Reflections on Good Friday

Last night my family attended our church's Good Friday service. In past years our church has not had a Good Friday service, so I've only been to one twice before, at other churches. It was a very quiet, reflective service, more so than the other two I have attended. It almost seemed like a vigil, with the lights dimmed and the candles lit at the front of the sanctuary. The music was quieter than usual, and almost all the words spoken were scripture readings or corporate prayers. As a congregation we read through old testament and new testament passages of the crucifixion, ordered by the seven words of Christ upon the cross. After each, we prayed together and then sang a hymn. It was a time for humility and reflection. Easter in all its celebration will come soon, but Good Friday is a time to focus on the sufferings of the Christ, before we focus on His subsequent glories. Suffering is necessary before glory.

In America, Easter has become largely the Easter Bunny's holiday, but even amongst conservative Christians who do not "celebrate the Easter Bunny", the events of Holy Week are glossed over in the celebration of Easter. Good Friday is often a blip on the timechart of our salvation. We invite friends or neighbors to the Easter services, when we are all happy and joyful (rightly so) as we celebrate the defeat of death, but a close look at the suffering of our Lord is more uncomfortable for us, so most churches either don't have Good Friday services or they are sparsely attended. We are comfortable with the resurrection, but the crucifixion makes us squeamish. We can talk about Jesus dying for us, but then we want to quickly move on to the joy of the resurrection.

A few weeks ago my pastor preached on Christianity Without the Cross, taken from Mark 8:31-33. Next to the sermons he preached on the Pharisees (see posts here and here), this was possibly my favorite sermon he has preached since he was installed a few months ago, though I unfortunately won't have time to recount much of it here.

The passage for the sermon tells of Peter's own distaste for talk of the sufferings of Christ. As evident throughout the gospel of Mark, Peter would much rather speak of Christ's subsequent glories than his sufferings. Mark, Chapter 8 (ESV):

31And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32And he said this plainly. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. 33But turning and seeing his disciples, he rebuked Peter and said, "Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man."

Peter's problem is my problem as well. I admit that meditating on the events of Good Friday is not my favorite task. How can we fully appreciate His grace to us, though, unless we first understand, even to a small degree, the pain that my Savior had to endure for my sins and the sins of all who would believe? Like Peter, I would rather focus on the exaltation of Christ and His love and goodness. I'd rather not have to believe that my Messiah has to die for me, after all I don't really need that much help, do I? I'd rather Him remain the glorious King and the Good Shepherd.

Christ loves us and came to help us become better people. He will never let anything bad come our way. If we follow Him our lives will be rosy. God is a God of love and kindness. Jesus came to die for everyone because He doesn't want anyone to go to hell. God loves you just the way you are, so trust in Him.

Even those of us who don't hold to the Health, Wealth, and Prosperity gospel are like Macbeth in Shakespeare's play. We want to hold on to half-truths like the ones above because they give us hope by our definition and they make us feel good. We are assurred that we will triumph, but we triumph our way as we help God clean ourselves up. I'd be more comfortable with the gospel if Jesus came to help me become more like Him, but Christianity isn't about Jesus coming to help us become better people. Admitting that I need a Messiah so much that He had to come and die for me without my help is hard. When Christ died for me I was his enemy. I would never have chosen God if He had not chosen me. I was spiritually dead without Him; I wasn't drowning, I was dead!

I am never so aware of the penalty of my sin than when I meditate on the cross. I don't mean the cross in the flippant sense we often speak of it, wear it, or sing about it; I mean the cross and the torture that Jesus endured with love and compassion - the gritty details. For an unpretty look at the details of a crucifixion, I suggest reading this post on Mrs. B's blog. It's not nice, but it's part of the story of what Jesus did for His children.

It is easy to accept the love of Christ, but harder to accept the wrath of God, though both are an integral part of God's perfect nature. In the cross we see the wrath of God poured out on Christ, as He stands in our place. We see God's perfect Son speak with forgiveness, compassion, and love as He is in utter agony. It is hard to accept that it was necessary because of my sins - Do I really need a Savior that bad? Yes, I do.

In my eyes, the most difficult and poignant part of the crucifixion story is not the moment Christ's hands are pierced, or when He breathes His last, or even when He shows forgiveness to His persecutors. It is the moment when God the Father turns His back on His beloved Son, when Jesus utters, My God, my God, why have You forsaken me? I cannot even begin to understand the rejection that Jesus felt at that moment, when He, who was the perfect Son of God, was abandoned by His Father. I am the one who should have been abandoned, I am the one who should be rejected by God.

I'm forgiven because you were forsaken.
I'm accepted, you were condemned.

Hell is horrible not because of the torture, flames, thirst, beatings, or any other truths or speculations regarding that place of endless torment; Hell will be horrible because God will not be there. Hell is a state of permanent abandonment by God. To atone for our sins, Christ had to be abandoned by the Father. Suffering was not enough, dying was not enough, rising from the dead was not enough. The Father had to pour out His full wrath on this Spotless Lamb, and He had to turn His back on His Beloved Son.

That realization is to me more horrible, more discomforting, more sobering than all the other details of the crucifixion. In the Father's abandonment of His Son we see the full justice and wrath of God, and the weight and consequence of our sin. It's not a pretty picture, but it's part of the glorious story of God's love and provision for us. It's part of the story of His salvation of His people.

The good news is that the crucifixion and the Father's abandonment of the Son is not the end. After enduring death and rejection, Christ defeated death when He rose again on Easter! Together, the crucifixion and resurrection are the Good News. Separate, they paint an incomplete picture; Good Friday and Easter are the story of God's redemption of His people. Easter without Good Friday is meaningless.

Long ago He blessed the earth
Born older than the years
And in the stall a cross He saw
Through the first of many tears

A life of homeless wandering
Cast out in sorrow's way
The Shepherd seeking for the lost
His life, the price He paid

Love crucified, arose
The Risen One in splendor
Jehovah soul Defender
Has won the victory

Love crucified, arose
And the grave became a place of hope
For the heart that sin and sorrow broke
Is beating once again

Throughout Your life
You felt the weight
Of what You'd come to give
To drink for us that crimson cup
So we might really live

At last the time to love and die
The dark appointed day
That one forsaken moment
When Your Father turned His face away

Love crucified, arose
The One who lived the died for me
Was Satan's nail-pierced casualty
Now He's breathing once again

Love crucified, arose
And the grave became a place of hope
For the heart that sin and sorrow broke
Is beating once again

Love crucified, arose
The Risen One in splendor
Jehovah soul defender
Has won the victory

Love crucified, arose
And the grave became a place of hope
For the heart that sin and sorrow broke
Is beating once again

Love crucified, arose
The One who lived and died for me
Was Satan's nail-pierced casualty
Now He's breathing once again

- Michael Card

There is a Fountain

There is a fountain filled with blood drawn from Emmanuel’s veins;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their guilty stains.
Lose all their guilty stains, lose all their guilty stains;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their guilty stains.

The dying thief rejoiced to see that fountain in his day;
And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away.
Washed all my sins away, washed all my sins away;
And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away.

Dear dying Lamb, Thy precious blood shall never lose its power,
Till all the ransomed church of God be saved, to sin no more.
Be saved, to sin no more, be saved, to sin no more;
Till all the ransomed church of God be saved, to sin no more.

E’er since, by faith, I saw the stream Thy flowing wounds supply,
Redeeming love has been my theme, and shall be till I die.
And shall be till I die, and shall be till I die;
Redeeming love has been my theme, and shall be till I die.

Then in a nobler, sweeter song, I’ll sing Thy power to save,
When this poor lisping, stammering tongue lies silent in the grave.
Lies silent in the grave, lies silent in the grave;
When this poor lisping, stammering tongue lies silent in the grave.

Lord, I believe Thou hast prepared, unworthy though I be,
For me a blood bought free reward, a golden harp for me!
’Tis strung and tuned for endless years, and formed by power divine,
To sound in God the Father’s ears no other name but Thine.

- William Cowper, 1772

Yay! We get to go to a conference!

(read title in happy, sing-songy voice for proper effect)

I really like conferences because they are a great way to get a whole lot of information packed into a certain amount of time in a (hopefully) organized way.

Last July I really, really, really wanted to go to Answers in Genesis's weeklong Creation Mega-Conference up in Lynchburg, Virginia, but it didn't work out because of our summer schedule :(. I was really sad, because Creation Science is one of my (many) interests, thanks to Father Dear :-D.

This July I wanted to attend Vision Forum Ministries' History of the World Mega-Conference up in Hampton, Virginia, but funds and distance will prevent it. Lodging was going to be expensive, and the conference isn't held on a college campus, so there are no dorm facilities are available :(. I was sad because history fascinates me and I thought a quick panoramic look at world history would be very beneficial.

The main problem with both of these options was distance and lodging. Parents Dear suggested waiting until there was a conference closer to here (imagine that. . . ), since we do live in a populated area and eventually such a conference would likely be held somewhere in Metro Atlanta. So I waited.

Then I found out about American Vision's Worldview Super Conference that is to be held in Toccoa Falls, GA, which is only 1 1/2 hours from us :-D. I don't know a whole lot about American Vision, though I've heard good things about it. Is anyone else better acquainted with American Vision? The theme of the conference is Creation to Revelation. . . Connecting the Dots. There are a lot of well-known speakers who will be there, including Carl Wieland (scientist associated with Answers in Genesis), Doug Phillips (founder of Vision Forum and speaker for Institute for Creation Research), Gary DeMar (president of American Vision), etc. Perhaps the most interesting feature of the conference is the three evening debates they are hosting on Separation of Church and State, Creation and Evolution, and The Great Tribulation: Postponed or Fulfilled. I like debates :-D.

It looks to be an interesting conference and since it's so close, we get to go (Lord willing)! We don't even have to get lodging, since 1 1/2 hours is quite drivable for a few days - I commuted to UGA one hour from home 4-5 days a week for 2 years, so this doesn't phase me. Anyway, I'm excited because we just registered for the conference :). The conference is May 24-27, which unhappily prevents Father Dear from attending (excepting possibly the 27th), since he has finals and post-planning on that Wednesday - Saturday :(, but Mother Dear, Sister Dear, and I can still attend, Lord willing.

Okay, okay, so I get thrills out of odd things. Just humor me and smile :). Is anyone else going to the conference, by any chance?

Bill Amend would be so proud. . .

. . . to know that at least two people actually cared enough to complete his mathematical color-by-number comic on Sunday :). I of course did not take part, because that would have been so geeky. *rolls eyes*

The orginal comic.



And Hannah claims to have escaped the math geekish tendencies that run rampant in our family. *knowing chuckle*



Mother Dear is, of course, right in the thick of it all - and using a calculator! *hides face in shame* I suggested attempting to find or derive a divisibility test for 13, 17, and 19 - rather than relying on a calculator or using long division - but they would have none of it. If you're going to be geeky, I say do it properly!



The finished product, very nicely done :).

A misplaced "good"?

'Tis Interesting how often I can read something and not notice little details, omissions, patterns, or breaks in patterns. I was reading Genesis 1 today for the umpteenth time in my life, and for the first time I noticed that God never pronounces the events of day two as good. In addition God pronounces "good" twice in day three and twice in day six. I had previously noticed the details of day six, but not day two and three.

Day 1:
And God saw that the light was good.

Day 2:
Nada

Day 3:
And God saw that it was good.
(after the waters are gather and dry ground appears)
And God saw that it was good.
(after the earth produced vegetation)

Day 4:
And God saw that it was good.

Day 5:
And God saw that it was good.

Day 6:
And God saw that it was good
(after the land animals were created). . .
And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good
(after mankind was created)

Has anyone else noticed these breaks in the pattern (particularly the omission in day two)?

I think the additional "good" in day six is to emphasize that the creation was very good after mankind was created. Before it was good; after man it was very good. Notice also that in Chapter 2, when the creation of man is expanded, God said that it is not good for man to be alone, another break in pattern. Only after Adam's helpmeet was made was the creation complete and very good.

The omission of "good" in day two is a little more perplexing to me, as is the addition of another "good" in day three. Having no revelations myself, I turned to an authority on the subject :).

John Calvin's explanation:

Moses has not affixed to the work of this day the note that "God saw that it
was good:" perhaps because there was no advantage from it till the terrestrial
waters were gathered into their proper place, which was done on the next day,
and therefore it is there twice repeated.

So the expanse was meaningless or incomplete until the waters under it were gathered to make dry ground appear? His commentary helps a bit, but it is still a bit foggy to me. It almost seems like day two should have ended after verse ten instead of after verse eight. I wonder why God split the days as He did.

Any comments, speculations, suggestions as to why there is this break in pattern?

Is Finding a Husband a Game?

While we're on the subject of male-female relationships, be sure to check out Lydia's recent post on courtship. She did an excellent, well-balanced job with the subject!

Now continuing from my last post on The Rules. . .

As I stated in my previous post, The Rules hinge on the notion of turning a cold-shoulder to men whom you admire, remaining elusive and mysterious towards them. We women evidently can't be friends to men: we must be elusive butterflies, creatures unlike any other. I have some definite problems with this mentality. My dislike of this school of thought is founded on a number of reasons, most notably the following two: I don't like to communicate false feelings to people, and I like to be nice and friendly to people.

I don't like this notion of the cold-shoulder because it communicates false feelings. I really like him, so I'm going to act like I don't. That sounds dangerous, not to mention deceptive. Granted, there is a world of difference between the feelings one has and the feelings one relates, but concealing one's feelings is a whole different issue from relating other, untrue feelings. That's called lying. The Rules encourage women to hide their true nature, presenting a masked woman to men:

On a job interview, you don't act "like yourself." You don't eat cake if you're serious about losing weight. Similarly, it is not wise to let it all hang out and break The Rules as soon as you begin dating a man.

You may feel that you won't be able to be yourself, but men will love it!

Being a creature unlike any other is really an attitude, a sense of confidence. . . You're not desperate or anxious. . . You trust in the abundance and goodness of the universe. . . You're not cynical. . . You're an optimist. . . Of course, that is not how you really feel. That is how you pretend you feel until it feels real.

It sounds like the authors are explaining to women how to play a game, an intricate dance of flirtation, fantasy, and deception. If that is how to be a creature like any other, I don't think I'll join. It sounds to me like the authors like to play with fire.

I would think men would like to feel confident that they really know the woman with whom they are "falling in love." Men don't like to have the burden of discovering all of women's emotions! Remember Melanie? In the words of the authors of The Rules book, Melanie's boyfriend eventually proposed to the one girl he thought he would never get - her! I feel sorry for that poor guy, trying to decide if the girl he loved would ever have him. We women have more complex emotions, and we would do well to help men figure us out a bit.

Marrying someone because she is intriguing, for the purpose of spending your life figuring her out, is dangerous! Look at Marguerite in The Scarlet Pimpernel. She learned the hard way the danger of marrying someone because he was intriguing. Of course, it worked out in the end, but she could have been stuck with an idiotic fop the rest of her life, just because she was attracted to Percy since he was mysterious and elusive.

Certainly there is danger in exposing or concealing too many of one's feelings! In Sense and Sensibility Marianne and Elinor discover the pitfalls of either extreme: the former suffers from concealing nothing while the latter suffers from communicating nothing. Undoubtedly there is error on either side. My point is that we should not purposely communicate false emotions, something key to The Rules. Which true emotions we should conceal or communicate is another matter entirely.

I feel that this cold-shoulder notion also goes against common civility. I was raised to be nice to people, simply put. (Odd concept, I know.) If I give someone the cold shoulder it's usually because I'm uncomfortable around him, either because of his behavior/conversation or because of signals I have received that he may be interested in me (if I am not interested in him). Or perhaps we have nothing in common so we just don't talk much. Even then I'm still cordial! By default, I'm friendly. It seems the kind, polite thing to do, no? This refers back to my mention about following the Golden Rule rather than The Rules.

As a note of caution, there is a vast difference between being friendly to a man and throwing yourself at his feet. Miss Bingley would be a bad example of a woman who was overly-friendly (possessive, manipulative, jealous, slanderous to others, . . . ) with regards to Mr. Darcy, for the sole purpose of attracting his attention. Miss Bingley is a not a good example of a woman who did not give the cold shoulder to her chosen man. I'm not endorsing her type of behavior! I fully realize that care is needed when relating to members of the opposite sex. I do not relate to my male friends as I do to my female friends, even those that I know so well as to view as "brothers." There is an unspoken barrier in our relationship, not because we don't care about one another but because we do care about one another - and we care about our future spouses.

I am not giving license for wild-man-chasing behavior! Cold-shoulder = bad, but wild behavior = bad. We women should certainly not throw ourselves at a man or flirt with every man that comes our way. We are to keep our hearts and bodies guarded, careful in the way we relate to men. We should act as Ambassadors of the King, not as hussies desperately grabbing for a guy. I would like to someday pledge my whole heart to a man, as far as I am able, not the pieces that are left over from one broken relationship after another. As Gretchen Glaser recently said, "Forsaking all others" sometimes starts before you even know who you're forsaking them for.

One of my friends attended Taylor University in Indiana (yay!). There were two all-girl dorms on Taylor's campus: Olson Hall and English Hall. Olson Hall was known for the "wilder" types of girls who ran after the guys, and English Hall was known for the "Suzy-homemaker" types. A saying on Taylor's campus runs: Boys date the girls from Olson and marry the girls from English.

Isn't that the truth? Popularity and attraction are all well and good, but most men realize in the long run that the quintessential sorority girl (or the small college equivalent. . . ) doesn't make a good life partner. (The song Barlow Girls comes to mind here as well.) I think The Rules are, in a way, reacting to this wild man-chasing behavior, rightly realizing that in the long run, men do not go for "that kind of girl." Amen! - but let's make sure we're not reacting with an equally horrid suggestion.

I really don't like this notion that men and women can't be friends, because frankly, I don't just "feel the need" to be polite to people (including men), I also like people (including men). I like to study people. I like to learn about them and find out what makes them tick. Complex people, especially, fascinate me. I enjoy deep conversations, and many of those deep conversations are with men. My hope and prayer is that men realize that I regard them as friends and, if fellow Christians, as my brothers in Christ. They are not prizes to be won, but people with whom to converse and from whom to learn. Maybe someday I'll glance over at one of my brothers in Christ and realize that our friendship is turning into something more. As is often the case, L.M. Montgomery communicates this eloquently:

Perhaps, after all, romance did not come into one's life with pomp and blare, like a gay knight riding down; perhaps it crept to one's side like an old friend through quiet ways; perhaps it revealed itself in seeming prose, until some sudden shaft of illumination flung athwart it's pages betrayed the rhythm and the music; perhaps... perhaps... love unfolded naturally out of a beautiful friendship, as a golden-hearted rose slipping from its green sheath.

This idea of mutual companionship growing from friendship to love seems to be missing from The Rules. We catch a guy and then become friends; sounds backwards to me. The authors tell women how to act in the presence of a man they like: Be quiet and mysterious. . . Don't talk much. They should have added smile vacantly to keep with the theme. I think men want a life-long conversational companion, not a girl who is a big question mark or an elusive butterfly that flits about the room playing games.

Being a creature unlike any other is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on how you define the term. We certainly should strive to be different than the shallow types who throw themselves heart, body, and soul at a man. Christian women should be different because we are members of a royal priesthood, a chosen generation, and our difference should shine in every part of our lives! Men should notice that we are different, not because we wear lipstick when we run or because we ignore them or because we are mysterious, but because we conduct ourselves with dignity!

In Anne of Avonlea, Anne desparingly asks Marilla why Gilbert loves her. In reply Marilla says to Anne, "Because you made Josie Pye and Ruby Gillis and all of those wishy-washy young ladies who waltzed by him look like spineless nothings." Gilbert recognized something special in Anne, and it wasn't her recent facial or her elusive behavior - it was her substance!

Consider also the example of Ned Jones in Berkeley Square. Ned had spent his whole youth chasing women and treating them like disposable lovers. While hiding from the police for fraudulent charges, he finds himself working in the same household as Maddie, a girl of character and morals. She is so different from the saloon girl types he is used to, and he finds himself falling in love with her. Later in the story, in a moment of despair, he slips back into his old ways and finds temporary comfort with another woman. When Maddie finds out about it and confronts him, Ned's reply shows the awakening that his heart has had:

All right, I took another woman out like I've done since I was 15. You don't talk; not proper talkin'. You've a drink, a laugh. Easy. But suddenly everything you've always had ain't good enough. 'Cuz you seen somethin' else. And nothin' can ever be the same again.

Ned, once content with the shallow and temporal, was awakened when he finally met someone who was different - a creature unlike any other. Yes, Maddie was a creature unlike any other, but not the same creature as Melanie. Maddie and Melanie - two creatures unlike any other. I think we all know which creature we should strive to be!

The Rules

I'm back with more gems from Sister Dear's Interpersonal Communications class! I'm finding some of the reading material to be both fascinating and amusing :). Earlier this week I posted on one method of finding a guy ;) and then a post on anxiety which I thought was timely given the topic of relationships, contentedness, etc. I'm still looking at articles on male-female relationships. Hannah also gave me an interesting piece on family relationships that I hope to scan in the near future, though right now I've barely skimmed it. I am enjoying more free time this week since the public schools are on Spring Break :). No tutoring!!!

The most interesting piece I've looked at so far is The Rules: Time-tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right. It's actually an entire book, but Hannah's professor just xeroxed off a few chapters for the class. If I ever find it at a thrift store or garage sale, I think I may have to get it, just out of curiosity. It's very interesting in a sad, twisted sort of way. It's essentially a manual for playing the old-fashioned game of "hard-to-get". There's about an ounce of truth to the concepts presented, and several hundred pounds of hogwash.

I have to applaud the authors, Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider, for starting off on the right foot. They make no bones about the fact that women follow The Rules to find a lasting romance and a life-long marriage, of which most women dream, even if they hesitate to admit it (emphasis mine):

Modern women aren't to talk loudly about wanting to get married. We had grown up dreaming about being the president of the company, not the wife of the president. So, we quietly passed The Rules on from friend to friend, somewhat embarassed because they seemed so, well, '50s. Still, we had to face it: as much as we loved being powerful in business, for most of us, that just wasn't enough. Like our mothers and grandmothers before us, we also wanted husbands who would be our best friends. Deep inside, if the truth be told, we really wanted to get married - the romance, the gown, the flowers, the presents, the honeymoon - the whole package.

Perhaps I should begin by summarizing The Rules. The basic idea behind the book is that men like a challenge and will only appreciate something for which they have to work hard. We single women should be the elusive, lofty desirables who make men want to come after us. In the words of the authors (emphasis mine):

They [The Rules] are a simple way of acting around men that can help any woman win the heart of the man of her dreams. . . The purpose of the rules is to make Mr. Right obsessed with having you as his by making yourself seem unattainable.

My problem is the mentality that is behind The Rules. The authors seem to ignore the fact that the end does not justify the mean, nor does good ambition always result in success in the long-run. I think The Rules, at least the little I am acquainted with them, seem based on manipulation and snobbery almost - an attempt at superficiality that is a dangerous way to enter any relationship. Follow Rules X, Y, and Z to snag Mr. Right and live happily ever after!!??

The portions of the book that I read are riddled with anecdotal evidence. So-and-so didn't follow The Rules and ended up with Bozo; so-and-so did follow the rules and is married to Mr. Perfect who adores her. Wow, those few examples really convince me. I love all sweeping generalizations. *rolls eyes* The authors make some wonderful promises to those who commit to follow The Rules. Just a sampling:

If you follow The Rules, you can rest assured that your husband will treat you like a queen - even when he's angry with you. Why? Because he spent so much time trying to get you. You have become so precious to him that he doesn't take you for granted.

and. . .

When you do The Rules, you don't have to worry about being abandoned, neglected, or ignored!

and. . .

Read The Rules. Follow them completely (not a la carte) and you will be happy you did. How many of us know women who never quite trust their husbands and always feel slightly insecure? They may even see therapists to talk about why their husbands don't pay attention to them. The Rules will save you about $125 an hour in therapy bills.

Ironic that the authors offer $200 e-mail consultations or 1-hour phone consultations for $250 - and I'm not making this up!

The authors admit that playing hard-to-get isn't easy work, and they consistently acknowledge that:

It's easy to do The Rules with men you're not that interested in. Naturally, you don't call them, instantly return their calls, or send them love letters. Sometimes your indifference makes them so crazy about you that you end up marrying one of them. That's because you did The Rules (without even thinking about it) and he proposed! But settling for less is not what this book is about. The idea is to do The Rules with the man you're really crazy about. This will require effort, patience, and self-restraint. . . Keep thinking, "How would I behave if I weren't that interested in him?" And then behave that way. Would you offer endless encouragement to someone you didn't really like? Would you stay on the phone with him for hours? Of course not!

So, we women are therefore instructed to turn a cold-shoulder to the men we like, because that will drive them crazy and make them love us even more. Isn't that nice?

The authors first discovered The Rules from their friend Melanie, a girl who seemed to just attract men like bees to honey. Finally the authors asked Melanie what her secret was, and she told them:

One day, after years of watching girls like Melanie snag the men of our dreams, we asked Melanie how she got such a great catch. She took pity on us and told us about The Rules. She said that we were nice but we talked too much and were overly eager, and that we mistakenly tried to be "friends" with men rather than elusive butterflies, or, as she put it, "creatures unlike any other." Needless to say, we were offended by what seemed to us to be downright trickery and manipulation.

Hmm, I'm rather offended as well. Creatures unlike any other could be good (depending), but elusive butterflies? It's interesting to note that Melanie's grandmother (who passed The Rules down to her) was considered a romantic success because of all the proposals she received in her youth. Granted, I'm not trying to blame every refused proposal on the young lady in question, who may well be innocent in the matter (hehe, thinking of a certain scene with Lizzy and Mr. Collins. . . ), but a general pattern of frequent proposals and subsequent refusals does give one reason to question the motives and behaviors of the said young lady. . .

We're not allowed to be friendly to men, says Melanie? That rubs me the wrong way. . . I really don't like this notion of turning a cold-shoulder to men in whom you are interested, coupled with the picture of an "elusive butterfly." My dislike is founded on a number of reasons, most notably the following two: I like to be nice to people, and I don't like to communicate false feelings to people. This post is already rather long, so I'll expand my thoughts on that in my next post, to be completed very shortly, Lord willing.

It is interesting to note that The Rules hinge on the "believing in yourself" mentality that just makes me nauseated. Anything with that sort of mindset is not for me. I gag over commercials that urge people to buy something because "you're worth it." *shudder* Definitely not my cup of tea. Evidently it is the cup of tea from which a bonafide Rules Girl is supposed to drink: You tell yourself, "Any man would be lucky to have me," until it sinks in and you start to believe it.

There also seems to be an over-obsession with outward appearance. I will give the authors this: they recognize the value of neatness and orderliness and encourage good eating and exercise to keep your body health. They also encourage feminine dress, which I fully support! Of course their idea of feminine clothes is a little different from mine. . . but I'll spare you the details. After the positives I mentioned, though, their attention to outward appearance seems to go downhill:

Don't leave the house without wearing makeup. Put lipstick on even when you go jogging! Do everything you possibly can to put your best face forward. If you have a bad nose, get a nose job; color gray hair; grow your hair long. . . Manicures, pedicures, periodic facials, and massages should become part of your routine. And don't forget to spray on an intoxicating perfume when you go out.

I'm not claiming that any of the above is wrong nor that I don't do some of the above myself (see recent post on long hair. . . ), but it is more the way the authors insist that all these things are needed to attract men. Lipstick while jogging? Give me a break!

A final point of irritation is the absolute trust the authors have in their method. The reader is entreated, trust this process. It seems The Rules are viewed as a magical formula to find a perfect guy, and neither the formula nor the perfect guy exists on this earth! Call me strange, but I think that God is the author of romance. If I thought it was a matter of chance and game, I'd have reason to fret and worry with discontent at my current single status. As it is, though, I am commanded to rest in God's sovereignty, trusting in His perfect plan. Paints a different picture, does it not?

So, all in all I don't think I'll become a Rules Girl. I think I'll just be a girl of the Golden Rule, which certainly doesn't command me to lead men in an intricate game of guessing and flirtation. More importantly, I'm striving to be a Praying Girl, realizing that ultimately my romantic future is in the hands of He who created the love between man and woman. My method may not sell zillions of copies or be translated into 27 languages. It also won't garner me oodles of proposals like Melody or her grandmother, but then, as Amy from Little Women would say, "You only need one, if he's the right one."

It's someone's birthday....

Yippee!!! I (Hannah) am hijacking Susan's blog to bring you a post wishing my Sister Dear a very happy birthday! Yep, today, is her birthday. She is 22 years old. Wow. In honor of her birthday, I believe I shall write her a poem or two. Among my many other talents, I am quite poetic.

Susan is 22 years old.
As yet she bears no mold.
Her sister is great.
Her family likes cake.
She doesn't really like the cold.

If you aren't already tearing up, I'm sure you will as you read this....

Susan, fair maiden of the fields
Delighter in all things that are beautiful and sacred
May it be that hearts always float on the wind before you
That feet never stop walking, arms never stop moving
For you, fair maiden, for you
As you eat by day and sleep by night
Always, always thinking, breathing
May you find rest, food, and delight for you soul
In your home
Oh, happy home!
That which is so easily lost
And regained
When the cows return
For their sweet grass

Now let us move on.... The question must be answered, that which I'm sure all of you have been wondering! What is mathematically significant about the number 22? If you think of anything that I do not share below, please do share this delightful bit of knowledge!

There are 22 books in the Bible that have 22 or more chapters! Here are a few samples of chapter 22, verse 22 from some books...

Exodus 22: 22 Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan.
2 Samuel 22:22 For I have kept the ways of the LORD; I have not done evil by turning from my God.
Proverbs 22:22 Do not exploit the poor because they are poor and do not crush the needy in court
Matthew 22:22 When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.

If you add up the letters in Susan's name (Susan Elizabeth Garrison) you get 22 letters!

22 is a Schröder Number.
22 is a Centered Heptagonal Number.
22 is a Hexagonal Pyramidal Number.
22 is a Pentagonal Number.

Twenty-two is the number of writable regular polygons in an Euclidiean circle: 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 24, 30, 36, 40, 45 , 60, 72, 90, 120 , 180, 360. These are twenty-two of the twenty-four dividers of 360 , the two first, 1 and 2, not defining polygons.

The Chemical Element Titanium has an atomic number of 22.

The Human head is constituted of 22 bones: 8 for the cranium and 14 for the face.

The twenty-two channels linking the ten "Sephiroth" between them in the "sephirotic Tree" of the Kabbalah. (I know you've always wondered whether it was 22 or 23 channels. Now you know!)

Several old alphabets had twenty-two letters: Chaldean, Sabean, Roman, Copt and Hebraic. The letters of the Hebraic alphabet are divided into three mother letters (Aleph, Mem, Shin), seven double letters (Beth, Guimel, Daleth, Kaph, Phe, Resh, Tau) twelve simple letters (He, Waw, Zain, Heth, Teth, Yod, Lamed, Nun, Samekh, Ayin, Tzade, Qoph).

And this is perhaps my personal favorite:

In the year 22 AD the Red Eyebrows defeated the main Chinese imperial army at Liang.
Go, Red Eyebrows!!!!!!!

(I got a lot of this lovely, fascinating information on the number 22 from http://www.virtuescience.com/22.html)

And last, but not least.... check out this really, really cool bit about today's date! Yes, today certainly is special! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12152248/from/RS.5/
Is that not so cool?!

Thank you for tuning into explorations into the number twenty-two. For now, I'm Hannah Garrison. Good-bye and good day!

Happy Birthday, Sister Dear! :-)

A Few Thoughts on Anxiety

To go along with my posts on "finding a guy" - one already posted, the other forthcoming - I thought a few thoughts on anxiety (and contentment) would be appropriate.

I was reading recently in I Peter 5:6-7 (ESV):

Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you.

Now, perhaps this is not the case in all versions, but in the ESV, verses 6 and 7 form one sentence, rather than two, indicating some link between the humility of verse 6 and the anxiety of verse 7. I'm in a women's Bible study at my church, and we're going through I and II Peter using Carol Ruvolo's book Grace to Stand Firm, Grace to Grow as a guide. Before reading the lesson each week, I outline the passage and write down my thoughts and reflections on it. Then I take a look at a commentary (or two) to get another perspective. Then, finally, I look at the lesson book. That way I get to look at the passage with fresh eyes before gleaning wisdom from a few different angles.

I had been outlining the passage for the week, jotting down my own thoughts, and I stopped when I came to the two verses above. Why were they one sentence? I love finding similarities and parallels in verses in the Bible, so I am always looking for connections.

I kept pondering the connection over and over, praying for clarity. There had to be a reason they were connected, but I was not seeing the link between anxiety and pride! It didn't seem to fit to me. Normally anxious people are the meek, quiet types, not the really proud, pompous types. I could tell that I was missing something important, so I moved on, coming back to it a bit later.

I realized, after further meditation, that anxiety springs from a belief that God really doesn't know what he is doing; it comes from a mistrust in His sovereign plan. Anxiety is saying to God, "I think I can do better than you." Ah, some light was shed! Placing one's self above God in wisdom and ability - that would definitely qualify as pride! My revelation was further confirmed when reading the accompanying lesson in our Bible study book (emphasis mine):

Humbling ourselves under God's mighty hand fills us with bold confidence as it dissolves fear and worry. When we marinate our minds in his wisdom, accept our circumstances as ordained by His providence, and see ourselves as His perfectly loved children, we will, quite naturally, cast all our anxiety upon Him.

All our anxiety is rooted in pride. If that's a new thought for you, think with me for a while. Anxiety screams that we've taken over the reins of our lives and stopped trusting God. It shouts that our circumstances have bolted out of control and God hasn't curbed them to our satisfaction. And it orders Him to shove over and give us a shot at it. Anxiety puts us in the spotlight and blinds us to the fact of God's sovereign care.

So, like every other sin in my life, it seems, even my anxiety goes back to pride. I keep wanting my way, not God's way. Original sin, no?

Such a reminder about anxiety is always good during spring, when a young person's thoughts turn to love. It's also a good reminder with the upcoming wedding season. . . It also would have been a good reminder two months ago for Valentine's Day. . . Or over Christmas, during "engagement ring season". . . Come to think of it, a reminder about anxiety is good any time of year :).

Actually, it's really strange. I spent my time in college anxious that I would never find a husband and die an old maid - well, close anyway ;). Now that I've been out of college, though, I really haven't struggled much with anxiety regarding my single status. One of my best friends got married last month, and I honestly never had strong feelings of envy regarding her courtship or marriage. Not really at all, in fact. I can attest that this is totally a work of God in my heart, because I never could have predicted that it would have been such a joyous and peaceful time for me. I just couldn't help but be happy for her, and I realized that this was her time for marriage, not mine.

I've been learning more and more that God has placed me exactly where He wants me, and He will leave me there for exactly how long He wants me there. Does that mean I never wistfully think of finding the man of my dreams and beginning a home together? Of course not. I'm human, and I do think that God gave me those desires for a husband and children, however He may use those desires in my life. But I am learning more and more to trust God in His timing, even if His calendar is different from mine. He's God and I'm not, and that is comfort enough for me.

I'm not anywhere near desperate enough to tie a red ribbon on my cart to try to snag a guy (see previous post), nor am I likely to follow The Rules to catch a man either (post on The Rules to follow soon). Instead I'll just let my Heavenly Matchmaker do the work, in His way and His time. I trust Him way more than I trust myself, my family, my friends, Wal-Mart, or Yenta ;).

Lord, you created me and saved me, and you sustain and sanctify me. I am utterly and completely dependent on your sovereign care. Lord, how can I do anything but trust you? You are my God! I lay my hopes, dreams, desires at your feet, Lord. Take my prideful anxiety, and replace it with a humble trust in your plan.

It's April 4th!!!

Yeehaw! *does handsprings* No laughing at the image of Susan (a) doing handsprings, (b) in a skirt, (c) without breaking a bone.

Guess what's special about today :-D.

I'm not NEARLY that desperate for a guy. . .

Shopping List
- Eggs
- Milk
- Bread
- Mr. Right
- his phone number
- dinner for 2?

My Sister Dear is in an Interpersonal Communications class at UGA, and she's brought home some very interesting articles given out by her professor. Currently they are studying male and female relationships. Need I say more?

Here are excerpts from an amusing article written by Katherine Heine of the Waco Tribune-Herald (article title unknown):

"Nice melons."

"Thanks. I couldn't pass up cantaloupe for 68 cents a pound."

The grocery store pickup. Many don't attempt such a risky endeavor for fear of coming across as a desperate creep, as well as the threat of subsequent rejection under fluorescent lights amid crowds of often nosy shoppers.

I don't know, sounds like a good idea to me. . .

You observe an attractive brunette reaching for a box of Honey Nut Chex, your favorite cereal, and suddenly envision the exchange of sweet nothings between each sugary bite. Or you spy a handsome devil eyeing banana peppers and get lost in conversation about their ability to flavor most any dish. And the next thing you know, you are serving a roast encrusted with the moderately spicy vegetable at your wedding reception.

*sigh* I knew it was my prince as soon as he reached for that perfectly-ripe pepper. . .

Wal-Mart is hoping to capitalize on the potential of the underutilized store dating scene in the United States.

What aren't they hoping to capitalize on? *smirk*

The retail giant established "Singles Shopping" at 91 stores in Germany to test the popularity of the stores role as matchmaker. Each Friday from 6 to 8 p.m., singles tie red ribbons to their shopping carts to indicate to other shoppers that they are in the market for love.

Wow. If only I had thought to use the ribbon technique years ago. . .

Stores set up "flirting points" stacked with romatic merchandise, such as candles, chocolates and wine, to set the mood. Wal-Mart boasts that more than 400 people take part in the weekly rendezvous for some mindless flirting or the possibility of lasting romance.

Only 400 people? It must not have caught on yet. . .

This next paragraph is the best:

First of all, for every attractive being who ventures through the aisles of Wal-Mart, there are about 20 over-weight guys named Bubba dressed in overalls picking up dog chow for their pit bulls and Kix for their 12 kids from three previous marriages. I am all for one-stop shopping, but picking up bread, lunchmeat and a man in one trip seems more than a bit desperate and awfully callous.

Hehe. I can't read that without being tickled. That is great. And true. Especially down here in the South, y'all!

Well, my abdominal muscles have been well-exercised now. That was funny. I am excessively diverted :).

Disclaimer: I am not knocking those who have happened to meet their future spouse in a grocery store or other similar places. I merely find it amusing when people target those sorts of places as pick-up spots. I guess it could be worse. Here in the South people use family reunions. . . ;)

Stay tuned for more from Hannah's Interpersonal Communications file. . .

Reflections on Hair Care

*edit* Inspired by Brother Dear, I now have a guy version and a girl version of this post :).

Guy Version:

Long hair is fun and keeping it nice takes more effort than you guys realize. Be nice to the women in your life, and appreciate their long hair. Act like you care when they describe their hair care routine to you.

Girl Version:

Growing up, my sister and I cut off our locks to our chins every summer to prepare for the heat and humidity of Georgia :-P, then let our hair grow all year before our annual hair cut again the next summer. My hair care routine consisted of a shampoo and conditioning every two days or so when I was younger, increasing to every day when I was about twelve. From then on, for years I faithfully shampooed my hair every day to combat my oily scalp. Ah, the joys of adolescence.

The summer I was fourteen was the last time I cut my hair above my shoulders. I spent the next three years growing out my hair to my waist, discovering the previously unknown delights of long hair. I had always loved playing with hair, be it my hair or someone else's hair. There was so much more I could do with my long hair - all sorts of fun buns, coiled braids, crowns, loops, knots, and twists. Long hair is a lot of fun :).

For those interested in fun ideas for fixing hair, try Klutz's Braids and Bows or Hair for some great ideas. I found my copy of Braids and Bows for fifty cents at a garage sale :). Both books are great; Braids and Bows is aimed more for younger styles, while Hair leans towards older styles. Hair has many elegant styles to try if you're looking for something extra-special. In Timely Fashion also has instructions for some nice period styles. Unfortunately it is becoming increasingly harder for me to find instructions for styles that match my length of hair, which is currently about nine inches below my waist. Most styles are recommended for hair "no longer than waist length" or "no longer than mid-back." Combine extra-long hair with extra-slippery hair, and Houston, we have a problem ;).

Anyway, as I said, I started growing my hair out when I was fourteen. The winter I was seventeen my hair had finally reached my waist. That Christmas vacation I cut twelve inches off my hair, leveling it to a few inches below my shoulders. I had enjoyed my long hair, but realized that it was becoming an obsession for me at the time and also a difficulty for me to manage. I never regretted cutting off those twelve inches, as it really did help me put my priorities in focus, and because I really was having a horrible time caring for my hair. It was dry, brittle, staticky, and flat. I couldn't find a brush that would work well on it, which didn't help matters. All in all cutting it was definitely a good choice.

I never did have any curl growing up, even as a baby, but the length of my hair had made it flatter than ever. I received my dad's fine, straight hair, unlike my brother and sister, who definitely inherited my mother's curly genes! I never minded my straight hair, but I did want my hair to have body, which just wasn't happening with my current length and care of my hair! Can you say '70's double-take?

Although, as I said, I never regretted cutting my hair, I also decided right away that I was going to try to grow out my hair again. I calculated that in two-years time my hair would be waist length again. (My hair grows about 6-7 inches per year.) Sure enough, two years later my hair had reached my waist again. This time around my hair was much more manageable, so much so that I have continued to grow out my hair and am still waiting to see when it finally stops growing. I love having long hair! It is currently nine inches below my waist - soft, shiny, and manageable on most days. (It's still not bouncy with a lot of body ;), but it's not as flat and blah as before.) Why is it more manageable this time around? Several reasons.

First of all, I educated myself about split ends. Split ends usually occur at the end of individual hairs (which are all different lengths), not just at the end of one's entire length of hair. Trimming one inch off a long length of hair does nothing for the split ends that are somewhere in the middle of that length. I started individually trimming my hairs for split ends. It sounds tedious, but it's not if you do it gradually and methodically. I also have my mom trim my hair an inch or so every year, just to even up the ends. I find that most of my problematic split ends are on the underside of my hair, especially concentrated in the hairs directly below my ears. I don't know if this is common, or if it's just me, but I mainly focus on keeping split ends trimmed in these areas.

When I sit down to brush my hair out at night I try to start at the ends. When I reach a snarl I pull that section of hair forward and trim it for split ends. I have found some fascinating split ends over the years :) - all sorts of interesting patterns. Anyway, this works very well to systematically trim split ends as I find them. I also occasionally sit down and pull random sections of hair forward to trim for split ends. The key is to remember to look all up and down the section of hair - not just the end - and twist and turn the hair section to look at it from all sides. Hold your hair against a contrasting color. My hair is very light so I look for split ends against a very dark brown or blue or a black background. That way my hair shows up well and I can see splits easily. I use a pair of small sewing scissors to snip individual split ends.

I also educated myself about cleaning my hair. I was perplexed that my hair could be dry and oily at the same time. This seemed rather contradictory to me. I faithfully washed my hair every morning to rid my scalp of build-up oil, but by mid afternoon (when it finally dried!) it was dry and crackly, especially right under my ears. Ick! I shiver when I think of the dry frizziness of my hair right around my neck. It was clingy and didn't feel right down. All I wanted to do was pull it back away from my neck! My hair just didn't feel comfortable down because it was so dry and clingy, yet the next morning it was greasy at the roots and begging to be cleaned. Thus went the vicious cycle. What was I doing wrong? I was determined to find out.

There are many standard comments I get about my hair. One comment I have gotten many times is You must use a ton of shampoo! I find it amusing to set people straight on this point. You see, I use far less shampoo than the average American female. It takes me about 7 months to go through an 8 oz bottle of shampoo, and I'm not exaggerating. I am able to do this for two reasons: I only wash my hair about twice a week, and when I do wash my hair I only use an amount the size of a quarter.

See, what I found that I was "doing wrong" was over-washing my hair, not under-washing it. The harsh chemicals in most shampoos aggravates the scalp, causing the scalp to over-produce oil to compensate for the drying effect of the typical shampoo. Solution? Milder shampoo, less shampoo, and less frequent shampooing - I now wash my hair only twice a week. I place a dab of shampoo on top of my head and throughly massage it through my scalp. I only shampoo my hair until about my shoulder, lifting the remaining length out of the way as I rinse my hair to get minimal shampoo on the rest of my hair. This helps the ends of my hair from drying out, but the hair near the scalp from being too oily.

Now, I may scrimp on the shampoo, but I apply conditioner quite liberally (heh, and you thought I was conservative. . . ). I focus mainly on coating my hair from the shoulders down, often barely applying any conditioner to the scalp. This keeps my scalp less oily and my ends more conditioned. I coat on the conditioner and let it sit for several minutes. I turn off the water to conserve hot water (see, I'm back to being conservative again. . . ). When I rinse it, I don't do so thoroughly, leaving my hair still feeling a bit conditiony. This keeps my hair softer with more moisture and even something resembling body at times. Conditioning is so important for long hair! I also finally did decide to buy Pantene ProV, which while much more expensive than my previous choices, really does make a huge difference.

When washing and rinsing your hair, be nice to your shafts and use lukewarm water. For the final rinse, the colder you can bear it the better. Rinsing in really cold water is one of the best ways to get a really shiny look, although I personally don't care enough to withstand freezing cold water just for a little more shine. Also, use a blowdryer sparingly (or never)! All that heat applied directly to your hairs is so bad for the shafts! I avoid blowdryers at all costs, resulting in a morning of airdrying whenever I wash my hair. My hair is so dry if I use a blowdryer, and it takes me forever to untangle it, not to mention the dangers of having it sucked into the back of the blowdryer. Ouch!

It was hard to wean myself off a daily hair shampoo, as I just didn't feel completely clean after years of slowly becoming addicted to a daily shampoo. I was determined to break the vicious cycle, though! I started skipping a hair wash every three days, then went to every other day, then increased the gap gradually until I now only wash my hair every 3 or 4 days. My hair has mood swings so sometimes it's only 3 days and sometimes it's as long as 6. It really is much better now! I wouldn't go back to a daily wash (especially with long hair) if you offered me a lot of money. Okay, okay, it would depend on how much. . .

For those with curly hair or really thick hair, the time between washings could likely be extended even longer. I have very fine hairs and only medium thickness hair, so oil collects much easier than for someone with coarser, thicker, curly hair. All the above tips work for my hair, and I do not profess that they will work for other types of hair. Experiment, experiment, experiment! Enjoy your long hair, and be thankful that God gave us women long hair as our glory! :-)

Some of my favorite long-hair pictures:

A college senior picture, taken last spring.

Okay, admittedly this picture was just an excuse to show off my grandparents' gorgeous view from their back deck. Who wouldn't love to live overlooking the Ohio River in Southern Indiana. *wistful sigh*

Okay, not my best look (I was mid-sentence!), but it shows the length of my hair pretty well. It's the best recent picture I have (February) that shows the full length of my hair uncurled.

Some people pick their nails when they are bored. I braid my hair ;).

A close-up of my hair after pin curls.

The second attempt at pin curls, which was a little more poodle-y than before, but ah well. Just look at the nice tamer hair that all the other lovely bridesmaids had :).

To kill the monotony - Hannah's (natural) curls :-D. I wish she would leave her hair down more often. . .

Another rare and unedited instance of Hannah with her hair down - caught on film! er, memory stick. Whatever.

Interesting Article on Population Growth and Decline

Another great article linked from LAF :). This Foreign Policy article is on population control, a subject I find very fascinating.

I really loved the intro to the Foreign Policy article:

Across the globe, people are choosing to have fewer children or none at all. Governments are desperate to halt the trend, but their influence seems to stop at the bedroom door. Are some societies destined to become extinct? Hardly. It’s more likely that conservatives will inherit the Earth. Like it or not, a growing proportion of the next generation will be born into families who believe that father knows best.

See? I've tried to tell people that my desire to have lots of children is part of my plan for fulfilling the Great Commission :-D. I've gotten some awfully odd looks for saying that, by the way. . .

And for those who think population control is such a huge concern, I've heard from various sources for quite some time that this is not the complete story. Too bad the general media doesn't let us in on this side of the story:

With the number of human beings having increased more than six-fold in the past 200 years, the modern mind simply assumes that men and women, no matter how estranged, will always breed enough children to grow the population—at least until plague or starvation sets in. It is an assumption that not only conforms to our long experience of a world growing ever more crowded, but which also enjoys the endorsement of such influential thinkers as Thomas Malthus and his many modern acolytes.

Yet, for more than a generation now, well-fed, healthy, peaceful populations around the world have been producing too few children to avoid population decline. That is true even though dramatic improvements in infant and child mortality mean that far fewer children are needed today (only about 2.1 per woman in modern societies) to avoid population loss. Birthrates are falling far below replacement levels in one country after the next—from China, Japan, Singapore, and South Korea, to Canada, the Caribbean, all of Europe, Russia, and even parts of the Middle East.

The population declines are such that many governments offer incentives to couples who produce children. Quite a different story from what we in America hear, eh?

It seems that merely by their own agenda for population control, liberals will manage to gradually become more and more outnumbered:

Meanwhile, single-child families are prone to extinction. A single child replaces one of his or her parents, but not both. Nor do single-child families contribute much to future population. The 17.4 percent of baby boomer women who had only one child account for a mere 7.8 percent of children born in the next generation. By contrast, nearly a quarter of the children of baby boomers descend from the mere 11 percent of baby boomer women who had four or more children. These circumstances are leading to the emergence of a new society whose members will disproportionately be descended from parents who rejected the social tendencies that once made childlessness and small families the norm. These values include an adherence to traditional, patriarchal religion, and a strong identification with one’s own folk or nation.

Read the whole Foreign Policy article here. Need it be said that I did not agree with the slant of the article?

After reading the Foreign Policy article, then hop over to Albert Mohler's site for his review of the article.

Hattip: LAF

A Nation of Culinary Illiterates

I found this Washington Post article on the growing lack of cooking skills of Americans to be quite interesting. Some of you may remember my posts on cooking from scratch that I posted last fall. You can find those posts here, here, and here.

Here are some of my favorite quotes from the Washington Post article:

"Thirty years ago, a recipe would say, 'Add two eggs,' " said Bonnie Slotnick, a longtime cookbook editor and owner of a rare-cookbook shop in New York's Greenwich Village. "In the '80s, that was changed to 'beat two eggs until lightly mixed.' By the '90s, you had to write, 'In a small bowl, using a fork, beat two eggs,' " she said. "We joke that the next step will be, 'Using your right hand, pick up a fork and . . .' "

"We're now two generations into a lack of culinary knowledge being passed down from our parents," said Richard Ruben, a New York cooking teacher whose classes for non-cooks draw a range of participants, from 18-year-olds leaving for college who want to have survival skills to 60-year-olds who have more time to cook but don't know how.

"In my basic 'How to Cook' class, I get people who have only used their ovens to store shoes and sweaters," he said. "They're terrified to hold a knife. They don't know what garlic looks like."

For many people, cooking classes like his compensate for what they did not learn at home. "Food companies have to acknowledge that there used to be a level of teaching in the home by moms and grandmas that is not as evident today," said Janet Myers, senior director of global kitchens for Kraft Foods who has been creating and testing recipes for the company for 30 years.

Read the whole article here.

Hattip: LAF

The Family Nobody Wanted

Has anyone else read The Family Nobody Wanted by Helen Doss? I finally picked it up Tuesday and finished it Wednesday evening :). I've been mainly reading heavier books the last several months so it was a refreshingly light and quick read.

The book is about a couple that cannot have children of their own. They set out to adopt a child, and by the end of the book they have adopted a total of 12 children. The family is a poor minister's family, yet there is lots of love to go around. The father spends several years in college and then seminary, as he feels called to the ministry, and he often has misgivings about adding "one more" to the family, due to financial stress and an already over-taxed ministry schedule. In the end though, he doesn't regret any of the 12 children he agrees to adopt :).

The stories of how the family gets each child is interesting. It is also interesting to note that 10 out of the 12 children are bi-racial, which was a big issue in the 1930's, '40's, and '50's, when the story takes place. The Dosses specifically targeted bi-racial children (mainly Asian and Mexican) because those were the "unwanted" children - neither race would claim them because they were "half-breeds".

If you are interested in large families or adoption, then you'll enjoy this book :). True stories are always best, and this story is true, written by the mother of the family, Helen Doss. She wrote the book in the early 1950's. I found a 1954 copy at a thrift store, but I've heard that the book recently came back into print as well.

I remember several years ago hearing a man sing a song called Unanswered Prayers by Garth Brooks:

Unanswered Prayers

Just the other night at a hometown football game
My wife and I ran into my old high school flame
And as I introduced them the past came back to me
And I couldn't help but think of the way things used to be

She was the one that I'd wanted for all times
And each night I'd spend prayin' that God would make her mine
And if he'd only grant me this wish I wished back then
I'd never ask for anything again

Sometimes I thank God for unanswered prayers
Remember when you're talkin' to the man upstairs
That just because he doesn't answer doesn't mean he don't care
Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers

She wasn't quite the angel that I remembered in my dreams
And I could tell that time had changed me
In her eyes too it seemed
We tried to talk about the old days
There wasn't much we could recall
I guess the Lord knows what he's doin' after all

And as she walked away and I looked at my wife
And then and there I thanked the good Lord
For the gifts in my life

Sometimes I thank God for unanswered prayers
Remember when you're talkin' to the man upstairs
That just because he may not answer doesn't mean he don't care
Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered
Some of God's greatest gifts are all too often unanswered...
Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers

The man explained before singing that he and his wife had been unable to have children, and they had fervently prayed for the Lord to allow them to have children of their own. They continued in infertility and eventually decided to adopt. The man explained that every time he sees his son he thanks God for not answering his prayers, since he would not have his son if they had been able to conceive. This man's story came back to me as I was reading The Family Nobody Wanted, especially the last chapter.

I find it interesting that usually books have one passage (two in the case of Les Mis, my other recent read) that really jumps out as the summary passage for the book. Oftentimes it is near the end of the book, as in this case.

In the last chapter of the book the Dosses are finally cleared to adopt their last three children. The night before the adoptions are sealed, Carl and Helen go around the house tucking all the children into bed and just gazing at them as they sleep soundly. Helen narrates:

As we tiptoed back downstairs, I said, "In my prayers, I give thanks that we never had children of our own, after all. Of our own blood, I mean, because children couldn't be any more my own than these. Somehow I feel that our family was meant to be just this way."

"I do, too."

I looked at him. "You truly don't regret it?"

"If I had it to do over again, I'd still want it this way. You're looking at a happy man who has his quiver full."

"Full of what?"

"Children." He laughed at my puzzled face. "It's a phrase from a psalm:

As arrows are in the hand of the warrior,
So are children to a man in his youth.
Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them.

There was no mistaking his sincerity and he was not putting on any front. At last I was at peace with myself, inside. I put my hand in his.

"I'm glad you feel like that. I-I used to wonder, sometimes. You've always been so eager to, well, find God. You wanted to know what the divine will was, and you were often so impatient of things that stood in your way."

"I did find God," Carl said. "Not in my theology textbooks, not completely in a mere church building. . . I found Him in the trusting faces of our little children."

In Need of Musical Balance

Two things for which I have been waiting finally came in the mail last week :-D.

The first is Calvin's Commentaries. I've debated buying them for some time now, and when CBD advertised them for only $99, it was hard to pass them up. I really need to stop reading the CBD catalog! I just find too many good choices in there, as opposed to my typical experiences with local Christian bookstores. Twenty-two hardbound volumes for $100 is a steal! They now occupy a nice row in one of my bookcases :).

The second is a set of hymnbooks with CD accompaniment tracks for part singing. We ordered them from Christian Leaders, a site I found by doing random searches for part singing aids. The spiral-bound books have 80 well-known hymns with 4-part sheet music. The CD's have four piano tracks for each hymn: the first has all four parts, the second is only alto, the third tenor, and the fourth bass. We've been enjoying the books and CD's so far, working on A Mighty Fortress is Our God and Amazing Grace. My Jesus I Love Thee is next on our list. It is so much fun to sing parts, and so much richer than singing with only the melody!

Our family has dabbled in part singing a bit in the past, but we've been wanting to work on it more. Mom and dad both have some background with part singing, but Hannah and I only know a few songs in parts. Father Dear is a bass, or more precisely a baritone. Mother Dear, Sister Dear, and I are all most comfortably altos, though I have a slightly higher tone and can sometimes sing soprano. Granted, it is considerably more fun to sing harmony, but it sure would be nice to be a true soprano for the sake of balance. Ah well.

Hey! We could put out a personal ad :).

Three altos and a bass seeking sopranos and tenors between the ages of 10 and 80, preferably human. Ability to read sheet music a plus. Must be able to carry a tune. Metro Atlanta area. If interested, call the Garrisons at 144-144-8128.

The Golden Road

Once upon a time we all walked on the golden road.
It was a fair highway, through the Land of Lost Delight;
Shadow and sunshine were blessedly mingled,
And every turn and dip revealed a fresh charm
and a new loveliness to eager hearts and unspoiled eyes. . .

- L. M. Montgomery, The Golden Road

The Golden Road is one of my favorite L.M. Montgomery books. I have spent more time enjoying and quoting Anne of Green Gables, yet there is a certain charm in The Golden Road and its prequel, The Story Girl. The two books together tell the story of cousins living in the small Prince Edward Island town of Carlisle. The books are the basis for the TV show The Road to Avonlea which, while also endeared to me, is quite different than the books. Of course, it is unnecessary for me to say that the books are better :-).

I love the simplicity of the life portrayed in these two books. In Carlisle, life moves slowly. There is time to stop and smell the roses. The lasting things in life are valued; the things that will be remembered and passed down from generation to generation. The cousins occupy their time with good old-fashioned fun - no video games needed in this little town ;). They pitch in at harvest; they munch on homemade goodies; they write their own newpaper; they collaborate on schoolwork; they listen to Sara tell stories.

Sara, the heroine of the story and the oldest of the cousins, has the natural gift of storytelling, and throughout the books are woven numerous tales that she tells, some short, some long, but all possessing a charm absent in most modern storytelling. Storytelling was once considered a gift and an art, back before the printed word, television, and the internet were widely available on a daily basis. Today oral storytelling is not valued as it once was, and we have dulled our senses with cheaper forms of communication. One of the charms of The Story Girl and The Golden Road is the numerous stories woven throughout, each with an old-fashioned charm that made it special. L.M. Montgomery is a master storyteller, and Sara embodies this quality of the author.

The antics of the cousins are amusing, to say the least. The cousins have quarrels and jealousies and receive due punishments from their parents on occasion, but overall they really do have a rare (at least compared to today's society) sense of right and wrong. My favorite anecdote in this regard relates to the dream journals the cousins keep. For a time the cousins hold a running contest for the most interesting dream. Each of the cousins keeps a journal by his bed to record dreams each night, and the next day they compare dreams. The cousins go to great lengths to dream sensational dreams - the most amusing effort was the consumption of great amounts of indigestible foods just before bedtime - yet never once do any of them consider making up an interesting dream. The lengths to which they go for sensational dreams is ridiculous at times, but they never stoop to falsehood in this instance; it doesn't even occur to any of the children.

I greatly enjoyed the sense of family and heritage that was woven throughout the books. The cousins live on a family farm that has been passed down for generations. The house and farm are full of memories and treasures from the past, and the children genuinely enjoy delving into their heritage. The farm boasts a large orchard that has a tree named for each child and grandchild of the founding couple of the family farm, as well as special family guests down through the years. They eat "Aunt Julia's cherries" and the "Rev. Mr. Scott's plums" as they ramble through the same woods and hills as their relatives long-dead. The extended family lives nearby and attends the same church and school together. Family ties are important in this story, and the saying blood is thicker than water well-encompasses the King family.

While Anne's story is one first of childhood, then maturation, marriage, and children, the story of the Carlisle cousins spans only a few years and therefore does not include a panoramic look at their lives. As the books progress the older cousins do mature to an extent, but even at the end of the second book they are still very much in their youth. This allows one of the lasting impressions of the book to be that of youth, bringing us to the title of the second book.

So what is the golden road that inspired the above quote and the book title? The golden road is childhood or youth, that portion of one's life before adulthood. It is named as such because of the carefree glory of those days of a person's life. Youth allows time to explore, to learn, to play; adulthood follows with heavier responsibilities and more time commitments.

I cherish the memories I have of my childhood. I had a very carefree youth, with little grief or pain. I was blessed to be raised in a strong Christian home and discipled by my parents through home schooling. I had responsibilities (school, chores, etc.), but I also had plenty of time to laugh and play, delighting in being young.

Through the ages, youth is often glorified as the ideal time in a person's life. Everyone, it seems, is searching for a fountain of youth. Women, especially, in our society will go to any lengths to look younger and feel younger: plastic surgery, botox, chic clothing, the works. We long for the days when we had more energy, more physical appeal, more free time, more friends, more fun. Younger is better, right?

Wrong. Younger is not better. Younger may be more carefree, younger may bring back glorious memories, younger may be a good start, but younger is not ideal! As a matter of fact, Ecclesiastes tells us that youth is meaningless, and Proverbs tells us that grey hair is a crown of splendor. Our culture has idolized youth and forgotten the great benefits that come with age. We are content with the simple, when we should be seeking for something greater.

Like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea, we are far too easily pleased.
- C.S. Lewis

Isn't that true? We are far too easily pleased with the carefree leisure, the lack of responsibilities, and the simplicity that youth offers. We need to heed Solomon's advice and not utter, "Why were the old days better than these?" Don't wish for youth again! Read the Bible. You will find that youth is not the ideal state; instead old age is valued. More so, the wisdom that should come with old age is to be especially sought.

Job 12:12 Is not wisdom found among the aged? Does not long life bring understanding?

Youth is a start, but we don't want to remain in perpetual youth forever. I recently heard a pastor say that he would not trade anything to go back to being the man he was at 20. He said he wouldn't trade the world for the things he has learned in the decades since. That pastor recognized the value of wisdom and understanding. Was he still as good-looking and youthful as he was when he was 20? No. Was he as free from responsibility? No. But he was closer to Christ's image, as the Lord has been working all things together for his good, that he might become slowly and surely more like Christ.

In Tolkien's literature, the elves grow wiser and more beautiful with age. Isn't that the way it should be, if we look at beauty in a Biblical sense? Contrary to our popular culture, the Bible speaks of beauty in an absolute sense, not merely as a subjective attribute that is prevalent among the young. Outward beauty will fade away, no matter how good-looking a person is in his youth, but inner beauty is something that should grow and mature with wisdom as the years pass, and that is the kind of beauty that we should seek.

Childhood is a starting place, but it is not an ending. The simplicities of childhood are delightful, and I am thankful for the memories I treasure. I wouldn't trade the world to become 10 years old again, though. To do so would be to cast away the wisdom and understanding that the Lord has slowly been feeding my stubborn, sinful self. I wouldn't take such a giant leap backwards in my sanctification for anything!

I read The Story Girl and The Golden Road and love to relive childhood with the King cousins. I revel in the simplicities they experience, and laugh at their antics. In the end, though, I am glad that the golden road of youth is not permanent. I am thankful for my childhood, but I am even more thankful that I am not stuck there in my ignorance forever. I am thankful that God is slowly and surely leading me along a higher path, as he enables me to leave behind my lesser understanding for a greater knowledge of Him. May I always seek to be changing, and never be content in remaining just as I am.

I Corinthians 13:9-12
For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.