Daily Survival Kit for Serious Illness

Im reading up and cleaning.  Certainly not something I live for, that's for sure.  But as I do so, I come across things I've saved to use "later."  This is one of them...


Daily Survival Kit for Serious Illness
by Thomas L. McDermitt (1989)
a long-time cancer patient and skeptic

(You don't have to agree with all of this all of the time.  But if it generally speaks to you, try to read all or parts of it every day, or have it read to you.  Part of the help is in the doing, regardless of your attitude or emotions of the day.  On some levels the help is gradual and often not evident)

1.  Today I am going to try to live through this day only, and not dwell on or attempt to solve all my problems at once; just focus on the piece that is today.  I can do something for several hours that would be difficult to even think about continuing for several months.

2.  Just for today, I am willing to accept the possibility that there is a  purpose to this suffering; that it can be a source of meaning and growth for myself and others, though I may not always recognize the ways.  And it seems possible that this suffering will not be in vain, because of what may be some kind of existence beyond.

3.  Just for today, let me remind myself that I am basically a worthwhile person, worth loving, despite my faults and limits.  I deserve the efforts of others to help me through my illness.

4.  Just for today, I want to be aware that it is all right to want too much from others at times.  Illness brings out and intensifies the small child in all of us.  And if I feel hurt when those who care for me cannot be there, it may help to remember that they have needs, frailties, and limitations of their own.  A lack of response does not mean that they are personally rejecting me.

5.  Today I may feeel the need to complain a great deal; I may have little tolerance; I may cry; I may scream.  That does not mean that I am less courageous or strong.  All are ways of expressing anger over this mess, or rightly mourning my losses.  Endurance itself is courage.

6.  It is my life at stake now.  So maybe today I can allow myself to be a little less concerned about the reactions or impressions of others.  Maybe I can allow myself to feel a little less guilty or bad about what I did not accomplish or give.  Perhaps today I can be a little more gentle toward myself.

7.  Surviving this is all so difficult.  At times it seems impossible--that I have had evoug.  Down the line I will know if and when I have had enough, when I cannot push the limits any further.  I will have the right to choose to stop, without feeling that I am "giving up."  But today I think I can deal  with this illness.  Sorrow runs very deep, but I think I can rise again.

8.  Just for today , maybe I can give healiing "the benefit of the doubt."  The drugs are powerful; the natureal healing capacity of my body is powerful.  And who knows, perhaps there is healing power in my will to struggle, and in the collective love and will of others.

9.  Just for today, perhaps I can take heart that we are all connected.  And I may still have some things left to contribute to the family of man; some light to add to the light.  Even now my endurance (however imperfect) is a gift, an inspiration for others in their struggles.

10.  It seems reasonable that there is a season for everything, and a time for every purpose.  Pain, weakness and exhaustion may distort my senses and spirit.  Today, however, I can at least find some hope in nature's way, if not in some master plan.  The chances are fairly good, and it seems worthwhile to hope that I will have some cycle of wellness yet.

Mormonism and Theocracy

Based on dates of postings it appears that I've been ignoring my blog.  Actually, that is far from the truth.  Some time ago I finished a book about Mormonism and I've been working to try to pull together information concerning Mormonism's theology, which can be a bit difficult to do.  If you look back over time since Mormonism's conception you'll find that their beliefs and theology have changed frequently and therefore, at times,  it is difficult to discern exactly what they believe.  Also, the church may support one view or belief internally but deny that view publicly so they will be "accepted" by Christians.  Janis Hutchinson states, "What began as a strategy of secrecy to avoid persecution has become over the course of the 20th century a strategy of minimizing discussion of the  content of theology in order to avoid being treated as pariahs" (Scott, Latayne.  The Mormon Mirage, 3rd ed., 251).  My last comment may make you think, "But Mormons are Christians."  Although they claim to be Christian, their "Christianity" would probably not be considered as such by Protestants and Catholics. 

What you will find when you read what I will post about the Mormon faith will no doubt surprise you if you've never read or studied anything about Mormonism.  Although as a Christian I find their theology strange enough, there is one issue I find a bit disconcerting: the Mormon goal of taking over the United States government.  No, I am not a conspiracy theorist, for this is a documented fact of the church.  

The following are some quotes from The Mormon Mirage by Latayne Scott, a former member of the church, as well as Janis Hutchinson, another member.  I will use quotes so no one thinks I am making anything up or reading anything into their words, though I will not copy the full 3-4 pages.  (253-255)

"Hutchinson documents from LDS and former LDS historians an organization formed by Mormon leadership under Joseph Smith called The Kingdom of God (or, alternately, The Government of God) that was to be ruled by a Council of Fifty who were sworn to secrecy about the organization and its aims and very existence...The express aim of the organization was the takeover of the United States government, not by violence, but by the grooming of Mormons to run for and win political office.  In sufficient numbers, such lawmakers and policy makers would transition the government from a democracy to a theocracy.

Brigham Young had even more far-reaching plans for 'the complete overthrow of the nation, and not only of this nation, but the nations of Europe'  The aim of the subsequent one-world government would be to prepare the world for the second coming of Christ and a thousand-year, literally theocratic kingdom.  At one point LDS leaders were quite open about his agenda...any LDS priesthood holder seeking political office was required to first garner permission from Church authorities.  As recently as the late 1960s, Mormon historian Klaus J. Hansen said of the Council of Fifty that Church leaders of his time were not likely to do away with it.  And as late as 1985...that 'though the ceremony of coronation continues to this day, it is not publicized outside the Church...'

Another  disturbing, and well-documented element...called the 'strategy of secrecy' is the blood oaths that were part of the LDS temple ceremony up until at least 1927.  In these oaths, temple ordinance participants swore enmity to the United States government and promised to avenge the blood of LDS persons who died in conflict with the government.  While there is no evidence that any man in current LDS leadership took that oath, its effect was intended to be ongoing, as noted by author Richard Abanes: 'It required Mormons to promised that they would teach their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren to take vengeance on ''this nation.''  (Did current LDS leadership teach this to their children and grandchildren?  The fact that their own fathers would have sworn that oath gives reason for pause.)

In addition to these elements of LDS history...was the firm belief in a prophecy of a future date in which the US Constitution would be in serious trouble, and only saved by the LDS Church.  As a people, it was our aim to produce as many LDS lawmakers, judges, politicians, and legal experts as we possibly could, so as to fulfill and satisfy prophecy.  

Any faithful 'temple Mormon' politician has a dilemma to which Mitt Romney responded in his well-publicized speech about his loyalties.  The issue wasn't just in the minds of potential voters; it is a real dilemma for an LDS politician.  If Romney, for instance, were to be elected president of the United States, he would be asked to swear a solemn oath to protect the Constitution of the United States as a priority over any other loyalties to any other earthly entity.  However, when Mitt Romney 'took out his endowment' (participated in a secret rite in an LDS temple prior to going on his LDS mission and later before being married in such a temple), he swore another oath before God and witnesses...to keep the 'Law of  Consecration': a vow to consecrate time, energy, talents, and material possessions to to the Church for the purpose of  'building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion.'  In addition, Romney's 'calling' to be a bishop in the Mormon Church required that he render absolute loyally to the LDS Church and its prophet."

If you want to learn more about Mormonism I'd urge you to read my upcoming blog post concerning Mormons and their theology.

The Cross and the Flame: Faces of Gravel Hill

Here is an ad I made for the church to use, but we have decided not to use it.  I wanted to share it anyway.  I picked the best smiles I had of people, nothing more.  So if you don't see yourself here it's nothing personal.  I might have a photo of you with a great smile, but I tried to use men and women as well as younger and older folks.