Well, It's Done

It could suffice to say that Pet Day went well and now it's over. But I'm more long-winded than that, so I'll offer a few descriptive sentences...

This year was lower in stress than last year - there weren't any fireworks to scare dogs (as was the case last year with the football scrimmage) and people in general seemed pretty low key. My team at the food booth worked together quite well, and I had a good time. It sounds like we netted a fair sum (I suppose you could think of "netted" in two ways, although the fishing-related term might erroneously suggest some unethical means of obtaining money).

I was going to drive Andy with the wagon and give people rides, but he was behaving poorly. Therefore, KH and I ended up driving him around campus with the sulky and no passengers. It's great fun to have people stop and look/ask questions, and it's good PR for the club (as long as he's behaving!).

Yes, a good day over all. I think I'll sleep well tonight.

Sleep Deprivation

Wednesday night was a time of little sleep, and I haven't fully recovered. On my way to CS's I found out (from my voice mail) that I was to take part in foal team that night. Therefore, after visiting CS, going with her to prayer meeting in the middle of the visit, and engaging in valuable discussion I went back to school. I was there until 2:50 am. RB and I took care of a "dummy foal" - good experience although I do not think it was wise for the owners to spend such sums on a foal that (as far as I know) had little chance of becoming normal. (If the foal was worth a lot of money it might've made sense - I don't know if that was true.) Definitely, humans with low mental capabilities should not be regarded with such little regard, but animals do not have eternal souls.
The foal went into respiratory failure around 1:30 am and in spite of our extended efforts to revive it did not recover. Respiratory failure may have resulted from a spreading brain stem abscess which was previously suspected because of a vestibular problem (the foal walked in a circle). It so happens that a respiratory control center and part of the vestibular system are in the medulla of the brainstem.

I crashed at CS's for 4 hours, and returned to school.

I can function on minimal sleep, but my performance level suffers. I got a word mixed up on a test today, called RB "Laura" (because her last name is Bush, I guess. I don't think she's a democrat, so hopefully it didn't offend her), made some worthless statements I might not have made in my right mind, and seemed to have decreased proprioception.
Sleep works wonders that I am "brutally" reminded of when it is absent!

I have heard that driving with lack of sleep may be worse than driving under the influence of alcohol. I can believe it, to a certain degree.

A bit of Google research yielded these quotes from the VOIDD (Victims of Irresponsible Drowsy Drivers) webpage:

"Driver fatigue doesn’t get as much attention as drunken driving, but it can be just as deadly." Dr. Alan Pack, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, PA.

"Driving drowsy "is just as bad as having five drinks and getting in the car", says spokesman Mark Hammer, New York’s Institute for Traffic Safety Management and Research, Albany, NY

Maybe I should keep that in mind and organize my life so I don't need to stay up late cramming for tests.

Penguins

Those of you who find my posts boring may consider reading my dad's comments. There's one under "And So They Were Wed." If you are a true Varney you will understand the meaning behind the pseudonym...

Led by the Holy Spirit

There are many issues the Bible does not address - for instance, it doesn't expressly say whether I should read novels written by non-Christians, part my hair on the side, or play sports.

Perhaps that is partly because some activities are wrong some of the time but not all the time, and wrong in excess but not in moderation. Some activities may be wrong if performed for a certain motivation but perfectly fine if performed for another.

There are other things the Bible does not condemn in a black and white fashion that are actually wrong under all normal circumstances. Perhaps this is one place the Holy Spirit and the heart come into play. If my heart is right, and I listen to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, then perhaps he will help remove all improper motivations . Is it possible that by that process God may lead me and everyone else to never do certain things, even though the Bible does not clearly condemn them? As a case in point, consider gambling. If my love for my fellowmen is greater than my love for money, and if I am happy to work in proportion to the monetary sum received, will I ever end up gambling? (I suppose you could make a case for gambling just for the fun of it, but why play at something that would be wrong in its full glory?)

Toads, Hemoglobin and Banana Skins

Today's news:

People used to smoke toad skins to get high. - Dr. Rhian Cope, in toxicology class.

Dr. Mosley, lecturing about the effects of high altitude (with its correspondingly low partial pressure of oxygen) on percent hemoglobin saturation, informed us that he once went to a high elevation on a trip and took a pulse oximeter along (just for fun, as far as I could tell). He measured his percent hemoglobin saturation,found it to be extremely low, and proceeded to measure the saturations of those with him. I found the sheer nerd quality (which, to be clear, is regardly highly on this blog) of this episode to be rather amusing.

Principles of surgery again: today we took our quizzes on bananas. I don't think I'd ever written on a banana before, but it works pretty well. There was one written question. The rest of the quiz involved making an incision down the length of the banana, extracting the "tumor" (banana insides), sending it to pathology (eating it), and demonstrating a few surgery stitches on the incision edges.

These articles contain some pictures of suture patterns (the quiz involved a cruciate, a vertical mattress, and a simple interrupted):
"Mattress Sutures: Vertical, Horizontal, and Corner Stitch"
"Suturing Techniques"

Imagine grading a pan of banana skins.

And So They Were Wed

We made it to California and back in three pieces. It was a good trip.

He did it — my youngest cousin Kevin got married, tied the knot, signed the papers, bit the dust*.
It's sort of funny - I'd seen my cousin only 3 times between 1992 and 2004 but I still have a cousinly pride and attachment to him. I've done less with him than some people from church, but I claim him more.
The wedding was held on the Mendocino Headlands. Kevin and Gretchen stood not far from a cliff's edge, waves breaking over the rocks below, wind blowing through the trees, birds chirping. It was pretty neat. They took some of the family pictures on the edge of another cliff - there were no casualties.
The reception was in the Mendocino Hotel, which was built in the 1800's. It was a good time - making connections with relatives, laughing, etc. (My immediate family was among the last to leave - oops! But that's no surprise - it's pretty standard for us - and I'm actually not ashamed of it as long as it doesn't put anyone out.)

Much of highway 20 from Williams (on I-5) to Fort Bragg (where we stayed Saturday night) is very scenic. It's a "bit" on the wine-dy side but definitely a sight to behold, with fabulous wildflowers, treed hills, suspended fog, and farms. I had a strong desire to stop and take a closer look at the wildflowers.

Some people have a strong bias against California and/or its inhabitants.
I was born in California, have a certain love for the state, and wish people had a better view of it. They should not label Californians based on the small section of land that is the coast with its overpopulated cities and poorly-mannered drivers. While I suppose the majority of California's population belongs to such areas, and while I suppose that those areas receive the most publicity, there is another side to the state. The Californian towns I have lived near have been quite nice (Springville, Nevada City, and Alturas) - people would do well to take such towns into consideration when formulating a label for the state.

Ah, well, it doesn't really matter all that much, I guess.

* Not intended negatively

Kidneys and California

"The dumbest kidney is smarter than the smartest internist." - Dr. Craig Mosley (in reference to the kidney's ability to remedy plasma imbalances)

"uterine smooth forest" - myself, by accident when trying to write "uterine smooth muscle" in toxicology lab yesterday while one of my classmates was talking about forests to a couple other students. She found it extremely amusing.

I'm heading to California shortly for a cousin's wedding. He is the last of my cousins to enter congugal felicity (which isn't saying much since I have only 3). I guess they are ahead of the game compared to my brother and I.

I hope travel is conducive to formulating a couple posts about issues of interest to me at this time.

Okay, I'm outta here.

Music, Suturing and IQs

Banning music appreciation classes, have you ever had a professor who lectured with music playing in the background? I hadn't, until yesterday.

It was Dr. Gustafson again, lecturing in principles of surgery class with an assortment of music styles playing relatively loudly in the "background." He was recently listening to music in his wife's (?) car, and thought we might appreciate it as well! We were rather amused.
The lecture information was sort of conducive to music. It was not particularly deep conceptually, and involved suturing demonstrations performed by Dr. Gustafson on one of the suture-practice legs. (The demos were projected large on the wall using a projector document camera.)
Gustafson previously informed us that music can be nice to have in surgery, particularly during endoscopy and closing of the incision - while driving the endoscope or stitching and throwing ties you can rock to the music.
I wonder what type of music I'll play when I do surgery. It might be like ice skating where choral music would not produce the desired effect, and I don't think rock is appropriate for Christians to listen to. Maybe some sort of fiddling or classical guitar would work - though that idea is more or less a shot in the dark.

To change the subject slightly, "principles of surgery" makes use of a different aspect of intelligence* than most of the veterinary curriculum up to this point. To a large extent, the previous classes have required an adequate verbal intelligence but have made considerably less use of performance (non-verbal) intelligence. Surgery requires good psychomotor skills for making knots properly, understanding how suture and knot styles behave, handling instruments, etc. Those skills are more related to performance intelligence, and may therefore turn the tables with regard to who's top of the class.

Speaking of intelligence, if you need your pride set down a notch or 10 you can try these IQ tests.

* According to my limited understanding of intelligence types.

Someone Else Can Do It

I'm on the food committee for Pet Day 2005, and had a related meeting this afternoon - it looks like things are coming together.

When I signed up for the Pet Day 2004 food committee, I did not realize what was involved. It's sort of fun to run a food booth, but the preparation and planning is a bit of a headache for one who wants to follow the relevant food safety laws.
This year I am not the food booth supervisor, which is great because it will not be my responsibility if a law is violated. Some people feel more free to use their own common sense instead of following the letter of the law. In reality the health officials probably don't care much about such aberrations, but I personally would not feel comfortable with them. Having me out of the supervisory position may therefore be better for everyone involved. I will wield my influence in the direction of obedience to law, but will ultimately feel justified to leave the overall activities in the hands of another. I hope that's not an awful cop-out.

Self Half Life

I woke up some time between going to bed and leaving it, and the thought that immediately came to me was "self half life." Since it was the thought of a fogged and somnolent mind I may rue sharing it. But it suggested some spiritual application, so here goes.

In pharmacology we were taught about half lives - the amount of time it takes for a substance following first order kinetics to diminish by half it's concentration. (It's like the scenario with a frog that aims to travel a stated distance by hopping half of the remaining distance each time.) When a substance behaves according to a given half life, the concentration after a number of hours 't' is equal to the original concentration (Co) divided by '2' to the power of time/half life [C(t) = Co/2^(t/half life); is there an equation editor for blogger?]. Hence, the shorter the half life the sooner the substance is cleared out of the system.

The shorter the "self half life" the sooner there will be less of me, and less of me should mean more of God (self = carnality in this case). At my death my carnality will enter zero order kinetics (where elimination occurs at a constant rate unrelated to the amount of substance present) for an infinitely short time and will vanish completely.

Roses and Humor

Hmm, I think I should post something else to get my dog cadaver post further down the list.

Roses and humor from principles of surgery class:
Roses: root beer floats in class last Wednesday (to teach the importance of using the right tool for the right job (spoon vs straw vs chop stick) ).
Humor: surgery dress-up by Dr. Gustafson and his research assistant this morning. They had a large plush dog with one of our suturing-practice arms attached to it by hemostatic forceps. Dr. Gustafson put on gown, gloves, cap, and mask. The assistant prep'd the surgery site (the arm); Gustafson applied "sterile" towels around the area, clamped them with towel clamps, put a surgery stocking over the arm, added a fenestrated drape, etc - mostly while demonstrating the sterile way to do things. We enjoyed it. I'll post pictures if I can.

I've got a story idea worked out and need to start writing it. It's about time I entered the writing groove again.

On Second Thought...

Out of sensitivity to the population majority and/or a realization that such posts may not garner any long standing blog readership, I have removed my dog cadaver post. It was related to school, and I honestly do not have a penchant for dog cadavers (so please do not regard me as sick-minded), but I suppose I should take measures to preserve my reputation.

Disappearing Money

I thought I was being smart, getting money credited to my checking account from my credit card so I could smoothly pay off my tuition without going home to get cash. Apparently that's not a courtesy service provided by my credit card company and I was charged for the transaction. Bummer. If I had paid for my tuition in two parts, one from the credit card and one from checking, I wouldn't have received the delightful finance charges. Funny and sad.

I really ought to have a booklet of the do's and don'ts and potential repercussions surrounding my card. It's sort of like the Bible verse "How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" But I suppose the credit card company would prefer I remain unblissfully ignorant.

Be Ye Kind

Last night I went to a meeting with the Christian animal science/vet student types. We were discussing how to prove that Jesus was who he said he was, and (maybe because trusting the Bible is somewhat key to that proof) I brought up the subject of canonization. At some point I stated that the Catholics have additional books in their Bible and shortly thereafter someone leaned over and commented that there were Catholics in the room. I had been completely unaware - there was a Catholic at a previous meeting, but I completely forgot that one might be present last night.
I suppose maybe the comment was made to me because I sounded disparaging toward Catholics, and I ended up apologizing to the group. (I don't recall that what I said was unkind to Catholics, but my tone of voice may well have implied some of my opinion about Catholicism.) It is not wrong to state disagreement with Catholic positions on various matters, but it is never right for me to come across disrespectfully. I am too used to going about Catholic-less circles where I would be unlikely to offend anyone with my demeanor regarding them. But even in those circles it is not right to be contemptuous of them.

Now, another angle on this subject... I have a tendency to tailor my demeanor to fit my audience, and I need to watch that. If I came across as contemptuous of Catholics, it might have been because I subconsiously thought the others (being supposedly protestants, according to my subconsious) would have thought unfavorably of Catholicism. My opinions of present-day Catholicism are not emotionally strong against it - I actually have a fondness toward the Christian stream that has run through the Catholic church. I think the late Pope John Paul II was largely to be commended. Hence, whatever unkindness came across may have been largely, well, hypocritical, I guess.

Diversity Honored

The push toward honoring diversity may be beneficial to Mennonite women like myself. I think people are nicer to me than they would be otherwise.
My status as "baby" of my vet school class may also generate increased kindness towards myself, as well as mercy on my immature/strange aspects. In a way it would be nice to be thought of as older and taken more seriously - but then I'd have to play the part of the older, staid individual and that might be less than ideal.

I wonder how it'd be if I was neither Mennonite nor young; or if I was a Mennonite longer ago when people had less tolerance for the unusual.

Co-Visitantes

Yesterday I went to see SS who recently had knee surgery at a hospital in town. After receiving directions to her room, I got on the elevator and punched 3 for the appropriate floor. The elevator stopped, the door came open, and there were Amos, Anita, and Lorinda Kropf! Apparently I gave them one of my weird (in this case surprised) Claire expressions, and we all laughed. They had seen me on my way to the building/something and were trying to beat me to SS's room.

It was neat to see how cheerful SS was in spite of her surgery - a good example for me.

Tox Test

I sort of deserved to do poorly on my toxicology exam today. Researching headcovering wearing and typing voluminous blog posts when I should have been studying about glutathione peroxidase and ischemia-reperfusion injury - it's really not justifiable.
At the very least, I expected to come up against some questions I had little clue about.

It was not so. And I'm not bragging about superior information retention, either.

Here's the deal - 285 pages of notes, 173 study questions. A large portion of the notes were unexaminable and we were strongly encouraged a couple times to study the study questions for the test.

Well, I read through a fair amount of the examinable stuff once, and focused on the material covered in the study questions.

As it turned out, all of the test questions were modified/identical copies of the study notes. So, I think I did okay.

All the students had the same chance of doing well, so it was sort of fair for me to do all right. However, if I had worn myself to a frazzle studying really hard for the test, I wouldn't have felt repaid for my efforts. If I had actually studied the notes themselves more and the questions less, and therefore got some of the questions wrong when those who studied the notes less aced the test, I would have felt disgusted.

But with that quantity of notes, it was the easiest fairest way for the professor to test us. It's her first time teaching the course, so I definitely give her quite a bit of slack for the note quantity. There's a lot that we should learn, so how would she decide what to discard? I also applaud her for writing so many notes (it took a lot of effort) and for doing it in advance of the course starting. She is very on top of things, she really wants us to learn, and she is a nice person above and beyond her professorly duties (I suppose that theoretically shouldn't go into an analysis of a professor, but it counts for a lot).

Gettin' Thrown Around

We got to practice on cows in our last two general medicine labs.
Yesterday I was trying to get a stomach tube down a Jersey (pretty small compared to Holsteins) and she threw me around quite a bit. My arm is still sore today.
It's part of the fun, honestly.

I attempted an injection between the sclera and conjunctiva over an eye and mostly failed. It's hard to aim for an eye that promptly retracts into the head upon touch (unlike people, cows have retractor bulbi muscles that allow them to do so) and becomes covered by the third and external eyelids. The whole thing of jabbing needles near eyes also goes against my upbringing and the resulting trepidation effected less boldness of strike.

I finished listening to "A Tale of Two Cities" yesterday. It's the second time I've experienced the book (read it 5 years ago) and this time I had a greater appreciation for the sheer evilness and lack of love of the French revolutionaries. Their bitterness against the aristocrats is understandable given their nonregenerate selves; nonetheless, the thirst for blood was heart-wrenching.
The book ending was very well done - romantic, moving, artful - even relatively satisfactory. I recommend it to critical thinkers.

Headcoverings - Part II

I should wear a covering while praying and prophesying, but what about hypothesis 2? Should I wear a covering at all times? The answer is not as cut and dried as that to hypothesis 1, and there are likely a number of headcovering-wearing "protocols" that would fulfill the Scriptural injunctions.

Some are concerned that it would be adding to Scripture to wear a headcovering at all times when the Bible sets forth certain occasions when it should be done. Definitely, it would be wrong to state as Scripturally authoritative that women should wear headcoverings at all times. Paul made no such statement, and the church is not authoritative.
I do not, however, think it is wrong to wear the headcovering at all times. It would not be wrong for a man to go about bareheaded all the time, even though he is not praying all the time. He just should not state that it is scripturally necessary to always be hatless.

Let's take this a little deeper. We all (should) know it is important to consider more than one passage of Scripture before deciding on a matter. The absence of a principle (a principle to be found elsewhere in the Bible) in a chapter does not mean we should disregard it in relation to that chapter. I'm not advocating piecing unrelated parts of the Bible together to make some form of statement as one would make a card from sundry magazine cuttings. But be reasonable, and you'll be fine.

So, headcoverings are to be worn while praying and prophesying; for the purposes of demonstrating headship, having power "because of the angels," and concealing man's glory.
It would make more sense to wear a headcovering most of the time if prayer was to be frequently engaged in. Is it?
Prayer is communication with God. It is a really, really important part of our relationship with him. While the Bible does not require that a certain percentage of the day be spent in prayer, it seems that a vibrant relationship with God would involve frequent prayer. If my entire life is to be lived as holy before God ("For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his." Heb 4:10 - our entire lives are to be for God. Living for God requires communion with him - not just on Sunday, or during one's devotions, but always.), I will seek his guidance regarding interactions with others, I will have a heavenly focus that leads me to pray for the salvation of those around me, I will frequently thank God for what he has done for me, etc. Prayer should be very common in my life.

Some verses to support this concept:
"Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;" Eph 6:18
"Pray without ceasing." 1 Thess 5:17 - I don't think it means to pray always, but prayer should be an integral part of my life.
"Be sober, be vigilant;" 1 Peter 5:8a - part of being watchful involves a mind frequently turned toward God.
"O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day." Ps 119:97 - if we are meditating often on God's word, it would be natural to also seek his guidance for understanding it.
(Please don't think that I live up to the prayer ideals I have delineated here - they are good goals, though.)
Since prayer is to be so frequent, it would make sense to usually have a covering on. However, it is good to have more reasons for doing something than simple convenience.

I personally think I would be less prone to pray if I had to affix a covering to my head each individual time. I would have less of a tendency toward continual communion with God. If I was an ideal Christian, that wouldn't be an issue. But I'm not the ideal, and should be willing to facilitate communion with God by wearing a covering as much as is reasonable.

If I was in a college lecture and continually taking my covering out of my backpack to pray for the professor with a headache, or the classmate who lost their train of thought during a speech, or some friend way off across the US, it would be distracting (yeah, it would point out to the others the reason for my wearing a headcovering, but I don't think they would form a favorable opinion of it). I can imagine that they'd ask me why I didn't just wear it all the time. "Well, uh, because the Bible only said to wear it when I was praying and prophesying so I think it is therefore wrong to wear it any other time." Maybe that reasoning contains a bit of legalism, along with the concept that one must wear a covering at all times. Scripture neither commands women to wear coverings at all times, nor to not wear coverings when not praying.

Donning a covering upon praying could become similar to the Pharisee praying on the street corner. Obviously, I wouldn't be applying my headcovering so conspicuously to be thought well of, but it may look that way to others.

To be fair, if I doned my headcovering every time I prayed, it would help remind me of my position before God - but I still hold that I would pray less often and not be as close to God as I might be otherwise.

I think a proper operating standard would be to wear the headcovering as much as is reasonable - in other words, most of the time. Traditionally, it seems that men have so interpreted 1 Corinthians 11 with regard to not wearing headcoverings - they wear them sometimes, but remove them upon entering a house. Women similarly should feel okay about removing their coverings when a necessary activity requires it.

Let me reiterate that I think it is best to wear a headcovering the majority of the time. I am not saying that the Bible commands it, but rather that it should facilitate me in my Christian life and I think in the lives of others, too.

Again, if my logic is bad, let me know.

Headcoverings, Part I

Christians should spend most of their energy loving their fellowmen and building God's kingdom. Though I am about to discuss the wearing of headcoverings, please do not think that I am fixating on that issue and giving it a significance on par with faith in God or something.

However, 1 Corinthians 11 is in the Bible for a reason and sincere searchers of Scripture would do well to understand its application to our lives.

I'd like to take a look at two hypotheses:
1: Christian women should wear the headcovering when praying and prophesying.
2: Christian women should wear the headcovering at all times.

Let's test hypothesis 1: should I, a Christian woman, wear a headcovering when praying and prophesying?
I will argue Yes" based on the following:
1. To demonstrate submission to the headship (God over Christ over man over woman) - v. 3
2. I don't want to shave my head - v. 6 (I guess I partake in that natural inclination)
3. Our focus should be on God's glory, not man's - v. 7
4. It provides power which is necessary "because of the angels" - v. 10 (which suggests the practice should be followed even when no one else is around)
5. These reasons are not based on cultural standards from Paul's day, but rather eternal principles and a natural inclination God has instilled in people.
6. The word "covered" in verse 6 refers to a veiling while the word "covering" in verse 15 regards long hair. If long hair was the covering Paul referred to in the early part of the chapter, verses 4-6 could be read as follows: "Every man praying or prophesying, having long hair, dishonoreth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with short hair dishonoreth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman have short hair, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her have long hair." It wouldn't have made sense for Paul to command a woman with short hair to have her hair shorn when it has already been so. Additionally, the command to wear a covering -"while praying or prophesying"- suggests the covering may be applied at that given time period (and not be permanently present as with long hair).

The above logic works for me - if you detect holes in it, let me know.

Motivation and Principle

The entity "change" is not wrong. The way things have been done for the last ages is not necessarily the best way. The best way 50 years ago might not be the best way for today because of, well, other changes. The best way for me operating in Corvallis, OR may not be the best way for me in Uzhgorod, Ukraine. I'm not talking situational ethics, but rather the most appropriate application of absolute principles.

A certain incident of change may be wrong if the new way is wrong, or if the motivation for change is wrong.

Case in point: the common headcovering style for moderately conservative Mennonites is the nylon mesh cap. One could argue that such coverings take too long to make and the material is too expensive (poor stewardship on both accounts). If for those reasons a church decided to switch to a cotton hanging veil that covered as well as the cap, such a change would be acceptable.
If, on the other hand, the church switched to the new style in order to blend better with a scarf-wearing worldly fad, that would be unacceptable.

If you thought the wearing of cape dresses caused unbelievers to focus more on your dress style than your Christianity and...

1) you changed to something equally feminine, simple and modest, that would be fine.
But if...
2) you changed to mini skirts and tightfitting blouses, that would be wrong. (If strangely your motivation was absolutely fine and you were sincere, that doesn't make the change right. The principle of modesty was missed and hopefully someone would correct you.)

Dernier Cri

The Bible says: "Be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds."
My church standards enjoin the members to "not follow the fashions and fads of the world" in attire (?) - I'll check on that and correct it if it's wrong.

Some conservative Mennonite groups do a pretty good job of being unconformed to the fashions of the majority of the female populace. I mean, cape dresses vs low rider pants; head coverings vs uncovered heads; no pants, no swim suits in mixed company, etc. It's required in their standards, they aren't interested in being disciplined for breaching them, they have peer pressure from their Mennonite friends to keep them in line, and they have been raised to value standards of modesty. A certain percentage of them actually dress the way they do because they personally believe they should.

However, from time to time I've noticed the presence of -Mennonite- fads and fashions. While people should try to dress becomingly and not militate against a pleasant countenance, following fads seems like an improper focus. Granted, the majority of Mennonite fads might not be driven by sensuality, but they are definitely a focus on something other than God. Consider 1 Peter 3:3,4: "Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price."
Christian women should focus on developing godly character qualities; not getting the new headcovering style (indeed, headcoverings should be about the last clothing item to change style according to whims of fashion. If you're going to be vain about something - and please don't be about anything - but if you're going to, choose something secular), the new wavy collar cut, the new belt, the new sweater with larger holes in the knit.

Mennonite fashions... I think we could do without them.

Personality and Friendship

Personalities... what sorts help people make friends and keep them? What aspects of mine should I alter, keep in check, magnify, or abolish to maximize the value and depth of beneficial Christian relationships?
I think I should change some things related to how I come across. I hope I won't end up identifying non-issues and changing things that will make me even less desirable to be around.

***

Are deep friendships to be found primarily among those of very similar opinions, or can two people with somewhat different life styles be very close? It seems like friendships are of more value when the friends do not agree on everything and therefore can argue and learn from each other. (Keeping in mind, of course, that debates must be held in a loving and respectful manner.)

In God's Eyes...

Why do nice people need God? Some people think that as long as a person lives a good life, sacrifices of themselves for the benefit of others, etc. there is no good reason why they should not go to heaven. Ages ago, I read the tract "Must nice people repent?" Well, obviously the problem was that they hadn't repented of their sins.... but, what does it really mean to repent of one's sins? I think back then I missed the boat when it came to realizing what about "nice people" God really didn't like.

Because I was human, I knew I needed to confess my sins like everyone else. I accepted it as head knowledge but really didn't believe that there was much wrong with me. I was a nice person (hurumph - that's what I thought back then!) who also confessed my sins (thereby providing some self-atonement to "make up for" my missteps). I thought I had it pretty much together, especially compared to everyone else out there (including other Christians). I didn't understand the heart change Christians should aim for.

Maybe the attitude about a "good person" being just fine comes from a "works religion" viewpoint. If it is the works themselves that save you, why does it matter whether you believe in God or not? The works could (in strict theory, and only as relates to the tangible things of life) have a very similar effect on the lives of others.
I suppose I used to view (and probably still do to some extent) my life from a works perspective (as a balance between the good and the bad deeds committed, with my confessions helping to "atone" for my sins). With that analysis, it was sort of logical for me to have regarded myself favorably. No wonder I had trouble recognizing myself as a sinner in need of God.

Works do nothing for the doer unless they are coupled to faith - and then it is not really the works that are beneficial to one's salvation, but rather the works are the manifestation of a heart after God. The motivation for living and the works that compose life are different for the Christian vs the non-Christian. Christians should do good deeds out of their true love for God and others, while non-Christians (speaking quite generally, because to be more specific I think there are non-Christians who are seeking God's ways and therefore would fall into the Christian motivation category) do not derive motivation from a focus on God.

One's motivation for life shows up in their thought life. How do I think of myself in relation to God? Do I view Him as the be all and end all, the main reason for my existence? Or do I feel self-sufficient and self-made? How do I compare myself to others?

God wants more than "nice people."
He wants a self-less, humble person with a heart after him; one who truely recognizes that without God he is nothing; one who honestly sees his purpose in life as consisting of loving God and others and whatever issues from those character traits.

Focused on Cattle

Friday evening I went to Boardman, OR with four of my veterinary "colleagues" (TF, BM, STM, and RW). Boardman is known for nearby stash(es) of nerve gas.
Saturday morning we met with Bill Gover, manager of the feedlot south of town. He had a George Bush look (something about rancher types?) and was very friendly and informative. He spoke about the Oregon Country Beef (OCB) program they have there. This program caters to health conscious people by providing meat from short-fed* animals not treated with antibiotics (except sulfas) nor fed animal products. Because the feedlot also contains non-OCB (Beef Northwest - BNW) animals, they have the capability to switch animals over to BNW in the event that they require antibiotics.
We drove around the feedlot - looking at the hospital pens (containing primarily respiratory cases), the feed mill (their cows are fed uncooked french fries, corn from the midwest, and hay), the various pens of healthy cattle. They have about 34,000 cattle on 100 acres (as my mother put it into perspective, that would be like having 340 cattle in the one acre field behind our house) - it was not particularly offensive in odor, and the ground was pretty dry. Some of the cattle are from Hawaii - a new one on me - and others were retired roping steers from Mexico.
Off in the distance there were two dairies and a cloud of dust rising from a compost pile. STM and I (who were driving around with Bill) were informed that in addition to manure they put their "deads" in the compost pile. The heat sterilizes the mixture, and it is sold as steer manure - if I knew before I had forgotten that dead animals could be in such manure.
We didn't learn much that was veterinary related, but gained information that should help us speak intelligently to our feedlot clients in the future.

From the feedlot TF insisted on heading East (not the way we were supposed to go) and North; we came upon a sign for a fish hatchery, and ended up there as there was some mention of interest and little or no opposition. I think TF worked there one summer.

Our final stop was the Krebs ranch in Cecil (on the way we stopped to investigate a snake that was squished in the road - it turned out to be a gopher snake maybe two to three feet long. TF gave us a bit of a lesson in distinguishing bull snakes from rattlers).
At the ranch we were cordially welcomed by Clint and Maureen Krebs and further informed about OCB. The marketing information was interesting - i.e. save briskets in a freezer until St. Patrick's Day rolls around and people want corned beef; butcher bulls around the beginning of baseball season to make hot dogs. Clint didn't express great belief that antibiotics shouldn't be fed to cattle, but he follows what the customer wants. (It reminds me of Marshall Fields': "Give the lady what she wants.")
Something interesting about OCB is that they do not set their prices competitively. I think they set their prices based on the cost of raising the animals, etc and not as a mark up compared to generic beef. I suppose it won't be that way forever, if they finally get enough competition; it also sounds sort of communistic. But in a way it seems like the Christian way to do business - not trying to do better than the other guy but just pricing based on what things are worth.

* Short-fed cattle are fed at the feedlot an average of 90 days instead of the normal 120 days. This practice reduces the amount of fat in the meat.

Citation: http://managingwholes.com/hatfield1.htm

Little Women

I'm about done reading Little Women (amazingly, it's the first time I've read the book). The ending has been completely unexpected so far. I thought Jo would straigten up and marry Teddy as was his initial desire, but he ended up marrying her sister and Jo regarded it as best. It looks like she (25 years old) is going to marry someone around 45 yrs of age. I'll admit that I was disappointed and regarded sourly the twist in romance. I thought the book could have been written better to make that ending more palatable, could have prepared the reader to be more happy with it.
But really thinking about it, I suppose in reality the ending is better than the stereotypical romance story and therefore of greater value as a book. It is more true to real life when people don't fulfill their youthly spouse ideals (ideals should mature with the person); heroines should not always marry young men; life is not predictable nor entirely logical from a human perspective; and life doesn't always provide foreshadowing nor clearly point to future events as books may sometimes do. Real life is tortuous and the more interesting for it.

No Jumping to Conclusions, Please

When evaluating introverts, people should be really, really careful not to misunderstand them. Maybe they don't operate well in social settings, maybe they are poor communicators and therefore poor department heads, etc. But they can still be loving, funny, enjoyable people. You just have to look a little deeper to see the real them.

Contentment

Content = desiring no more than what one has (I might disagree with the entire implications of that definition)

Last night at prayer meeting there was a good discussion regarding contentment.
A couple questions: Are non-Christians ever truly content?
Is it wrong to ever desire something I don't have?

There may be non-Christians who are absolutely happy with what they have* . But say you take away all the things/people in a person's life that are making him happy. Then what? The Christian has access to the power to remain content; he may not tap into it perfectly - I know I don't - but I think in general will be more content than the non-Christian.

It is not wrong for me to desire something I don't have. Actually, I think I can remain content (by my definition of the word) while still identifying items I would like. What's important is my motive for desiring those things, and whether I would honestly be okay with not having them.

There are certain eternal treasures that Christians should never be content to be without.

* Unless all non-Christians have a vague sense of incompleteness because they do not have God in their lives