LOVE OF GOD DEMONSTRATED IN LOVING OTHERS

For a long time I struggled with not knowing how to love God and worried that I was not a true Christian because I could not grasp what was expected of me.

Granted I grew up accepting Christian principles and knowing God as my Lord and Savior, learning very early in life how to worship and to pray to him, but I had trouble understanding how to truly love God in the way that I thought I should.

The uncertainty remained with me well into  adulthood. I knew all too well what it felt like to be in love and to be loved in a husband and wife context but I could not equate that emotional and physical bliss to a love of our Creator.

After all, how can you love God whom you have never seen? 

Everything that I read or heard on the question either went over my head or failed to adequately provide answers. I cannot believe the amount fruitless study I engaged in over the years, church sermons I'd listened to and lip service I paid before, almost out of the blue, the light finally dawned on me...You love God by loving others. Why had that simple truth evaded me for so long? 

The basic nature of God is love. What else is there to say? For so long I had been seeking a different kind of love befitting God and in reality there are no different levels or degrees of love to fit certain circumstances.

When we love others with unselfish love, we are taking on the nature of God and in effect loving him. We are commanded to love God and love our neighbor as our self. When we do this, we are demonstrating that we love God.

When you enter the world of Christianity, you must change your basic nature. The world has programmed us to look out for ourselves, to do whatever is necessary to get ahead. God created us with the instinct for self preservation. As a Christian, however, we must look out for others also.

After all these years of building up self we must sacrifice some time and effort, to serve others. I believe this is one of the most difficult lessons Christians have to learn. It may seem as if we are coldly and deliberately sabotaging self. In reality, we are simply learning to love others as we do our self.

Christians are supposed to operate by agape love. We are to have genuine concern for other people. Again, I believe that Christianity has failed to change the world because too few Christians understand or are willing to operate in this fashion.

The word love brings up many things in our mind. Greek and Latin terminology has different words for love. Flirtatious love, brotherly love. Sexual love. Friendship love, logical love, smothering love, divine love. The English language has only one word for love. It defines itself, so is it any wonder that we have trouble looking for any other definition?

In Greek, agape is used in most Scriptures that deal with the love man has for God, and God has for man. It describes the very nature of God. He is love. Since we are made in his image, it should describe our nature.

Agape love is a little different. It is not a feeling; it's a motivation for action that we are free to choose or reject. Agape is a sacrificial love that voluntarily suffers inconvenience, discomfort, and even death for the benefit of another without expecting anything in return.

Jesus introduced agape love principles with the golden rule: Do to others what you would have them do to you (Matthew 7:12 ). This law is based on Leviticus 19:18. Love your neighbor as yourself. It is called the Royal Law in James 2:8, because all laws of relationship are based upon it.

The principles of agape apply in marriage also.

Love that involves romance is great but it is by nature selfish, predominantly satisfying self needs only. Agape love causes each partner to seek satisfaction for their spouse first. Both needs are met in a beautiful relationship if agape principles are followed. Marriages fail because people quit being concerned for their spouse.

So then, love can be described with the three letters -- "G-O-D" -- and three words "God is Love." The world describes love as an emotion. It is much more than that. It is giving and commitment.

Consider that God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son. He loved, he gave the most precious gift it was possible to give. He is committed to us for life, like we are to be in our wife and husband relationships.

And the loss of a life partner does not mean that our ability to love has gone with them...I get it! Love is a living thing and it is to be shared abundantly as long as we live.

I am so relieved that I now know how to love God. If by chance, like me, you didn't know before, I hope you are (relieved) now too my friend!

It was really not that complicated after all.

CANADIAN INTERMENT CAMPS REMEMBERED

Commemorative statue and interpretive panel stands at the east end of St. Paul’s Lagasse Park in Alberta.

No doubt you missed it but Thursday, Oct. 28, was National Internment Commemoration Day in Canada. The history of Canada’s World War I internment operations remains not widely known, nor understood.

During a time when government approved Indigenous residential schools are very much in the news, this is just another in the numerous dark-gray smudges blemishing Canadian heritage that will not, nor should not, go away -- lest we forget.

From 1914-1920, 8,579 “enemy aliens” were interned behind barbed wire under armed guard in 24 camps across Canada. The majority were ethnic Ukrainian immigrants, nominal subjects of the Austro-Hungarian empire and included 81 women and 156 children. At least 109 internees died of illness or injury in the camps and six men were fatally shot trying to escape.

More than 80,000 others were compelled to register with the authorities and endured state sanctioned indignities, including for some the confiscation of what little wealth they had. Those who were wounded in less visible ways cannot be so easily counted and the trauma of internment resonates still. A trilingual, 100-year anniversary commemorative statue and interpretive panel stands at the east end of St. Paul’s Lagasse Park in Alberta.

The Ukrainian Canadian Congress has released the following video produced by Ryan Boyko capturing the history of the internment of Ukrainian immigrants in Canada. Click on the link to view it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3FtxeMId8U

DO YOU HAVE A STRING HOLDING YOU BACK?

Many years ago in a small town there lived a mayor who everyone knew and loved.

One day this mayor decided to visit the travelling circus which had just come to his town. When he arrived, the show master greeted him and after shaking hands slapped him on the back. The show master insisted that the mayor take a quick tour behind the scenes, before the show started.

So off they went, first visiting the tent where all the circus animals were kept. When the two stepped inside the tent - the mayor’s eyes widened. As he looked around he saw tigers, giraffes, bears, lions, and in a far corner of the tent he spotted a young elephant around whose leg was wrapped an enormous metal chain, which tied him to a thick wooden pole.

As the mayor's attention was drawn to the other side of the tent, he noticed an enormous elephant. But after looking closer, he jumped and pointed a quivering finger…because the enormous elephant was only tied to a pole with a thin rope no thicker than your little finger. A rope which the enormous elephant could have easily snapped with a flick of his leg.

The mayor quizzed the show master, “Don’t you have this backwards? Shouldn’t the small elephant have the thin rope and the large elephant have the thick chain?”

The show master smiled, and responded, “That’s what you would expect, isn’t it?” He continued, “But we have found that when an elephant is young, that is when they try their hardest to break free and so they require the most restraint and the thickest chains. “But by the time they become much larger and stronger their will has been broken. They have come to think it is impossible to break free. And so they cease trying. Thus all they need is a thin little rope, and they will never try to move away from their pole.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Many of us are like that large strong elephant. What ties us to our “poles” in life is not a thick metal chain, or even a string, but our fears and past failures which haunt us. Maybe we tried to do something at some point in life, but were laughed at and criticized. Maybe we were told that we weren’t good enough.

It is the negative experiences from our past which hold us back from being what we could, or are called, to be. We feel trapped by our circumstances and unable to step into the freedoms out there awaiting us. Even though our capabilities grow and our ability to reach out and lay hold of freedom gets stronger as we grow older, we stop trying because our will has been broken.

Yet all we need to see is that string wrapped around our legs and acknowledge the fears and insecurities which at times feel so debilitating are really tiny and weak in comparison to our actual strength and abilities that have been supressed for so long.

All we need to do is flick our legs to break the string -- and start walking.

The wonderful world outside the "tent" we all grow up in awaits the few who are brave enough to simply take a step forward -- and snap the string.

 Science and the Gospel

Showing how they work together

Do science and theology undermine each other or support each other? 

I'll be the first to admit that there will be a lot of readin and writin in this science-theology dialogue post but brevity would not do justice to the serious nature of the subject matter and my reason(s) for pursuing it. So I beg the indulgence of my reader friends -- Christian, Jewish, et al -- in offering a framework for answering the aforementioned question on the following broad descriptions of science and theology.

First, in addition to being an academic discipline, theology (Greek: theos, logos) is God talk. God talks to us through Scripture and nature; and we talk to Him in prayer and talk about Him with words or actions (which speak louder than words). Second, science (Latin: scientia, knowledge) includes the academic disciplines of formal, natural, applied, social, and theological sciences. Many thoughtful scientists and philosophers have recognized the correlation of academic disciplines, and the potential unity of science and the humanities.

From this perspective a person may be professional in some sciences and amateur in others. In addition, it is evident that we are all involved with science and theology on some level and, therefore, can engage in science-theology question to some degree.

As we wrestle with questions about the gospel and science-theology dialogue, let us consider the biblical instruction to “remember the days of old, [and] consider the years of many generations” (Deut. 32:7).

In the premodern period theology was queen of the sciences because the church founded the universities where science was cultivated. At times there were conflicts between traditional theology and new discoveries in science. However, some essential assumptions of modern science may be traced back to the premodern period, when theology provided the context for the development of the scientific method.

In the modern period various sciences became mature, and natural science was regarded as king of the sciences. Many ceased thinking of theology as a science and trusted science as the solution to all human problems. Nevertheless, Friedrich Schleiermacher (the father of modern theology) defined theology as a positive and practical science.

In the postmodern period many scholars recognize that there are serious limits to both science and theology, and that both can be used for good or for evil. Some persons respond to this by cultivating anti-science and anti-theology attitudes. Others respond by proposing that science-theology dialogue can minimize their potential for evil and maximize their potential for good.

It is important to note that premodern, modern, and postmodern perspectives currently coexist. While some persons identify exclusively with the values of one perspective, we should recognize the positive and negative features of each approach. Rather than premodern theology as queen or modern natural science as king, we need a biblically informed postmodern strategy for science-theology dialogue and I may allude to that in future Wrights Lane posts.

Meantime I want to bring alive for you the thoughts of a remarkable woman 150 years ago as she wrote revealingly on mankinds' scientific and theological struggle to understand the nature of an all-mighty God. She had critics and her authenticity was often questioned, but the provocative and fascinating Ellen G. White was truly ahead of her time.

Ellen G. White

Ellen G. White was a 19th century religious writer, missionary and co-founder of the ‘Seventh-day Adventist Church’, an internationally recognized religious organization. A prolific author, she produced more than 5000 articles and 40 books during her lifetime. Some of her well-known publications include, ‘The Desire of Ages’, ‘The Great Controversy’ and ‘Steps to Christ’. 

Her publications are revered today as many believe her works are direct revelations from god. Her works have been translated in over 140 languages across the world and her publications mostly threw light upon topics pertaining to theology, evangelism, education, creationism and agriculture. 

As an advocate of vegetarianism, she stressed the importance of treating animals with respect and believed that vegetarianism would help human beings grow spiritually. 

In the following extract from one of her earlier formidable works, March 13, 1884, White talked rationally all those years ago about how science and God's written word can work in harmony. You have to read the text slowly and carefully in order to follow the thought process, bearing in mind the pre-modern context from whence it comes. Her opening paragraph is most profound.

“The fool hath in his heart, There is no God.” The mightiest intellects of earth cannot comprehend God. If he reveals himself at all to men, it is by veiling himself in mystery. His ways are past finding out. Men must be ever searching, ever learning; and yet there is an infinity beyond. Could they fully understand the purposes, wisdom, love, and character of God, they would not believe in him as an infinite being, and trust him with the interests of their souls. If they could fathom him, he would no longer stand supreme." She continued...

"Many, when they find themselves incapable of measuring the Creator and his works by their own imperfect knowledge of science, doubt the existence of God and attribute infinite power to nature. These persons have lost the simplicity of faith, and are removed far from God in mind and spirit. There should be a settled faith in the divinity of God's holy word. The Bible is not to be tested by men's ideas of science, but science is to be brought to the test of this unerring standard. When the Bible makes statements of facts in nature, science may be compared with the written word, and a correct understanding of both will always prove them to be in harmony. One does not contradict the other. All truth, whether in nature or revelation, agrees. Scientific research will open to the minds of the really wise vast fields of thought and information. They will see God in his works, and will praise him. He will be to them first and best, and the mind will be centered upon him. Skeptics, who read the Bible for the sake of caviling, through ignorance claim to find decided contradictions between science and revelation. But man's measurement of God will never be correct. The mind unenlightened by God's Spirit will ever be in darkness in regard to his power. 

"Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Those who have no vital union with God are swayed one way and another; they put men's opinions in the front, and God's word in the background. They grasp human assertions, that judgment against sin is contrary to God's benevolent character, and, while dwelling upon infinite benevolence, try to forget that there is such a thing as infinite justice. 

"When we have right views of the power, greatness, and majesty of God, and of the weakness of man, we shall despise the assumptions of wisdom made by earth's so-called great men, who have none of Heaven's nobility in their characters. There is nothing for which men should be praised or exalted. There is no reason why the opinions of the learned should be trusted, when they are disposed to measure divine things by their own perverted conceptions. Those who serve God are the only ones whose opinion and example it is safe to follow. A sanctified heart quickens and intensifies the mental powers. A living faith in God imparts energy; it gives calmness and repose of spirit, and strength and nobility of character. 

"Men of science think that with their enlarged conceptions they can comprehend the wisdom of God, that which he has done or can do. The idea largely prevails that he is bounded and restricted by his own laws. Men either deny and ignore his existence, or think to explain everything, even the operations of his Spirit upon the human heart, by natural laws; and they no longer reverence his name or fear his power. While they think they are gaining everything, they are chasing bubbles, and losing precious opportunities to become acquainted with God. They do not believe in the supernatural, not realizing that the Author of nature's laws can work above those laws. They deny the claims of God, and neglect the interests of their own souls; but his existence, his character, his laws, are facts that the reasoning of men of the highest attainments cannot overthrow. 

"Nature is a power, but the God of nature is unlimited in power. His works interpret his character. Those who judge him from his handiworks, and not from the suppositions of great men, will see his presence in everything. They behold his smile in the glad sunshine, and his love and care for man in the rich fields of autumn. Even the adornments of the earth, as seen in the grass of living green, the lovely flowers of every hue, and the lofty and varied trees of the forest, testify to the tender, fatherly care of our God.

"The power of the great God will be exerted in behalf of those that fear him. Listen to the words of the prophet: 'Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? There is no searching of his understanding. He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength. Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall. But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.' 

"In the word of God many queries are raised that the most profound scholars can never answer. Attention is called to these subjects to show us how many things there are, even among the common things of every-day life, that finite minds, with all their boasted wisdom, can never fully comprehend. 

"All the systems of philosophy devised by men have led to confusion and shame when God has not been recognized and honored. To lose faith in God is terrible. Prosperity cannot be a great blessing to nations or individuals, when once faith in his word is lost. Nothing is truly great but that which is eternal in its tendencies. Truth, justice, mercy, purity, and the love of God, are imperishable. When men possess these qualities, they are brought into close relationship to God, and are candidates for the highest exaltation to which the race can aspire. They will disregard human praise, and will be superior to disappointment, weariness, the strife of tongues, and contentions for supremacy. 

"He whose soul is imbued with the Spirit of God will learn the lesson of confiding trust. Taking the written word as his counselor and guide, he will find in science an aid to understand God, but he will not become exalted, till, in his blind self-conceit, he is a fool in his ideas of God. "

CONCLUDING NOTE: In summary to all of the forgoing, many Christians are concerned with science and theology; and the current postmodern period presents a challenging and exciting opportunity for dialogue centered in the everlasting gospel.

A CLOSER LOOK AT CHRISTIANS AND JEWS

Krister Stendahl stated a long time ago: “Our vision is often more abstracted by what we think we know than by our lack of knowledge.” *

Krister Stendahl, eminent ecumenist, New Testament scholar, former bishop of Stockholm and dean of the Harvard Divinity School was best known in the wider ecumenical movement for his attempts to bring Christians together at the ecumenical table, he challenged them to see the beauty and value in other religious traditions. His contribution to Christian self-understanding amidst religious plurality, particularly with regard to Jewish-Christian relations was exceptional. He coined the now famous term "holy envy" to describe the proper attitude of interreligious dialogue partners who see in the others' faith a spiritual richness that is not available in one's own.

For most of my life, dating back to Sunday School teachings, I was under the impression that the difference between Christians and Jews was that Judaism does not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Therefore all holidays that have a connection to the life of Jesus are not part of Jewish life and/or practice (Christmas, Easter, Lent, Advent, Palm Sunday, etc.).

Until recently that has been the extent of it.

An interest in biblical translations from the original Hebrew, however, has given me a  surprisingly new perspective on the matter.

With the notion that most modern Christ-followers mistakenly think that the New Testament states that the Jewish people rejected Jesus, one has to wonder if our reading of the New Testament itself is always accurate?

The foundational proof text for the idea of the “Jews rejecting Jesus” comes from the traditional misreading of the Gospel of John, where in translation from the original Koine Judeo-Greek we read: “He came unto His own, but his own received him not.” (John 1:11).

The standard interpretation equates “his own” with first-century people of the Jewish religion; thus making two basic interpretive mistakes. First, it ignores the grammar of the original – the first “own” is neuter (τὰ ἴδια), but second “own” is masculine (οἱ ἴδιοι). This indicates that at least the first “his own” cannot possibly refer to the Jews! The second mistake ignores the fact that the word (Ἰουδαῖοι) used in John’s Gospel, translated traditionally as “Jews” back then did not mean “people of the Jewish religion” as it does today. The primary meaning of this word was “Judeans” or even “the leaders of the Judean region.”

The New Testament acknowledges that there was a veil placed upon Israel for the spiritual benefit of other nations (reminiscent of the veil that was once placed on Moses’ face). But the New Testament never claims that “the Jews rejected Jesus.”

The question that bothers Apostle Paul is “why don’t all Jews believe in Jesus”? He formulated the issue as follows: “Did God reject His people?”

A very clear answer follows: He absolutely did  not! … at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. (Romans 11:1,5)

11 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, 3 “Lord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life”? 4 But what does the divine response say to him? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5 Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

So then, the all-important difference between Christianity and Judaism is the Person of Jesus Christ. Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies of a coming Messiah/Savior. Judaism we find often recognizes Jesus as a good teacher, and perhaps even a prophet of God, while denying that He was God or that a sacrifice for our sins was necessary.

I am left asking myself, “How many other interpretive mistakes am I making because I don’t have a full understanding of the Jewish background of Scripture?” I'm attempting to remedy that situation through further and deeper study, putting aside traditional understanding of the Gospel of John and ideally replacing it with another one more faithful to the original text perspective.

After all, the Jews have been in this religious business much longer that we Christians. 

POST NOTE: When Paul wrote in Romans about the sinfulness of humanity or the power of God’s grace to miraculously and completely change lives, he knew that of which he spoke. It was played out before his eyes every day. His letter to the Romans stands as the clearest and most systematic presentation of Christian doctrine in all the Scriptures. Paul began by discussing that which is most easily observable in the world—the sinfulness of all humanity. All people have been condemned due to our rebellion against God. However, God in His grace offers us justification by faith in His Son, Jesus. When we are justified by God, we receive redemption, or salvation, because Christ’s blood covers our sin. But Paul made it clear that the believer’s pursuit of God doesn’t stop with salvation; it continues as each of us is sanctified—made holy—as we persist in following Him. Paul’s treatment of these issues offers a logical and complete presentation of how a person can be saved from the penalty and power of his or her sin.

PLAY BALL!...BATTER UP!!

With the World Series set to start next week I was in a baseball frame of mind this weekend and dug out some of my old baseball bats just for the fun of it and old times sake. Typically (for me) there is a story behind several of these old chunks of ash dating back to my playing days in the early 1950's.

Perhaps the most unique bat in my collection (see above photo) is not really a bat per se, but a miniature Hillerich & Bradsby replica bearing the signature of Billy Rogell, an old Detroit Tiger in the 1930's. Rogell actually presented this bat to me at a banquet honoring members of a Dresden Legion-sponsored team that won the Ontario Juvenile "C" championship in 1953.

Billy Rogell

Billy Rogell played 14 seasons in the big leagues, mostly for the Detroit Tigers. He appeared in two World Series. Rogell was in 1,235 games at shortstop, but also in 104 at third base and 78 at second base. He came up originally at age 20 with the Boston Red Sox in 1925. After being out of the majors in 1929, he came back in 1930 with the Tigers. During his big league career, he was one of the best fielding shortstops in the league (despite committing as many as 51 errors in a season). From 1932 to 1938, he finished in the top five in shortstop fielding percentage, leading the league in that statistic twice.

Rogell's New York Times obituary remembered him as Charlie Gehringer's double-play mate, and also as part of an infield that drove in 462 runs in 1934 - 139 for Hank Greenberg, 127 for Gehringer, 100 for Rogell and 96 for Marv Owen.

In a strange play in the 1934 World Series, a throw by Rogell knocked out Dizzy Dean who was pinch-running. It led to the quite possibly apochryphal headline "X-Rays of Dean's Head Revealed Nothing". Rogell worked as a minor league manager with the Lancaster (PA) Red Roses for part of the 1941 season.  After his baseball days Rogell was on the Detroit City Council for 36 years of a 38-year period ending in 1980.

I hit two home runs with the big brown Spalding bat bearing the autograph of major league star Barney McCowsky (also shown in the photo) in an Ontario Junior "C" championship final game played against a Niagara district all-star team in Chippewa the following season (1954). Of particular significance was the fact that I had never previously connected for a four-bagger in organized minor baseball. Oddly enough this was a particularly long 36-inch bat and at 16-years-of-age I should not have been using it at the plate.

Barney McCosky

William Barney McCosky was an outfielder in Major League Baseball. From 1939 through 1953, he played for the Detroit Tigers, Philadelphia Athletics, Cincinnati Reds and Cleveland Indians. McCosky batted left-handed and threw right-handed. McCosky played in 1170 games, 535 in center field and 477 in left field.

The other bat in the photo was a more reasonably-sized 34-inch "Al Kaline Louisville Slugger" Hillerich and Bradsby model that was always a favorite, whenever I could get one, later in my career. It was Flame Tempered, surprisingly a grade below the more common Powerized bat, but ideally weighted and suited to my swing and grip, particularly when connecting with inside pitches. I put a few out of the park in the 1960's with this one too. 

Al Kaline

Al Kaline, nicknamed "Mr. Tiger" and needing no introduction, was an American professional baseball right fielder who played 22 seasons in Major League Baseball (MLB) for the Detroit Tigers. For most of his career, Kaline played in the outfield, mainly as a right fielder where he won ten Gold Glove Awards and was known for his strong throwing arm. He was selected to 18 All-Star Games, including selections each year between 1955 and 1967. He was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame in 1980, his first time on the ballot. Near the end of his career, Kaline also played as first baseman and, in his last season, was the Tigers' designated hitter.

*It should be noted that all of the abovementioned bats were Canadian made, Hillerich & Bradsby being manufactured in my hometown of Dresden in the 1930s and 40s before the entire operation was moved back to Louisville, KY. headquarters in about 1956. The Spalding bat may have been made in St. Marys or Hespler.

THE FEEL-GOOD ASPECTS OF RECOGNITION

This need for recognition it is in everyone

Just to be commended for a job well done
For to be ignored can be a hurtful thing
As it can live in the mind as a painful mental sting
To be mentally starved of a thing the mind of is in need
For so many people is so sad indeed
It is widespread in people Worldwide in every Land
This need for recognition which should not be hard to understand
Though not everyone can be wealthy and know of widespread fame
Few wish to live and die as an unremembered name.

~~ Francis Duggan

Human beings are social creatures. To survive and thrive we need other people and we relish being liked. Feeling connected matters. Being left out, or ignored, hurts.

It’s a need that’s inbuilt into our physiology and relates to the way the neurotransmitter dopamine works in our brains. Simply put: When you feel a positive sense of connection, an emotional reaction takes place and dopamine is released. It creates a sense of pleasure. But dopamine levels drop quickly. So it’s likely you’ll be motivated to repeat that behaviour again in order to get the next hit – fuelling a spiral of positive social behaviour towards one another.

But what happens in a situation when you feel excluded from something? Perhaps you find out about a get together arranged by a few of your friends – and you haven’t been asked to go. Or maybe a conversation breaks up just as you walk over to join it. Perhaps, in the workplace setting, there’s a high profile meeting which several of your colleagues have been invited to but not you. How would you feel?

Research suggests exclusion creates a sense of social pain which fires up exactly the same area of the brain that experiences physical pain. Feeling left out hurts – literally.

The sense of wellbeing that comes from feeling connected has big implications. And as I see it, an important way to create and maintain this sense of connection and belonging, and reduce a sense of exclusion, is via sharing recognition.

What role can recognition play? The positive feedback and appreciation that comes from feeling recognised creates feelings of pride, pleasure and increased feelings of self-esteem, releasing dopamine every time.

But don’t forget about dopamine’s short-lived effect. So to sustain the impact, it needs to be regular and ongoing recognition, not just an occasional thank you. ‘Old school’ recognition used to be top down only.

But now the way we communicate has evolved. We’ve gone social. And that’s impacted on today’s approaches to recognition -- the ability to recognise, acknowledge and show appreciation to each other no matter what their position on social media (LOL) or elsewhere in everyday life.

Feedback is a gift. It can be awfully wrapped or you may not like what’s inside, but after more than 60 years of writing for public consumption, I have learned to take away what serves me and leave the rest behind. Negative feedback always hurts so it is best to take the time and decide what’s valuable and what’s not.  

In retrospect, I struggle with taking negative feedback personally and die a thousand deaths to think that someone does not agree with me or has been offended in some way by something I've written. My skin has been known to be a little thin because of the effort and intensity I devote to every word and sentence I write.

I adhere to advice of an old editor who mentored me back in the day: "Remember that wrongly put feedback says more about the person delivering it than it says about you."

Awe yes, recognition in the form of feedback...what would we do without it and what do we do with it!

Given my choice, I'll take positive feedback every time. It just naturally makes me feel good.

How about you my friend?

A POST ABOUT TEASING THAT BEARS REPEATING

Alright...I confess. I'm one of the world's worst teasers.

It is just the way I am. I have come to rationalize it as a means for an otherwise basically shy person to break through all formality by creating a moment of levity that has instant potential for individual connection. My type of teasing is always good-natured, revolving around a very minor quirk or something offbeat someone says or does and, ideally, both parties find it funny.

I may tease about an item of clothing that is just a little different, a new hairdo or something unusual that I have just observed or overheard in conversation...That sort of thing. The intent generally to leave the impression that I actually noticed. And always with at least a hint of a smile. As a result, I've had to be careful when wearing a COVID mask these days, in fact it has kind of taken the fun out of teasing or wise-cracking for the most part.

I tease people I like, or think I would like if I knew them better. I also tease friends on Facebook, a tricky chance I take with potential to backfire without the benefit of body language and voice tone. I strongly suspect that I may have overspent my welcome in certain isolated cases of this nature. Still, the devil makes me do it!

A teaser has to be careful though because teasing can often be mistaken for sarcasm. It has to be done in a jovial, friendly way. There are those who do not understand the humor or purpose for levity.

I understand too that humor can unnerve people with insecurities because it uncloaks their wounds and weaknesses. They feel vulnerable, out of control and emotionally naked. In a nutshell, while you’re feeling pleasure, they’re feeling pain.

As a “rule of thumb,” I am forever conscious of having fun at the expense of others. Seriously, if they’re not laughing at one of my witty cracks, it isn’t funny. It is hurtful. Simply respecting the other person’s feelings without saying the proverbial, “You’re just too sensitive!” or “Can’t you take a joke?” is my ultimate hard-earned attitude.

I cannot begin to enumerate the times that I have said to myself: "I've got to stop doing that!" But you know what they say about old habits...

Admittedly, our world does have people that do in fact take themselves and others way too seriously. However, happily there are more people who get or understand humor and I derive satisfaction in walking away in the end feeling that I have generated a chuckle, maybe even provided the one bright spot in someone's day.

I do it with complete strangers too, and more often than not generate a positive response. In fact, I delight in wearing the "funny guy" or "friendly guy" labels often applied to me after an unsolicited, teasing or good-natured comment of some sort.

It is imperative, however, to know the where, the when, with whom, and how much humor is good enough in given situations. It is all about sensitivity!

PICKED UP IN PASSING: NEVER LOST IN TRANSLATION

When I was struggling to learn French in high school 70 years ago you could never have told me that I would eventually develop a fascination with languages and the origin of certain words.

Learning a new language can be a rich, rewarding, even unexpectedly delightful journey. Sometimes a word that is new to us may sound so beautiful you'll want to hear it repeatedly. 

Other words may have such poetic or inspiring meaning that you can't wait to share your discovery with friends or family. Still, others get lost in translation when trying to describe the word in your native language. Here are just a few examples:

First, in order and terms of sheer size, is the word Nakakapagpabagabag (Naka-ka-pag-paba-ga-bag). This term, spoken in the language of the Philippines (Tagalog), is used to describe "something that creates anxiety or uneasiness,” which is precisely what I feel each time I try to pronounce it!

Next is Kaamos – a Finnish word for "polar night." A phenomenon that happens within the polar circles, Kaamos refers to a period of darkness that lasts more than 24 hours. The term also holds an emotional impact when used to describe a feeling of depression resulting from a lack of daylight.

Last but certainly not least in terms of profound meaning is Hiraeth -- a beautiful Welsh term with an elegant and poetic definition. It combines elements of homesickness, nostalgia, and longing. It is charged with a subtle acknowledgment of an irretrievable loss — a blend of place, time, and people that can never be recreated." 

In stark contrast to these fascinating examples is the story of a certain lawyer, well-known for his arrogant use of legal terms in his courtroom speeches. Worse, he made a hobby of translating Scripture into this double-talk. For example, his version of one of the petitions in the "Lord's Prayer" went something like this:

We respectfully request, and entreat, that due and adequate provisions be made on the date hereinafter set forth, for the structuring of whatever methods may be appropriate for the allocation and distribution to those of us pronouncing this invocation, of sufficient quantities of processed wheat and other grains as may be required for life-giving sustenance.

Translation: Give us this day our daily bread!

A SELF-ADMISSION I'VE NOT NEGLECTED TO POST

Okay, so I admit it. I tend to procrastinate. The sole consolation is that I have company...just about everyone is by nature a procrastinator.

Yes, even those people who work so hard they’re annoying… the ones who seem almost robotic in their ability to get stuff done, and who seem like they’d never even be tempted to waste their time like the rest of us “mere mortals”... I've found that even these people are consistently tempted to do the easy things first, and to put off the hard stuff.

I know of only one person who does not fit the above mold and friends have labelled him a dynamo and human tsunami. Nervous energy does not allow him to rest until everything on his plate on a particular day is cleaned up NOW. In his mid 50s he remains a bachelor -- not necessarily indicative of anything LOL.

Euphemistically speaking, most of we humans have to resist the urge to press “Control + T” then type “gmail.com” and then scroll through our inboxes…and scroll through our Facebook feeds… and watch entertaining videos on YouTube which do nothing to move forward our businesses and/or personal affairs. Simply put, distractions in general are our enemy!

I’ve come to believe that this is just how we naturally work. And so rather than continually failing to change this about myself, instead I am compelled to focus on creating external conditions which force me to get the essential things done.

I should state, however, I do not procrastinate when it comes to my writing. Developing an idea for a story always comes first and at the expense of everything else -- eating and sleeping included. I also sense that my procrastination becomes more of an issue the older and lazier I get. "Awe, I'll get to it tomorrow when the spirit moves me." sort of thing. And if tomorrow does not come, well then it will be too late anyway.

Apart from pre-occupation with story-telling, here is a personal, four-step process I call on for creating external conditions which negate my increasing tendency to put things off:

(1) Identify the most important task for today
(2) Break down the process of achieving that task into simple steps
(3) Set a deadline
(4) Announce, or own, the deadline

After identifying the critical task, then get to it my pal -- no matter how simple or how complex the challenge.

If you break it all down into small steps, it seems much less daunting… and much more achievable. 

In a perfect world you should not have to go to this length to get things done. But who's talking about a perfect world?

HERITAGE COLLECTION: HAND-PAINTED ANGEL DOLLS ARE FINE "CHINA" MADE IN "JAPAN"

July and March birthday angels.

When I grew up in the 1940s figurines of all sorts were prominently displayed in homes, particularly the Wright household, which may account for my nostalgic fondness for pieces inherited from my mother Grace. I'm sure a number of my "older" friends can relate.

Included in my collection are three special occasion hand-painted china Angel dolls -- two birthday and one Christmas -- crafted by Geo. Z. Lefton. I wouldn't part with them for the world. For me there's something soothing about these charming keepsakes and the memories attached to them. 

My favorites are the birthday angel dolls, one July for my mother's birthday and the other March for mine. I know that there was a February doll too (my dad's birth month) but for the life of me I do not know what happened to it.

The July angel is appropriately labelled Water Lilly Ruby because she is holding a basket of delicate pink water lillies. The March angel is appropriately a St. Partick's Day boy (March 17) outfitted in suitable Kelly green Irish attire, complete with Shamrocks and Irish roses.

"Xmas" Angel

The Christmas angel is more like a Mrs. Santa with her bright red, fur-lined coat and hat and arms full of gifts...Truly a work of art. Lefton's angels were known for their black, piercing eyes. My mother brought out the Christmas angel only during the Yuletide season.

It is interesting to note that George Zoltan Lefton, also referred to as Geo Z Lefton, arrived in the United States from Hungary in 1939. Although Lefton made his living in Hungary in sportswear, his passion for fine porcelain turned from a hobby into a business when he founded the Lefton Company in 1941 in Chicago.

When Pearl Harbor was bombed in 1941, many Japanese-owned businesses in Chicago were looted. Lefton helped board up a business owned by Nunome, a Japanese-American friend. After the war, Nunome assisted Lefton in developing essential relationships with china producers in Occupied Japan. The Allies' plan was to help Japan rebuild and grow, but not to allow Japan to have the manufacturing capabilities to rearm itself. Pottery and porcelain manufacturing fit into the areas of acceptability as set by General Douglas McArthur and the ally forces.

Lefton was one of the first American businessmen to deal with the Japanese after World War II. The first pieces of Lefton China with the "Made in Occupied Japan" mark reached the United States in 1946.

Fine china produced by Lefton in Occupied Japan included a wide range of pieces, dating from 1946 to 1952. Designs included delicate, formal pieces with gold edging and soft floral patterns to the whimsical and playful designs of the 1950s. Many of the pieces of Lefton China from Occupied Japan were produced by the Miyawo Company during this period. Quality and price were notably reasonable on Lefton China pieces from this period.

Over the years the Lefton Company has produced numerous products that are highly sought after by collectors including, but not limited to, cookie jars, holiday items, figurines, teapots, jam jars, planters, pitchers, shakers, Red Hat pieces, wall pockets and head vases.

At one time Lefton products were sold in more than 10,000 shops in the United States and Canada, and given their popularity it seems unlikely that one could go very far in any antique mall in the country without finding a piece of Lefton china or a Lefton figurine.

Lefton China can be identified by the marks on the base of each piece. Identifying marks vary, but they may include "Lefton's," "Lefton China," "Geo. Z. Lefton," "G.Z.L.," or just a letter "L." Many pieces were marked by both a maker's mark and a paper label, as is the case with my Water Lilly Ruby. Those made from 1946 to 1952 will also include "Made in Occupied Japan" as a part of the identifying markings.

Lefton China continued to be produced in Japan until the 1970s. Production in the 1980s and beyond moved to Taiwan and Malaysia. Most importantly, the quality remained high. Unfortunately, George Z. Lefton died in 1996 and the Lefton Company was sold in 2001 after 60 years of producing some of the most popular collectibles and kitchenware. Production under the Lefton China label continues today.

PICKED UP IN PASSING: EVER BEEN IN A HURRY BUT DIDN'T KNOW WHERE YOU WERE GOING?

Psychiatrists tell us that a common complaint of their patients is “I don’t seem to be going anywhere with my life.” Reason enough, to be in the grip of despair. One is reminded of the ancient parable of life in which a young sea horse said to his father…

“Give me my inheritance. It’s time for me to live my own life. I’m going to seek my fortune.” His father gave him ten gold coins, and the young sea horse eagerly swam away.

Before long, he met an eel who stopped and asked, “Where are you going?”

He replied, “I’m going to seek my fortune!”

The eel said, “If you give me three of those gold coins, I’ll let you have these electric flippers that will get you there in half the time.” The sea horse became excited. He gave the eel the coins and went on his way quicker than before.

After using his electric flippers for awhile, he met he met up with an octopus who asked, “Where are you going in such a hurry?”

“I’m going to seek my fortune!” exclaimed the sea horse.

“I’ll sell you my aqua-scooter for three of your gold coins. Then you’ll get to wherever you’re going much faster.” The seas horse, now more excited than ever, gave him the coins, hopped on the aqua-scooter and went on his way, faster than ever.

Soon he came upon a big shark who asked, “Where are you going?”

“I’m going to seek my fortune!” declared the sea horse..

“Well,” said the shark, “if you ‘ll give me those four coins I’ll show you a shortcut that will get you there much quicker.”

The sea horse was now beside himself with excitement. He gave the shark the last of his coins, adjusted his flippers, put his aqua-scooter into high gear and followed along the short-cut… right into the wide open jaws of the shark. Unfortunately, the poor little sea horse was never to be heard from again.

Many people are like the little creature in the morality tale: they’re in a big hurry, but have no clue as to where they’re going, much less how to get there. They are in need of guidance and direction. In other words, they need to let God, not their “fortunes,” be at the center of of their lives. They need to partake of some spiritual nourishment — the very Bread of Life — in order to gain the strength to change.

HEY WHITEY, WIPE THAT PRIVILEGE OFF YOUR FACE!

Can we talk -- openly and civilly?

I know that's not always easy when the subject of discussion happens to be privilege as it pertains to racial advantage, but let's try!

White privilege for instance is not a discussion of one's class or societal status, rather it is a discussion based in the benefits and advantages that some races of people receive from years of  prejudice and discrimination. You're hearing more and more about "privilege" these days, particularly from academics who are overly generous with their findings as a result of studies and surveys. One thing about it, however, is the fact that it brings privilege to the forefront of our thinking.

Having privilege does not mean that an individual is immune to life’s hardships, but it does mean having an unearned benefit or advantage one receives in society by nature of identity. Examples of types of identity that can afford an individual privilege include: race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, socioeconomic status, country of origin, language, and/or ability.

I’ll use myself as an example: My privilege stems from my whiteness, maleness, middle-class upbringing, education, resources for food, access to health care, and familial support. In many ways, I am an expert on the ways my privilege has benefitted me. This is not to ignore that my personality quirks at times put me at a disadvantage, but it doesn’t take away from the many "unearned" benefits I was handed simply from being born with certain traits and  resources.

Now, talking in terms of being privileged vs. underprivileged, there is every possibility that many of us could easily come away with a guilt complex compelling us to apologize endlessly to the less fortunate of those born on this planet. There may also be a tendency to be a bit defensive when responding to an accusation of white privilege. It is naturally difficult to identify with the label of privilege i.e. "It wasn't easy for me growing up either...We had to work hard for everything we got!"

However, when thinking about unacknowledged privilege as a phenomenon, I recognize that since hierarchies in most societies are interlocking, there is most likely a lot of privilege (be it gendered, white, heteronormative, socioeconomic) that is denied and protected.

What I want to convey in this article is not an inherent understanding of privilege, but rather a reflection on the knowledge I have gained through living experience, self-examination and peer consultation.

As society generally does not give lessons on how to combat and speak about privilege, it puts the onus on us, global citizens, to address imbalances. Privilege is a tricky subject to talk about, and can spark misunderstanding. I find part of the issue in discussing privilege, is that even individuals who have abundant privilege want to be acknowledged for their hardships. This makes sense -- we all want empathy towards our life challenges, in many cases carrying a sense of pride in obstacles that have been overcome.

WHEN IS COLOR RELEVANT...WHEN IS IT NOT?

I had to give myself a quick check recently following a text message exchange with a "white" journalist friend, easily young enough to be my grandson, who has taken on the cause of telling the story of athletes of color, Black and Indigenous, who overcame barriers to break into their chosen sport during several decades of imposed team and league segregation, primarily 1930-1950. We talk often and compare notes.

On this occasion, I brought to his attention the fact that I had written about two baseball-player friends from my hometown in the early 1950's, without once mentioning the fact that they were Black, because it was not relevant (to me) then any more than it is today. Here is my friend's rather scolding rebuttal:

"Couldn't disagree more, but that's ok...From spending hundreds of hours in the last few months interviewing members of almost every prominent family in the area that included Black athletes, that would not be an appreciated or welcomed sentiment to erase that portion of a person's identity and overlooking the barriers that stood in most if not all of their paths. It is extremely relevant today, as it was yesterday, and I understand it's only privilege blocking that understanding, because I know you're a kind and good person."

So, there you go...Even though I have written volumes deploring racial bias and discrimination, I can be accused of privilege when it serves a purpose. In all fairness, the story was not about the two ball players and any hurdles they may have overcome. It was about the remarkable life of a coach they just happened to play for. My initial impulse was to be offended before giving myself that aforementioned check.

Personally, when first entering a conversation about privilege, it is best to ask about the ways in which the person does not have privilege. This is helpful not only in understanding the individual more, but also in extending empathy. 

In a conversation as touchy as one involving privilege, it’s important to try to disarm defensives and cultivate open dialogue. Then, after speaking with the person about the ways in which they don’t hold privilege, you can ask in what ways they do. (I’m not remiss in using myself as an example.)

Structuring a conversation that includes the way people have and don’t have privileges makes it easier for others to understand the power of privilege in creating a system of oppression, and this process is transformative.

It is important to understand that just because we don’t have certain kinds of privileges doesn’t mean that we don’t benefit from other forms of privilege. If we realize this, it is easier to work together with folks who share our privileges and those who don’t, to create a more equal world.

Now, consider white privilege for just a minute. For instance, in North America white privilege is a construction created by rich Europeans who wanted to combine their wealth in the New World by pitting poor Europeans against Indigenous and African peoples working as slaves. Poor white people were made to feel that they were superior to other races, and were given small privileges over people of color to create diversion. What this meant was that poor white individuals got to be superior to blacks, but still not on equal footing with wealthy whites. Ultimately, these privileges do not create advantage for the vast majority of the population, and subsequently, this division creates unfairness.

Similarly, men have social and economic privileges over women. This is created from a deep rooted patriarchy that prioritizes men over women. Male privilege isn’t helping anyone ultimately though - it doesn’t help families where mothers make less than male partners, and it doesn’t benefit women in helping to advance the fields of science, math, technology, journalism, finance, and engineering. We all lose when people are treated unfairly and not on the merit of their personhood.

Ultimately, in order to move from a space of marginalization, people need to confront their privileges and recognize that inequality helps no one. As global citizens, we have the revolutionary ability to transform the political, economic, and social environment by recognizing that injustice creates a societal imbalance that negatively impacts everyone.

In an effort to break the systems of oppression within our societies, it is important to intentionally set-aside time to think about justice, and whether or not our values are aligning with the ways in which we live our lives. Though it is true that hardships are not limited to a specific race, this argument is irrelevant to a discussion on white privilege. It is as if saying, "well, I struggle too" will protect the white individual and cast off any sense of personal attachment to white privilege. 

White privilege doesn't mean that you haven't struggled. It means you have been (unfairly) steps ahead in life because of your skin color. Blacks are born into a society where their skin color is already a hardship.

Because racism is written into our government and woven into our society, white privilege is an unfortunate reality, but it's one that, as a culture, we can work to amend so long as we begin to acknowledge its existence. So next time someone tells you to "check your privilege," don't take it as an insult. Listen, see your ignorance, and become conscious of your own privilege. Because the reality is, it's hard to self-examine and we are all in need of someone to tell us when to check our privilege when we, ourselves, are blind to it.

AND HERE'S SOMETHING ELSE TO PONDER...

In the struggle to turn blacks into whites, draconian measures have been used increasingly. Unfortunately, this attempt at racial alchemy has failed, and there is little prospect of success.

The time has come to end this experiment, just as we ended Prohibition. This is not a call for restoring Jim Crow-like legally required segregation. Rather, it is an acknowledgement that neither blacks nor whites want forced assimilation. Left to their own inclinations, both groups would stay out of each other’s way. Let us live and let live, and not impose the values of one group (white) on those (black or indigenous) who reject them.

This disengagement can and must be a win-win and appeal to economic interests. Both blacks and whites would be freed from totalitarian measures devoted to objectives that have proven impossible.

As for the likelihood of success, consider the remarkable evolution of gay rights. The idea of gay marriage once seemed absurd. Today it is mainstream. Progress on disengagement will be incremental, starting at the fringe and slowly becoming orthodox wisdom, but it can happen.

What gives optimism is that both blacks and whites are tired of today’s social engineering. The most formidable enemies of realistic solutions are relatively few -- energetic white egalitarians in universities, the mass media, and government — not the public.

Progress requires that toxic social engineering be exposed and debated. Voters will reject it just as they reject “affirmative action.” Conceivably, in a decade, there will be no more talk of spending billions to close intractable race-related gaps, just as schemes to uplift humanity by banning alcohol have almost vanished.

Disengagement enjoys an enormous advantage: Nature has hardwired humans for separatism, not assimilation. Surrounding oneself with diversity is not an evolutionary strategy for survival. In the long run, it is radical egalitarians, not we, who fight the uphill battle. Only their superior social position and fanaticism keeps assimilation going.

With exceptions where inter-racial wedlock changes the name of the game and the way it is played, it must be acknowledged that, left to free will, people sharing common characteristics, whether racial or religious, prefer to be among themselves. Separatism need not be legally imposed apartheid; it will occur naturally, though there will be many voluntary exceptions.

And it is unlikely that anyone reading this post will live to see the day when society collectively lives happily ever after -- together, but separately. It will take time!

Remember, people will be people. But in the end, ideally in a perfect world, free to play the game of life as equals on a team with varying characteristics and capabilities, on a level playing field. That's the way I conceive my friends and former team mates having always played the game, in spite of "privilege" that at one time none of us knew we had...or did not have, depending. 

As for me, I thank God for privileges of fate. There are those who are not as fortunate and we have to do something about it beyond customary sympathetic lip service so easily paid to racial discrimination in general.

FOOTNOTE: I intend to eventually add this post to my "Dresden: A Perspective on Racial Discrimination..." blog site dicktheblogsterremembers.blogspot.com