I sleep on my sides. I use a C-Path machine so the mask doesn't let me sleep on my stomach--which I used to do sometimes--and I've never slept on my back, probably because my childhood asthma made sleeping on my back very congesting.
So, I sleep on my sides--mostly on the left side but sometimes on the right. I read in bed most nights and always on my right side, so when I turn to my left to turn off the light, I usually just stay there.
One thing I've noticed over the years is that I seldom dream on my right side. Dreams come from left side sleeping. Which makes the dream I had in the middle of the night on my right side unusual.
And the dream itself was unusual.
After years of Jungian dream analysis, I tend to remember dreams and ponder them. Last nights deserves it.
I was in a large room--as large as a small church with several other people, all of whom I knew. Oh, they weren't people I know in waking life but I knew them all in the dream.
There were three people behind a bar that stretched almost all the way against the left wall. There were no bottles behind it so it wasn't a bar in that sense. In fact the stools were those kind that turn that the base is screwed into the floor and they were white and cushioned like diner stools. The bar looked like the bar you see in old-fashioned diners.
Three women were behind the bar talking animatedly with two men, one on a stool, the other standing beside a stool. In the dream I knew them all and was eves-dropping on them. (Which I do in real life! I tend to hear most of the conversations around me.)
The other part of the room had several desks like in an office. I was at one of them. There were two men and one woman at desks and a few empty desks. One desk--not mine--had a chair in front of it and people would come in and talk to the man there for a while. It was like he was advising them about something.
What I was doing was sorting little hard paper animals--like pieces of a puzzle--and attaching small strips of a narrow orange tape on them and then writing something I was thankful for on each and dropping them in a glass. I believed the other people at the desks were doing the same thing, but I wasn't sure if it were a competition between us to write the most things we were thankful for or not.
I remember some of the things I was writing on the tape on the animals--'nature', 'Bern', 'grandchildren's names', 'birds', 'love' and other things.
Just as I was worried I would run out of animals and tape before I ran out of things I was thankful for, one of the men at the bar said something about 'a pint and some chips' and everyone in the room--including me--burst into a boisterous chant about pints and chips that sounded like a sea chanty. I didn't know the words but sang along with no problem.
In the midst of us singing and laughing, a tall, young man with lots of curly hair, dressed like a Hippie from the 60's--wild shirt and bell bottom pants and sandals. He sat down in front of the man and was totally confused and I tried to tell him why we were chanting but was laughing too much to make sense (besides, I didn't know why!).
Just then someone came and gave me more cardboard animals and more orange tape.
Then I woke up.
Already I know my 'Dream Maker' was telling me I had lots of things to be thankful for and ought to say more about them. Sunday I'm going to tell the people of St. James that when we get to the part of the Prayers of the People where we give God thanks, I want it to last 5 minutes and we should talk over each other and just say out loud every thing we're thankful for....
I'll ponder the rest of the dream some more, teasing out other messages from my unconscious mind and heart and let you know if anything really interesting shows up.
In the meantime--spend more time pondering and sharing what you're thankful for.
That might be a very good and transforming thing to do...and keep doing....
Friday, June 22, 2018
Thursday, June 21, 2018
This was my fourth post out of over 2100
And I still stand by it....
(This is actually a piece out of my sermon on Lent III, with some
expansion of the piece--and it is really "why" I am an Episcopalian.)
Michael Ramsey was the 100th Archbishop of Canterbury. He served from 1961-1974. (To get some perspective on that #, St. John's has been around since 1732 and I am only the 17th Rector! "Being old" by US standards is like 'being rich' by Albanian standards. However, none of the Rectors of St. John's was ever murdered or beheaded or burned at the stake....That was, over the centuries, an occupational hazard of being ABofC.)
Ramsey contended--and I agree--that the Anglican Communion (at least what fiction that passed for it in his day) drew its theology primarily from the Doctrine of Creation and the Doctrine of Incarnation.
The Doctrine of Creation teaches that God created everything out of nothing and "it was good". In fact, Genesis says that God created humankind in God's "image and likeness". The Doctrine of Incarnation teaches that the very same Creator God took on flesh, was 'incarnate' as a human being to live and die as one of us. Unlike almost any other Faith, Christianity teaches of a God that got down and dirty with us. We are not the sport of the gods and God is not infinitely removed from us. God was one of us. And if the Holy took on flesh, flesh must somehow be holy.
Starting a theology from those two doctrines leads to a very high view of human nature--just a little below the angels, as the Psalms say. So human beings, in Anglican theology, are basically and inherently 'good'. Given world enough and time, people TRY to do the right thing. The church exists to inspire and console and comfort and counsel with men and women, not to 'control' them.
Roman Catholics and Baptists begin their theology with the Doctrine of the Atonement. The Atonement teaches that human beings are so basically and inherently bad and evil and sinful that if left to their own devices they will get into dangerous mischief. Consequently, the church exists to control and regulate those odious little vermin and keep them out of trouble.
All of us adhere to those three doctrines, but we Episcopalians emphasize Creation and Incarnation (that's why we're so good at doing Christmas!) over Atonement and RC's and Baptists emphasize Atonement. They both have many rules (different rules, granted--no RC would prohibit dancing and Baptists, as far as I can tell, don't fret too much about birth control) while the Episcopal has so few rules.
Most Christians see the world in black and white while Episcopalians look at a world of a multitude of shades of gray. That creates a remarkably different 'world view' and a completely altered relationship with the church. A friend of mine calls the Episcopal Church "the grownup Church", meaning that we treat people--even kids--like adults who have a brain in their head and a conscience in their heart and a spark of divinity in their soul. We believe people want to do the right thing by their very nature and need not be herded into salvation by sheep dogs of rules. We don't tell that to people enough--probably because we are also--because of our English roots--polite, reserved and self-effacing.
But the secret shouldn't be hidden beneath some bushel basket of enforced humility. I actually believe people might be attracted to a church that doesn't ask them to leave their brain in the narthex and be told what to do with their lives lest they go to hell. The mega-church phenomena, as far as I can tell, doesn't ask people to leave their minds outside but lulls their minds to sleep with entertainment and false security.
I really believe the Episcopal church comes as near as any Christian denomination to 'telling the Truth' about who we are and whose we are. We are 'dust and ashes'--that's True...but we are also shining, loved, gifted children of God--loved just the way we are and given by God the resources to be the best we can be at being who we are.
(I must admit that on sunny June Sundays I'd like to have that RC rule about not coming to church puts your soul in peril! But Episcopalians would suggest 'coming to church' and being part of a worshipping, giving community is a good way of being 'all we can be'...but not the only way....We never claim to be "The Way". Maybe that's why our evangelism sucks--we don't have fear or guilt to drag people in....But I wouldn't have it any other way....)
Monday, March 16, 2009
why I'm an Episcopalian
Michael Ramsey was the 100th Archbishop of Canterbury. He served from 1961-1974. (To get some perspective on that #, St. John's has been around since 1732 and I am only the 17th Rector! "Being old" by US standards is like 'being rich' by Albanian standards. However, none of the Rectors of St. John's was ever murdered or beheaded or burned at the stake....That was, over the centuries, an occupational hazard of being ABofC.)
Ramsey contended--and I agree--that the Anglican Communion (at least what fiction that passed for it in his day) drew its theology primarily from the Doctrine of Creation and the Doctrine of Incarnation.
The Doctrine of Creation teaches that God created everything out of nothing and "it was good". In fact, Genesis says that God created humankind in God's "image and likeness". The Doctrine of Incarnation teaches that the very same Creator God took on flesh, was 'incarnate' as a human being to live and die as one of us. Unlike almost any other Faith, Christianity teaches of a God that got down and dirty with us. We are not the sport of the gods and God is not infinitely removed from us. God was one of us. And if the Holy took on flesh, flesh must somehow be holy.
Starting a theology from those two doctrines leads to a very high view of human nature--just a little below the angels, as the Psalms say. So human beings, in Anglican theology, are basically and inherently 'good'. Given world enough and time, people TRY to do the right thing. The church exists to inspire and console and comfort and counsel with men and women, not to 'control' them.
Roman Catholics and Baptists begin their theology with the Doctrine of the Atonement. The Atonement teaches that human beings are so basically and inherently bad and evil and sinful that if left to their own devices they will get into dangerous mischief. Consequently, the church exists to control and regulate those odious little vermin and keep them out of trouble.
All of us adhere to those three doctrines, but we Episcopalians emphasize Creation and Incarnation (that's why we're so good at doing Christmas!) over Atonement and RC's and Baptists emphasize Atonement. They both have many rules (different rules, granted--no RC would prohibit dancing and Baptists, as far as I can tell, don't fret too much about birth control) while the Episcopal has so few rules.
Most Christians see the world in black and white while Episcopalians look at a world of a multitude of shades of gray. That creates a remarkably different 'world view' and a completely altered relationship with the church. A friend of mine calls the Episcopal Church "the grownup Church", meaning that we treat people--even kids--like adults who have a brain in their head and a conscience in their heart and a spark of divinity in their soul. We believe people want to do the right thing by their very nature and need not be herded into salvation by sheep dogs of rules. We don't tell that to people enough--probably because we are also--because of our English roots--polite, reserved and self-effacing.
But the secret shouldn't be hidden beneath some bushel basket of enforced humility. I actually believe people might be attracted to a church that doesn't ask them to leave their brain in the narthex and be told what to do with their lives lest they go to hell. The mega-church phenomena, as far as I can tell, doesn't ask people to leave their minds outside but lulls their minds to sleep with entertainment and false security.
I really believe the Episcopal church comes as near as any Christian denomination to 'telling the Truth' about who we are and whose we are. We are 'dust and ashes'--that's True...but we are also shining, loved, gifted children of God--loved just the way we are and given by God the resources to be the best we can be at being who we are.
(I must admit that on sunny June Sundays I'd like to have that RC rule about not coming to church puts your soul in peril! But Episcopalians would suggest 'coming to church' and being part of a worshipping, giving community is a good way of being 'all we can be'...but not the only way....We never claim to be "The Way". Maybe that's why our evangelism sucks--we don't have fear or guilt to drag people in....But I wouldn't have it any other way....)
Wednesday, June 20, 2018
Lies
A 'lie', according to Wikapedia, is "a statement used intentionally for the purpose of deception".
Lies, according to me, is the lingua franca of the current administration of our country.
Lie One--"the law passed by the Democrats made the President separate children from their parents at the Southern boarder." That 'law' has been a 'law' since the Bush administration and neither Bush nor Obama 'interpreted' it to separate children from their adults.
Lie Two--"only Congress can correct the problem with a new law." The President could have corrected the problem with a phone call.
Lie Three--the President corrected the problem (that only Congress could correct!!!) with an executive order. There was no need for an executive order to correct the problem, a phone call would have done it.
Lie Four--everything is alright now about child separation. No it's not. No one seems to know for sure, but around or mare than 2000 children have already been separated and the executive order and no known agency is empowered to reunite them. Some of the children are as far away from the boarder as New York and Chicago. How to get those kids back to their parents? No one knows.
Only the enormous outrage of most of the religious community and most of the country's citizens and even some Republicans made the President refute Lie one and two by telling Lie three and four.
It's all lies.
Apparently the President believes and believes fair well, that if you tell a lie enough it might begin to sound like an 'alternative truth'.
There's no end to the lies we've heard. I see fact checks every day about anything the President says.
Germany's crime is up 10% because of refugees. No, it's down 10% even as they accept refugees from Africa and the Middle East.
Tariffs will improve the economy. No, most economists think a trade war is anathema for our economy.
Canada and Mexico are against us and North Korea is for us. No, Lord God, no....
Pulling out of the UNESCO, the Paris Climate Accord and defying the G-7 will make America great again. No, all that is non-sense and not since the beginning of the 20th century have so many of our traditional allies doubted our 'greatness'.
It's a nightmare beyond dreaming.
Deep breaths. Deep breaths.
There must be an end to the lies somewhere. Please vote in November and send a clear message to this President (who will not be named.....)....
Lies, according to me, is the lingua franca of the current administration of our country.
Lie One--"the law passed by the Democrats made the President separate children from their parents at the Southern boarder." That 'law' has been a 'law' since the Bush administration and neither Bush nor Obama 'interpreted' it to separate children from their adults.
Lie Two--"only Congress can correct the problem with a new law." The President could have corrected the problem with a phone call.
Lie Three--the President corrected the problem (that only Congress could correct!!!) with an executive order. There was no need for an executive order to correct the problem, a phone call would have done it.
Lie Four--everything is alright now about child separation. No it's not. No one seems to know for sure, but around or mare than 2000 children have already been separated and the executive order and no known agency is empowered to reunite them. Some of the children are as far away from the boarder as New York and Chicago. How to get those kids back to their parents? No one knows.
Only the enormous outrage of most of the religious community and most of the country's citizens and even some Republicans made the President refute Lie one and two by telling Lie three and four.
It's all lies.
Apparently the President believes and believes fair well, that if you tell a lie enough it might begin to sound like an 'alternative truth'.
There's no end to the lies we've heard. I see fact checks every day about anything the President says.
Germany's crime is up 10% because of refugees. No, it's down 10% even as they accept refugees from Africa and the Middle East.
Tariffs will improve the economy. No, most economists think a trade war is anathema for our economy.
Canada and Mexico are against us and North Korea is for us. No, Lord God, no....
Pulling out of the UNESCO, the Paris Climate Accord and defying the G-7 will make America great again. No, all that is non-sense and not since the beginning of the 20th century have so many of our traditional allies doubted our 'greatness'.
It's a nightmare beyond dreaming.
Deep breaths. Deep breaths.
There must be an end to the lies somewhere. Please vote in November and send a clear message to this President (who will not be named.....)....
Sunday, June 17, 2018
One good thing about getting older
I read 5 or 6 books a week, mostly mysteries but often a straight novel.
One I read yesterday and finished today is called The Immortalists, by Chloe Benjamin. I urge you to read it. Wondrous, disturbing, troubling and beautifully written. Go to the library and get it.
I get all my books from the Cheshire library. Bern sometimes buys a book on line. She just got a trilogy by Philip Pullman. The first book is The Golden Compass. They are fantasy. I used to love fantasy--Ursela La Guinn, the Harry Potter books, the Game of Thrones books. But I don't read it much now. I'm starting, tonight, The Book of Dust by the aforementioned Pullman. It's the first of a new trilogy. Bern insists I try it. I'll let you know.
But one great thing about getting older and losing a bit of memory is that I sometimes get a book and realize I've read it but I don't quite remember how it turned out and so I read it again.
I've got a Linsey/Havers mystery I've read before but am going to read again.
That's pretty cool--to enjoy something twice.
Getting older isn't all bad--nevermind my knees.....
One I read yesterday and finished today is called The Immortalists, by Chloe Benjamin. I urge you to read it. Wondrous, disturbing, troubling and beautifully written. Go to the library and get it.
I get all my books from the Cheshire library. Bern sometimes buys a book on line. She just got a trilogy by Philip Pullman. The first book is The Golden Compass. They are fantasy. I used to love fantasy--Ursela La Guinn, the Harry Potter books, the Game of Thrones books. But I don't read it much now. I'm starting, tonight, The Book of Dust by the aforementioned Pullman. It's the first of a new trilogy. Bern insists I try it. I'll let you know.
But one great thing about getting older and losing a bit of memory is that I sometimes get a book and realize I've read it but I don't quite remember how it turned out and so I read it again.
I've got a Linsey/Havers mystery I've read before but am going to read again.
That's pretty cool--to enjoy something twice.
Getting older isn't all bad--nevermind my knees.....
Crossing the line
I try not to talk about politics in my sermons. There's no one listening who hasn't figured out how ultra-liberal, socialist-democrat I am, so I don't have to point that out in sermon time.
Secondly, religion and politics--like church and state--should have a line between them. They just should. There are lots of right-wing churches who tell their members who to vote for that I believe should be stripped of their non-profit status. Just me talkin'--but talkin' true.
But today, I crossed the line in my sermon at St. James, Higganum. I crossed over into a political debate that I think is also a theological and moral debate: the separation of children and parents if they cross the boarder illegally.
The Administration keeps saying they're enforcing 'the law'--which isn't true. They are forming policy by interpreting the law in a way they want to. The same law they point to has been in place for at least two administrations before this and neither Bush nor Obama chose to interpret it the way the current President has.
And, truth be known, the President, in my mind is using this immoral and un-American tactic to get a vote on immigration in the Congress that he will only sign if it includes funding for his maniacal 'wall' across the southern boarder. Folks in the White House know how heinous this separation of children from parents is--but they're using it as a bargaining chip...which makes it all the more despicable.
I was freed to cross the line by Attorney General Jeff Sessions who quoted from Romans 13 to justify 'enforcing the law'. And Paul does say a lot in that chapter about obeying 'civil authorities'. I would remind you he was writing in a time when being a Christian was illegal in the Roman Empire and it only made good sense to stay below the radar by 'obeying authority'.
What enraged me was that Sessions (a Methodist Sunday School teacher for heaven's sake!) must not have read the previous chapter of Roman. In Chapter 12 Paul advises us to 'share what you have with those in need' and 'to welcome the stranger into your house'.
That sounds like a pretty moral and sensible immigration policy to me--one that this country has, for much of it's history followed.
Unless you are 100% Native American, your ancestors came to these shores longing for a better life. And they built our nation up. Diversity is the hallmark of America. Today's immigrant is tomorrow's hard working citizen.
But even if you have some more conservative view than the 'open boarder view' I have, you must acknowledge that ripping children from their parents' arms is hideous and wrong and must, must, please God, stop!
(One man after church told me, "I wish you hadn't preached that sermon because now I have to do something." Perhaps the best comment I ever got about a sermon.)
Secondly, religion and politics--like church and state--should have a line between them. They just should. There are lots of right-wing churches who tell their members who to vote for that I believe should be stripped of their non-profit status. Just me talkin'--but talkin' true.
But today, I crossed the line in my sermon at St. James, Higganum. I crossed over into a political debate that I think is also a theological and moral debate: the separation of children and parents if they cross the boarder illegally.
The Administration keeps saying they're enforcing 'the law'--which isn't true. They are forming policy by interpreting the law in a way they want to. The same law they point to has been in place for at least two administrations before this and neither Bush nor Obama chose to interpret it the way the current President has.
And, truth be known, the President, in my mind is using this immoral and un-American tactic to get a vote on immigration in the Congress that he will only sign if it includes funding for his maniacal 'wall' across the southern boarder. Folks in the White House know how heinous this separation of children from parents is--but they're using it as a bargaining chip...which makes it all the more despicable.
I was freed to cross the line by Attorney General Jeff Sessions who quoted from Romans 13 to justify 'enforcing the law'. And Paul does say a lot in that chapter about obeying 'civil authorities'. I would remind you he was writing in a time when being a Christian was illegal in the Roman Empire and it only made good sense to stay below the radar by 'obeying authority'.
What enraged me was that Sessions (a Methodist Sunday School teacher for heaven's sake!) must not have read the previous chapter of Roman. In Chapter 12 Paul advises us to 'share what you have with those in need' and 'to welcome the stranger into your house'.
That sounds like a pretty moral and sensible immigration policy to me--one that this country has, for much of it's history followed.
Unless you are 100% Native American, your ancestors came to these shores longing for a better life. And they built our nation up. Diversity is the hallmark of America. Today's immigrant is tomorrow's hard working citizen.
But even if you have some more conservative view than the 'open boarder view' I have, you must acknowledge that ripping children from their parents' arms is hideous and wrong and must, must, please God, stop!
(One man after church told me, "I wish you hadn't preached that sermon because now I have to do something." Perhaps the best comment I ever got about a sermon.)
Saturday, June 16, 2018
Eleanor and Brooklyn
So, we take the train to Grand Central from New Haven. Then we ride the 4 or 5 subway (doesn't matter which) to Atlantic Avenue/Barclay Center. We used to be within 2 blocks of Tim and Mimi's apartment from there--but now it it a 20 minute walk and we're not going to do that!
No taxi available so Tim comes to get us.
Then he goes to work and we spend the day with Eleanor. Joy.
She'll be two in August but talks like a champ and is almost never unhappy.
She and Bern were out on the balcony for almost an hour with soapy water in a big bowl and some of her toys which she washed more than they needed and she watered Tim's tomato plants and flowers. The tomatoes are way ahead of ours in CT!
I sat near and watched them, but Tim and Mimi and Eleanor live on the 13th floor and I cannot--cannot--go out on the balcony. It freaks me out. Heights.
Eleanor ate whatever we gave here--cheese, organic chicken noodle soup, tangerines--took an over an hour nap and since it was Friday and Tim and Mimi have 'those kind of jobs', they were both home before 5 p.m.
Bern taught Eleanor to say "ooo-la-la" though she said it "ooo-la-la-la" to both of her parents when they came home.
Then an Uber to Atlantic Avenue and the subway to Grand Central and a train to New Haven and a car to Cheshire.
A wondrous day.
But I'm not sure I could live in Brooklyn or any of NYC. Too many people on too many cell phones in too big a hurry.
A block or two from Mimi/Tim/Eleanor--an area where all you need is a block or two away--maybe, just to be near them.
But I'm just not sure. I'm too old for city life. I like it fine--love it, in fact--here in Cheshire, our house surrounded by trees, lots of birds, not much to do.
July 4 we're going to the Bradley/Chen's in Baltimore to see those three granddaughters.
Life is good. Watching the flesh of our flesh growing and prospering is wondrous.
No taxi available so Tim comes to get us.
Then he goes to work and we spend the day with Eleanor. Joy.
She'll be two in August but talks like a champ and is almost never unhappy.
She and Bern were out on the balcony for almost an hour with soapy water in a big bowl and some of her toys which she washed more than they needed and she watered Tim's tomato plants and flowers. The tomatoes are way ahead of ours in CT!
I sat near and watched them, but Tim and Mimi and Eleanor live on the 13th floor and I cannot--cannot--go out on the balcony. It freaks me out. Heights.
Eleanor ate whatever we gave here--cheese, organic chicken noodle soup, tangerines--took an over an hour nap and since it was Friday and Tim and Mimi have 'those kind of jobs', they were both home before 5 p.m.
Bern taught Eleanor to say "ooo-la-la" though she said it "ooo-la-la-la" to both of her parents when they came home.
Then an Uber to Atlantic Avenue and the subway to Grand Central and a train to New Haven and a car to Cheshire.
A wondrous day.
But I'm not sure I could live in Brooklyn or any of NYC. Too many people on too many cell phones in too big a hurry.
A block or two from Mimi/Tim/Eleanor--an area where all you need is a block or two away--maybe, just to be near them.
But I'm just not sure. I'm too old for city life. I like it fine--love it, in fact--here in Cheshire, our house surrounded by trees, lots of birds, not much to do.
July 4 we're going to the Bradley/Chen's in Baltimore to see those three granddaughters.
Life is good. Watching the flesh of our flesh growing and prospering is wondrous.
Wednesday, June 13, 2018
choices we make
I was looking at an almost 25 year old photo album tonight. Pictures from when Bern and Mimi and I visited Josh in England.
After college Josh got a green card for England in some program and went to live and work there for a year. He worked in a pub near Chelsea's soccer stadium, so it was a very busy pub. Most of the people who worked there were foreigners like Josh and lived in a dormitory behind the pub.
While he was there he dated a young woman named Anna, from Columbia, I think. There are several pictures of her in the album. She is lovely--though every woman Josh ever dated was lovey--and her face looking at Bern and Mimi and Josh shows great honesty and affection.
I liked her a lot, in that brief visit. But then I liked every girl Josh dated except for one from UMass.
They had their time and chose, one or the other of them, to move on.
What if they hadn't?
Where would Cathy, our daughter in law, have ended up? We would never have had Morgan, Emma and Tegan to love.
What is wondrous to ponder is how every choice we make in life ripples out.
It's why I choose (I hope I'm getting 'chose' and choose' right! a tough one for me) to have no regrets. To regret anything I did or didn't do would alter the reality of today--June 13, 2018 wouldn't be what it is if I had made a different choice at any point in life.
And I simply adore and am eternally grateful for my life as it is this day.
So, no regrets.
I made stupid choices along with brilliant ones, but they led me to this moment and this moment is where I want to be.
So, as I said, no regrets.
(Regrets, it seems to me, come to the fore when life hasn't turned out well. I understand that and feel compassion for those in that place. But if you are satisfied and joyful with you life, regret not....just me talkin'....)
After college Josh got a green card for England in some program and went to live and work there for a year. He worked in a pub near Chelsea's soccer stadium, so it was a very busy pub. Most of the people who worked there were foreigners like Josh and lived in a dormitory behind the pub.
While he was there he dated a young woman named Anna, from Columbia, I think. There are several pictures of her in the album. She is lovely--though every woman Josh ever dated was lovey--and her face looking at Bern and Mimi and Josh shows great honesty and affection.
I liked her a lot, in that brief visit. But then I liked every girl Josh dated except for one from UMass.
They had their time and chose, one or the other of them, to move on.
What if they hadn't?
Where would Cathy, our daughter in law, have ended up? We would never have had Morgan, Emma and Tegan to love.
What is wondrous to ponder is how every choice we make in life ripples out.
It's why I choose (I hope I'm getting 'chose' and choose' right! a tough one for me) to have no regrets. To regret anything I did or didn't do would alter the reality of today--June 13, 2018 wouldn't be what it is if I had made a different choice at any point in life.
And I simply adore and am eternally grateful for my life as it is this day.
So, no regrets.
I made stupid choices along with brilliant ones, but they led me to this moment and this moment is where I want to be.
So, as I said, no regrets.
(Regrets, it seems to me, come to the fore when life hasn't turned out well. I understand that and feel compassion for those in that place. But if you are satisfied and joyful with you life, regret not....just me talkin'....)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)