One of my favorites is a glass pitcher full of lemons with a ribbon and recipe for lemonade attached. It's useful but also looks pretty! I've done a small watermelon tied with a bow, but the ribbon doesn't stay on well, and that's kind of out of season, so...

Boiling a kid in it's mother's milk, while part of the Mosaic Law, is not part of the Ten Commandments. Christians have never held to the Jewish civil and ceremonials laws, which were fulfilled by Christ. A huge part of the New Testament is devoted to this discussion. The abolition of the Jewish dietary laws is specifically commanded by Christ himself in Acts 10. This is in no way an example of Christians "demoting" sins because of their lack of negative effect on others. While we are always conscious of how our sins affect our neighbor, sin is first and foremost a breaking of God's Law, and an act of rebellion against God. The Ten Commandments are divided into two tables: the second deals with acts against our neighbor (murder, theft, adultery), but the first deals specifically with sins against God (idolatry, misuse of God's name, honor of the Sabbath), and these are considered paramount. When King David sinned by committing adultery and then murder, he confessed to God, "Against you, you only, have I sinned" (Ps 51:4). While David's acts clearly caused harm to at least two other people (the adultery was at least partially coerced -- who can refuse the king? -- and the murder is obvious), he recognizes that first and foremost he has offended God. It is precisely our justification, being made right with God by his forgiveness in Christ, that frees us to focus on loving and serving our neighbors. Slavery is an interesting example, because, unlike homosexuality, it is a case of Christians actually becoming more stringent in their morality than the Bible would demand. Slavery itself is not prohibited in scripture, although certainly many of the abhorrent trappings that accompanied it in the early years of American history are. I think you are right that there is a shift towards acceptance of homosexuality in the church, but given its clear prohibition in scripture, I'm not sure that issue will ever have the universal consensus that slavery has. As to people being hurt in the meantime: I can only speak for myself here, and I realize that for some anything I say will be considered disingenuous. There's not much I can do about that. But I do not desire to cause harm or pain to anyone, and certainly would not inflict it intentionally. Well, that's not entirely true. I certainly HAVE inflicted pain intentionally, when I am angry, or hurt, or otherwise lashing out. I know the depths of my own depravity. But what I mean to say is that I do not harbor any ill will towards anyone, based on their sexual orientation. That said, some of the pain that SSA people feel (and I'm speculating, based on discussion here and elsewhere) may sometimes be caused by their being brought face to face with God's Law. Usually that comes through Christians who proclaim that Law, but I'm sure there are other avenues. And the declaration that one is a sinner, and in rebellious violation of God's Law, is painful. Actually, the Law is designed to be painful, on purpose. Its function is to drive us to despair of ever being what God would have us to be. What we forget is that the Law doesn't have the last word. Christ does. And Christ has fulfilled the Law on our behalf and bled and died for our transgressions. God is not angry with us -- quite the opposite! God looks upon us with unbelievable favor and is pleased with us, because of what Christ has done. We need only to repent and believe.

I didn't want to start history with ds until 1st grade, so for kindy this year I cobbled together a study of holidays around the world. We take one holiday per month and learn about the culture where it originates. We cover all kinds of things -- geography, food, dress, religion. He's enjoying it! We're doing Chinese New Year this month and will be learning to eat with chopsticks this week!

It's not spelled out as clearly as it could be, IMO. Ideally, the child memorizes the entire passage as you read it a few times, then writes. I highly recommend this video SWB produced, called "Dictation with Dan." She demonstrates how to do dictation with one of her children. It helped us tremendously. Part 1 Part 2

I realize this may not be directed at me, but as the one who brought up excommunication, I just want to point out that excommunication and shunning are NOT the same thing. Excommunication -- as the word implies -- means that you are barred from receiving the sacrament of communion (the Lord's Supper). Many sacramental Christian traditions teach that only those who are penitent (i.e., confess that they are sinners in need of God's mercy) are allowed to receive the sacraments (namely, baptism and the Lord's Supper, although different traditions may add others to this list). Again, this is to benefit the person in question, not the church, both to encourage the sinner to repent and also to protect them -- St. Paul is clear that taking communion in an unworthy manner can literally kill you. Absolution, or the pronouncement that God forgives us our sins, is also withheld. It only makes sense that the church would not pronounce forgiveness for a sin that the person in question does not believe is sinful and (obviously) is not asking God's forgiveness for. Forgiveness is an all-or-nothing proposition -- St. James tells us that if we have broken one commandment, we are guilty of them all. Discipline in these ways should only be practiced after sincere and loving counsel from God's Word, explaining the nature of the sin, what God's Law says about it, and urging repentance. Discipline is ONLY allocated to the church, as an institution, not to the family, nor to individuals. That is why it is inappropriate for parents to refuse fellowship to (i.e., shun) their children in these instances. (I agree, as someone pointed out above, that distance may be warranted in cases where it is necessary to protect others from real harm, but that's a matter of protecting innocent parties -- including ourselves -- not in an attempt to force repentance.) We can still speak truth to those we love, encourage them to repent and believe in Christ for the forgiveness of their sins, but we continue to love and serve them, knowing that they are beautifully created in God's image, and that Christ bled and died for them, as he did for us. I realize that church discipline is abused routinely, but I'm responding to the question raised here as to what my tradition teaches -- and this teaching is in line with the Word of God.

Right. Everything God created was good. Sin and death entered the world through our first parents when they chose to disobey God. And we don't struggle against our sin nature in order to be worthy in God's eyes. We struggle against our flesh in order to sacrifice ourselves for the good of our neighbor precisely BECAUSE we have already been declared righteous in God's sight.

Open invite used to be the norm at the small church I grew up in. It had probably 200 members when dh and I married there sixteen years ago, and my dad insisted on an invite to be read to the congregation during service (he was paying, so...). I would guess 20 or so extra people came, most of those friends of my grandmother. We had a very simple reception, so it didn't impact our bottom line too greatly.

I understand what science teaches, and I didn't say or mean to imply that science attaches a moral judgment to SSA one way or the other -- although as you admit, science imposes its own moral threshold, predicated on whether or not a given trait "threatens the whole." But both science and Christianity affirm that SSA is the result of some inborn trait or genetic construction. Christianity does (historically, at least) attach a moral judgment to SSA, because Christianity understands itself to have the revelation of God's Law. Within the belief system of Christianity, God alone retains the right to say what is or is not damaged, broken, corrupt, or (we would say) sinful in God's creation. The problem is that American Christianity has in large part lost the understanding that humans are damaged, broken, corrupt, and sinful BY NATURE. And yes, the loss of this understanding accounts for some of the views expressed on this thread and also helps to explain the (IMO, wrong) actions that some people take against LGBT family members. That SSA is a genetic trait is irrelevant (or, rather, a given). We all have a myriad of inborn traits that are sinful, which cause sinful impulses, which cause sinful actions. Even being able to stop the impulse from manifesting in an action is largely irrelevant: When it comes to our standing before God, the impulse alone is enough to condemn us. We throw ourselves on God's mercy and trust that he is loving and faithful to forgive, as he has promised. The putting to death of our sinful nature is done, not to attain favor with God, but in order to love and serve those around us. However, this characterization is not entirely accurate: Mortifying the old nature and raising the new nature to life is not something we do -- it is something God does in us, as we daily repent of our sin (thereby agreeing with God that our sinful thoughts, words, and deeds are in fact sinful and require forgiveness) and cling by faith to the promise of God that we are forgiven. We will never, in this lifetime, be free of the old nature, or perhaps even make notable progress against it, but we hold fast to the promise of forgiveness in Christ. Knowing that we have a right standing before God, and everything that we need or will ever need, secured for us in Christ, we are set free to love and serve our neighbors for their own sake. God's Law then gives shape to what that love should look like. It often means sacrificing the things that seem most innate and natural to ourselves for the good of those around us. This is the cross Christ promised us we would have to bear. Excommunicating professing Christians who refuse to submit to the truth of God's Word has always been intended for the benefit of the erring Christian, not only the preservation of the community. Those who refuse to repent stand condemned before God, and out of love we cannot turn a blind eye to that. We dare not pretend to receive them as a brother/sister in Christ and allow them to continue under the misconception that their sin does not matter. Christ's admonishment is to treat such a person as an unbeliever -- a person to be loved, and served, and also called to repentance and faith in Christ for the forgiveness of their sins. The reaction of the church in such a case is loving counsel, but also the refusal of absolution and the sacraments, because these gifts are reserved for the people of God. Within the family, the situation is different. We are not called, as parents, children or siblings, to withhold our love from those around us, but to continue to be kind to them, sacrificing ourselves for their good, loving and caring for them, and when the opportunity presents itself, calling them to repent and believe and receive the forgiveness promised them in Christ. Sorry that's long. Hopefully it explains my point of view somewhat. Thanks for the thoughtful discussion.

We are headed out the door to my mom's for Sunday dinner right now! We eat together most Sundays. She doesn't always make the same meal, though. When my grandmother was alive, we gathered there. She was a former restaurateur and cooked like she was still cooking for that crowd! I don't think this is as prevalent as it used to be, however. But we still enjoy it!

IMHO, the difficulty of this stems from a fundamental misunderstanding, both within and without the church, of the nature of sin. The Bible, at least in many interpretative traditions, does portray homosexuality as a form of sexual and social deviancy. What we miss, however, is the fact that the Bible labels ALL forms of sin as social and spiritual deviancy. If God has established and ordered the world, then God gets to say what things deviate from that established order. And God has spoken. In a sense, secular society is ahead of the church on this one when it cites modern scientific discoveries that there is something fundamental to their make-up that causes a same-sex attracted person to gravitate toward members of their own sex. Instead of arguing against this, the church should be pointing out that this is what Christianity has affirmed all along: Human beings are broken. The brokenness takes a wide variety of forms, but we are all fundamentally flawed, sinners in the core of our beings. Sin is not something we DO, it's something we ARE. How we as Christians, forgiven sinners, treat other people, other sinners, is the same regardless of their particular deviant proclivities: We call them to repent and believe the good news that God has forgiven their sins in Christ. Repentance does mean we have to acknowledge our deviancy, our sinfulness, before God. Refusal to acknowledge our sin, or insistence that what God has called sin is not sinful, casts doubt on the validity of that repentance. Yet even here there is grace, because repentance and forgiveness are not one-time events, but a way of life for the Christian. The church has often erred by, as you say, insisting that those with SSA simply "stop being queer." Christians don't "stop being queer" any more than they "stop being gluttons" or "stop having an explosive temper" or "stop worrying" or what have you. Our sinful nature doesn't leave us when we repent and believe. But, we are given a new nature, one that is perfectly righteous and without all those sinful, deviant tendencies we were born with. These two natures are at war within us -- and the Bible does tell us to put the old nature to death and put on the new nature. This is painful and difficult and sometimes feels as though it goes against everything that is within us, but Christians are called to suffering and to bearing a cross. We should bear each other up as well, for each of us should know the struggle of daily denying ourselves the desires that feel most natural to us, whatever form they take.

Don't want to quote in case you need to delete again. You mentioned that you are having a hard time determining what is normal behavior from what is "spoiled" and what is a result of her illness. I assume she's under the care of a professional for her mental health struggles, and I know you said you are looking for a new therapist for yourself. I think those are both good things. Do you have any contact with your dd's doctor/therapist? While he or she can't discuss your adult dd's treatment, perhaps it would be wise to make an appointment to discuss YOUR response to dd's illness. If you haven't already done so, you can ask at that time what is reasonable to expect your dd to contribute at this stage of her treatment and what is not. It might help you gain clarity on the line between assisting and enabling. I can understand how difficult it must be to know how far to go in either direction, and of course you want to do what is best for dd, while also taking care of your own health needs. You are a great mom, that much is clear. It sounds like your other children are wonderful, caring young people, and I know you also want to protect them. But they are adults as well. Have you discussed dd's illness and your own one-on-one with them (especially ds, as he seems to be at home full time)? I'm sure they want the best for their sister too (and for you), and it will help if you can all cultivate an attitude of being in this together. I know it isn't "fair" that they have to suffer some of the consequences of dd's illness, but families take care of each other, especially when someone is in need of help. Your dd is sick, and you are sick as well. I'm willing to bet that, if ds understands that he is helping his mom and his sister to care for themselves and get well by suffering through sub-par housekeeping and maybe even contributing a little more than his "fair share" from time to time (not that I would require this, or even ask it), he will do so gladly. ETA: Apparently I forgot how to use prepositions.

I don't know what the range of normal is, but I did not experience anything like that. Does your doctor's office not have a physician, or at least a nurse, on call to answer questions?

I will say that if dh had to write a poem or submit SAT scores, things would be looking much more bleak than they do at current!! :lol:

DD11 has been getting her cycle every 21ish days since she started menstruating in July. I was concerned as well -- enough that I asked my GYN about it at my appointment. He was very much UNconcerned, said it wasn't unusual at all and probably would regulate itself over time. He said to give it a year, at least. Even if it doesn't regulate, he said it's not a problem medically, but that she could be given bc to help regulate if it became annoying for her. So far it doesn't bother her, so that's good. It would sure bother me! If your dd doesn't regulate in the next few months, it might be worth bringing up to her doctor, if for nothing more than peace of mind. Obviously, if she experiences any other issues, that might warrant intervention sooner.

Sick with worry is right. The past year has been terrible for us, and it seems like every time we're about to turn the corner, we get the rug ripped out from under us again. We've both gained a ton of weight from the stress. We thought all week that he'd be getting an offer any day. And he still could, the recruiter was very positive. But there are still other candidates in the running, and it could just as easily be a no. But thanks. If it does pay off, it will all be worth it. He has other prospects, but nothing near as good as this one. He wants it so badly, and I want it for him.

I'm not planning on testing my k-er this year (we're not required to test by law until age 7). But for young kids, I really like the Woodcock-Johnson. It's administered by a professional and takes about an hour. Most is oral in the early grades. Much less stressful than the bubble tests, IMHO. Around here, the cost is about the same as any of the other testing options.

It's a huge multi-national corporation. I'm not sure how much that has to do with it. Most of them were peer interviews. The company seems to put a lot of emphasis on making sure the candidate is a good fit with the existing team culture. Which is a great thing. But yeah -- this week has been particularly hard because we thought he would be hearing something soon. The recruiter told him tonight that she's had nothing but excellent, positive feedback from everyone he's talked to, so there's that. Knowing that he's done so well and is soooo close makes me even more on edge. This would be a huge step up for him!

:grouphug: I remember your previous posts too. Unfortunately, I agree that it might be time to call her bluff and tell her she needs to move now instead of waiting until June. She can't hold that over your head if you're willing to force her hand. Hopefully this will be enough to wake her up, and your relationship won't suffer any long-term effects, but really, your relationship is already suffering badly. This is your best chance to help it, in the long run. Regardless of what else you decide, definitely stop doing anything for her that you are doing. No more laundry, groceries, dishes, money, favors -- anything. Ignore everything else. Find a way to make it up to your ds for having to use a nasty bathroom -- let him use another bath, if possible, or give him some other reward/token of appreciation. At the very least, let him know how much you appreciate that he is a team player and willing to contribute to the family, and that you're proud of him (you probably already do this, but just reiterating it).

DH was laid off in December. Right before Christmas, he applied for a job with a large corporation. They called within a few days to set up an interview. Since then, he's had at least EIGHT phone interviews, plus a face-to-face meeting with six members of the team he'd be working with. The latter was on Monday. The hiring manager said he could expect to hear from them within a day or two. The only thing contact he had for the rest of the week was an email asking him to fill out a more detailed application than he'd originally been required to submit when he first applied. Did that. Finally spoke to the recruiter from HR this evening. She said they still have interviews to conduct next week and he will hopefully hear something by Friday. I know there are a lot of job seekers out there, and companies want to be sure they hire the right person, but argh! WHY does this process have to be so grueling??? Surely there is a better way!

I'm thinking along those lines too, but if the accounts are only in his name, she's probably going to run into problems cancelling them.

I'm not sure, but if it were me, I'd be on the phone with the bank/credit card companies to see what my options were. If they have joint accounts, there may be a way to put a temporary freeze on spending. Maybe not. If it's just his money, there probably isn't a whole lot to be done, legally, short of court intervention. So the wife called their joint marriage counselor, looking for advice, and then the dh got a call from his personal counselor ratting out the wife? Is that right? How did the other counselor even find out? Is he/she not alarmed at the dh's behavior? I would certainly be involving anyone who has any involvement in his mental health care, and NOW.

Welcome!

Confession time... I was one of those moms who always tried to get their elementary kid into the older groups. Mostly because dd was bright and I thought she'd get more out of interacting with older kids. {ducks rotten vegetables} Now that I have a middle-schooler myself, I've seen the error of my ways. Tweens and teens, especially, deserve their own space. Yes! As we hurtle towards high school, I am finding that I enjoy homeschooling more and more. I LOVE the conversations that are beginning to emerge with dd. My greatest fear, though, is grading her increasingly complex assignments, especially the ones that are not as straightforward, such as papers. What if I think she deserves A's but she's really doing C-quality work? And I have to put my opinion on paper and send it to colleges as proof of her education?? Yikes! I hope that before the time comes I can find some resources to guide me. Things I don't get: Crafts and other hands-on, messy, useless endeavors -- This is exactly why I outsourced preschool and brought them home for elementary! Science experiments -- Even if I manage to have all the supplies on hand, they NEVER work! Saxon-hate -- Saxon's methods make so much sense to me!

This is SO me. The non-socially awkward people in my life (thank you, dh) assure me that is not even close to being as bad in reality as it is in my head. I'm sure that's true for you, too. :grouphug: