My Prayer

3 Nephi 18:20 says, "And whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, which is right, believing that ye shall receive, behold it shall be given unto you."

Many times I have while praying struggled over what to ask for. Sometimes I wanted something very badly but thought it was too much to ask for - more than I really deserved. Sometimes I wasn't sure that what I wanted was really right - or at least right for me. Sometimes I worried that I couldn't get what I wanted without somehow denying somebody else's agency. And sometimes I was so emotionally exhausted that I didn't even know what I wanted at the time.

And many times I have ended up saying some version of, "Thou knowst what I need better than I do.Whatever that is, please let me have it."

External Consistency

I recently followed a link to a tarot card site and got some free readings. The general, love, and career ones, meant to answer specific questions I thought of while selecting the cards, were not particularly illuminating. Then I went to another love one which was supposed to predict romantic compatibility based on birthdates. So I entered my birthdate and chose a date for the guy, then it used those dates to assign us cards. I was Chariot; he was Strength. And this is how the analysis ended: "Both are independent spirits but Strength likes to occasionally imagine there is such a thing as soul mate and love of a lifetime. Chariot is far too sensible for that nonsense and inevitably Strength can feel Chariot is simply too cool a cucumber to meet the requirements for passion."

The first thought that struck me upon reading this was, "Since when am I too sensible to imagine a love of a lifetime?" I actually posted some of my not-entirely-against thoughts on the matter here.

Then I remembered that I am a Scorpio. The attributes associated with Scorpios that I always remember are passion and mystery. So, if the date of my birth makes me a passionate Scorpio, how can it also make me "too cool a cucumber to meet the requirements for passion"? I thought that maybe my mysteriousness hides my passionate depths, but then that is basically saying that Mr. Strength writes me off before bothering to really look for the capacity for passion. And that does not seem right at all.

Is it really too much to ask that two completely unrelated divination systems fit together logically?

Unspeakable Things

On Friday I was reading the part in the Book of Mormon where Christ is giving his apostles in the Americas their desires. Then, after Christ leaves, "...the heavens opened, and they were caught up into heaven, and saw and heard unspeakable things. And it was forbidden them that they should utter; neither was it given unto them power that they could utter the things which they saw and heard..."

I have often thought about why it was that they can't speak of the things they saw. The first part, where it says they saw unspeakable things, sounds like human language is inadequate to describe what they saw. But in the next sentence, it says they were not given power that they could utter the things they saw and heard. And that sounds more like they would just be too emotionally overwhelmed to do so.

Maybe human language isn't quite inadequate, and if they try to get across what they can in their language, they can't get the words out because of the power of the experience?

What Are They Thinking?

Not too long ago there was a popular video going around called "Should Christian women wear bikinis?" that talked about how the male brain reacts to seeing a scantily-clad woman. In it, the presenter read an excerpt from an article from Princeton and said, in part, "When the young men viewed the scantily-clad women, the part of the brain associated with tool use lit up...The researchers also discovered that when some of the men viewed these scantily-clad females, the men's medial prefrontal cortex (part of your brain) was deactivated... This is the region of the brain associated with analyzing a person's thoughts, intentions, and feelings.... The doctor remarked, 'It's as if they were reacting to these women as if they were not fully human.'"

I didn't read the research myself, but I'm assuming for now that it made it through peer review and was published in a reputable academic journal. And judging from the men of my acquaintance who shared it, it does fit with their personal experience, at least to some extent.

I would like to point out, by the way, that not every man's medial prefrontal cortex deactivated when looking at the pictures.

On Tuesday, a college friend of mine shared a link about a new law in Pakistan against throwing acid on women. As part of her response to a question I asked about it, she said, "Before this law, it was customary for a man to throw acid on a woman for an indiscretion like failing to bear a son, or out of rejection (if I can't have her, no one will want her because she'll be disfigured!), or through an inability to provide a handsome dowry to the husband from her parents, or for any reason that stems from revenge, or the need to dominate and control."

I can't help but wonder what the brain scans would show when those men looked at a woman. Because even a tool is generally better treated than that. And it's hard to imagine that somebody would throw acid at a person while really considering their thoughts, intentions, and feelings.

Different Perspectives

Here are a couple excerpts from Flip by David Lubar from different points of view that are interesting to consider together. I think this reflects the sort of thing that happens all the time.

Taylor:
"They're checking us out," Ariel whispered. She ran a hand through her hair.

Taylor shook her head. "Not us. Just you." There was no denying Ariel was gorgeous. Boys had been looking at her since the fifth grade.

"Don't talk like that," Ariel said.

Taylor sped up, eager to get away from the group by the door. But wherever she and Ariel went, she was aware of the stares. And aware that they weren't aimed at her.

Ellis:
Taylor was pretty, too. Maybe even prettier than Ariel, he thought as he studied the two of them together. But she was so much like a sister, he had no trouble talking when she was around. I wonder if she knows how pretty she is? He figured she must. How could she not know?

A Quick Anne Quote

Tonight I was thinking about things my friends sometimes post on facebook, bragging on their husbands' thoughtfulness or saying that they have the best husband in the world.

Then I remembered this exchange in Anne of Avonlea.

"What is it really like to be engaged?" asked Anne curiously.

"Well, that all depends on who you're engaged to," answered Diana, with that maddening air of superior wisdom always assumed by those who are engaged over those who  are not. "It's perfectly lovely to be engaged to Fred . . . but I think it would be simply horrid to be engaged to anyone else."

"There's not much comfort for the rest of us in that, seeing that there is only one Fred," laughed Anne.

Insert polygamy joke here.

Mismatched Moods

At the top of each hymn in our hymn book, there is an adjective indicating how each hymn should be played or sung. For some, it is Reverently. For others, it is Joyfully, or Resolutely, or Meekly. The adjective at the beginning of We Thank Thee, O God, For a Prophet is Brightly. And I think for the most part we do pretty well at singing that hymn brightly.

But the thing is, there are a couple of lines in that song that just don't feel at all happy or bright to me. When I sing them, the contrast between what I am singing and the manner in which I am singing it is rather disconcerting.

The first line is in the second verse: The wicked who fight against Zion will surely be smitten at last.
I can see how there can be some comfort in knowing that justice will be served. But smitten is a very strong verb and it is easy to go from being glad that there will be justice, a good thing, to enjoying the thoughts of our enemies suffering as a type of cosmic revenge. Also, I tend to think of this justice as being a sober thing that must be fulfilled, not as something bright and cheerful. I also remember that nearly all people will be inheriting some degree of glory in the hereafter and that we are told to love our enemies. Those two bits of information do not seem at all consistent with feeling joy while thinking of anybody being smitten.

I previously posted thoughts on a similar matter in Death of a Bad Man.

The other line that bothers me is the very last line of the song: While they who reject this glad message shall never such happiness know.

When I was a teenager, I had a hard time understanding how we could be truly happy knowing that other people missed out on so many blessings and chances for progression in the eternities. Especially people we knew and loved. I found a section in C.S. Lewis's book The Great Divorce that helped me, but unfortunately I can't find the book now.*

But it still saddens me when I think of people missing out. And these aren't even necessarily bad people. They just for whatever reason do not accept the gospel. There are plenty of good, moral people out there who don't believe or don't give it a chance. So to sing brightly about them missing out just doesn't sit quite right with me.

That said, I do like the hymn overall. I had a very wonderful experience singing it in the Conference Center during General Conference several years ago (which is actually the first time I remember noticing the disconnect). I am grateful for the gospel and the prophet and continuing revelation, and I do feel the optimism and hope expressed. I just wish that a couple of what seem to me very serious, sober lines were treated with a touch more gravitas.

___________________________
* December 3, 2011: I now have a copy of the book with me and found the passage, which it turns out is a bit too long to include in the main post. So I'm putting it down here.

"...What some people say on Earth is that the final loss of one soul gives the lie to all the joy of those who are saved."

"Ye see it does not."

"I feel in a way that it ought to."

"That sounds very merciful: but see what lurks behind it."

"What?"

"The demand of the loveless and the self-imprisoned that they should be allowed to blackmail the universe: that till they consent to be happy (on their own terms) no one else shall taste joy: that theirs should be the final power; that Hell should be able to veto Heaven....it must be one way or the other. Either the day must come when joy prevails and all the makers of misery are no longer able to infect it: or else for ever and ever the makers of misery can destroy in others the happiness they reject for themselves."