The Beautiful Heresy- Christian Universalism

Am I a heretic? Maybe. If believing that God is all powerful, all loving, wiser than His creation and perfectly willing and capable of saving all of His children makes me a heretic, sign me up.


Life After Death- The Burden of Proof- Book Review  

, , , 9 comments

Cover of "Life After Death: The Burden of...Cover of Life After Death: The Burden of Proof
If you've known me for any length of time, you probably know I am obsessed with the topic of life after death.  It's probably the result of being told for the first 18 years of my life that this life really didn't matter except as the test for whether you go to heaven or hell.  Whatever, the reason, I still have this fascination with peeking behind the veil and seeing what's on the other side.  I don't know how many books I've read on near death experiences and life after death.  But, of all the books I have read, I think Deepak Chopra's "Life After Death, the Burden of Proof" is probably my favorite.

The book doesn't try to prove life after death merely by talking about NDEs.  It's really more about cosmology and the nature of reality than it is about trying to track the soul after we die.  Chopra draws deeply from an ancient Indian tradition called "Vedanta".  I found it fascinating that throughout the book, he relates recent scientific discoveries to ancient religious traditions.  The book looks at at death and the universe completely opposite from the way Christianity and many religions view death and the way modern scientists view the material universe.  Death is seen as a miracle, similar to the miracle of birth.  I was taught that death entered the world through sin and is the enemy.  Something to fear.  The Devil and Death are the enemy and God rescues us.  Chopra says death is a miracle that:

  • Replaces time with timelessness
  • Stretches the boundaries of space to infinity
  • Reveals the source of life
  • Brings a new way of knowing that lies beyond the five senses
  • Reveals the underlying intelligence that organizes and sustains creation (what most of us would call God)

Rather than seeing the Universe as something that just "happened", the book sees the material world as having arisen from Consciousness.  Science has been trying to figure out what consciousness is and how it has arisen from a Big Bang of inanimate material.   That is once science figure out that it hasn't just always been here.  Chopra's approach, and what he argues science is uncovering, is that the material world has actually arisen from Consciousness.  It's not the "spiritual" world that is unreal, it's the material world that is the illusion. or the projection.  The way he weaves scientific discovery with the ancient traditions of the Indian rishis is very interesting.  It reminds me of an illustration I saw presented by a theologian many years ago.  Scientists arrive at the top of the mountain to discover a theologian sitting there.  The theologian looks up and says "What took you so long?"  Religion has taught us the Universe wasn't always here.  Religion has taught us that some Intelligence created the material world. Religion has taught us there is design and purpose for what we see. Religion has taught us that we are more than our bodies (our brains).

The afterlife begins to make sense when you take the approach that consciousness is not in the brain.  But, the brain is more like a receiver of consciousness.  This is a model being investigated by some neuroscientists.  Science cannot tell us how the brain works. We can see it working, different parts lighting up as we think or dream.  But, we are obviously more than just our brains. For example, while many people believe that our brains produce our thoughts, thoughts actually can change brain chemistry.  Since drugs are somewhat effective in treating depression one could say changing one's brain chemistry can change one's thoughts.  However, talk therapy works as well and can produce changes in brain chemistry.  Meditation can produce changes in brain chemistry.  It's definitely not a one way street.  While depression can be caused by chemical imbalances, a depressing event can lead to those chemical imbalances.   So, our thoughts are clearly not only produced by our brain chemistry. Something, outside of our brain, is the observer, the creator.

The book does touch on Near Death Experiences (NDEs) and OOBEs (Out Of Body Experiences).  It also talks about different levels of reality from the physical all the way up to the ultimate level (called the Akashic field in this book).  The heavens and hells experienced by people who have had NDEs are temporary stops along the way (as many who have had NDEs have reported).  They are largely created by the mind and the expectation of the person dying.  Of course, scientists have said this all along- they're purely subjective experiences and do not reflect reality.  But, this brings us to the question as to what the nature of reality is.  If you're in a dream and you can't wake up, that is reality to you.  We call this reality because it's a shared experience.  But, reality is whatever your senses tell you it is.  None of us experiences reality directly (in this body anyway).   How much do our minds create "reality"?

At the point of death, our ties to the physical world fall away and we begin to experience more directly the other two realms (the subtle world the the world of pure consciousness).  Chopra talks about how we can begin to shift our focus on these realms of reality before we die.

In the second part of the book, Chopra talks about the burden of proof.  He addresses the following five questions:

  • Is Akasha real (the realm of pure consciousness, the Void from which all creation flows)?
  • Does the mind extend beyond the brain?
  • Is the universe aware?
  • Does consciousness have a basis outside of time and space?
  • Can our beliefs shape reality?

If we can answer all of these questions in the affirmative, it's not so hard to believe that we survive the death of our bodies (really the death of our brains since that is where the mind is said to reside).  Chopra links the question about Akasha to what scientists are discovering about the ultimate nature of the universe.  He gets into some pretty complex physics that I have to confess I don't really understand.  But, what is interesting is that the word Akasha has an English equivalent- ether.  Up until the late 1800s scientists believed there was no "void" in space but everything was transmitted through the ether.    Physicists more recently have gone back to a model that says space is full of activity in the form of invisible fluctuations in the quantum field.  Physicists have come up with a Zero Point Field which contains not just what we see in the universe but everything that could possibly exists.  This "field of fields", this seething exchange of energy is what everything that exists pops into and out of existence.  The Zero Point field has been calculated to contain 10 to the 40th power more energy than the visible universe.  This sounds a lot like what religion has been telling us that the unseen is incredibly more powerful than the seen.

That last paragraph may have been over your head (it's over mine).  Chopra goes on and gives some analogies that are very helpful.  Basically what he is positing it that our physical world is projected from a nonmaterial source.  The invisible world comes first.  And, reality increases the closer one gets to the source.  As we die, we do not blink out of existence. We move from the projected to the real.

The next chapters go on to address the other questions asked above.  Chopra concludes with a poem by Rabgindranath Tagore.  He only gives part of it.  But, I've looked up the whole thing.  Some of the words in this translation are slightly different than Chopra presented them.  I like this one better.  I've been reflecting on this for the last few days and it has brought me comfort.  I fear death because it's a journey into the unknown.  But, this poem relates death to birth.

I was not aware of the moment
when I first crossed the threshold of this life.


What was the power that made me open out into this vast mystery
like a bud in the forest at midnight!


When in the morning I looked upon the light
I felt in a moment that I was no stranger in this world,
that the inscrutable without name and form
had taken me in its arms in the form of my own mother.


Even so, in death the same unknown will appear as ever known to me.
And because I love this life,
I know I shall love death as well.


The child cries out
when from the right breast the mother takes it away,
in the very next moment to find in the left one its consolation.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]



Health Care vs. White House Beer? Are You Kidding Me?  

, 2 comments

OLD BEERImage by defekto via Flickr
Wow. I wish I had written this. Well said. I could not agree more. Read this article by Frank Schaeffer about health care and what the media should be focusing on now. I think Frank stole my thoughts!


Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The Third Jesus- Book Review  

4 comments

Cover of "The Third Jesus: The Christ We ...Cover via Amazon
Deepak Chopra, while not a Christian is someone who admires the teachings of Jesus. In his book The Third Jesus, Deepak Chopra tries to help Christians and others rediscover Jesus from a different perspective than many Christians see Him. The title "The Third Jesus" is a reference to the fact that we don't truly know the real Jesus. The historical Jesus, the man who lived in Israel over 2,000 years ago is lost to us. All we have is a few short books about His life. He was born, then we have one incident around the age of 12 and suddenly He was 30. We have a few short stories of a two or three year period and those stories were written as far after His death as World War II is from current times. The second Jesus is the Mystical Three-In-One Christ. He's the result of thousands of years of theology and construction by the church. The second Jesus cannot be embraced without first embracing all of this theology. Chopra finds these two Jesus tragic because he believes they steal something precious, the Jesus who taught His followers to reach God-consciousness. According to Chopra, Jesus' teachings weren't about "salvation" in the by-and-by but about reaching full human potential in the here and now. Chopra believes the early church found Jesus' teachings so radical and impossible to live by that they essentially abandoned the hope and turned Him into the second Jesus.

After explaining his premise, Chopra moves on talk about where and what the Kingdom of God is and Jesus' view of it. The next part of the book takes the sayings of Jesus and interprets them through the lens of what Buddhists call "enlightenment". Chopra takes sayings, stories and parables of Jesus and shows us what he thinks Jesus meant by them, how Jesus used them to teach people to reach enlightenment in this world, not the next. The last part of the book, "Taking Jesus As Your Teacher", I found to be the best. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, Jesus gave us a lot of the what in the teachings we have from Him. But, we have very little of the how. Chopra gives spiritual exercises you can do to follow the teachings of Jesus. Jesus didn't write anything down. Outside of the Lord's Prayer, we have very little form of how to pray, or contemplate or meditate from Jesus Himself. I have often complained that Christianity doesn't give us enough of the "how" to follow the path and Buddhism does a much better job. But, what I am realizing is that the Buddha didn't give a lot of detail on how to do things either. We get too attached to forms. But, most of us need some guidance as to how to get started at least.


Overall, I found the book to be very good. Not really earth shattering after having read stuff about Jesus by Marcus Borg and Thich Nhat Hanh. But, I did enjoy looking at Jesus' teachings again through a different set of lenses. Each time I look at them from a different perspective, I pick up something.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Champions  

0 comments

Most Improved Swimmers - 1


Kayla and Shayna each received the Most Improved Swimmer in their age bracket for Windwood this year.  It was Shayna's first year.  Both girls went from not being able to go off of the blocks headfirst to having pretty good entries by the end of the year.   Both girls improved their times enough to be on the relay teams.  In the end-of-year championships, Kayla beat all of her times from last season's championships (except for breast stroke) and beat her best times from during the year shaving 2.5 second off of one of her bests.  They worked hard.  Even though Shayna said she didn't want to do swim team, she didn't complain about the 8AM workouts.

Yesterday, we received the results of Kayla's end-of-year standardized testing.  In addition to making National Junior Honor Society this year, she received the OHVA Head of School Honor Award for Academic Excellence this year. She scored in the Advanced range for Reading (top) beating the State Average, District Average and School Average scores by a wide margin. She scored in the Accelerated range in both Math and Writing also beating each of the averages by a wide margin.  I knew she knew her stuff when it comes to her math.  But, she gets so nervous, I was concerned with how she'd do on the test.  She did great!

Shayna took reading and math assessments.  She also got the Heat of School Award.  She was off the chart on her Reading score and scored in the Advanced range for Math.



Health Care in Europe  

, , 11 comments

Cover of "Sicko (Special Edition)"Cover of Sicko (Special Edition)
I've been discussing health care on a couple of people's Facebook pages lately. It is an issue that is near and dear to me, as an independent person having to buy my own healthcare and health insurance in the market. I'm pretty satisfied with my health care insurance, except for the fact that the price is sky-rocketing with no end in sight. And, I have a $2,500 deductible. So, for a simple procedure for my wife I just had to fork over $2,400. For my family of four, my monthly premium is now more than the mortgage on my first house (including taxes, PMI and everything). It's my third largest monthly bill behind only my mortgage and my car payment. Health insurance, which used to be an afterthought (in terms of how much I had to pay) is now a major spot in my budget and is increasing at an amazing rate. This year alone, it jumped over 30%.

I hear from many of my friends that they are scared of a government run health insurance system. They point to examples of government inefficiency, waste and bureaucracy that we all are way too familiar with. However, as Obama pointed out, if someone proposed a plan like what we've got today where it's not portable, you can be denied coverage, the cost is guaranteed to double in the near term and you're not guaranteed to get the care you need whether you're covered or not, no one would vote for it. If you haven't personally felt the sting of rising health care costs, you're probably on an employer paid plan. But, even those buffers are wearing thin. When I first got coverage there were no deductibles or co-pays. No one cared what anything cost. Now co-pays for well-care have increased, people are having to pay deductibles before their coverage kicks in. Employers are asking people to pay some of their own premiums. And jobs are being lost and wages frozen because health insurance premiums are such a significant cost for employers. The system is broken, folks.

I don't think a completely socialized national plan is the answer for America for a number of reasons. But, if you've seen the movie Sicko, you've seen how it has worked for other countries. Recently, people I know were speculating on what health care is like in places like Europe and Canada. I've seen a recent ad on TV where a "Canadian nurse" is warning us to not adopt a system like theirs. I happen to know a guy in Canada who says their health care system is excellent. I know a guy in Ireland who thinks their system is really good. You can still buy private insurance. But, the National Health System is good enough that most people don't. I asked him to share his thoughts with me and he sent the following:


Every health care system in western Europe is different, though all of them are comprehensive in that the whole population is covered, and none of them are financed primarily by private health insurance but rather by tax revenues or by compulsory social health insurance (normally with contributions from employers and employees). They are either run directly by the state or if not are closely regulated by law and by statutory bodies. But obviously I can only speak from experience for the UK national health service (NHS) which also covers us here in Northern Ireland.


I'm not sure what critics of our system mean by "rationed", Brian, so maybe you could clarify that further. Obviously in any health care system, however financed or run, medical resources are finite and that can lead to waiting lists for some kinds of procedures - hip replacements for example. Waiting lists had become quite high for some non-emergency operations in the 1990's, though they have come down considerably in recent years as more resources were pumped into the system, but those who can afford it often take out private health insurance to avoid the waiting lists. We do have private sector clinics, hospitals etc., and some doctors and surgeons combine private practice with working for the NHS.


As part of my terms and conditions of employment in Nortel, I can choose to be covered by a private health insurance scheme for a small premium, but I've never had any occasion to make use of it. The NHS is generally excellent in dealing with the most serious illnesses (and with accident & emergency) such as stroke, heart disease, cancers, MS and so on.


12 years ago, when I had a serious eczema problem - eventually much of my body was covered by seeping sores and rashes - the NHS admitted me to a local hospital where I stayed for about a week. I had regular appointments afterwards at the dermatology dept in the same hospital and received a variety of treatments, including UV radiation treatment when my hands were seriously affected.


Recently, as you know, I found that I had a higher than normal white blood cell count (discovered when I was donating blood which I did several times a year). The blood transfusion service rang me and advised me to make an appointment with my doctor. He saw me quickly and did further tests which confirmed that I had a high wbc count. They referred me to the City Hospital in Belfast, a couple of weeks later, where I was more comprehensively tested and saw a specialist, who told me I had lukemia (CLL to be precise). Currently I go in for testing and a consultation with the specialist 3-4 times a year, and if I eventually show symptoms they will start giving me treatment right away - probably chemotherapy.


Personally, Brian, I would have to say that I've never experienced any serious problems with the NHS - and not only in my own case, but with my family and my wife's family. When my dad had to be taken into care because of dementia, the NHS found a nursing home for him (in a beautiful spot right in the heart of the countryside) and it didn't cost me a penny. I could go on and on...for instance, the old lady who lived next door to me when I moved into this house eventually developed cancer (at 103!) - she had people who called every day to do household chores and make her food, and nurses who were in and out all the time (at the end, they were actually there 24/7, as she didn't want to go into hospital to die).


I'm rambled on and on as usual so just one more comment. The leader of the main opposition party in the UK (the Conservative Party), David Cameron, recently lost his 6 year old son who had suffered from cerebral palsy and epilepsy.
There have always been people on the Conservative Party's right wing who wanted to introduce 'market forces' and increased privatization into the NHS. Cameron has promised the public that he will not go down that route, pointing out that his own son was cared for under the NHS from his birth to his death.
In a speech in 2006, Cameron said :
“I’ve spent the night in A&E departments and slept at my child’s bedside. I’ve got to know the people who dedicate their lives to helping others."


“The fact that we have in this country a health service that takes care of everyone, whatever their needs, whatever their background, is one of the greatest gifts we enjoy as British citizens. We should never forget it, and we should never take it for granted.”


There is a big social consensus in the UK that the NHS has been one of our great achievements in the post-war period. Admittedly it has slipped from its position at the cutting-edge of European health care systems - most experts would say that there are many better national health care systems in other parts of Europe (France and Germany for instance & I would be surprised if the Scandinavian systems aren't top notch but I know nothing about them).


If there's any other info I can give you, Brian, don't hesitate to ask.
Here's my point. Our system is broken. It's unsustainable. If we do nothing, none of us will be able to afford health care in the not too distant future. We already pay way more than many other countries that have much better outcomes than we do. We are scared to trust this to the government yet, the private sector has not only not improved things over the last 15 years since we started discussing this, it's gotten worse. I hear a lot of people saying (now), "Let the private sector handle it". Up until now there's been no motivation to. Health care delivers are happy with the status quo because they can raise prices without any fear of competition. Insurance companies are happy because they just pass that along to you and me in the way of higher premiums and there's not a darn thing we can do about it. No one (until recently) shops for the best price on a surgical procedure. My hope is that, if nothing else, the government's threat to completely overhaul the whole system will motivate some of these corporations to do something before the government has to and maybe, just maybe we'll see real reform in the next couple of years. If that happens withough the government having to insure a single citizen, I'd be fine with that. But, doing nothing is not an option anymore.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

An "Unfathomable" Arrrest  

, 12 comments

Frederick Douglass portraitImage via Wikipedia
Recently, a Black Ivy league scholar was arrested in broad daylight for disorderly conduct in his own home.  The headline on CNN was titled "An 'Unfathomable' Arrest".  Was it unfathomable?  Really?  Not to me. I hate to have to take the dissenting view from what seems to be the majority opinion being expressed by black folks on this one.  But, I'm going to.  I kind of feel like maybe I should just keep my mouth shut on this one. There is real racism in America. It goes on every single day.  I have been and continue to be a victim of it.  It's important that when it happens that people are made aware of how far we still have to go.  But, when we cry wolf, we hurt our own credibility, we  actually hurt the cause of racial progress.  In the name of being politically correct, I fear the majority of reporters are scared to point out what is obvious to most of us.

Some of the details of the case are still disputed.  We do have the police report.  Maybe Gates will say something later that will change my mind.  But, I don't think he's disputed any of this. The gentleman who was arrested was seen by a (white) woman entering a home.  There were two men on the porch.  She saw one man putting a shoulder to the door (which was stuck according the report I saw last night).  She called the police and an officer was dispatched.  He arrived at the home to find the professor inside.  The officer asked for the professor's identification to confirm he resided at the residence. Rather than hand the office his identification, the professor proceeded to demand the officer's name and badge number and his identification.  The professor refused to step on the porch and speak with the officer.  To the officer's request for identification, he replied "Why because I'm a black man in America?'  According to Gates' own report, he is the one who brought up race, not once but more than once.  If there was racial profiling going on here, as some claim, the professor was guilty of it (too).  He assumed that the office asked for his identification because he was black and the officer was white.  He not only assumed it, he verbalized it.  The officer asked Gates to "step out onto the porch and speak with me," the report says. "[Gates] replied, 'No, I will not.' He then demanded to know who I was. I told him that I was 'Sgt. Crowley from the Cambridge Police' and that I was 'investigating a report of a break in progress' at the residence.  It's been reported that, at some point during the escalation of the confrontation, the professor made reference to the police officer's "mama".

Jelani Cobb, an author and professor at Spelman College in Atlanta, says it's troubling on many levels when "one of the most recognizable African-Americans in the country can be arrested in his own home and have to justify being in his own home."  Really?  Troubling?  He may be recognizable to Jelani Cobb.  But,  I didn't know his face or name before yesterday.  And, recognizable or not, if a man (black or white) is seen putting his shoulder against a door, it's reasonable for a citizen to call the police.  It's reasonable for the police to respond.  And, it's reasonable for the police to ask the man to prove that he should be there.  I would expect the same whether the man was black or white.  When I lived in Lexington, KY in a middle class neighborhood, I locked myself out of my house one day. I called a locksmith to let me in. The company dispatched a white guy. He came, let me in and then asked me to go into the house and to show him my driver's license and a piece of mail with my name on it to prove I lived there. It seemed like a very reasonable thing to me. Did he do it because I was black and it was a predominantly white neighborhood? Was he racially profiling me? I don't think it was either. It was just standard operating procedure and nothing more sinister than that.

Kim Coleman, a Washington radio host, cultural commentator and blogger, said she grew numb when she saw the mugshot."I was not prepared for that," she said. "To see one of my heroes in a mugshot was not something that I was expecting. ... It just tells me we're not in a post-racial society."  She said there's a reason why you don't hear about prominent white people arrested in their homes: "because it doesn't happen."  Kim, I don't know that it doesn't happen that prominent white people aren't arrested in their homes.  I wonder how many of them get belligerent with the police, making accusations about their motives and talking about their "mamas".  You're right.  This is an indication we're not in a post-racial society.  We don't know what part race played in the policeman's actions.  But, from the professors own words during the confrontation, we know that race played a major part in his actions.


Black or white, right or wrong, whether engaged in legal activity or not, when a police officer asks you for your identification it's best for you to produce it.  I've been pulled over for DWB (driving while black).  As a prudent person, when the police pull me over, I cooperate. It's not because I'm black and they're white.  It's because they are the police and have the force of the law behind them.  If I have a dispute, I'll take it up with the appropriate authorities later.  But, to get into a shouting match with the police is just stupid, IMO.   I would hope a man who has lived as long as the professor is would have learned this lesson. 

Sorry, professor, unless more facts come out in your favor, I just can't get behind you on this one.  
BTW- tonight is the second in a series by Soledad O'Brien- Black in America.  It's on CNN.  The first one was excellent.  If you get a chance to watch it, I suggest you tune in.  I'll be watching.  We still have a long way to go. 



Related articles by Zemanta




Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Baa Baa Black Sheep  

4 comments

Sheep in Nordstrand, Nordfriesland, Germany
I heard a truism a long time ago "Every family has a black sheep.  If you can't think of who the black sheep is your family, you're it."  There is no doubt in my mind that in my family, I am the black sheep. After many years of struggling with it, I now not only accept it, I embrace it.

A couple of weeks ago I went on vacation with Ty, the girls, my parents, my brothers, my sister and all the nieces and nephews.  This was  first for our family.  The first time since I was 16 years old that I've been on vacation with my parents and all my siblings (my sister was three at the time).  "Vacation" is a concept I really just don't get.  You leave your comfortable home to go sleep in a strange place and then proceed to do things you could do at home.  Unless you're going to the beach or to visit historical sites, I just don't get it.  I much prefer "staycation".   But, hey, everybody else likes vacation, so I go along.  We rented a cabin in the Smoky Mountains in Pigeon Forge, TN, the home of Dollywood.   This post isn't so much about the vacation as it is the experience of spending time again with my family.  I am the only person in my family to have left Columbus, OH. You can draw a circle with a radius of less than 10 miles around my parents', both my brothers' and my sister's houses.  I left Columbus, what I thought was temporarily, about 25 years ago and haven't lived there since.  I always thought I'd go back someday.  But, now I really don't think so.  The saying you can't go home again is true for me.

Being around my family is always a mixed-bag for me.  On the one hand, I really like seeing them because I don't see them that often. My sister was 3 and my brother 6 when I left for college.  I missed seeing them grow up.  My brother who is three years younger has children my children's age.  So, we see each other fairly often.  I always especially enjoy being around Brandon (my brother 11 years younger) and Bridget (my only sister) because it gives me the chance to get to know them better.   But, there's always something about being around family that irks me.  It took me years to figure it out.  I was in therapy around the age of 40 when it finally dawned on me.  

We are all a combination of what we bring into this world (nature) and what we encounter once we get here (nurture).  What I've realized is my nature and my nurture are at odds with each other .  And that  has caused me a great deal of distress during my life.  Families demand that people play certain roles. These demands are usually unspoken and often enforced in subconscious ways, but that doesn't make them any less real.  As I keep exploring my inner world and discover my "true" self, I  find that what I'm expected to present in the family is just not the real me.  The really odd thing is the constraints placed on us by our families, the "voices" as J. Keith Miller characterizes them in "The Secret Life of the Soul" (one of the best books ever) become internalized and soon we can't differentiate the outside influences from our own.  Even when I'm away from family, I struggle to be my true self. When I'm around my family, all the things I dislike about myself, all the things I want to change I see mirrored back to me and I have to admit I resent it.  Two things I need to interject here.  First, my family is made up of great people.  My parents have given us all a lot, materially and spiritually.  They taught us, nurtured us and did the best they possibly could.  My brothers and sister are caring people, devoted husbands, fathers and solid citizens.  None of us has ever given my parents the big disappointments (drug addiction, jail time, children out wedlock). Secondly, none of my resentment is personally directed toward anyone in my family.  It's more directed to the frustration I feel because of the split between who I am and who I'd really like to be.

OK, so what is this split?  Just how would I like to be different?  There are many ways.  But, I think the common denominator is fear.  I am a very fearful person and that fear manifests in a number of ways.  I fear failure.  I fear embarrassment.  I fear sickness.  I fear death. The fear of failure keeps me from trying many things.  The fear of embarrassment makes me timid around other people.  The fear of sickness and death led to panic attacks that nearly became crippling and still lurk just beneath the surface (and sometimes break through).  I cannot tell you how many times during the week with my family I heard the words "Be careful" or something to that effect.  Now, we were in a houseful of 7 children who often act with seems like no regard for consequences.  So, there was good reason to say that on more than one occasion.   And, caution has served us all well.  However, what I've realized is no one in my family is a risk taker.  We're all full of fear.  I now own my own business.  I voluntarily left two of the safest jobs around.  The first was working for the gas company- lifelong employment baby!  The second was IBM.  Each time I left one of these jobs, my parents wondered what in the world I was doing.  Almost 10 years after leaving the safety and comfort of IBM, when I told my mother I was going to start my own business not only was she not happy for me, she was frightened for me.   She asked me if it wasn't too late to go back to IBM.  I've always known I wanted to be an entrepreneur.  Well, I remember it from the time I was about 12 anyway.  But, it took me another 30 years to break the bonds of fear and strike out on my own. 

Another way my family of origin manifests in me in a way I don't like is my inability to just be myself around other people.  I have a very difficult time expressing my feelings which ironically many people take to be aloof or even arrogant and conceited.  I am really shy.  But, growing up I was accused of being "stuck up".  Deep down, I am a very sensitive person and really want to be close to people.  But, as a kid, expressions of emotion (positive or negative) were not expected or modeled in my family.  I don't recall my parents ever hugging or holding hands or (gross) kissing.  I don't ever remember even touching my father.   My mother stopped hugging me when I became a little man around the age of 5 and said I didn't want hugs anymore.  We never told each other that we loved each other.  Compliments in my family are pretty few and far between.  When someone is paid a compliment, there is always this air of suspicion.  "What did you really mean by that?"  "When is the other shoe gonna drop?"  We mask this by a cutting sense of humor.  You've got to keep your wits about you when you're in a gathering with us.  I tried to pay my sister a compliment while we were on vacation (granted I didn't word it very well) by telling her how she had been on such good behavior during the trip.  She lives alone, is a neat freak and was in a house full of other people's children, a lot of mess and a lot of noise.  I knew it was stressful for her.  Everyone assumed I was making a joke when I tried to pay her the compliment and even when I tried to explain "Yes, folks, this is a real compliment."  No one believed me.  I have worked hard to overcome this aspect of my background.  We still don't hug in my family.  Well, my mother said she wanted to start hugging because the daughters-in-laws families hug. So, we do hug her now.  I have made it a point to tell my girls that I love them every single day.  I make sure I hug and kiss them often.  I tell them how proud I am of them, frequently.  Starting with them, as a blank slate, that comes easily.  But, it doesn't with anyone else.  I struggle to really be who I want to be with anyone other than them.  For anyone outside my family who knows me, you probably think of me as being almost robotic.  But, in my family, I am known as the "sensitive one".  And, believe me, that is not a compliment.

Coincidentally (or not), Mike spoke about "rejecting rejection" this past weekend.  The story was Jesus's brothers and sisters coming to take Him away because they thought He had gone crazy.  Jesus had some pretty radical teachings on family.  He even used the word "hate" saying that if you did not hate your father and mother you could not be His disciple.  I don't "hate" my birth family (or my wife  or my children) and I never will.  But, I don't believe Jesus meant this any more literally than He did His command to cut off our hands or pluck out our eyes.  What I do hate is the way I allow others' expectations to hold me back from becoming my "true" self.  And, what I have to sort out is how I have internalized their expectations and work on freeing myself from those bonds and just be the black sheep I was born to be.





Reblog this post [with Zemanta]



Newer Posts Older Posts
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)