of profanity.
To justify myself with regard to skipping the book on the Dust Bowl, we developed questions and found answers about
- how far it is across the English Channel,
- why there had to be an official observer in the boat,
- where Dover and Calais are,
- why you ought not eat before swimming,
and other things.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
An Abusive Wife
Call the cops.
Have them come arrest me.
My family is SO abused.
Do you know what my poor miserable husband endured this week? He didn't get a cherry pie for his birthday. Can you believe it??? How much abuse can a man be expected to endure?
And then, to rub salt into his wounds (and because there are no cherries in the house), his abusive wife made banana cream pie. How can he be expected to eat his second-favorite pie in the world, when he hasn't yet eaten his cherry pie this week? Oh, the horrors!
Okay, seriously now....
You have to wonder about how well you're feeding your family when you begin to realize how spoiled they are. Oh, the veggies should've been boiled for about one minute less. Or it would've been nice if the food had been cooked in a shallower pan so that it could develop a crunchier crust. Or the cantaloupe should've ripened one day longer or one day shorter.
It's almost enough to make me intentionally give them cruddy food, so their tastebuds aren't so outrageously spoiled and so the bar isn't set so high! Like the line in the movie "Searching for Bobby Fischer," when you get really good at something, people expect fantastic results all the time. Anything average becomes disappointing. Maybe it's better to keep expectations low. Anybody for PBJs on white bread for the next 26 meals??
Have them come arrest me.
My family is SO abused.
Do you know what my poor miserable husband endured this week? He didn't get a cherry pie for his birthday. Can you believe it??? How much abuse can a man be expected to endure?
And then, to rub salt into his wounds (and because there are no cherries in the house), his abusive wife made banana cream pie. How can he be expected to eat his second-favorite pie in the world, when he hasn't yet eaten his cherry pie this week? Oh, the horrors!
Okay, seriously now....
You have to wonder about how well you're feeding your family when you begin to realize how spoiled they are. Oh, the veggies should've been boiled for about one minute less. Or it would've been nice if the food had been cooked in a shallower pan so that it could develop a crunchier crust. Or the cantaloupe should've ripened one day longer or one day shorter.
It's almost enough to make me intentionally give them cruddy food, so their tastebuds aren't so outrageously spoiled and so the bar isn't set so high! Like the line in the movie "Searching for Bobby Fischer," when you get really good at something, people expect fantastic results all the time. Anything average becomes disappointing. Maybe it's better to keep expectations low. Anybody for PBJs on white bread for the next 26 meals??
Friday, March 30, 2007
Brian's Song
Short movie that we managed to make time for last time, partially by turning it on during supper. Brian's Song is a movie I saw when it was new back in the 70s. I remembered the part about the friendship. Back when I saw it the first time, I didn't realize what a big deal it was that a black man and a white man became friends and even [gasp] roommates when they played for the Bears. I remembered the part about Piccolo dying of cancer at the end. What I didn't remember was how funny the movie was!!
Going off totally off on a tangent now: Watching the movie sure made me realize something about the change in language in our society. When somebody near the start of the movie expressed surprise or shock, he said, "Golly!" Golly? Wow, that was a nice change from the "oh my god" you hear all the time on tv and in movies now. There was also a scene that would never ever make it in a movie today, where Piccolo was trying to egg Sayers on to do his exercises to get back his strength after an injury. He called his friend a particular N-word (a 6-letter pejorative for a black person), and the two guys ended up laughing uproariously over the stupid attempt to anger Sayers. Definitely NOT something you'd see in a movie today!
Something else we've had the last week or so from our Blockbuster membership is the first disk of the second season of The Flying Nun. The kids and Gary have seen more of it than I have. But I've caught a few episodes when I've been working in the same room. And these are just a crack-up too. Fun and light-hearted and silly and wholesome.
Going off totally off on a tangent now: Watching the movie sure made me realize something about the change in language in our society. When somebody near the start of the movie expressed surprise or shock, he said, "Golly!" Golly? Wow, that was a nice change from the "oh my god" you hear all the time on tv and in movies now. There was also a scene that would never ever make it in a movie today, where Piccolo was trying to egg Sayers on to do his exercises to get back his strength after an injury. He called his friend a particular N-word (a 6-letter pejorative for a black person), and the two guys ended up laughing uproariously over the stupid attempt to anger Sayers. Definitely NOT something you'd see in a movie today!
Something else we've had the last week or so from our Blockbuster membership is the first disk of the second season of The Flying Nun. The kids and Gary have seen more of it than I have. But I've caught a few episodes when I've been working in the same room. And these are just a crack-up too. Fun and light-hearted and silly and wholesome.
Infant Communion
My husband tells me there's an interesting discussion going on over on Pr Petersen's blog. I'd love to go look, but laundry and cooking call. Looking forward to reading later.
How can it be that I have accomplished so much nothing today? Okay, Maggie and I did some schoolwork. And we have a nice dinner: stroganoff over noodles, hot fresh whole-wheat bread (with homemade peach jam), roasted carrots, and homemade banana cream pie. I sure do like eating, but sometimes I wonder if I oughtn't be doing something else with my time other than cooking.
How can it be that I have accomplished so much nothing today? Okay, Maggie and I did some schoolwork. And we have a nice dinner: stroganoff over noodles, hot fresh whole-wheat bread (with homemade peach jam), roasted carrots, and homemade banana cream pie. I sure do like eating, but sometimes I wonder if I oughtn't be doing something else with my time other than cooking.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
"Third Use" and Penance
There's a difference of opinion within our synod about whether the "third use of the law" needs to be specifically and pointedly preached. Some pastors think that preaching the law is what is necessary, and that the Holy Spirit will also use that damning law to inform Christians of how to live. Other pastors think that an important part of sermons is to say, "Now that you've been forgiven, thus-and-such is what you should be doing."
Regardless of what he intends, when the pastor "preaches third use" his people are hearing that good works are more important than forgiveness. A pastor who "preaches third use" (as opposed to "preaching the law") definitely thinks forgiveness is important; he also knows that it is the Gospel that causes us to want to obey the law. But somehow, nevertheless, the message still comes through that Christianity is mostly about being good.
How does this effect his people's desire for private confession?
When pastors "preach third use," do they have people clamoring for the pastor to "hear their confession and pronounce forgiveness to them in order to fulfill God's will"? When pastors "preach third use," what goes through their people's minds when they dare to begin thinking about the possibility of maybe considering going to confession?
Even though my father-confessor does NOT tell me what to do or how to be good, even though he does not "preach third use," even though he does not give penance, I still sometimes fear what he might say. There are times my sinful nature wonders, "Can I really say this in front of him? What if he comes back with a line, 'Well, if you're really sorry about that, then you'll do' yada-yada-yada." And I know I'm incapable of doing whatever-it-is. But then I grab hold of myself and think about the sermons. In his sermons, the point of the law is to slay the sinner, to leave the sinner no means of patting himself on the back, no means of thinking that I'm doing an okay job of being a good little Christian, no means of planning out "better obedience" (which would allow me to pat myself on my back later, if'n I can't do it quite yet). In his sermons, the point of the law is to smash our self-righteousness so that Christ's righteousness is the only thing we can cling to. So I know it will be the same in the confessional. The point of his absolution is to assure me of what Christ has done for me, assure me of Christ's love, assure me of His promises. The point is not to make sure I start behaving properly. Pastor trusts that the gospel will do that of its own accord, in God's time, and in God's way, and with God's measure of good fruit.
But if a pastor's sermon preaches "third use of the law" to make me into a good person, then how would I ever know to trust him with my confession made in private? How would I know that he would forgive instead of giving me law to perform ("third use" though it be)? If I am weak and sinful and cannot perform the law, what good would it be to go to the pastor, suspecting that I might just to be told what I should do? Does the commitment to "preach third use of the law" among us undermine the yearning of the people for that Sacrament of Private Absolution? Does "preaching third use" teach us to shy away from that Sacrament?
Regardless of what he intends, when the pastor "preaches third use" his people are hearing that good works are more important than forgiveness. A pastor who "preaches third use" (as opposed to "preaching the law") definitely thinks forgiveness is important; he also knows that it is the Gospel that causes us to want to obey the law. But somehow, nevertheless, the message still comes through that Christianity is mostly about being good.
How does this effect his people's desire for private confession?
When pastors "preach third use," do they have people clamoring for the pastor to "hear their confession and pronounce forgiveness to them in order to fulfill God's will"? When pastors "preach third use," what goes through their people's minds when they dare to begin thinking about the possibility of maybe considering going to confession?
Even though my father-confessor does NOT tell me what to do or how to be good, even though he does not "preach third use," even though he does not give penance, I still sometimes fear what he might say. There are times my sinful nature wonders, "Can I really say this in front of him? What if he comes back with a line, 'Well, if you're really sorry about that, then you'll do' yada-yada-yada." And I know I'm incapable of doing whatever-it-is. But then I grab hold of myself and think about the sermons. In his sermons, the point of the law is to slay the sinner, to leave the sinner no means of patting himself on the back, no means of thinking that I'm doing an okay job of being a good little Christian, no means of planning out "better obedience" (which would allow me to pat myself on my back later, if'n I can't do it quite yet). In his sermons, the point of the law is to smash our self-righteousness so that Christ's righteousness is the only thing we can cling to. So I know it will be the same in the confessional. The point of his absolution is to assure me of what Christ has done for me, assure me of Christ's love, assure me of His promises. The point is not to make sure I start behaving properly. Pastor trusts that the gospel will do that of its own accord, in God's time, and in God's way, and with God's measure of good fruit.
But if a pastor's sermon preaches "third use of the law" to make me into a good person, then how would I ever know to trust him with my confession made in private? How would I know that he would forgive instead of giving me law to perform ("third use" though it be)? If I am weak and sinful and cannot perform the law, what good would it be to go to the pastor, suspecting that I might just to be told what I should do? Does the commitment to "preach third use of the law" among us undermine the yearning of the people for that Sacrament of Private Absolution? Does "preaching third use" teach us to shy away from that Sacrament?
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
American Idol
Bummers! Chris left tonight!
My plan was for Sanjayah, Haley, Chris R, or Phil to leave soon. I didn't care which order, but it was okay with me if they didn't come back. Jordin and Lakisha were on my next tier. I wanted Chris S, Gina, Blake, and Melinda to be the ones who held out till May. I figure the final night should come down to a choice between Blake and Melinda, even though Chris S is [was.... boohoo] my favorite.
Well, I've managed to discipline myself much better this year, and not get totally hooked on this season's Idol. But with Chris getting low-votes last night, the show just lost much of its draw.
My plan was for Sanjayah, Haley, Chris R, or Phil to leave soon. I didn't care which order, but it was okay with me if they didn't come back. Jordin and Lakisha were on my next tier. I wanted Chris S, Gina, Blake, and Melinda to be the ones who held out till May. I figure the final night should come down to a choice between Blake and Melinda, even though Chris S is [was.... boohoo] my favorite.
Well, I've managed to discipline myself much better this year, and not get totally hooked on this season's Idol. But with Chris getting low-votes last night, the show just lost much of its draw.
Encouragement
The organist wasn't at church on Sunday. So tonight she was asking Pastor how it went: if there had been a substitute or if we'd sung a capella. She mentioned again about how his wife should be trying her hand at accompanying the congregation.
I know she's intending to be encouraging. But it just doesn't come off that way. It's pressure. Unwanted pressure.
There are people who have free time to devote to reading or to learning new things or to hobbies. I would dearly love to spend time learning the organ, or at least getting good enough at piano to be able to accompany the congregation on organless Sundays. I would love to get my German back and learn it well enough to be able to read Gerhardt's hymns without having to puzzle through them auf Deutsch. I would love to have the time to take care of the yard properly and to grow a vegetable garden. Maybe even an orchard and an herb garden and a flower garden. I would love to get my Greek back. I would love to read a book that I want to read to myself, instead of reading only what's necessary for the kids' schoolwork. I would love to sew again. I would love to write articles for magazines and the local newspaper. I would love to catch up on projects (like photo albums). I would love to rest.
But I can't. So I don't. I do what's necessary, just like a lot of other moms. And that's okay. Really, it is. But what makes it hard is when other people presume that I'm as bored as they are, and they have suggestions for what I can be doing in my spare time to "serve others." And what they intended as encouragement just becomes another weight, another load, another discouragement.
I know she's intending to be encouraging. But it just doesn't come off that way. It's pressure. Unwanted pressure.
There are people who have free time to devote to reading or to learning new things or to hobbies. I would dearly love to spend time learning the organ, or at least getting good enough at piano to be able to accompany the congregation on organless Sundays. I would love to get my German back and learn it well enough to be able to read Gerhardt's hymns without having to puzzle through them auf Deutsch. I would love to have the time to take care of the yard properly and to grow a vegetable garden. Maybe even an orchard and an herb garden and a flower garden. I would love to get my Greek back. I would love to read a book that I want to read to myself, instead of reading only what's necessary for the kids' schoolwork. I would love to sew again. I would love to write articles for magazines and the local newspaper. I would love to catch up on projects (like photo albums). I would love to rest.
But I can't. So I don't. I do what's necessary, just like a lot of other moms. And that's okay. Really, it is. But what makes it hard is when other people presume that I'm as bored as they are, and they have suggestions for what I can be doing in my spare time to "serve others." And what they intended as encouragement just becomes another weight, another load, another discouragement.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Hospital Update
We spent the day at the Cleft Palate Clinic. We saw an x-ray video of Maggie speaking, and we saw the aerial view of the top of the back of her throat while speaking too. She's got very good movement in her palate, as well as lateral movement in the sides of her throat that's nearly average. The speech pathologist rated her as having "moderate hypernasality." One small point of her palate can reach all the way to the back of her throat to shut off air supply to her nose while speaking, but WAY too much air is leaking through into her nose.
So she will be having another surgery. For those of you who know about vcfs surgeries, it'll be the sphincter, not the flap. It allows for less obstruction of the airway than does the flap surgery. Basically, she will have some muscle tissue near her tonsils cut and wrapped around the back of the inside of her throat. That will fill up space, making it easier for the palate to reach to the back of the throat, and also make for less work to pull in the sides of her throat too.
Both the pathologist and the ENT are totally at a loss to explain the sudden onset of the hypernasality on the day of the open-heart surgery. They said that adenoids decrease in size at puberty, and so the palate-length she was given during her Furlow surgery is no longer adequate, due to the changes in her pharynx. Basically, they expect the back wall of her throat to move a little further from her palate during puberty. But that doesn't explain why she was fine on the morning of November 28 and hypernasal after she was extubated. But they do know how to fix it.
The doctor understood our leeriness of scheduling surgery soon, since it's only been four months since the open-heart. So we're planning for it to be in August, after the wedding and CCA symposium and HT conference and LCMS convention. This is a "little" surgery, only three hours in OR, and probably only a one-night stay in the hospital. The lung problem I see on the horizon is that she may not be able to blow up balloons post-surgery, as it would be too much pressure on the stitches in her pharynx.
I was pleased with what the speech pathologist reported. Maggie is quite understandable, given the amount of air that's escaping through her nose during speech. If she speaks slowly, enunciates clearly, adds a little volume, and opens her mouth wide while talking, she can compensate nicely for the hypernasality. But it's more work than it should be for her. Hence the need for surgery. Maggie's tests with the pathologist demonstrated very good articulation of sounds. The only thing she had ANY problem with whatsoever was a smidge of laziness on the s-sound. But her r-sound and all the others were spot-on. Yippee for that!
The other nice thing is it sounds like we're not necessarily going to need speech therapy. "Just" surgery. So it's not going to have to be two or three trips a week to Milwaukee for therapy. Another yippee!
So she will be having another surgery. For those of you who know about vcfs surgeries, it'll be the sphincter, not the flap. It allows for less obstruction of the airway than does the flap surgery. Basically, she will have some muscle tissue near her tonsils cut and wrapped around the back of the inside of her throat. That will fill up space, making it easier for the palate to reach to the back of the throat, and also make for less work to pull in the sides of her throat too.
Both the pathologist and the ENT are totally at a loss to explain the sudden onset of the hypernasality on the day of the open-heart surgery. They said that adenoids decrease in size at puberty, and so the palate-length she was given during her Furlow surgery is no longer adequate, due to the changes in her pharynx. Basically, they expect the back wall of her throat to move a little further from her palate during puberty. But that doesn't explain why she was fine on the morning of November 28 and hypernasal after she was extubated. But they do know how to fix it.
The doctor understood our leeriness of scheduling surgery soon, since it's only been four months since the open-heart. So we're planning for it to be in August, after the wedding and CCA symposium and HT conference and LCMS convention. This is a "little" surgery, only three hours in OR, and probably only a one-night stay in the hospital. The lung problem I see on the horizon is that she may not be able to blow up balloons post-surgery, as it would be too much pressure on the stitches in her pharynx.
I was pleased with what the speech pathologist reported. Maggie is quite understandable, given the amount of air that's escaping through her nose during speech. If she speaks slowly, enunciates clearly, adds a little volume, and opens her mouth wide while talking, she can compensate nicely for the hypernasality. But it's more work than it should be for her. Hence the need for surgery. Maggie's tests with the pathologist demonstrated very good articulation of sounds. The only thing she had ANY problem with whatsoever was a smidge of laziness on the s-sound. But her r-sound and all the others were spot-on. Yippee for that!
The other nice thing is it sounds like we're not necessarily going to need speech therapy. "Just" surgery. So it's not going to have to be two or three trips a week to Milwaukee for therapy. Another yippee!
Monday, March 26, 2007
Podunkville
The doctor needs me to go to the hospital for some tests. She couldn't get me in to the local hospital today. But tomorrow I have to be at Children's all day with Maggie for speech pathology, x-ray, and ENT. So I floated the idea of having me take the tests while we're at the big medical complex in the city tomorrow. Doctor thought it was a great idea. She called to make the appt. They laughed at her! The first appt available is in two weeks. She needs test results sooner than that, so she called around the urgent care facilities in our county until she could find someone who could fit me in today. Goodness gracious, the big city sounds like the Canadian health care system: you better not need anything right away. Emergencies are not permitted because they weren't scheduled in advance. ;-) It sure is different out here in Podunkville where there aren't so many people to fit in.
The Strain of Multi-Tasking
Mom: Maggie, you didn't finish your apple. You ate less than half of it. Get back in here and eat the whole thing so it's not wasted.
Daughter: But Mom, right now I'm doing my schoolwork with the pictures of the body, and putting the parts where they go on the big piece.
Mom: You can come in here and eat your apple AND play with the anatomy felts.
(But she couldn't. She stood there and began to eat the apple.)
Son (coming to the kitchen closet to fetch a broom): Hey, the vacuum cleaner is sitting in the hallway instead of being in the closet. Hey, Maggie, come put the vacuum away.
Daughter: I can't. I'm eating my apple. MOM TOLD ME TO.
Mom: First, you were supposed to put the vacuum away without being told. Second, you can chew a bite of apple while you put the vacuum away now, and then come back and get another bite of apple.
(Daughter managed, with great pains, to accomplish this 3-second endeavor of multi-tasking.)
Mom: Now, you need to mop the floor.
Daughter: But, Mom, you told me to eat my apple!
Mom (just a mite exasperated): Take a bite of apple. Chew it while you go to the closet and get the mop bucket. [Task is accomplished.] Now take a bite of apple and, while you're chewing, go fetch the ammonia for the bucket. [Task is accomplished.] Now take a bite of apple and chew it while you're filling the mop bucket with water. [Task is accomplished.]
(Mother wonders how long these minute & detailed instructions will have to be given before child figures out that two things can be done at once. Can you even imagine how hard it would be to accomplish anything at home if you had to WAIT -- doing nothing else -- for the wash machine to get done before you could change a load of laundry??)
Daughter: But Mom, right now I'm doing my schoolwork with the pictures of the body, and putting the parts where they go on the big piece.
Mom: You can come in here and eat your apple AND play with the anatomy felts.
(But she couldn't. She stood there and began to eat the apple.)
Son (coming to the kitchen closet to fetch a broom): Hey, the vacuum cleaner is sitting in the hallway instead of being in the closet. Hey, Maggie, come put the vacuum away.
Daughter: I can't. I'm eating my apple. MOM TOLD ME TO.
Mom: First, you were supposed to put the vacuum away without being told. Second, you can chew a bite of apple while you put the vacuum away now, and then come back and get another bite of apple.
(Daughter managed, with great pains, to accomplish this 3-second endeavor of multi-tasking.)
Mom: Now, you need to mop the floor.
Daughter: But, Mom, you told me to eat my apple!
Mom (just a mite exasperated): Take a bite of apple. Chew it while you go to the closet and get the mop bucket. [Task is accomplished.] Now take a bite of apple and, while you're chewing, go fetch the ammonia for the bucket. [Task is accomplished.] Now take a bite of apple and chew it while you're filling the mop bucket with water. [Task is accomplished.]
(Mother wonders how long these minute & detailed instructions will have to be given before child figures out that two things can be done at once. Can you even imagine how hard it would be to accomplish anything at home if you had to WAIT -- doing nothing else -- for the wash machine to get done before you could change a load of laundry??)
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Bugs
On those few warm days we had a couple of weeks ago, I noticed that the centipedes had gotten really bad in the basement again. But then we dropped down to freezing temps, and the situation improved. But now we're having nice, pretty, warm days again, and they're back. Walking on centipede corpses (or the live bodies that you are turning into corpses as you be the Bigfoot Godzilla tromping on the little dudes) sounds like walking on a floor littered with potato chips. All that crunching... yuck!
The Asian beetles are back too, but not in such massive numbers as the box elder bugs. It's just plain disgusting when bugs crawl on you, in bed, during the middle of the night. Yuck again! We've sprayed so much poison in the south end of the house that I can taste it. We bought bombs but can't find a time until next weekend when we can all be out of the house for the necessary amount of time for them to take effect. I'm hoping that within a week this will all be a bad memory.
The Asian beetles are back too, but not in such massive numbers as the box elder bugs. It's just plain disgusting when bugs crawl on you, in bed, during the middle of the night. Yuck again! We've sprayed so much poison in the south end of the house that I can taste it. We bought bombs but can't find a time until next weekend when we can all be out of the house for the necessary amount of time for them to take effect. I'm hoping that within a week this will all be a bad memory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
