Pumpa's Trip to the East Coast to Help Move My Grandkids

Can you imagine living in a two-bedroom, one bath, 700 square foot, 2nd floor apartment that has no parking, no yard or grass, no washer and dryer, no dishwasher?  Can you imagine living far away from family and long-time friends in Brooklyn, New York?  Can you imagine having four children, one aged 3 1/2 and three aged 1 1/2 in one bedroom, and obviously being incredibly cramped for space? 

That was the life of my daughter Emily and her husband Adam the past year and half or so, and it has been incredibly difficult.  Because of a fairly substantial, heaven-sent pay raise from Adam's current employer, they allowed themselves to dream about moving.  They found a nice home on a tree-lined, suburban street with a driveway with their own parking, with a fenced large grass side yard, in New Jersey.  It has four levels (one of them is an attic floor where they can store stuff), three bedrooms, and a washer and dryer in a finished basement (the bottom level)!  It was inevitable that they move, and this house which they are renting on a month-to-month basis, seemed like a great fit.

I volunteered to fly to New York last week to help them finish packing and to help with the actual move.  It was amazing how much stuff they had crammed into their little living space.  It was amazing how cheerful Church members showed up and helped watch the kids as others finished packing, lugged furniture, boxes and stuff down the stairs and onto the truck, and cleaned walls and floors and appliances and fixtures as stuff was taken away.  I did what I could, cheerleading as I huffed and puffed and sweated (it was SO humid!) 

We said good-bye to those good souls that helped in Brooklyn and drove our U-Haul to Rutherford, New Jersey near the Meadowlands Sports Complex (where the New York Giants play football).  There in the heat and humidity we unloaded the truck rather quickly with the help of a couple from a nearby New Jersey congregation of the Church and placed stuff in the new house.  Soon, the kids and Emily arrived and Emily promptly took off their clothes except for Elizabeth's underwear, put the triplets in swimming diapers, turned on a sprinkler, and let the kids run around in the water in their new side yard.  Emily says it warms her heart to see her children be able to run and play safely on grass that is theirs.

The next few days were emotionally intense as the temperature sweltered and the humidity became worse (it finally rained the night before I left) and kids and Mom (and Pumpa) were adjusting to the new house with boxes everywhere and not much cooling.  Having four children under age 4 in any circumstance is difficult (Lucy, one of the triplets had a fever), but the heat and the disorganization exasorbated the difficulty.  I felt quite helpless sometimes because I wasn't sure where Emily and Adam wanted to put things and because the kids want their Mama and not Pumpa when she's around, and would actually push me away and cry and/or scream for her.

Finally, yesterday, it was time to leave.  Adam took the day off to help Emily organize the house and to assist with the kids, particularly sick Lucy.  After hugs and kisses, Emily and Elizabeth took me to the Newark Airport.  I flew to Phoenix and then to Burbank where Geema awaited me.  How strangely wonderful to feel the dryness of the air, to not hear crying or screaming, to be in an uncluttered environment once again.

I'm glad that I was able to do what I did for this little family so far away.  I'm so proud of Adam and Emily and how they deal with their circumstances and how they are attempting to make a life for themselves and their little, loud family.  I know that neither Ann nor I could do what they are doing.  We want to support them in any way possible, to help them in this transitional time in their lives.  Bye-bye, Pumpa!

Trying to Understand My Thoughts and Feelings About Same-Gender Attraction

In a previous post last year, I wrote about my feelings with regard to how people in faith communities respond to people who decide to attend their churches that may not look or act (or smell) like they do.  I also talked in that same posting about those who are brave enough to attend who may be homosexual and how important I feel it is to love them unconditionally.

A recent posting was indirectly about homosexuality as well, about how misunderstood I felt as a supporter of Proposition 8 in California and how some in that community or those who actively supported that community were condemning me for being judgmental of them when they in fact were being judgmental of me.

I desire to return to the topic of homosexuality, and how I am attempting to reconcile my beliefs about the LDS Church’s doctrine with my support of the LDS Gay and Lesbian community.  I have thought much about this topic, and while I try to understand what I think about it, I wanted to write about it to challenge myself and to help crystallize those thoughts.  

I read with great sorrow some recent posts by a fellow LDS blogger, Mitch Mayne, who is an openly gay member of the LDS Church.  He transcribed some of his interviews with members of the Church who have come out but who still are still attempting to cling to their faith and belief in the Church.  They describe the utter turmoil of their situations, of how difficult it is to feel misunderstood by those to whom they have looked for leadership and ideally, for Christ-like unconditional love.  Their stories and their lives have affected me greatly.  I was able to sense their profound pain.  I invite you as well to read their stories at mitchmayne.blogspot.com.  I also would invite you to watch the stories of some gay and lesbian students at BYU who have produced a You Tube video that can be seen at the following URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym0jXg-hKCI. 

Gay and Lesbian Students at BYU

I was likewise affected by a recent blog entry on the Huffington Post.  It was written by a non-LDS reporter who attended a conference in Virginia recently.  The conference was sponsored by “Circling the Wagons,” a group of members of the LDS Church who have been affected by homosexuality and who are having difficulty maintaining their faith in the Church.  I will sometimes go to the Huffington Post website to look at stories about Mormons, and imagine my surprise when upon reading the blog entry I realized that the blogger/reporter was quoting Katy Adams, the daughter of our dear friends, the Birrells, who have a gay son whom I love. 

Mitch, Katy and Friend

Even though the Church reversed its policy in 1978 allowing all members of the Church regardless of race or color or ethnicity to hold the Priesthood, I do not see the Church ever sanctioning marriage between two men or two women, just as I do not see the Church ever sanctioning women to hold the priesthood.  I understand that “ever” is a long time, but to sanction same sex marriage and women holding the priesthood seems to fly in the face of Church doctrine.  Not allowing blacks to hold the Priesthood was policy, not doctrine, to the best of my knowledge, even though some Church leaders treated it as doctrine.  When the policy changed, all discussion ended among Church leaders and all embraced it.   I just don’t see that happening with this issue.

Leaders of the Church have been clear in stating the doctrine that sexual relations outside of marriage, be they heterosexual or homosexual, are a sin, and if someone violates this law of chastity, “they are subject to the discipline of the Church, just as others [heterosexuals] are” (Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, Nov. 1998, 71).   In the same General Conference talk, President Hinckley stated, “To permit such would be to make light of the very serious and sacred foundation of God-sanctioned marriage and its very purpose, the rearing of families.” 

Elder Holland

The Apostle whom I love and regard as being as loving a man as I have ever known, Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, has written, “First, let’s be absolutely clear on what God wants for each of us.  He wants us to have all of the blessings of eternal life.  He wants us to become like Him. To help us do that, He has given us a plan.  This plan is based on eternal truths and is not altered according to the social trends of the day.”

“At the heart of this plan is the begetting of children, one of the crucial reasons Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden (see 2 Nephi 2:19-25; Moses 5:10-12).  They were commanded to “be fruitful, and multiply” (Moses 2:28), and they chose to keep the commandment.  We are to follow them in marrying and providing physical bodies for Heavenly Father’s spirit children.  Obviously, a same-gender relationship is inconsistent with this plan.”

Even if in the coming years the ban against same-gender marriage is 

overturned by the courts and declared unconstitutional, I do not envision that prompting a change in such basic doctrine.

I know that this is a “wintry” doctrine for my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters within the Church.  I feel it (as much as a straight can).  However, I believe in the doctrines of the Church with all my heart (I choose not to have faith in only those doctrines I fully comprehend and understand—but to have faith in all of them) and I particularly have an abiding testimony of the Plan of Salvation as preached by the leadership of the Church.  I just don’t think that doctrine can change.

What I do believe can change and needs to change, and hopefully will change sooner than later, is a Church-wide, consistent but loving policy of how leadership handles believers who happen to experience same-gender attraction.  There are too many stories of rigid Church leaders who seem to be more interested in what they perceive as keeping the Church pure than in being loving shepherds of His sheep.  There is inconsistency in how same-gender attraction is handled because there are, to the best of my knowledge, no specific guidelines in the Church’s Handbook used by leaders worldwide.   One church leader will come down hard on a struggling gay man or lesbian woman who experiences feelings of same-gender attraction and call a disciplinary court and excommunicate them, while another will diligently try to work with the angst-filled member and extend his own personal caring and love.

I know about this type of inconsistency in leadership in dealing with those who struggle with sexual issues because of my continuing work in the Church’s Addiction Recovery Program.  I hear stories that horrify me about some rigid Church leaders who seem to be completely emotionally barren and sound like they have their own issues, and then hear other stories about men who are truly listening and seeking to lift and love the struggling persons that come to them for love, caring, and understanding.

Not so long ago, I believe that the unwritten thought within the Church and among leaders was that leadership should guide those feeling same-gender feelings to just get married to someone of the opposite gender and that the feelings would go away.  More recently, I believe the idea was to direct such people to programs which would challenge their beliefs of only being attracted to same gender individuals.  The former is foolhardy and just plain wrong, while the latter seems to me to be simplistic.

Although a leader may have negative feelings towards a gay or lesbian, he needs to make every attempt to put his negative personal feelings, his personal discomfort about homosexuality, way in the background.  What he should do is to try to emulate what Jesus Christ would do with the individual in front of him: show unconditional love.  It is his responsibility to try to understand, to feel the pain, to feel the possible confusion.  In other words, he needs to truly listen and care.  He should not have a preconceived notion to punish and keep his flock pure.  He should not withdraw either, but should try to engage this sheep of his flock as the Good Shepherd would do. 

There may be occasions where the law of chastity has been violated, and when that occurs, the leader can still show love and caring towards the individual.  In many cases, these souls have testimonies, have faith in the doctrine, and want to feel God’s love.

Mitch Mayne shared the following important points in his talk at the Circling the Wagons Conference regarding being loving to those who are not straight but who have faith and a testimony and want to worship alongside straights, 

“When it comes to LGBT members, this creates a safe space for all to walk in our doors, just as they are, without fear of persecution or retribution. It enables them to genuinely feel that they have a home here, and allows them to grow and develop as equal children of our Father.”

He then brings up another way of looking at our non-straight brothers and sisters, a concept he has discussed with me and that I wholeheartedly embrace.  He remarked, “There is very likely a test wrapped up in all of this, for there is undoubtedly a reason that some of us are gay and lesbian, while others are not. But what if the test, really, is not being given to gays and lesbians, but through gays and lesbians? What if we are actually the vehicle through which the test is being delivered? And the test, then, is not for us at all—but for you--our heterosexual brothers and sisters?”

“That would mean, then, that the test might really be this:  Will you, straight brother or sister, lend us equality? Will you view us as your peers, your equals? Will you move past your own fear and prejudice and genuinely show Christ-like love and compassion to a segment of society that, for whatever reason, appears to be the least of these in this sphere?”

“Or, will you shun us? Will you persecute us? Will you force us to choose between God and Gay, because that is what makes you comfortable? Will you compel us to choose between the faith we call home—and walking this earthly path with a companion we love?”

“Which will you choose? How will you perform on your test?”

I am committed to performing well on my test.  I am committed, to love these sons and daughters of God who as such are my spiritual brothers and sisters.  I am committed to being their advocate and a straight ally.  I am committed to lovingly educate my straight brothers and sisters and leaders, if given the opportunity, about this test.  I am committed to love my fellow man as the Savior would have me do.  If my Church is in fact the Church of Jesus Christ, and I know that it is, then we as members and leaders need to truly be “willing to take upon ourselves His name” by “always remembering Him” through our actions.  It is a continuing transition that needs to occur within the hearts of all believers.

The Final Transition - My Mother-in-Law

I was in Utah with my wife and two of my children to participate in the funeral of my mother-in-law, Helen Paxman this past Monday.  She passed on Wednesday, May 2nd, in Michigan but was flown to Utah to be buried alongside her husband and my father-in-law, Richard Paxman.  She was 87 years old, full of arthritis and pain and very much in the throes of dementia.  Ann and her siblings consider her passing a great blessing; to be released from her physical and mental suffering and to be reunited with her husband whom she has missed terribly since his passing some 15 years ago.

I realize that my belief and my family’s belief in an afterlife made this transition for Helen and for us a less foreboding one.  Our faith gives us sweet comfort.  It affords us peace in the hope that our souls, our essences, our spirits, continue to exist when our hearts stop beating.  How difficult it would be for me to not have that conviction. 

Our faith allowed us to imagine her glorious reunion with her husband dead for 15 years, with her sister Marge who died a few years ago and with her two brothers who died in their youth, with her mother and father and grandparents, and with friends and others who graced her life.  Perhaps most importantly for her, she returned to be with her spiritual father whom we believe sent her to mortality to have a mortal experience—which she had for 87 years.

Nevertheless, it was hard not to be touched by seeing my mother-in-law lying in her coffin.  It was hard to not be touched by the tears of close family and extended family.  It was hard not to be touched by the words spoken and sung during the funeral service.   It was hard not to be touched by the finality of a loved one’s mortality. 

I am very appreciative of the love shown by our friends the Lunts who put us up while we met with family.  It was great to feel the love and concern expressed by extended family and friends who made the journey to Provo for the proceedings.  It was nice to be able to connect with my family.  I feel blessed that both Ann and I could take time off, to pay for expenses to get us and two of our children to Utah and back, to have been able to drive safely to and from Utah, and to have had the health to do what we did.  We were/are truly blessed. 

STAYING WITHIN EMOTIONAL REACH

I'm the apple of her eye!

On Sunday, my wife Ann and I will celebrate 34 years of marriage.  In this day and age, that is an accomplishment I suppose.  But honestly, divorce while always an option never has seemed to be the way to ultimately deal with problems between us.

I can say that through the years, I have assimilated some of Ann’s personal and gender characteristics and she likewise has assimilated some of mine.  Perhaps more importantly from the standpoint of the couple’s therapy that I do routinely these days, she has been working on her own personal issues while at the same time I have been working on my own.  What that has served to accomplish is to keep us within emotional reach of one another.  What I mean by that is she has grown more secure in herself through the years while I have grown more secure in myself in those years, and that growth has been fairly equivalent.

Based upon my research and my clinical experience, when one partner in a relationship goes forward or backward in a significant way in their emotional life and their partner does not simultaneously respond in like manner, there are problems.  For example, if a partner gets caught up in an addiction, there is a regression in his or her emotional life, while at the same time, their partner usually has maintained and not regressed.  That’s a problem.  That presents a widening gap in their emotional reach of one another.  Another example might be a partner who has an exciting, fulfilling job while the other has a repetitive, non-stimulating life at home.  (Read my daughter’s example of my hypothesis in my recent blog entry of her blog post.)  That’s a problem.  That also likely causes a widening gap in their emotional reach.

As I state often in my clinical experience, when we go into a partner relationship, we enter at the level of our dysfunction.  In other words, we find and connect with someone who is as similarly “messed up” as we are (or aren’t).  We fall in love with someone who is within emotional reach of us.  Harville Hendrix, who has written extensively about finding our “Imago,” (Greek for our “image”— our likeness) is stating what I just wrote but in a different way.  We enter into relationships with similar “baggage” from our families of origin and our life experiences (nurture), and who we are (nature.)  If partners aren’t similarly “messed up,” the relationship will likely not last.

Icy surroundings, warm hearts

But then, unless a couple’s emotional lives remain somewhat close as the years pass, their relationship will likely be in peril and likely will not last.  Having read this hypothesis, I imagine my daughter might think that her relationship with my son-in-law might be doomed.  That is not necessarily so.  If both are really concerned about the other and each is willing to be humble and open to making changes in themselves, not expecting the other to change before they do, then they likely will stay within emotional reach of one another.  I pretty sure that will be the case with my daughter and her good husband who is a wonderful, humble man, and whom I am proud to have as a son-in-law. 

I know that Ann really cares for me on a deep level as I care deeply for her, but we both humbly realize that we each have issues and we try to work on them constantly.  In order for our marriage to flourish—that third entity in our partnership beyond her and me—, each entity has to “take care of their own side of the street.”  As we do so, the emotional distance between us is relatively small and we can deal with the resulting bumps in the road as they occur.

To be fully transparent, we have not always cleaned our own sides of the street.  In the past we looked outwardly to the other, to some degree, to meet our emotional needs.  And that occasionally surfaces even now, but when our partnership was wobbly in the past during challenges in child rearing, we got into therapy and we BOTH started working on our own “stuff,” and we continue to do so.  As a consequence, we have grown, and we have grown more or less at the same rate.  That small emotional distance between us has allowed us to grow together as a couple!

We sometimes "put on the dog"

Longevity in marriages does not necessarily mean that all is well and blissful.  For every one that is, there are as many or more that are not.  Couples can often merely tolerate one another because there is little emotional connection; they are not within emotional reach of one each other.  Those partners will often look to fulfill emotional needs outside of their relationship because there is so precious little within it.

So as I approach April 22, I have a huge smile on my face!  I have never been happier and more in love than I am right now at this time of my life.  My marriage just keeps getting better because there is emotional connection and passion.  My wife is my best friend, my confidant, my lover.  I cannot wait to be around her and love living life with her.  And what is most wondrous about this relationship is that the doctrine of my Church dictates it can last beyond death.  It can last forever; there is no “‘til death do you part.”  Why wouldn’t I want this blissful experience to go on indefinitely?

I am working hard on what I can control—myself, and on our marriage so that the transition from mortality to eternity will be natural.   HAPPY ANNIVERSARY TO ME!

"You are my lover, you're my best friend, you're in my soul"

Brushing Me with Broad Strokes

Coming to an LDS Temple/Building Near You?

When the State of California was embroiled in the voter battle over passage of Proposition 8 that sought to formally define marriage as between a man and a woman, I found myself being called on/expected as an ecclesiastical leader of a young single adult congregation in the LDS Church to get congregants engaged in getting out the vote and to work on getting a majority of Californians to vote in favor of the Proposition.  It occasioned me to look at it from both theological and humanitarian positions.  After considering who was asking me to do this, and considering consequences, I made the decision to support its passage and I got my young congregants involved.

I was attending school at the time, getting my Master’s Degree in Psychology, and my support was emblazoned on a bumper sticker on my wife’s car. It caused a brouhaha among my classmates who did not know whose car it was.  Many of my classmates were wondering how anybody could possibly support Proposition 8, especially in light of the “open mindedness” that we were learning was essential to become a good therapist.  I listened with interest as different classmates joined in the disparaging conversation, careful not to say that the car with “that” bumper sticker belonged to me.

Really? 

Still embroiled in the push-pull that was Prop 8, the withering onslaught of negativity and reproachful commentary continued online at a discussion website set up to allow students to communicate with one another (this was before Facebook became the medium to facilitate such communication).  I read with increasing indignity as the commentaries poured in one evening.  I got to a point where I could no longer just read the vitriol. 

It seemed to be the height of hypocrisy to read comments from my peers accusing people who supported Prop 8 as being unloving, uncaring, bigoted, etc..  They were usually the least judgmental people I knew and were being trained to be non-judgmental and open minded as psychotherapists.  And while I couldn’t comment specifically as to the character of each of my fellow supporters (I found nearly all to be loving and caring people), I knew who I was.  I knew that I was open minded, that I was caring and loving and non-judgmental (and was going into a profession where those character traits would serve me well), and felt that I was being wrongfully accused.

The Bumper Sticker

I decided to write a post declaring that it was my car that had the bumper sticker on it and that those that knew me well KNEW that I was non-judgmental, caring and loving.  Furthermore, without calling them out for saying/writing what they had, I merely told them that their words had hurt and that not everyone who supported Prop 8 was how they were portraying them.  In my response, I told them that I see people as people—and because of my religious paradigm, as God’s children and equal to me, not choosing to focus on their sexual orientation, gender, race or ethnicity, and that what I had been taught at our school further reinforced that construct for me.

For the record, not longer after I posted my response, I received a thoughtful response honoring me for my beliefs from my faculty advisor and sometime professor, David, who is gay, whom I had come to appreciate and highly regard and who had been very helpful to me in dealing with my struggles as a 50-something student.  I also received a very thoughtful response from my department chair, Deborah, a lesbian, whose partner ironically was raised as a Latter-day Saint.  In a caring way, she likewise honored my beliefs and informed me that because of what I had experienced at the hands of my peers, I could have greater empathy and compassion for those in her LBGT community who had and continue to experience the labels and broad strokes that I had experienced.  That empathy and compassion has helped me as I have taken the opportunity to have therapeutic relationships with that community and with a beloved transgender individual in particular.

An Active Mormon as President?

Fast forwarding to March 2012, I find myself in a somewhat similar circumstance with my conservative views.  In the current sociopolitical landscape, they and my religion are under attack from those who view themselves as being caring, open minded, and unbigoted.  If Mitt Romney becomes the Republican nominee for President of the United States (and it is becoming nearly impossible for that not to happen), I fear that in the coming months my religion and my religious views will be made light of, ridiculed, and besmirched.  If Romney were a Jew or a Muslim, the media would condemn the perpetrator.  But since he is LDS, and since my Church chooses to ignore and not respond to such attacks, those attacks will be fair game.  I would not be surprised to see “anti-Mormon” demonstrations similar to those that took place outside of the LDS Temple grounds in Los Angeles during the Prop 8 debate.

Night View of Los Angeles LDS Temple

Because of these fears and because I have already heard comments made by thoughtless people, I am publicly taking a stand.  Some people are finding or will find teachings, doctrines, and quotes from past and present leaders of the Church, or other material, that they believe entitles them to mock my beliefs, or Romney’s beliefs.  Some will portray him (and by association, me) as being a member of a cult, a member of an organization that represses women in a variety of ways, and a denomination so bigoted that they did not allow black members to hold God’s priesthood until forced to in 1978. 

 Tons of Donated Clothing for a Needy World

Does a cult allow its believers to freely interact with others in society, serve in the military, celebrate all national and religious holidays, and allow its believers to have differing political viewpoints?  Does a cult allow its believers to donate hundreds of thousands of work hours, hundreds of tons of used clothing, and millions of dollars each year to humanitarian projects that are intended for non-believers?  Does a cult allow non-believers to access their genealogical records so that they can do genealogical research to find their ancestors?  Does a cult build and run schools and universities that allow non-believers to attend?  If one is open minded at all and would look past the doctrines and beliefs and focus on the fruits of my religion, that person would have to admit that my Church is not a cult.  Cults don’t bear such fruit.

Relief Society Donating Food in DR Congo

Because members of my Church funded much of the battle to pass Prop 8 and fought against the passage of the ERA Amendment in the 70s, it will be portrayed as quaint, or even worse, as disenfranchising women and treating them as second class citizens within the Church.  What will likely not be portrayed is how the Church sponsors the largest organization for women in the world: the Relief Society, with a membership of over 4 million women in over 100 countries, which I know from personal experience and knowledge seeks to empower and teach women to be all that they can be and which gives them a voice.  There will be few if any words of praise about how women are honored and given respect over the pulpits of the Church, both on local and general Church levels.  You will not likely hear how in the most sacred and important of all rituals and ordinances of the Church performed in that LDS Temple in Los Angeles and in nearly 140 others around the world, women participate equally with men. 

Darius Gray with Merrill Bateman

In the finger pointing that will surely take place about how bigoted my Church is, you will likely not hear the historical context of how the Gentiles were forbidden from hearing Christ’s teachings while He was on the earth, and that it was only after Christ had been crucified and Peter had received a revelation from God that he decided that the Gentiles could finally be taught the Word.  Nor will you likely hear about how the Levite tribe was the ONLY tribe of the Tribes of Israel that could officiate in the rituals of the Priesthood in the Old Testament which along with the New Testament is in our Canon.  Those who ridicule will likely not tell you that certain black members were given the Priesthood in the early days of the Church, nor will they relate statistics of how the Church is growing faster on the African continent than on any other, and that most Blacks who have joined the Church and participate fully in the Priesthood have come to understand that it was God’s will and not formal Church doctrine that denied their race that blessing for a time.  

Black LDS Family

As it has in the past, the Church has maintained its political neutrality and continues to do so, evidenced by a memo from the top leadership of the Church affirming that fact that was recently read over the pulpits of all church congregations in the United States.  How else can you explain the Church “umbrella” under which Republican Mitt Romney and Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid share its protection?  Members of my Church may lean right in their personal politics and point their judging, labeling fingers at those who do not believe as they do–and I deplore them for doing so exclusively in our auxiliary meetings--but the policy of the Church is of neutrality.

To conclude, if those who may denigrate my beliefs, the doctrines I espouse, and my Church, I would ask you to get to know some members of my faith, to look at the fruits of this religion and belief system, to honor and respect its members who do not share all of the beliefs of the greater Christian world regarding Jesus Christ and the Godhead, to look past the sound bites and really learn about us. 

LDS Members Donating Disaster Clean Up Service 

If I choose to label an individual or group, I take an “I-am-better-than-you” view of them; there is negative pride inside of me.  Labeling gives me permission to distance myself physically and emotionally from that person or group.  It allows me to disengage myself from them.   I don’t have to deal with them because I suppose I know all about them and who they are and what they represent.  It’s emotionally easier than dealing with them.

I'm Trying to Be Like Him

I don’t want people to label me and paint me with unknowing broad strokes.  I am trying to follow the loving and caring example of my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and my religion and its doctrines and teachings have nurtured those attributes in me.  Engage me.

A Soul Cry from My Daughter

Dear Readers,

My daughter Emily (the mother of the triplets) has a wonderful blog --> 3-ring-circus.tumblr.com.  Like me, she uses the blog to send out to the blogosphere, to the world, her ideas, feelings, musings, trying to make sense of her life.  I found her most recent posting engaging and deeply profound.  I know my daughter and I know that she feels so deeply what she writes about.  I wanted to share her soul cry on my blog because after all she is a part of me; I raised her.  

And I want to say to the world how proud I am of her and her resilience in the face of overwhelming challenges; how she does get up every morning and tries to give my grandchildren the love and care they need even when she doesn't feel like doing so. 

March 13, 10:00 PM

This morning, I sat on the rug in my kids’ room, watching them play with their Mega Blocks. After three or four attempts to help them build a tower (the only thing you can build with Mega Blocks) followed by one of them knocking it down with glee, I was ready to scream. Or cry. Or run screaming and crying into another room. Which is what I did. (Okay, so I was screaming and crying on the inside.) I laid on my bed and was overcome by an immense feeling of boredom and despair. Then my eldest popped her head in the doorway and asked if she could come in. “Just close the door behind you,” I pleaded. But no. Three more little heads bobbed towards the bed. Back to the Mega Blocks we go.

The official Church position, and for my intents and purposes, the word of God himself is this:

By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life andprotection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.

So this, translated in my mind, sounds like this: In ideal circumstances (ie. the parents are married, alive, and able-bodied), the dad should work to pay the bills, and the mom should take care of their children in their home. At least while the children are young, mom’s primary focus should be on taking care of them, not on making money. That’s dad’s job. Both work for the good of the family focusing mainly on their own spheres of responsibility. But obviously, this can overlap. Dads are expected to pitch in w/ the kids and household chores. And if mom can manage to get all her stuff done and still have time to make some extra money on the side, well, then more power to her.  Maybe you agree. Maybe you don’t. But for me. this has been my understanding of How Life Works since I was a kid. And I’m not saying I disagree with it now. But I was thinking about this whole idea tonight and something struck me.

You see, the men (and by “the men” I mean Mormon men. In the USA. Who are middle class. So maybe none of this really applies outside of my little world…) Anyway, the men go to college where they spend all this time and money to figure out what career they want to pursue, get the education and training they need for said career, and then work in it for the rest of their lives. They may change careers at some point. But ultimately, and hopefully, they work at a job they enjoy while fulfilling their duty to provide for their family. There are a million different jobs out there. And any of them are open to them. The women, however, no matter what they studied in college or where they worked before having kids, all end up doing the same thing. Sure, some excel at baking. Others take on quilting. Some even learn photography. But we all are doing basically the same job: cooking, cleaning, caring for the children. We are all wiping bums and noses, making grocery lists, and picking up toys. My husband had endless choices when it came to deciding what he’d be doing with the vast majority of his time each day. I had one. 

I’m not saying this isn’t the way it’s supposed to be. I’m not saying I disagree with the church leaders who have taught this concept. I’m not shaking my fist at God (not over this, anyway.) I mean, if you take this line of thinking far enough, you start thinking, this isn’t fair. Why can’t I choose something else? I don’t think I would. I couldn’t imagine putting my kids in day care. It would kill me. I couldn’t imagine leaving them with a nanny, or even a close relative. Not all day, five days a week. It’s going to be hard enough sending my firstborn off to preschool next fall. So obviously, on some level, I chose this as the best (if only) option. 

And it’s not as if I cried with boredom and despair this morning because it’s all simply too easy for me. I’m not so smart/capable/awesomely talented that I’m bored with being a SAHM. In fact, I’m not a very good homemaker. At all. My husband recently pulled the bed away from the wall to reveal a huge patch of mold. Growing on the wall. I didn’t even know you had to check for things like mold. On walls. Behind beds. And there it was all this time. So you see, I’m not very good at this. And that’s only a part of the job description. There’s this whole “shaping of the future generation” aspect of my job description. Isn’t that amazing? I’m doing the most important work a person could do! Ever! SO IMPORTANT, PEOPLE!!!!! (How many times have I heard that in Relief Society?) All sarcasm aside, it does make me feel great when I teach my daughter a new concept. Or when the babies start to do the little hand motions to the “Five Little Monkies” song we’ve been singing every day for weeks straight. I am trying to take this seriously. I even thought about coming up with a curriculum to follow each day. I wrote it on my to-do list and everything. But every time I looked at it, I found something else to do. Because just looking at it made me want to simultaneously cry and fall asleep. 

So where does this leave me? I know that choosing to stay home with my kids was the right choice. I know that giving my time to the nurturing of my children and the upkeep of our home is very, very important. I also know that all this esoteric contemplation may come across selfish at worst and annoying at best. (So thank you for not leaving snarky comments.) But I still am left with the fact that tomorrow, I’m going to have to get up and do everything I did yesterday, Mega Blocks and all, and I really, really need to figure out how to be happy doing it. Or just not consumed with boredom and despair. Any ideas on how? And bonus points if you avoid using phrases like, “count your blessings” or “positive attitude.” I have an uncontrollable reflex that makes my eyes roll when I hear GospelSpeak. 

Okay, friends. Ready, GO! 

I wrote this last night, after a long, hard day. Today has been better. So maybe that’s my answer: just keep swimming.

BIRTHDAY TRIBUTE TO JANEEN

Janeen and My Brother Tom at the Beach

          On the occasion of her 75^th birthday, I wanted to take some time to write about my favorite sister-in-law.  I want her and the world to know how I feel about her.  She is no ordinary woman.  And rather than talk about her to others at some future point when she is pushing up  

daisies, I want her to know now!

          Since she got married to my brother Tom when I was less than three years old, I do not know a world without Janeen.  She has been a constant in my own life and that of my wife and children, supportive and loving through thick and thin.  I want you to know Janeen, as best I can describe her from the many interactions I and my family have had with her through these many years.

          Janeen ‘s greatest attribute is her ability to love, regardless of whether someone is worthy or not of that love .  I would be willing to bet a lot of money that if one were to ask just about anyone who interacts with her, from her children, grand children, great grand children, to friends or even acquaintances, they would tell you that they feel that Janeen cares about them.  She involves herself in their lives, anxious to know how they’re doing, what is happening in their lives—and she does so, I believe, because of her amazing ability to love.  It doesn’t matter if you are not living in the way she thinks you should live (I’m thinking of when my oldest daughter Rebecca lived with her and Tom); she looks past what a person does and looks at the lovable person that they are.  It doesn’t matter if a person has caused her grief (I’m thinking about my mother whom Janeen took care of during the closing months of her life); she continues to love them. It doesn’t matter if you are mentally or emotionally afflicted (I’m thinking about her tireless work with that population in her school district); she loves them even more.  It doesn’t matter if a person has not been considerate of her feelings (I’m sure I’ve done that in the past as has Tom, her offspring and others); she will look past the hurt and love them.

          I can honestly say that of all of the people that I have known closely—family, friends, co-workers, fellow believers—Janeen is the most loving and caring of them all.  To me, she exemplifies to the greatest degree the kind of love that God has for his children.  If that seem like lofty hyperbole, I am not given to doing that, and the person challenging that statement has not felt of her love for them.

          She goes out of her way to show you that she cares.  One would be hard pressed to count all of the meals she has lovingly provided me and others in her home and elsewhere.  I cannot count all of the encouraging words that she has freely given me and mine through the years.  If ever you need her to do something, she will move heaven and earth to accomplish it.  If ever you need her to take care of somebody on your behalf, she is there 100%.  If ever you need a shoulder to cry on, she will offer you hers and shed tears with you.

From my psychologically trained perspective (for what that is worth), I believe that she is capable of  loving and caring and being available for others because she has such a healthy view of herself, accepting who she is, warts and all, so that her issues do not get in the way of her interactions with others.  In other words, she is able to give so much because her issues do not get in her way, thus allowing her to better focus on you.  Most other people, and I include myself in that group, are challenged to be so available to others because our inadequacies get in our way.  Perhaps she can focus on others because she really does understand her relationship to her God, and she understands that the most important thing that we can do here in mortality is to love.  Everything else is subordinate to loving people.

          Another amazing attribute of this amazing woman is her attitude.  I am sure she has moments when physical ailments press in on her, or she feels some level of discouragement, but she deals with them in private (I guess) and does whatever she can to help you be happy and grateful.  (My family and I will forever quote her famous refrain, “aren’t we lucky?)  She has an uncanny ability to cheer you up, probably because she does not take herself very seriously.  She really tries to enjoy life and will do all within her power to help you enjoy your life as well.

          I am so appreciative that she has loved my brother through good and bad, always at his side following him wherever he has gone, being his counterpoint.  I am 100% sure that among the great legacies she has given to her posterity is her undying love and support for Tom (even though like most wives there are times, I’m sure, when she would like to kick him off the dock at Bear Lake!)  How many wives would have cheerfully lived in Nigeria or lived in a tiny flat in England as she did?

 I just want to conclude by saying that she is one of the greatest examples that I have this side of heaven.  I feel very blessed that I have had the privilege to have her grace my life.  I cherish her love and caring.  I selfishly hope that she is blessed with a good many more years here in mortality so that I may yet feel of her love for me.  May God’s choicest blessings be upon you now and forever, Janeen!

A RECOVERY PARADOX...FOR ME ANYWAY

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,

courage to change the things I can,

and the wisdom to know the difference.

So reads what is known in the Recovery World of Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Nicotine Anonymous, Sex Addicts Anonymous, and all of the myriad “Anonymouses,” or “Anonymai,” as the “Serenity Prayer.”  This Prayer has been recited by literally millions of people, and will likely be recited by millions more in the years and decades to come, especially as addictions continue to plague society.  It is a Prayer in which the person reciting it is committing to—or at least desiring to commit to—an emotional surrendering to a Higher Power.  This spirit of surrender is embodied in the first three steps of the Twelve Step Program that the organizations above espouse:

Step 1—We admitted we were powerless over [our addiction]—that our lives had become unmanageable.  (“I can’t.”)

Step 2—Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.  (“God can.”)

Step 3—Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood him.  (“I’ll let him.”)

The idea of “surrendering” in the recovery world that I inhabit is both appealing and perplexing to me.  Secular, popular Western culture (and ironically, LDS culture) seems to promote personal self-sufficiency, yet “surrendering” is in line with the doctrine of grace in Christian and other religious communities.  In my world of addiction recovery, and I spend a lot of time there, there appears to be a paradox of the Addict surrendering to God (a la Twelve Step Programs) vs. those same Programs and addiction rehabilitation programs far and wide promoting cognitive-based behavioral changes which have as their goal to restructure the thinking of the triggered addict so that new, positive, non-irrational thoughts can produce new positive behaviors.  It seems paradoxical to me because the former implies that the Addict is powerless over the addiction and should surrender to it (to feel it), and surrender to a “full of grace” God, yet the latter would imply that the Addict indeed has power and should take the “non-surrendering” responsibility and change his/her irrational thoughts that lead to addictive, destructive behaviors. 

Interestingly, in my therapy and Twelve Step work I have related both ideas to clients and members of recovery groups, depending on the circumstance.  I can easily defend both ways of dealing with addiction.  Perhaps this may be a deficiency in me.  I have the thought that I am wanting/needing to work out this paradox in order to be completely congruent in my role as a therapist.  But then, could both ways of looking at recovery be correct for the addict?  Can he/she experience both and incorporate them into their recovery? How does that work?  

Is it possible that surrender is indeed a necessary and integral part of recovery, and that someone using and “working” the Twelve Steps can simultaneously surrender will and change thoughts (“stinking thinking”)which then change behaviors?  Does the addict surrender to God (or a Higher Power) who then theoretically changes the thoughts of the addict?  Is challenging the irrational thinking a focus on abstinence from the addiction rather than on real recovery (assuming the belief that abstinence is not necessarily recovery)?

Or can it be said that surrendering to the feeling of the desire to “act out” or to participate in the addiction (feeling one’s “dark side”) must indeed occur in order for the addict to cognitively not engage in “stinking thinking” and choose not to indulge in the behavior? Is this the process that ultimately must take place in the life of the addict before there is recovery?  If so, what role does a Higher Power (God) and the addict’s surrendering to It/Him play in that process?

Or is the idea of surrendering the initial part of recovery, and the cognitive challenging of irrational thoughts the later, on-going work of the recovery process?  Or, when all is said and done, are they just two different ways of dealing with addiction?

I congratulate those who read this blog and have gotten to this end of my musings about addiction.  Writing this blog is an important outlet for me and this posting is all about me and my musings.  I apologize to anyone reading this who has not been affected by addiction or who couldn’t care less.  This blog is about my transitions (RED IN TRANSITION) and this is a transition from uncertainty that I want to make that is important to me.