Living a life full of liveliness includes grieving

I think it's obvious to anyone that knows me, or interacts with me often, that I'm not really myself at the moment. That's what drives me nuts about my moment in the ditch: I'm just not myself. Normally, I don't drive into ditches. I'm tired often, possibly entirely due to an emotionally draining last year but also due to my brain churning on bigger issues. I struggle to enjoy cooking and even feel overwhelmed with some of the basic tasks to be done. It's fair to say that recent events are still hanging painfully hard on me.

I've been reading articles here and there online about grieving. They all seem quite academic, and there isn't much in the way of practical help. Talking with Steve the other day helped a lot. Steve often seems to put things in a very practical way. He was expressing some of his own experience with his Father dying, and he said that his father dying just made things different. The world was changed, and getting used to the world being different is something that people that are grieving need to adapt to. That is the grieving process. That made sense to me, and is some good practical help.

If you had asked me a year ago how grieving would go, I would have said very little about the bigger picture, and talked about a relationship with the person that died. I thought my head would be swimming about my my Father and what was lost, and possibly yet undone between us. But instead it seems to be quite backward. I don't think about our relationship at all: nothing seems left undone, no unanswered questions on my mind, no unfinished business. But yet, my brain spins on a world that is different.

Scott Peck in 'The Road less Travelled' talks about balance and the depression that comes from letting go of the things we love in order to maintain that balance. If we are honest about life, things do change from time to time and we must let go of some things we love to maintain our balance. Or we have to lie to ourselves and avoid change in order to keep that balance. I'm just not sure what has changed so far, and what I need to honestly face.

Maybe it's as simple as giving up my chance to be and interact with my Father, and in him dying I've lost the ability, or option, to be there as a part of his life. That doesn't seem to be it, for me. Perhaps it's just understanding in a very personal way the implications of a life ending and I'm churning on if I've made the right choices that matter to me. That could be it. It's possibly as simple as being nailed with the stark reality of what is important in my life. Not in an angry way, but we only get one shot at a lifetime, and it needs to count.

It is very clear to me that my father fiercely created and lived the life he chose. Which seems so much of a tragedy to me because he chose not to share so much of himself, but locked it up. Finished, forever. Ironically my father would have scoffed at a lot of emotional noise. He'd say 'All I need is my Bible.' Sadly, that misses the point, or perhaps highlights it. I don't want to be detached from people and lock myself away. I don't want to fear and hide, I want to share in community with good people, and be balanced.

I choose to share with people, even though that means accepting the pains of life. I am so grateful for so many people, near and far, that care about me. Unbelievably so, at a time like this. I look forward to a lifetime full of rich sharing with the people that matter to me. That is what matters to me and I embrace that.

Trust vs Control as a parent: What teaches a kid?

Here's an interesting story:

A father plans to appeal after a Quebec court ruled that he didn't have the right to punish his 12-year-old daughter by barring her from a school trip

Obviously I don't know the whole story here, and this is not an attempt to judge. All of us parents need to do our own thing, in our own style, and in our own way. I would suggest however, that all us parents need to keep the end point in mind.

I had a very interesting moment this am as my 11 year old spoke up as I entered the room and said, 'Dad, you're good at making decisions, and I need some help deciding what to do'. He was trying to weigh options regarding taking a school field trip, or stay at school and work quietly on other projects.

Really, I don't care if he takes the trip to the badlands, or if he pursues other things. I'm thrilled as a father that he is in a spot, he's torn between various options and issues, and wrestles with his particular personality as he decides what is important. What were the issues? For him, choosing one means one is left behind. There is potential gains doing the trip, but massive risks on being trapped on a school bus for 4 plus hours. There is safety in peace and quiet, and doing more intellectual pursuits on his own.

I'm proud as a peach that he is owning the choices, owning the consequences and the decision, and had a load of tools to suggest to help evaluate what we know, to ask a couple of key questions that helped produce a clear decision.

Man, this kind of stuff isn't bad, it's the key. I want my kids to own decisions, and thrilled to be included as a friend, partner, trusted resource to come along side and help process. My best dad day yet.

There was a clear option to 'help' by telling him what to do, and controling the options. But what does that ultimately teach?

Oh, and he decided to stay.

Something God doesn't care about

I don't think that God cares that I'm turning 40 in just a few weeks.

First off, God is timeless, so what does that even mean to him? I'm sure he can conceive of someone turning 40, but there is no significance to him of 40 years of anything. In fact, I think the Bible supports that.

That begs the question of why do I care. I sure am thinking about it a lot. I think there is a bunch of measuring, reflecting, contemplating and such going on in my head. But again, those are all *my* issues. God doesn't have those issues, and supposedly He's already provided a solution.

I want to be spoiled and not have to deal with the pain of all of that reflection. All of those emotional issues related to pain about time moving on, things I haven't done yet, things I'll never get to do at this point. Wow, I really think I could wallow in all that.

I think life has pain so we choose to trust. I think God cares what we choose to do about pain. I don't think God cares very much about where the pain comes from.

If Mike is right:

The reality of life is suffering.
The reaction to suffering is fear.
The response to fear is either trust or control.
The effect of control is to propagate suffering.
The result of trust is transformation.
The mechanism of transformation is death.
The opportunity of death is resurrection.
The outcome of resurrection is true life.

An age milestone has got to be the a key realization of lots of emotional pain. Grappling with our emotional loose ends must result in fear, although I'm not sure that I can articulate the kinds of things that I'm fearful of. Perhaps knowing someone with cancer has fears attached? Perhaps some broken relationships produce fears? Maybe it's all those undone things at work that I fear the consequences of? If I'm all about clarity as a person, perhaps it's that I fear my life is way to messy? I'm afraid I'm failing as a person? I'm not sure but the designated response to the fear is to control it. That's why a guy in mid life crisis is supposed to go buy a sports car right? To control the situation by making ourselves feel better? Yeah. I can see that causing even more suffering for sure. I don't know about a sports car, but a trip to a beach would be nice.

So the right response is to trust. Trust that God is sovereign, all powerful and active in our world today. I need to remember that I am his child that he loves just as I am, and know that as I live my life and do what I do that there isn't anything left undone. Now that sounds really comforting. I can feel it. I don't think a sports car can deliver that.

But I'm not sure what that transforms? And what has to die... Is that my ego that has to die? I'm willing to let that go at this point. Somehow, that seems too easy.

This is going to require more beer and wings to process.

Why is change important?

For this, history provides a good clue.

Perhaps the goal and reason to change is required first, before change is effective. Needless to say a certain amount of self awareness, divine intervention, or something needs to happen for people to choose to change and reach something new. This is why doing nothing is a choice and it gets you to the goal of nothing.

Sure, changing for the sake of changing could just be a neurosis of it's own. I'm not sure which one that would be, but it boils down to some bizarre kind of control. But there needs to be a reason that gets us to where we want to go. There are times when change is not required. And times when not doing anything is the right thing to do.

The danger though with doing nothing is that you are probably just being lazy and not taking the time to look around you and ask what is working and what isn't. Worse yet, you value something else in your life that prevents you from changing. Sometimes the early warning signs are all around us, but we choose to ignore them. None of us are free from needing to observe what is changing around us, and start asking questions.

For our historical illustration, I present Douglas Haig. Born June 19 1861, born into a good (read rich) family and became 'Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig' of the British Empire. A top leader, commanded thousands, and as all accounts seem to go, a total idiot. The quotes you can find are priceless: 'as shy as a shool-girl, and as stupid as well'.

I pick on this guy because I seek to understand how I can be a better 'field marshal'. I'm not sure what license that gives me, but I plan to use it. And one of my big questions is the role of intelligence: do field marshals have to be really smart, or are things like self awareness, a controlled ego, the ability to ask for help, and an inquisitive nature just as important?

I guess we'll never know Sir Douglas Haig's IQ score, and it's hard to guess now. I would imagine the wealthy family played a big role in getting him along, but we have to assume he's at least as smart as the average guy. From his diary, and other quotes made by him, we certainly can see how he failed to adapt.

Some quotes from here:

* There is little doubt that Haig was an idiot. In 1926, 10 years after the barbed wire and machine gun defences of the German Army had proven conclusively that the day of the Horse Cavalry was over, Haig wrote "I believe that the value of the horse and the opportunity for the horse in the future are likely to be as great as ever. Aeroplanes and tanks are only accessories to the men and the horse, and I feel sure that as time goes on you will find just as much use for the horse - the well-bred horse - as you have ever done in the past".

* This man ordered hundreds of thousands of troops, his countrymen and 'damned colonials' to attack barbed wire entanglements 40 yards, sometimes 80 yards deep, covered by well placed machine guns in concrete pill-boxes on the high ground and did so without looking at the ground before during or after the battles. He did so time and time again and when confronted with the casualty lists merely said, "The nation must be prepared to see heavy casualty lists".

* "Success in battle depends mainly on morale and determination." Haig - 1907

* "The way to capture machine guns is by grit and determination." Haig - 1915

* "The nation must be taught to bear losses. No amount of skill on the part of the higher commanders, no training, however good, on the part of the officers and men, no superiority of arms and ammunition, however great, will enable victories to be won without the sacrifice of men's lives. The nation must be prepared to see heavy casualty lists." Haig June 1916 before the battle of the Somme

I don't think anyone would argue that determination is required to 'get it done'. A clear decision to risk your life for your choices requires an all or nothing kind of whole heartedness, and if you're going to battle you better be ready to fight and die. But how bad is it to fail to recognize a change to the 'rules' of war that are changing around you? Forget field marshals being experts at recognizing the changes in the 'game' around you, this is one of those things you have to learn in kindergarten. Failing to adapt is going to hurt.

Not to mention that failing to change, in this case sending thousands to die needlessly and without purpose is mind numbingly and obviously wrong. I'm going to guess it was his ego that was more important that all those lives.

Haig failed perhaps to see that a dead man cannot advance, and that to replace him is only to provide another corpse.
E. K. G. Sixsmith, British Generalship in the Twentieth Century, 1970

Perhaps being right was more important than the lives of others. Very sad.

But then, what is up with the British army leadership? Not only did he do this at the Battle of the Somme, but then he did it *again* later at the Third Battle of the Ypres. I just can't fathom all of that.

Starting out

Some folk (no names mentioned Mike and Della) have nicknamed me a hard ass before. A title that I kinda like, even though I don't think it's always been a compliment. It's true that I like a level of clarity in my life that some are OK without. I'm not sure really if it's that some people don't want a brutally honest level of clarity, or if sometimes too much clarity is actually bad. I'd have to admit that sometimes, forcing more clarity is just for my own likes and ends up taking life and liveliness from others in an awkward sort of way.

My personality is not only my excuse to push for this but also the way I'm made so I honestly have to start here.