You Almost Blew It, Anglican Church Of Canada!

  *I wrote this blog post a couple of days ago, when the vote to not support same sex marriages was announced. I was all set to post it when I discovered that there had actually been a miscount and that the Anglican Church of Canada would now be allowing their clergy to perform such ceremonies. At that point, it suddenly seemed pointless to post the blog. Upon further reflection, however, I am going ahead and posting it. Mainly because they felt it was something they actually needed to vote on and secondarily, that it was as close at it was*                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Yesterday, as I was going through Twitter, I ran across a report, posted by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, on the decision by the Anglican Church of Canada to not support same-sex marriages. Yes, you read that correctly, to not support same-sex marriages. If you'd like, you can read that report here. This decision was reached after a vote at the end of the six-day Anglican General Synod, attended by 200 delegates. In order for the resolution supporting same-sex marriages to have passed, it would have needed two-thirds support from three different orders---lay, clergy, and bishops. The lay and bishops were for it but the clergy (the guys who would ultimately be the ones performing the same-sex ceremonies) were narrowly against it.

Almost blew it.....

   I was both surprised and shocked at this and, quite frankly, rather ashamed.
   In a world where same-sex unions seem to have finally been accepted by the majority for what they are---simply two people who share the common bond of love for one another and wish to have it legally recognized and celebrated---it seems ludicrous and backward-thinking that an entity such as the Anglican Church of Canada should go out of its way to oppose them.
   Granted, the report indicates that the vote was extremely close and could not have actually been any closer. This is very small consolation. In this day and age, they shouldn't even have needed to vote---it should have been, to use a golf term, a "gimme". The Anglican Church of Canada really should have said to itself holy cow, there are couples out there who are dedicated and loving to each other and all they want to do is get married in a church and, by God, we should help them DO that!! What the vote actually indicates, though, is that some Anglicans are actually saying to themselves same-sex marriages? eww....that's kind of ICKY....!
   At this point, I just wanted to offer a little personal background on myself. 
   I am an avowed atheist. As a young child, however, I was raised in the Anglican Church, believed in Jesus and God, felt strongly about my religion and at one point even thought that being a clergyman was what I wanted to be when I grew up. And then I grew up! I have this clear recollection of the priest telling us near the end of our confirmation classes that, once we were confirmed, we would then be able to make adult decisions about church. My first adult decision, fueled at least partially by being in the throes of puberty at the time, was to stop attending! And that was the last time I was an active member of the Anglican church. Since that time, in the total absence of any proof or evidence that there actually is a God, I have become an atheist.
   Now, I told you all that simply to explain why it is that this decision by the Anglican Church has me as riled up as it does. There is a vestigial part of me which wishes, even though I am not an active participant in the church, that at least the Anglicans could have had the decency to do what I think is totally right in this case. This they have failed to do and this now the reason for my shame.
   I read the article, from the beginning, with shock and a modicum of disbelief. Part way down, however, my shock and disbelief turned to sadness and anger as I read the part about the Anglican minister, Rev. Allison Courey, who also happens to be a lesbian, who said that "many of us" had committed suicide because "death was better than being rejected by God". 
   This made me angry on a couple of different levels. Firstly, it seems that a simple recognition and acceptance of same-sex couples in the Anglican church might have gone a long way toward preventing this kind of tragedy. Secondly, the idea that anyone could feel "rejected by God" based on the legislation and beliefs of a bunch of Anglican bishops and clergy seems ludicrous to me. 
   This is where my atheism steps in. I truly don't believe there is a God and so I also truly believe you cannot be "rejected by God". On the off-chance that there  is some form of God then I don't believe he's going to let a bunch of humans on earth decide who he's going to reject or accept. It makes no sense to me that it might work this way. My advice to any same-sex couple who wanted to get married would be to go ahead and do that any old way you can and know deep in your hearts that God loves and supports you, regardless of what the Anglican church might say or believe. If God exists, I'm pretty sure He exists with or without churches!

   One of the other very disturbing things I read about in the article was when one of the younger speakers who was against the motion to allow same-sex marriage got up and declared that "God did not create another Adam, He created a woman." Okay, it always bothers me when people take the Bible literally... you know, ignoring all the evidence of pre-history and evolution. And if by some infinitesimal chance God did create Adam then he pretty well had to create Eve or the whole story ends there. After that, though, all bets were off!

   Here's another part which struck me as I read the article---the language. Here's a list of some of the words used: delegates, resolution, voted, percentage, debate, speakers, legislative, amend, authority, discussions, divisive. Now do any of these words sound like they have anything to do with spirituality!? Or does it sound a little more like current American news channels...?
   Okay, you have made me ashamed, Anglican Church of Canada, and I am pretty sure you've shamed, shocked and disillusioned many of your own faithful. Whether they stick around and continue to worship under these circumstances is hard to say. I know that I wouldn't but, then again, I left ages ago!

My Easter

   This past Sunday was Easter, and I spent it in a very leisurely way-- slept in, sat on my butt on the couch with the laptop, made a a quick trip out for propane and then had a nice steak dinner with my wife and her mother.

Not terribly fond of either one of them, actually...

   I did all this under the auspices of a holiday commemorating the resurrection of Jesus Christ-- an impossible event involving a possibly mythical man. I am game, though, for any celebration which provides me with an extra-long weekend. Yay!
   Back when I was a young lad, Easter invariably meant a  sunny day, lilies and a trip to church. Thankfully, it also meant candy and eggs. I remember it kind of annoyed me that Easter didn't generate the deluge of gifts that Christmas did and it befuddled me that people said it was a religiously more significant occurrence. I guess it was the fact that anybody can be born but only Jesus could actually die and then come back again which highlighted its significance. Oh well, as a kid, it just seemed like both a wasted opportunity for more gifts and having to get dressed up, all over again.
   I want to say that I am an atheist. It's a term which I think most people are familiar with. It's also a really nice, short little word and I appreciate short, little words. Most people understand an atheist to be someone who does not believe in God, or other deities.
   

Love it when the grandparents get all cute like that!

The problem though is that, by the truest definition of atheism, an atheist also does not believe in an afterlife. I believe in an afterlife. I just don't believe in God, or gods and I don't think someone is "in charge". Why and how I believe in a godless afterlife is probably a subject for a future blog post, however. In the meantime, I'm not sure what you should call me.
   Because of all this, religious holidays like Christmas and Easter can be a little problematic. There is some need to partake of holiday rituals because the majority of your friends and loved ones are. At the same time, though, there is also a need to protect your integrity as a non-believer.
   I wonder if Easter would be more fun if I believed in Jesus? There was a time when I at least believed in the existence of Jesus and I spent a lot of time pondering on what kind of man he might have been. I never believed he was the son of a god or anything but I did believe that he walked this earth and possibly had some charismatic pull over people.

Jeffrey Hunter in "King of Kings". Some actors get crucified
for their performances---Hunter didn't.

   Because I used to think he actually existed, it was always enjoyable for me to sit down and watch movies about his life, particularly at Easter. One of my all-time favourite movies is "King of Kings", with Jeffrey Hunter. For a brief period of time, on Easter day, I would take out my copy of this movie and watch it, generally by myself. It was kind of my own little Easter tradition. It's one of those powerfully epic Biblical movies and certain scenes never ceased to move me. I was also in love with the soundtrack.
   As my belief that there actually was a Jesus of Nazareth dwindled, my love for depictions of his life necessarily changed as well. Suddenly, it made almost as much sense to believe in a movie which had Santa Claus in it. So I now feel robbed of the one small connection I still had left with Easter---its movies.
   I am still quite happy to wish my friends and loved ones a Happy Easter, the same as I might wish them a Merry Christmas or a Happy Hanukkah (or St. Patrick's Day or Halloween, for that matter). I have no problem with acknowledging what might be important to other people, regardless of what my own belief system might be. I think we all grasp at what makes us happy and if the thought of sailing along on this rudder-less ship called Life, headed inexorably toward the edge of one of the greatest experiences a person can have makes me happy than so be it! Perhaps I should come up with my own little holiday, a day in which I celebrate a lack of gods in the world...hmmm...how about "Just Do Good Because It's Good Day"? Or maybe "Big Unknown Adventure Day"? Or, if all else fails, we could call it "Don't Put All Your Eggs In One Easter Basket Day"!     
   
    

The Deconverted Mr. Ripley

     This year, for Christmas, I received a copy of the book "Life Beyond Belief: A Preacher's Deconversion".
   It was written by a gentleman named Bob Ripley who, for the last 30 years, has been an ordained minister in the United Church of Canada. Fifteen of those years were spent as the senior minister at Metropolitan United Church, one of the most prominent United churches in Canada, here in London, Ontario. For 25 years, he has also been a syndicated columnist, writing weekly about religion and spiritual matters.
   I have read his column in the London Free Press off and on over the years and always found them to be informative, entertaining and easy to read. For those many years his readers knew him as "Rev. Bob Ripley". Then things changed.
   I was reading his column a few weeks ago and noticed that there was no longer a "Rev." in front of his name. This struck me as being strange but I kind of passed it off. Then, shortly thereafter, I read an article about him in the Free Press and discovered that he had renounced his faith and become an atheist.
   My reaction to this was not hmm, that's kind of interesting, it was more like woo hoo, that's cool!
   I am an atheist myself and find I am drawn to people who either believe in deities strongly or, conversely, don't believe in them at all. My question for either group always seems to be why?
   In Bob Ripley's case, I found it fascinating that a person who for all appearances had been living and breathing Christianity these many years had seemingly suddenly just...changed his mind!

   At the same time I discovered that Rev. Bob Ripley was now just plain old Bob Ripley, I also found out that he had written a book describing in some detail the lengthy and difficult (as you can imagine) process he'd undergone in coming to the realization that there is no God. This, then, the book I requested for Christmas (the irony is not lost on me) and this, then, the book I received!
   A lifetime spent studying theology and spiritual matters has made Ripley a knowledgeable man, not only in regard to Christianity but also most of the other major religions. Throughout the book, he will often draw comparisons between the religions.
   What he ends up describing, as he writes, was the slow and steady realization he came to that the things we are being asked to believe in the writings and teachings of the major religions (most notably, in this case, the Bible) are simply things which make little sense. We are asked to believe things that could not have happened and we are asked to believe things which modern day science has disproved. He also takes great pains to point out, with quotes, the discrepancies between the different Gospels in the Bible as to what happened when, where and how. After awhile, it became quite apparent that the Bible was very much a man-made thing and maybe not so much the word of God.
   He also points to his increasing interest, as an adult, in the scientific world as one of the things which started guiding him to his deconversion. Faced with the ever-increasing things we find out almost daily about the universe, it was impossible for him to reconcile his religious beliefs with what he knew to be actual fact.
   More than anything, he became a man who was distressed with what he saw as groups of people who had, from ancient time times up to the present, used religion as a reason for inflicting suffering upon other groups of people. He quotes passages from the Bible and other religious tomes which call for the destruction of enemies and non-believers. He goes on to provide historical examples of religion being invoked solely to justify greed and power-mongering.
   As I read, I personally found myself feeling more justified and reassured in my own beliefs. In terms of religion I am nothing more than a layperson in my understanding of things. Here then, in black and white, was a man who knew what he was talking about and had come to many of the same conclusions I had!
   As you might have guessed, Bob Ripley has lost some friends. New friends, however, have been made. He also says there are aspects of the Church he misses, such as the music and the fellowship. I can only imagine the inner turmoil the man must have been going through, to think about the thousands he ministered to or counselled, the weddings he performed and the funerals he officiated over all in the guise of being a man of God and then to feel it necessary to renounce all that.
   He relates that one of his former parishioners talked to him after he proclaimed himself an atheist and thanked him for having helped her through a difficult time. Sometimes words of support do the trick, regardless of whether there's divine inspiration for them or not!
   Bob continues to write his column and if you're interested in reading the particular column he wrote about his life-altering decision, you can read it here. As I mentioned before, I enjoyed reading his work when he was still an ordained minister. At the same time, I viewed him as a Christian writing about principally Christian things and, being an atheist, there was always at least a subliminal grain of doubt nestled there in my brain. Now, he has erased whatever small misgivings I might have had and there is a somewhat more welcoming and comfortable space for him.
   I read "Life Beyond Belief" in two days, interspersed with much holiday goings-on. It is obviously a thought-provoking read. On the back cover, one of the book's reviewers, Rev. Dr. Daniel Meester of the Old First Reformed Church in Brooklyn, NY declares, "If you're a Christian, you should take this book seriously, and if you're not...you'll find companionship." I would echo that.
   A humourous note. On Christmas Day, my wife, Doralyn and I were in the kitchen, working on dinner prep. My mother-in-law was in the livingroom and had picked up and was perusing my new copy of Ripley's book. She called out to us and made a reference to "Ripley". Doralyn didn't quite hear her and asked me what she'd said. I told her the reference had been to the Bob Ripley book. Doralyn said, "Oh..I thought she was talking about Ripley's Believe It Or Not..." At which point I replied, "Apparently he doesn't!"   
   
   

Hypocrisy

   I attended a funeral the other day. It was a fairly standard sort of affair, a United Church minister officiated and the funeral itself was for another minister. There were Bible passages read and alluded to and prayers said. I listened to the readings attentively and bowed my head during the moments of prayer.
   At the end of the service, the friend I was sitting beside asked me how I felt about all of this, seeing as how she was aware that I didn't believe in God. I suggested to her that this might be a good blog topic and this has led us to where we are now.
   This is not the first time I have been asked this question but it is the first time I have been asked by someone other than myself.
   I do give myself a little flak for participating in religious ceremonies such as weddings and funerals. I attended a candlelight service this past Christmas Eve and I argued with myself the whole time. I argued with myself before, during and after the service but, at the same time, I understood the process I was engaged in.
   It's a process called getting along with your friends and loved ones.
   In a world where you sometimes need to pick and choose your battles, there is sometimes room for accommodating people important to you. In a perfect world, your friends and loved ones will already be aware of your thoughts on such matters and will appreciate the fact that you might be sacrificing a small morsel of your principles in order to join in with them.
   That being said, I still feel hypocritical sometimes.
   Part of this feeling stems from the fact that I do spend a little of my time scrutinizing people who practise their faith religiously. I find myself looking for inconsistencies and motivation and contradictions with what they think, do and say. I'm not really sure why I do this. I'm not really sure why I pick out the religiously fervent when there are all sorts of other groups or individuals who are seemingly inexplicably driven by their beliefs, as well.
   The difference might be that religiously fervent people are involved in a process which has them engaging in all sorts of ritualistic behaviour, policies, guidance and decision-making  based on an unwavering faith in unseen forces, invisible and unprovable deities, and word-of-mouth ancient legends. I find it impossible not to scrutinize this, just a touch.
   The very faithful set a high bar for themselves. I am not a theologian in any way, but even my basic understanding of some of the tenets of different religions around the world tells me that it would be very difficult to faithfully live up to any of them, on a regular basis. This, then, opens up even more reason for scrutiny as you occasionally seem to come across people engaged in behaviour which runs contradictory to the stated beliefs of their religions. This just seems hypocritical to me.
   Is it any less hypocritical for me, then, to do the reverse, to  observe religious practices and to visit places of worship in which I have no belief? It is times like this when all the self-argument starts.
   Had I not been so clear about my disbelief in God and lack of faith in organized religion so often in past blog posts then my friend in the funeral home would not even have thought to ask me how I felt about participating in that service. Because I have been so clear on this issue, though, she must have felt as though questioning me about this was equitable and fair. I cannot and would not argue with her. If I am going to feel enabled to speak out then I must be prepared to engage them that hear me. 
   In the same way, I am spurred on to question the vocal faithful, the ones who praise their deities openly and freely, even more than I might question the ones who go about their faith silently yet demonstratively. Perhaps it is because they seem so willing to engage.
   Whenever I do a blog post of any kind, I like to include a picture or two, for visual appeal. Tonight I went to Google Images and simply typed in "religious hypocrisy". More than any other image search I can remember doing, I was assailed by the sheer anger many of the pictures portrayed. The topic is clearly controversial, heartfelt and, apparently, simmers within large portions of the population. Frankly, I felt that posting many of them here would have tainted the issue I was trying to present. I went back and omitted the word "religious" and got what seemed like a much calmer response. This obviously tells you something.
   Whether at some point I might change my personal policy about participating in religious services is up in the air. I am not against standing up for what I believe in but, at the same time, if my mere presence and participation in some form of service will add to the collective ability to assuage people who desperately need it then I can only see myself continuing to do this.
   This being said, though, now that I know that I am occasionally being listened to I may have to start walking the walk. 
     
  


  

Happy Whatever Days!

   Here and there on Facebook these days, I've come across a variety of posts wherein opinions have been offered as to whether we should be saying "Merry Christmas" to one another during this festive season or perhaps should be using the more politically correct "Happy Holidays". I've also run across people decrying the use of "X" in "Xmas". Then there is "Jesus Is The Reason For The Season" and "Let's Put Christ Back In Christmas".

   I get the point people are trying to make. There is a pretty general feeling that we've gotten away from the "true meaning" of Christmas and have simply given in to the commerce of the season. As North America becomes even more of an ethnic cultural melting pot there will be more and more pressure to homogenize the Christmas season so as not to offend sensibilities along the way. This is difficult for many of us to accept. Not only has Christmas lost much of the significance it had for us as kids, we are now being told it's not acceptable to share our Christmas spirit with people using traditional greetings anymore!
   Honestly, I refuse to get angry about this. If I feel like wishing someone a Merry Christmas, I will simply do that. If I happen to know that the particular person is of a different faith and celebrates the season under a different name I will try and use that greeting, if I know what it is. If I don't know what it is, I might revert to something a little more generic.

   Christmas already has a pretty tenuous grip on my happiness, as it is. As a kid, naturally enough, I was always excited about it. As an adult, though, there are way too many stressors to be dealt with. Family get-togethers are almost impossible to co-ordinate, multiple work parties need to be scheduled around, perfect gifts need buying, and any pre-existing tensions are only heightened at this time of year. The list goes on, I don't think I need to itemize them totally.
   Every year I tell myself that whatever it is about Christmas that bothers me the most I won't fall prey to it again this year. Then, before I know it, I find myself just as engaged in the whole Christmas merry-go-round as I have been all the other years.
   It's not that I object to celebrating Christmas. What I would like to be able to do, however, are all the things I'm not feeling like I'm being forced to do. Whatever they are.
   Okay, I've gotten away a little bit from the whole "Merry Christmas" versus "Happy Holidays" thing I originally wanted to write about.
   When I really think about it, me wishing someone a "Merry Christmas" isn't as much a supposition that they will be celebrating the same kind of Christmas I will be as it is a wish that they will simply enjoy the same kind of feelings I hope to enjoy during this particular time of year, no matter what kind of religion they observe.
   In this way, were a Jewish person to wish me a Happy Hanukkah, I would still get their meaning or intent. And still be as thankful for the sentiment.

Givingthanks Day

   I am generally a thankful kind of guy. I am thankful for many of the bigger things such as a great family, good job and good health.
   I am, however, pretty constantly thankful for some of the everyday things most of us take for granted.
   Walking and running for an example. I know several people who, through either accident or illness, have lost the use of their legs. Sometimes, even when I am just walking across a parking lot, I know what those people would give up just to be able to do that again. They could have just lost their homes and jobs five minutes previous but if, all of the sudden, they were able to walk again the pain of those losses would miraculously disappear. So it takes very little for me to be thankful for the ability to walk.

   I know people who cannot hear and people who cannot speak and I am thankful that I am able to do both of those things. I know people who have lost children, people who have cancer, and people who are brain-injured and I am thankful that none of these things have befallen me.
   Here is the problem I am having, though. I am deeply and profoundly thankful but I am not sure to who or what. I don't believe in God or gods so it doesn't make sense that I should be thankful to them. I tend to think that misfortune and good luck are in some ways just pure chance. So why be thankful to a simple spin of the wheel?
   Thanks needs to be directed at someone or something. I think this is somewhat part of its definition. If there is nothing, no-one or nowhere to direct your thanks then perhaps you cannot, by definition, be thankful. Perhaps the most you can be is happy, rather than thankful, with whatever your good fortune is.
   So I guess I am happy. Somehow or other, though, notwithstanding the atheist in me, I still feel thankful...

Loved Ones

   I am under the impression that there is a possibility I may run into some of my loved ones after I pass away. You certainly hear and see this talked about. Generally, it is talked about in a hopeful, comforting kind of way.
   I am thinking it would be nice to see a friendly face when I arrive on the "other side" and there are many of my loved ones whose faces I would be happy to see again. Any time that I have seen a medium on T.V., talking to the departed, it seems as though our loved ones are there and eagerly waiting our arrival.
   I can't tell you how many questions this raises in my mind, the idea that there may be an afterlife full of spirits and that there might be people here on earth who can communicate with them. So I will only raise one of them here.
   Who is a "loved one"?
   I have a pretty good idea of who a lot of my loved ones are I could potentially be seeing again. There are all sorts of family members, aunts, uncles, parents, grandparents and so on who have passed and could be there waiting for me.
   There are, however, a large number of people who I've been very close to as well who weren't relatives and isn't it quite possible I could run into them also? I have worked with people who have passed away, both staff and people our agency supports and I have been involved with many of them on an almost daily basis and it would almost make sense that if there is an afterlife then they would be partaking of it. Perhaps with me.

   I sometimes wonder if, in amongst the people I know, I might also run into total strangers. Or do you only come across loved ones? What if you "loved" someone but they didn't love you back? What if you only used to love someone, or vice-versa?
   Mediums make you believe that your loved ones who have passed are watching over you, on almost a constant basis. Do they choose to do this or are they compelled to do so, by some sort of other-worldly job description? I wonder if they ever get a break, maybe watch over a stranger's shoulder for awhile. I wonder how emotional they get as their loved ones continue on after them. Do they sense the passing of time and do they get impatient, waiting?
   As I sit here and write this, I wonder if I'm the only entity reading the words on the screen. Perhaps I should type a message...
   Any time I have seen a medium on T.V., one of the most consistent messages the departed seem to want to convey to their loved ones is don't be sad, get on with your life and everything is okay here. Somehow, this rings true with me, I can almost imagine wanting to comfort my loved ones back on earth this way after I've passed. Although I don't particularly believe in God, I do tend to believe in the afterlife and I see it as something not to be feared.
   I'm just not sure who I'm going to see there.
  
  

Prayer

   Every now and then, it feels like you should pray. Sometimes you get asked to pray, occasionally someone will offer up a reason for prayer which seems unavoidably worthwhile so you pray. Generally this means that someone is quite ill or is facing very dire circumstances. Because we are all so interconnected these days, quite often many people end up praying, more or less at the same time and for the same reason.

   The interesting thing to consider is what prayer means to each individual doing the praying and how the process of prayer might differ from person to person.
   I am not a religious person by any means and yet I still believe prayer is a worthwhile thing. Prayer, for me, consists of stopping what I'm doing and simply concentrating on whatever needs tending to at the time. I am not directing my prayer anywhere but right straight to the person or thing that needs it at the moment. There is no communion with a god, I am not sending my prayer off to a supreme being and asking him or her to consider it. No, I send it right to where it is needed the most. As far as I know.

   I tend to believe there is some power in prayer. I believe this because I think we've all dipped into the same energy that was created billions of years ago when the universe was created. That same energy is still around, in one form or another and we all belong to it. I believe this more for the sheer physics of it than anything. That is why I think it doesn't hurt to try and send some healing energy one way or the other. Now, I didn't have a guru tell me any of this, it is simply my own personal belief. That I just foisted on you...

   You can pray in the car, you can pray in the bathroom, you can pray at the end of the team bench, you can pray at the foot of your own bed just before you crawl in. You can use the conventional "clasped hands" prayer method or you can fold them behind your head while you're lying there in the hammock. You can pray and brush your teeth at the same time. Pray to a god or to no god in particular. Pray a lot or pray a little. Don't pray at all, if you don't believe in prayer. Do a good deed for someone who needs it. You wouldn't need to call it a prayer...but it almost is.
  
  
  

Brother Husbands?

   There is a "reality" show on T.V. these days called "Sister Wives". It revolves around the day-to-day struggles in a one man-four women marriage. Theirs is obviously a polygamous union and it falls under the auspices of the Mormon church. The man's name is Kody Brown and his wives are Janelle, Robyn, Meri and Christine. Between them, there are seventeen children. As a group they are all quite likable. Somehow or other they make the unlikely arrangement work, at least the part of it you see on T.V. There are issues, of  course, one of them being jealousy as you can imagine.
   The show also makes me quite angry, pretty well every time I watch it.

   The source of my anger stems from man-centricity of it. I'm not even sure that "man-centricity" is a word but I am going to use it anyway. Kody is a very well-spoken man who comes off as being quite charismatic. He seems to try his best at being a good father and husband to all his wives and children. When it comes right down to it, though, he runs the show. He seems quite willing to listen to all arguments but whatever he ultimately decides should happen, does. He says that the reason the relationships work is because they are based on genuine love.
   The kicker for me, though, is that I don't believe Kody Brown would even consider a relationship which was perhaps woman-centric. I cannot see him being one of four Brother Husbands, as an example. I cannot see him waiting his turn while his wife is off spending time with one of her other husbands. I do not see him likely bonding with the other husbands. I just can't, and this is the source of my anger.
   In totality, this show represents to me an essential problem with society today--men controlling women. It is not hard to look around in your everyday life and see examples of women being controlled by men. I find it especially galling that, on this one T.V. show, you have one man controlling four women at the same time.
   Whether any of the Sister Wives believe she is being controlled or not is hard to guess. In their own ways they seem like pretty strong women. They also seem to have done a pretty good job of bonding between the four of them. It's almost as if they were survivors on a life raft after a plane crash. All of the sudden you are in the same boat with strangers, nothing's going to change anytime soon, so you better learn how to get along and flourish as much as possible.
   The other part of all this which bothers me is the part the church plays. The Browns are Mormons and plural marriages are a practice condoned, at least in part, by this church. There is nothing much more man-centric than most religions and Mormonism is a leading example. In other blogs I have stated some of my concerns about organized religion and its historical place in society. One of my other concerns is the position of power it places most men in, even in these enlightened days.

"Brother Husbands"?

   So, all in all, it's a little hard to sit there and watch four intelligent women engage in a relationship I'm pretty sure the man would have no part of. Quite frankly, if one of them upped and "divorced" him it would kind of make my day.
   I put the word "divorced" in quotation marks because my understanding is that Kody is only legally married to Meri, his first wife, and that the other three women are only married to him "spiritually". The legal authorities, however, tend to think of "spiritual" as being akin to "common law", in which case what the Browns are up to would be considered illegal. As a family, they have already found it necessary to leave Utah and move to Las Vegas, to escape possible legal ramifications.
   So whether Kody gets dumped by a wife or wives or gets thrown in jail matters little to me. If, however, somehow or other there was a reality show called "Brother Husbands" and he was on it, I'd sit down faithfully and watch, every single week! 
  

Christians in the park

   Christians make me nervous. Christians in large groups, celebrating their Christianity make me even more nervous. Christians in large groups, celebrating their Christianity in public parks make me really nervous.
   There were a bunch of Christians doing this very thing this past Saturday morning in Victoria Park. I was running through the park in the morning and heard some music coming from the band shell, wondered what was going on, and then remembered---oh yeah... Christians.
   The fellow who'd organized this group of Christians had been in the paper and on T.V. recently because he'd been asking city hall to raise a Christian flag on city hall property to mark this special day and gathering. I guess city hall had originally said yes but then changed its mind. This may have had something to do with controversial remarks this fellow had made about kicking Muslims who wanted to practice Sharia law out of the country. This same fellow coolly predicted there would be 5,000 people in the park on the weekend to help celebrate.
   You could almost predict the outcome of all this. Nowhere near 5,000 people showed up, it was probably more like 500. Hecklers made an appearance and a couple of women started necking, provoking a response from the guy who arranged the whole thing. And that was about it, as I understand. There is a danger, of course, in reporting more or less only what the paper reported but it did seem like one man's brief moment in the sun, in the name of the Son.
   When thinking of large groups of historically organized Christians I am hard-pressed to come up with examples that don't cause my emotions to run the gamut from mild nervousness to a case of the full-blown heebie jeebies. The list, without much thought and as quick as they popped into my head, includes the Ku Klux Klan, the Amish, Mormons, Nazis, the Spanish Inquisition, the Catholic church, not to mention the Crusaders, the Salem witch hunters and people responsible for the obliteration of the Aztecs, Incas and North American First Nations. Saving the worst til last...T.V. evangelists.
   I imagine if you're a Christian and you're reading this then you're not taking to it too kindly. This doesn't bother me. It doesn't bother me because if you're a true Christian, as I understand it, you have a "turn the other cheek" mentality and will not take me too onerously to task on anything I've said here. By which I mean you won't hit me. Unless, of course, you possibly belong to one of the above groups...
   The fact that Christians make me nervous is a very personal thing and I imagine it stems from the feeling I'm just about to have something foisted on me whenever I'm around them. They occasionally even show up at my door, bearing books or pamphlets, extolling their brand of Christianity. They're harder to get rid of mainly because they're...well...nice. I am at the age now where it seems quite alright to be gruff and non-appreciative of telemarketers, door-to-door sales persons and rude shopkeepers but, because of their niceness, it is harder to be this way with Christians.
   I am one of those people who believe that Jesus may never even have existed, that he is a myth. I say this because there is apparently no secular record of an historical Jesus ever having existed. This statement is refuted all over the place (all you need do is Google "was there an historical Jesus?)  and what you end up with is scholars refuting other scholars so you really need to make up your own mind on this. If there actually was a Jesus, I believe his life was vastly different than the one portrayed in lore. In the two thousand years since he was said to have existed we have had to essentially rely on a word-of-mouth interpretation of the events back in those days. I also know that no two persons' recollection of an event will be the same and that no subsequent re-telling of a story will tell the same story exactly all over again. This is why I have doubts. I trust people as far as I can throw them. Because they are people.
   The funny part about all this is that I totally respect much of what Christianity stands for and much of what is said in the Bible. A lot of it makes sense. Jesus and his parables resonate with me. I am a pacifist by nature and appreciate the non-violence talked about in the Bible. My objection to Christianity is when there appears to be an agenda attached to it.
   I object to Christianity being used as motivation for killing people. I object to Christianity being used to make money. I object to it being used as part of a political agenda (see first two objections). I object to it being used as a means toward self-aggrandisement. I object to athletes making stupendous plays and then crossing themselves and pointing to the heavens, as if to give credit to God (unless, of course, they are willing to do the same thing when they drop the game-winning catch...).

   I appreciate people being Christians quietly, going about living virtuous lives with little mention made of their spiritual beliefs. If there is mention made of Jesus Christ it is perhaps because someone asked them, out of curiosity, why they are so happy, or motivated or driven or calm. I think all Christians need to do is "live the life" and I will, over time, lose my nervousness about them! 
  
  
  

Afterliving

   In my last blog, I offered the suggestion that Heaven might, in fact, simply be a place where you end up doing all your favourite things.
   It didn't really occur to me at the time but then I started to think about, given that definition, what Heaven would look like for ME.
   Here's what I came up with, in no particular order.

   Walking, hand in hand, with my wife, Doralyn, strikes me as a little slice of heaven. It has, from day one.

   Making an incredible save in ball hockey is hard to beat. To throw out a little of the miraculous, in the truest sense of the word, for a bunch of guys to see and then remember is an incredible feeling.

   Blogging is wonderful. To have that instant audience and get more or less instant feedback is an altering experience, if you are inclined to be any kind of writer.
   Sex, of course. And it is even better with a like-minded partner. I remember thinking as I was writing the last blog that perhaps a good definition of heaven would simply be one eternal orgasm. Except that we would likely get bored with it after awhile!
   A good morning coffee and the paper.
   Solitude. It can come in a variety of ways, times and places and occasionally is invaluable. There can also occasionally be two of you there.

   Music. Playing it or listening to it. Hundreds of different types of musical instruments around the world from cultures that have no common familiarity and they can all be tuned together. This tells you something about the nature of music.

   Coming home and seeing my wife's car in the driveway.
   Golf. A long, straight drive. A high, arching second shot. And a short right-to-lefter, for birdie.

   Driving through the Rockies. Something about this was ingrained in me when I was just a young boy. It may go back even further than that as, generations ago, my ancestors were true pioneers in the Rockies. Hard to beat.

   Blowing raspberries on my kids' bare bellies. They're in their 20's and 30's now, so it doesn't happen very often anymore...

   Gibsons, B.C. Where we usually ended up after our trip through the mountains. It has a magical quality to it which seems to infest all who visit with any regularity, especially children (but adults are not immune!)

   So these are some of the things you might find in my Heaven. I know there are many others, life is full of wonderful things that often we run into on a daily basis. And there is enough variety in them that you never seem to get bored or tired.
   As I've said before, I am in no hurry to discover what Heaven actually is or whether it even exists. I can grasp little bits of it here on earth and that is fine with me. I also believe that if there is no Heaven then the worst thing that can happen to you when you pass is to enter the state of not having been born.
   When I think of all the millenia that passed before I came into this world, the rise and fall of the dinosaurs, continents shifting, ice ages, dark ages, wars, explorations and discoveries, suffering and magnificent achievements and the fact that I sailed through all of them in blissful ignorance makes me think there really is no fear in returning to that state.
   My best guess, though, is that Heaven will find me safe in the warmth of all the things above, sharing them with the people I have loved and those who have loved me.
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Heaven

    As you can imagine, I have been thinking a lot lately about heaven and, more importantly, if there is one.
   The fact that it is also Good Friday today has prompted this consideration even further.
   Any time someone I know passes away I find myself wondering what exactly that person has now discovered and what kind of a journey they might currently be on.
    In an earlier blog, I mentioned that I am somewhat jealous of the dead. The reason for this is that I believe any truly important question you might have had is answered when you pass away. You find out whether there is a God or not. You discover if there is a Hell. You find out if there are aliens. You suddenly know where anything you might ever have lost went to (and still is!)
   If time travel is a possibility then you suddenly are aware of its mechanics. You find out whatever happened to Amelia Earhart and if there actually was a Jesus. All these questions and more get answered for you, in one fell swoop.
   Currently, my father is someone I envy. Today, as well, marks the 39th anniversary of my mother dying so I guess I envy her, too. This brings up another question--are my Mum and Dad together again? And how would my stepmother, who has also passed, fit into that equation?
   There are simply a mind-boggling number of questions I believe get answered when we pass.
   I do believe in an afterlife, not so much because I am deeply religious (far from it) but simply because the laws of physics seem to apply. One of those laws states that energy cannot be destroyed, only changed. Because we all are made of different kinds of energy and because this energy cannot be destroyed I think that we simply change when we pass. Moreover, I think we are all derived from that same incomprehensible burst of energy that occurred when the universe was formed and that's why we are all so interconnected. As the hippies put it, we are one with the universe!
   What I don't think, however, is that there is any kind of deity running the show.
   My Dad now knows what the story is and I am jealous, just a little. I'm also content to wait until it is my turn to find out. 
  
  
  
  

Angel

   In the series of blogs "Dad, these days", I tried to describe in fairly straightforward detail the trials and tribulations of Dad's struggle with Alzheimer's and then his ensuing hospitalization. At the same time, I was also attempting to keep his family and close friends abreast of what was happening in his life, on essentially a daily basis. For the most part, I stuck to the bare bones of things.
   Now, however, I would like to touch on one of the finer details of Dad's last few weeks.

   He had an angel.

   This particular angel's name is Doralyn and she is also my wife. I love her with all my heart for many reasons and she has done nothing in the last four weeks but provide me with more of them. In a variety of ways she has been my angel in the past and Dad's hospitalization has given me the privilege of watching her perform her angelic duties all over someone else for a change.
   In the first couple of days of Dad's stay he went through a period, before they were able to stabilize him, where he was adrift with anxiety, confusion and the simple inability to breathe. I remember him suddenly sitting up in bed many times, chest heaving, panicking at not being able to catch a breath. I remember Doralyn coming to him in this state and getting him to sit on the edge of the bed, at which point she proceeded to rub his back for him. It was wonderful to watch him melt away into this!

   She nursed him better than the nurses did. She saw the little things that needed tending to; the hair that needed combing, the teeth that needed brushing, glasses needing cleaning, all those things.
   Above and beyond all the physical things she tended to, she also minded his spirit. She was the one with calming touch and soothing voice. She was the one who stroked his hair and kissed his cheek. She was the one who reminded him how loved he was by everyone.
   And Dad responded to all that. He looked for her when she wasn't there. He always asked me to bring along "the cute one". I remember very well after one meal time when he was sitting in his chair, after the tray and stand had been pulled aside. He was sitting, hunched forward. with his forehead almost touching his kneetops due to exhaustion. She came and sat in front of him, held his hand and flirted a little bit. He pulled his head up, looked her in the eye, and reached out and cupped her on the chin. This is a moment that will stay with me forever.
   She ministrated to him daily, right up to the end. Whether it was clearing out the goopy eye or tending to the teeth and gums. At every visit she made him smile or laugh at something. When smiling and laughing were beyond him, she could still get a raised eyebrow.
   I have no qualms in saying that, if only one of us could show up, I believe he would have taken her over me. And, you know, I really didn't have a problem with that, I was just so thankful that she was there for him at a time when he needed the assuagement of his soul as much as anything else.
   Throughout all of this she has done much the same for me. On a pretty constantly daily basis she has asked, "What can I do for you?" There were times when I was able to tell her something specific but, more often than not, just having her there was enough.
   Doralyn loved my Dad just as much as any of us did. He was an easy man to love but part of her abiding love for him stemmed from the way he totally accepted her both into my life and into his. She told him this often. This was also a part of my love and admiration for this man.

   If there are heavenly angels, Dad is now among them. For me, I thank God for him having been visited by one here on earth.