In faith

"Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us." - Hebrews 12:1

I'm posting this in faith. This verse empowers me to continue forward even when I feel like I just want to forfeit the race of faith, where the ultimate goal is becoming more like Jesus (a lofty goal but not altogether unattainable).

A night to remember

Last night, I was unexpectedly invited to my friend Heather's house for an impromptu game/movie night. Upon arrival at her house (which we've affectionately deemed as located in the Middle of Nowhere), the first thing I noticed was a rare, vintage Kermit the Frog sitting on Heather's family's cabinet (upon further inspection, I found out that the toy actually sang too -- as if simply having Kermit was not enough!).

Before I continue, let me tell you about my affinity for Kermit the Frog. I grew up watching Kermit and his crazy friends' antics in the various Muppet movies, as well as being an avid Muppet Babies viewer. Then when I was in ninth grade, I started taking voice lessons. My teacher told me not to sing a certain way or else I would sound like Kermit the Frog. Did I heed such sage advice? Yeah eventually, but I couldn't wait to practice the Kermit voice. Besides, who wants to hear Pavarotti when they can hear Kermit?! Since then, I've been able to do Kermit's voice, as well as his unlikely admirer, Miss Piggy (a fact of which I'm not sure I should be proud...). Once I got involved with children's ministry, I used my Kermit voice to manipulate the puppets, even if the puppets were not frogs (the kids did not seem to notice since most of them aren't familiar with such high-quality cultural icons as the Muppets -- they're too young).

So that's how I developed my Kermit inclinations. So while we were playing Scrabble, I kept eyeing Heather's cabinet. Would they notice if I just "borrowed" Kermit for an undetermined length of time? Deciding that stealing him would probably not be right or favorable for my image, I tried to put his presence out of my mind. After a while, Heather's mom came home. Chatting with her, I discovered she has been involved with kids' ministry for over twenty years. As a result, she accumulated dozens of puppets. With ears wide open and mouth agape, I listened as this kids' ministry master told of her many creations involving puppets and marionettes. She brought out a few of the collection, including one very big green dragon. Then she said words that I wasn't quite sure I heard correctly: "Yeah, you're welcomed to take it, I need to get some of them off my hands." What?! A free puppet? Good-sized puppets usually run close to $100 and now this master is offering me a life-sized one?! God was surely smiling down on me. After talking with her some more, she again offered to give me more puppets if I wanted. (Was this my birthday?) I knew I had to make my move: "Uh, actually, I've noticed your Kermit over there. Would you be willing to let me have him?"

She hesitated a bit, but soon acquiesced, "Sure, I only got him for one dollar at a garage sale anyway." My jaw must have dropped to the floor. I was very thankful. I made sure she knew that Kermit would be in safe hands. I couldn't believe it though. I have searched eBay and Google and even the official Muppets website and none of them seem to be selling Kermit paraphernalia. Yet here I am, unassumingly at a friend's house to play board games, and lo and behold, there's a Kermit right in front of me! It was a very good.

But wait, there's more! I can't forget to mention that my good friends also got me a Kermit shirt that night, too! The shirt says, "It's easy being green!" with Kermit smiling. Who could believe it -- a Kermit shirt (another item I've searched for) and a Kermit toy and a giant dragon puppet? I still can't believe it, yet as I type this, Kermit is sitting on top of my desk, waiting to go to school with me.

An addiction

I've been really getting a kick out of blogging. I've been trying to figure out why because to a casual naysayer, blogging is pretty futile. My blog probably won't be read by many. Sure, I may increase my personal narrative style of writing, yet I don't see the need for that in my life.

Nonetheless, I say "poo!" to any naysayers. I like blogging, even if I won't reach the multitudes. With that said, let me explain why I think I'm becoming addicted to blogging.

First, I get a thought -- usually something strange, sardonic or cynical that I think others may agree -- and then my heart starts beating fast from excitement. It's gotten to the point (and mind you, I've only been blogging for less than two weeks) where friends and family will say, even before I say it, "I bet you're going to blog about that." Case in point, a few days ago, I was irritated with my mom about something irrelevant and she commented that I was going to blog about my ire. Which, of course, made me more agitated. Obviously, I did not blog about that incident (except to include it just now), but I got her point: I blog whenever I'm in a state of thought. In hindsight, I find her comment funny because I do blog when I'm happy, agitated, or feeling sarcastic (which are my three primary emotions, the last two usually coincide).

Ruminations on Philip Yancey and Human Suffering

He tackles the hardest questions about God and spirituality. He's the editor-at-large of Christianity Today. He's written numerous award-winning books. He's none other than Philip Yancey!

I've been a fan of his for about two years now, ever since reading The Jesus I Never Knew, a work about understanding the historical and biblical contexts of Jesus' day. This summer, though, I've had the privilege of reading two of his most hard-hitting books on God's relation to human suffering: Where is God when it Hurts? and Disappointment with God.

I picked up these books under the auspice of researching explanations for my upcoming internship with a local hospice organization. I know that I will encounter spiritual questions as a psychosocial counselor, even if I can't initiate God-speak. However, I know that I was subconsciously reading them for myself.

In the whole seven years since my conversion to Christianity (September 22, 2001), I've never had occasion to blame or talk to God about human suffering. That's not to say that I haven't had difficulties with my faith, it's just that the big "Why-does-God-allow-suffering" question has never struck a chord within me. But this summer, I've been up and down in my faith, often wanting to sit in the race God has set before me, not run. A lot of it has to do with a particular issue that I thought was better, but kept, and still keeps, bothering me. But reading Yancey's books have put it into perspective.

Where's God is directed toward people who physically suffer. The main point I really got out of this book came from a story about John Donne, my favorite metaphysical poet, who lived in the sixteenth century. He contracted the plague and was assumed to die. Living near a church, Donne would hear the bell strike daily, in observance of a funeral, reminding him of his suffering and probable mortality (it was also during this time when he coined the term, "For whom the bell tolls," which became a famous Hemingway novel). In one of his sonnets, he asked God to "redeem his suffering." This phrase stuck out to me, since I know that God will one day redeem my own problems for his glory (even though they are not physical) -- whether that means helping others in this lifetime or showing me his glory in the next lifetime. Rather than finding
"answers" to such difficulties, Yancey provides numerous stories on believers who are still in the midst of their struggles and disabilities, regardless of their hope or lack of hope in God. I think his approach in this book is appropriate since it seeks to empaththize with, not cure, these deep spiritual questions. Often dry, theological answers have almost no bearing on our suffering soul, even though they may be truthful. It isn't until his next book that he attempts to reconcile suffering and theology in a sensitive, genuine manner.

Disappointment is more applicable to me, since it addresses three questions that "no one dares to ask out loud" (as the subtitle describes). These questions are none other than, Is God unfair? Is God silent? Is God hidden? Anyone who's felt any sort of spiritual disappoint can agree that they sometimes ask these same questions. I know I have. This book is meticulously woven with scriptural examples of believers who suffered a lot of disappointment with God, as well as twentieth-century contemporaries who feel rejected by God's lack of appearance that he showed biblical characters. I can't explain the whole structure of the book, but Yancey takes great pains to address many viewpoints. For me, I really connected with the idea of faith in Moses' day vs. faith in the Church era (33 AD - present). Yancey explains that the Israelites were "spoiled" by the fact that God showed many physical signs of his presence: rescuing them from Egypt, leading them through the wilderness by appearing as a cloud of smoke, providing manna as food, giving them a direct Law that left no gray area between right and wrong, etc. As a result, they did not feel isolated from his power or question his existence. Sounds like they had it made, right? Yes, but it didn't help their relationship with God. It made it worse.

They had no need for faith, they were unable to choose Him. As a result, they rebeled and often followed other gods, often incurring the wrath of the true God they had abandoned. Nowadays, we have the luxury of experiencing God by our own belief, even though people often call faith blind. Yes, our lack of physical proof of Him may falter -- quite often, actually -- but we are able to enter into a relationship with him out of love and faith, which are two of God's favorite characteristics. He doesn't require us to sacrifice lambs or call us unclean if we get sick, unlike the precepts of the original Law. The Law was fulfilled through Jesus, so all we have to do is come as we are.

Now obviously, this explanation is not a cure-all to spiritual problems, but it helped me gain some perspective on my questions. I am thankful for this mystery of Christian faith, even though it can be frustrating (and quite often, at that). However, I'd rather run to God in the beautiful uncertainty of faith, knowing that he accepts me, as opposed to being scared that I've broken his Law.

This has been a long blog, and I'm not confident that I've made myself clear (which happens a lot). Just know that these two books have helped me tremendously, both as a counselor-in-training and as a thinking Christian. May He help you on your journey through the valley and the mountaintop.

Carey-ing around the neighborhood

Yesterday, I decided to work on my fitness and walk the neighborhood. I'd previously decided to take one of my dogs, who all lead sedentary lifestyles. The most robust (wild, crazy, hyper, etc..) of the pack is our youngest, Carey, a 90 lb+ black lab/German shepherd mix. As we left, my dad, an avid Dog Whisperer viewer, advised me to make sure Carey did not lead me but walked alongside me. Complying, I headed out.

Before I go further, let's explore our last neighborhood excursion, which was about a year ago. First, we came across a snake and she was oblivious as she almost stepped on it. Also, Carey was about ten pounds lighter and more of a puppy. I'd forgotten that extra poundage would make the trip a little more exhausting for her. Even still, I've never been a big fan of jogging/walking the neighborhood because of the risk of seeing unwanted former schoolmates and meeting bestial dogs that were interested in smelling the rumps of my dogs, among other things. Moreover, I enjoy a little thing called the sidewalk. I despise walking in the streets because people have parked their car where the driveway and sidewalk intersect. You paid for a sidewalk, yet you're blocking it?! I feel highly awkward when I'm walking by a house with an inhabitant hacking out a lung while puffing away on a cigarette in their open garage. At least they smoke outside. Finally, I'm not sure the proper pedestrian ettiquette, but how do you respond with someone walking toward you? Who is the first to step out of the way for the other person to cross? There's obviously not enough room for the both of you. But since I'm determined, stubborn, and usually have a large dog ambling along with me, I wait for the other person to sidestep. With all that said, I was looking forward to spending some quality time with Carey.

So we set out, Carey sniffing wildly at her surroundings. She was all over the place; I felt bad for yanking her choke chain too vigorously to make her follow my demands (I quickly got over that feeling, though). We em-barked on our journey and she knew who was boss (me). I wanted us to actually exert ourselves, so I made sure we were going at a vigorous pace.

The entire walk is approximately 3mi. By mile 0.25, her heavy panting indicated she was running on empty. I knew she was gone when I was the one leading -- no, I was pulling her. I talked with her. I told her that I'm the human, and she's the wild dog who is to stereotypically lead me faster than I can walk. She responded by panting out doggy saliva. By mile 2.75, I kept urging her along like a coach, "Come on, Carey, we're almost there!" I employed my handy positive regard counseling skills (at least I'm learning something useful for all that money) which empowered her to cross the finish line-- our front door.

In hindsight, I'm sorry to say that I was wrong about Carey. She can't go the entire distance. She is poorly out of shape for a dog who is less than two years old. When I go for my excursion today, I'm going to let her rest but I think I'll take Mariah, who is no less out of shape, but still pretty agile. And I also think I'm going to go on a walking trail, rather than a neighborhood. It's less awkward that way, and the sidewalk is large enough for two people to pass by each without conflict. And it's probably illegal to park a car across the path!

Stewie Griffin

I was watching Family Guy last night and wanted to blog about how cool Stewie Griffin is. For those of you who don't know, Stewie is a baby with a football-shaped head who is set on world domination and harming his mother Lois (ouch, that doesn't look as funny in print as it does on the show...). He's well-read: he read Grapes of Wrath which is one of my favorite books and he's interested in reading his dog's novel. He's got a British accent (it sounds like it to me) but he was born in Rhode Island. How'd that happen? He's got a whole weapon armory behind his toybox. He makes a lot of cultural allusions that I don't even get half the time. Why can't all babies be that well-rounded?

Reading Lolita in America

My good friend bought me the classic Lolita by Vladamir Nabokov for my birthday (thanks, J-Birdie). I heard about the controversial book a few years back, and being a person who likes to investigate controversy (as well as being an English lit buff), decided I wanted to read it. Now, before I go further, let me explain what Lolita is not. It's not a pornographic book at all, although it does cover an older man's psychotic obsession with a teenage girl. It also isn't really vulgar since the narrator wants to maintain an air of romanticism toward his young love object. Finally, and most importantly for my own reputation, I definitely did not read it because it was about pedophilia. With all that established, let me discuss it.

Here's the synopsis for those who haven't heard about this. It's narrated by Humbert Humbert as his personal journal/deposition regarding his highly illegal and mainly psychotic obsession with 12-yr old Dolores (a.k.a., "Lo", or "Lolita"). This story, taking place in post-war America and published in 1955, could obviously cause some friction. Good ol' Hum, who continuously mentions the attractiveness of his physical looks, tells how Lolita's mother immediately falls in love with him. Being attracted to her daughter, he decides that it'd be advantageous to marry her so that way innocent Lo will become his daughter. When the girl's off to an all-female summer camp, Hamburg (who periodically gives himself nicknames like this) arranges to kill his new wife. Just as he was planning, she discovers Hum's passionate journal, which describes in detail of his feelings for Lolita. By a strange twist of fate (which is an important motif in the novel), he never has to carry out his death plans because she is accidentally ran over just minutes after reading the journal (imagine that!). Shortly after the funeral (about which Lolita knows nothing), H.H. essentially kidnaps Lolita and takes her across the continental United States until she runs away with another adult three years later. Throughout the novel, readers (who are supposed to members of a judicial panel that's reviewing Hum's case) find out that Lolita is not as innocent as they would be inclined to think: she allows Humbert to physically take advantage of her in order to get things she wantsand she personally engages in multiple dalliances with others. I won't spoil the ending, but this is the basic plot of the story.

Now on for the good stuff: Literary discussion!

Readers need to remember at all times that Humbert is mentally ill (he mentions multiple times about being institutionalized multiple times) so his narration cannot be full trusted (if at all). Throughout his hospitalizations, he managed to deceive his various psychiatrists. Since he is a master of charm, readers must wary when analyzing the themes of the novel. Nonetheless, here are some points I got out of reading:

• There are many instances where Hum mentions charming people into manipulation. However, he doesn't do it in a way to blatantly tell his readers (who are supposed to be people who determine a prison sentence, remember) that he is deceitful. It's a theme that must be implied. Indeed, it almost seems as if Hum is not a criminal after all; he's just another guy who falls in love with someone (albeit, a girl who's one-third his age!)


• Many references all have a mythical theme (hotels named after enchantment, magical forests, etc) that all hint at the type of force that Lolita has over him. Also, Hum calls girls like Lolita "nymphets" which are mythical female creatures who have powers of seduction.


• Irony: Hum is in love with Lolita because she looks so innocent, pure, and naive. Yet we find out that Lolita is truly conniving and deceitful herself.


• The cause for Humbert's pedophilia is very Freudian in nature. His adulthood sexual frustrations began in an unfulfilled sexual desire in his early adolescent years.


• Lolita's full name is Dolores Haze. In Spanish, dolores means "pain", while haze often symbolizes confusion or hidden nature.


• A very complex style of syntax (sentence/punctuation structure) and dication (wording) furthers Hum's deceitful nature. A good portion of the time, I couldn't quite make out what he was saying!


• One of Lolita's pasttimes is reading movie magazines and performing in school theaters. I think Nabokov uses this hobby to mirror Hum and Lo's relationship. On the outside, it seems as if Hum is a widower raising his step-daughter. Yet we're aware of what happens "backstage" in their private lives. Their exterior lifestyle is all an act.
  

I really appreciated the literary aspects in this novel. Yes, the topic was disturbing, but it cleverly showed the inner workings of a deranged man and the extreme measures he would commit to fulfill his personal infatuations. I highly recommend this book for anyone who's looking for a psychological work of fiction. At this point, I can't determine the main theme, or message, that this book is supposed to tell of humanity. If I do, I'll get back to you.