As you know, I often speak of the many ways God holds on to us, and how we are called to claim Jesus for our own, and called to hold on to Christ and to God’s love. But, Easter is not about holding on!
Let us pray…
Lord, on this Easter morning, we celebrate your victory over death, and with it your promise of new life in our own futures. Open the scriptures before us, and enable me to clearly communicate what you intend for us to receive here today. May your gospel live within each and every one of us, driving all despair and fear from our hearts.
We rejoice in this opportunity for new revelations and a deeper understanding of your call to walk before you, spreading your gospel to all nations. We ask that your Word live and work through us to amaze and transform not only our own lives, but the lives of all whom we encounter. Help us to embody your teachings, and to live them, in all that we do, think, speak, and are.
In Jesus Name, Amen.
It’s Easter. At the start of our reading from John this morning, Mary Magdalene is alone in the predawn light, weeping before the empty tomb. The mortal remains of the man she loves are missing. Although she doesn’t know it yet, Jesus has been set free from the bonds of death.
As I said earlier, Easter is not about holding on. John makes this clear by telling us that once Mary realizes who is standing before her, Jesus says, “Do not cling to me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father.”
It seems that holding on to Jesus frustrates the plan of God! Jesus the man is again alive, just like Lazarus; but the transformation of the man into the Christ is not yet complete. Jesus is still in the process of as he puts it, of “ascending to my God and your God.”
Mary is given a role in this when he says, “Go to my brothers and tell them….” Her mission involves leaving him behind and carrying his message to all who believe. Her task is to let go, to forever turn away from the man she loves.
I imagine this was very hard for Mary. He was lost, and now he’s found. He was dead, but is alive again. Her arms ache to hold on to the man she loves, the man she’d given up as forever lost. What would happen when she turned her back to leave? Would she ever see him again? She must have asked herself whether her heart could bear losing him again. Turning away was a big risk.
This morning’s reading from Ezekiel 37, and our Gospel reading from John 11, are parallel stories. They both deal with the same issues, are presented in similar ways, and both demonstrate how utterly powerless we are in the face of death and darkness: readings we do well to consider on this, the last Sunday in Lent before Palm Sunday.
Let us pray…
Lord God, we ask that your Holy Spirit fill each and every one of us here this morning. Open the scriptures before us, and enable me to clearly communicate what you intend for us to receive here today. Make your gospel come alive within each and every one of us, driving all darkness from our hearts.
We rejoice in this opportunity to encounter new revelations and a deeper understanding of your unconditional, living, infinite love; and we ask that we be amazed and transformed by that love. Help us to embody your gospel, and to live it, in all that we do, think, speak, and are; both individually and jointly, as members of this congregation which stands before you as a portion of the Body of Believers who share your Gospel with their neighbors in this community.
In Jesus Name, Amen.
Both of our readings this morning deal with dark times, placing us within the narrative of those who have lost all hope, those who have nothing whatsoever left, and see nothing in their future.
We all have such valleys of darkness in our lives, times when the walls close in, times when the way forward is not just unclear, but entirely nonexistent. Times when we cannot see beyond that dark horizon that we cannot penetrate; times when all hope dies and death itself seems all too near at hand, or perhaps not near enough.
You’ll need small and inexpensive LED lights to give to the children. I recommend “finger lights” like those shown in the image associated with this posting. Clicking on the image will bring you to a product page for them on Amazon.com. Be aware that there are several vendors who make these lights: some are good quality, many are not. The ones shown here are good and reliable (and cheap, when bought in quantity).
The Presentation:
Tell me what do you think of when you hear the word “darkness”?
(Solicit responses from the children, looking for ways in which they connect to darkness, prompt if necessary.)
Why would we want to talk about darkness here, in Church?
(Solicit thoughts, looking for the idea of salvation and Jesus’ Resurrection on Easter as God’s way of redeeming us from darkness.)
The last couple of weeks have been an interesting mix of highs and lows for me.
The certainty of our own mortality has intruded itself forcefully into the lives of many in this part of the country recently, with the tragic deaths of two firemen in Boston the other day (and you can be sure, fire fighters are just as much ministers of God as those of us who wear clerical robes). Also, the first anniversary of the Boston Marathon Bombing is coming soon, during Holy Week in fact.
On a more personal note, old friends have recently made known their own brushes with mortality and how the afflictions of age are becoming more and more difficult to ignore, as has also proven to be too true for myself as well.
Finally, two friends of mine have died this week, one an old and dear friend from childhood, stricken down much too early in life following a very brief and devastating illness, much to the shock and dismay of her young students and the community where she lived. The second was a co-worker whom I’d known as a young man: she was always with a ready laugh and smile, dying after a long battle with a serious illness. Both great people, and both very much loved by the many whom their lives touched over the years.
Mortality does not play favorites, and (as my father has often said) “there is no get out of jail free card” – no exceptions. We will all someday confront the same dark horizon that these wonderful people (and so many others) have already passed beyond: never to return from the darkness that will eventually devour all lives, all nations and all human hope.
Based on the thoughts I surfaced in a recent post (and elsewhere) regarding what I see as God’s call to Unconditional Love, I’ve had several folks ask me questions along the lines of “Does that mean I have to love the person who [abused or hurt or seeks to control] me?”
Let’s answer this one carefully.
Love them? Yes.
Have a relationship with them? Well, that question requires a nuanced answer…
To begin with, let’s make one thing clear: Love and Relationship are not the same thing. We can choose to love another, even if the relationship we have with them is nonexistent (or nearly so). Loving another means building a bridge between another and you, opening a door to a better future, a better relationship. But just because that bridge exists does not mean you have to cross it, or that they will cross it, and you certainly should not cross it all the way to the other side!
Relationship is a two-way street. A relationship will exist in some form – after all, relationship is part of the very fabric of our existence. So, you do have relationships with others, all others. However, the extent and quality of that relationship is attenuated by the limitations we bring to the table. Love makes it possible to have a better quality and more balanced relationship with another, but only if they are willing and able to return that love. Love enables you to get to the midpoint of the bridge, but it is up to the other as to whether they’ll meet you halfway, or not.
A few (well, more than a few) years ago, my family and I moved to a home a little south of the small town of Honey Brook, near the border between Lancaster and Chester Counties in Pennsylvania.
This was deep in the heart of “Amish Country.” Our home was on a small hill, surrounded by farms, many of which were owned by Amish families.
War and disaster loomed large in the minds of many at that time, since Y2K and 9/11 had both occurred within the previous couple of years, and we as a nation were pumping ourselves up into a frenzy in advance of the invasion of Iraq. This sense of impending Apocalypse was also fueled by the “Left Behind” series of books by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, which was a huge hit in bookstores at the time, as well as a major topic of discussion in the media. (I might add that I loved the series, for the most part – good, fast paced and exciting stories. But did I find their theology to be well grounded and realistic? Not so much.)
A consistent theme many of my Amish (and ex-Amish) friends commented on is best summarized in this conversation I had with an Amish farmer’s wife who lived down the road from us (we frequently chatted when we stopped at her stand to buy eggs, chickens and produce):
“So, since you don’t rely on electricity or other modern technologies, when the world falls apart, you’ll be able to keep on going without too much problem.”
“No. We may not have electrical or phone lines. But we need diesel fuel to run our tractor; and we need diesel for the generator, which runs our milk coolers and other farm equipment. If those diesel trucks stop coming, we can’t run the farm. We’re just as dependent upon the rest of the world as you.”
Relationship: it’s always there, even when you don’t want it, inescapable and omnipresent.
So, in surveying the recent political flatulence over the issue of “Freedom of Religion” as portrayed in the recent and ongoing debate within Arizona and other states regarding who we can serve in our businesses and other organizations, I wonder: is the “right to serve only those that my religion allows me to” a real and achievable right, or a misguided attempt to delude oneself into thinking that we can simply dismiss those we find it uncomfortable to be around?
I can’t think of any group in this country more serious and steadfast on this issue of separating themselves from what they see as unwholesome influences then the Amish. Many Amish avoid developing relationships with “outsiders” that are anything beyond the level of casual or business acquaintances. In other words, they deal with “others” when they must, but only when they have to. If they could, they would sever all ties with outsiders, but they can’t. To survive in this world, they must accept some level of interaction with (and reliance upon) those whom they see as outsiders.
The proposed (and now vetoed) Arizona “Anti-Gay” Law (SB-1062) and all of the verbiage devoted to justifying it, didn’t go anywhere near as far as the Amish do. All that it’s proponents wanted to do was to have the right to not serve those they found objectionable, for “religious reasons.” No mention was made about their own reliance upon those who were “objectionable.”
If we’re really serious about isolating yourself from people whom we find to be objectionable, whatever the reason, then we need to do as the Amish do: isolate ourselves as completely as possible. After all, not only will “distasteful” people come through the shop’s door, but many of them are probably directly responsible for many of the products used or sold in our shops, as well as material we see in movie theatres, on TV or in print, not to mention the artwork on our walls, the furniture we sit in, and the clothes we wear.
We can’t have it both ways. To say we won’t serve people whom we object-to, for whatever reason, means we must also be willing to reject anything they provide to us as well. If not, then our objections are self-serving and disingenuous: not based upon a true and well grounded faith-based concern, but upon simply not wanting to have to deal with someone we find unsettling.
And yet, even the Amish have found they cannot go to that extreme. We must rely on others, even others we do not find it comfortable to be around. Relationship is inherent in not just the nature of human society, but in all of Creation. Relationship – with God and with our fellow human beings – is also at the heart of the Christian Faith. Relationship is inescapable, pervasive, and desirable.
And so I wonder why these issues keep on popping up under the guise of “Religious Freedom,” because it isn’t really about Religious Freedom, but about dictating to others what their place is – about confirming that where we stand, and our faith, is above reproach and not to be questioned, even though the validity of the others’ stance and their faith is to be questioned, and condemned. It is about a refusal to acknowledge that we must relate with “The Other” in some way, even if we don’t want to.
“Religious Freedom” is also being used, in this instance, as a watchword for the politics of division – forcing people into conflict with each other, building up reservoirs of hate and resentment that will give birth to even more sad and painful harvests in the future.
And that is ultimately the greatest fallacy of all: that of using the excuse of wanting to exercise one’s faith without obstruction or interference by eliminating others from the discourse; by refusing to be in relationship with them. And yet our faith calls for us to engage with others and to see in them not just God’s Love for them (and us), but God’s desire that we have fruitful and supportive relationships with all.
We cannot avoid relationship with others, no matter who they are. God’s gift is that we have the freedom to choose to pursue that relationship, to nurture it to achieve all that it can offer us; or else to refuse to even try, and so limit ourselves, and thereby limit our ability to fulfill God’s call upon our lives.
Peace,
– Allen
Copyright (c) 2014, Allen Vander Meulen III, all rights reserved. I’m happy to share my writings with you, as long as you are not seeking (or gaining) financial benefit for doing so, and as long as proper credit for my authorship is given. (e.g., via a credit that gives my full name and/or provides a link back to this site – or just email me and ask!)
We often hear that God loves us unconditionally, and that we are called to love everyone we meet in the same way. Matthew 22:37 & 39 give us the two Great Commandments, which are founded upon this principle: “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ and ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ St. Paul dwells on this topic in the well known “Love Chapter” of First Corinthians (1 Cor 13).
Unconditional Love is central to the Christian Gospel.
But, what is “Unconditional Love”?
Recently, I’ve been reading “Unconditional Parenting: Moving from Rewards and Punishments to Love and Reason” by Alfie Kohn, an interesting and informative book that seeks to apply science and reason to the raising of children. The book is fascinating, and not just because it uses convincing science and logic to throw many cherished myths about raising children right out the window.
What struck me in reading Kohn’s work is his thoughts on what “Unconditional Love” means, and it’s importance in becoming the well rounded, stable and (spiritually) healthy individuals we are meant to be.
For one, he points out that if we demonstrate our love for another only when we meet their expectations, then our love is conditional. Unconditional love “doesn’t hinge on how they act, whether they’re successful or well behaved or anything else.”
He also states that if we love children just as they are, then they learn to “accept themselves as fundamentally good people, even when they screw up or fall short.” This in turn helps them to be freer to accept other people just as they are, and helps them to flourish, instead of being lost in a sea of judgment and rigidity.
Kohn also says that “Conditional parenting is based on the deeply cynical belief that accepting kids for who they are just frees them to be bad because, well, that’s who they are.” This is true of conditional love of any sort. Paul says it best, in Romans 7:22-24: For I delight in the law of God in my inmost self, but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?”
In other words, we are inherently good (or, at least we yearn to be “good”) says Paul – and Kohn – and Jesus. But, if we do not learn to love unconditionally, if we choose to see the flaws in others before we see what God sees in them, then we are allowing the sin that is in our flesh (as Paul describes it) to obscure the goodness within us, and within others. We then fail to love others unconditionally, as we are called to do, because we have not learned to see beyond what a person does to embrace who they are – a beloved child of God, just like everybody else, including us.
Ultimately, “…The choice between conditional and unconditional parenting is a choice between two radically different views of human nature.” Are we essentially economic robots – our behavior is purely the learning that love is earned in return for correct behavior?
If we are primarily automatons that require incentives to behave well, then how can we be authentic people – authentic in terms of understanding who we are, and authentic in our dealings with others? Our love is conditional if we accept others only when their behavior is acceptable. This also means that we can only accept ourselves if the person we seem to be meets whatever standard we’ve set for ourselves. We will be distancing ourselves from God’s unconditional acceptance of that inner person we try so hard to hide from everyone else, including ourselves.
Why do we need to create a false “self” that others will find acceptable? When we do so, we can never be the person we are meant to be – we will always be a façade, a mask behind which we hide (and often lose) our true selves in the name of finding acceptance.
Kohn goes on to say that “Unconditional parenting insists that the family ought to be a haven, a refuge … [that love] does not have to be paid for in any sense. It is simply and purely a gift …. to which all … are entitled.”
This is echoed throughout the Bible, and especially the New Testament. God is seen as “our Father.” We are called children of God, and members of the “Family of God.” Paul says it in a different way at times, describing us as members of the “Body of Christ.” God’s love is a gift, one that will never be taken away, one that is always there, not given as a result of anything we’ve done.
All of these biblical metaphors reflect an understanding of the importance of accepting and loving others unconditionally; and understanding that they reflect how God loves us. “The other” is part of who we are, and so we must learn to love others unconditionally if we are to learn how to love ourselves in the same way, and learn how to accept the unconditional love of God which is already there, waiting for us.
“Love your neighbor as yourself” is not just about learning to love your neighbor, but also about learning to love yourself.
Love!
– Allen
Copyright (c) 2014, Allen Vander Meulen III, all rights reserved. I’m happy to share my writings with you, as long as you are not seeking (or gaining) financial benefit for doing so, and as long as proper credit for my authorship is given. (e.g., via a credit that gives my full name and/or provides a link back to this site – or just email me and ask!)
My friend, Pedro S. Silva, recently made an interesting point, which is that Science and Faith both begin from the same place. They both start with something that is invisible to the naked eye, approachable only through the functioning of the human mind.
In the case of science, all matter and energy begin with subatomic particles, mixtures of quarks and leptons in various configurations: interacting with each other at the behest of forces like gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force and the weak force. And yet, none of these elementary particles are seen, heard, tasted or touched. Instead, we observe their effects on other things, or throw subatomic particles at each other at ridiculously high speeds to see what flies out when they collide.
And we see invisible things in other ways – using telescopes to see the universe as it was back in time, even up to shortly after the “Big Bang.” Or, assembling myriads of data observations to find patterns that have would otherwise be hidden, patterns which have meaning to us, such as global warming, or economic trends, or opinion polls. (…If you believe that opinion polls have meaning, which I often do not!)
Science is all about seeing the unseen, employing specific tools to help us see and appreciate things that were previously hidden from us. Science is a useful tool, one we cannot ignore (even though some try). Science helps us see clearly where seeing was not possible before.
Faith is no different: like Science, it also makes it possible to find meaning in the unseen.
Like Science, Faith also begins from an invisible place, a place that cannot be directly observed, a place that can be inferred only through its effects upon other things. Those of us who are people of Faith call that place “God.”
Just like Science, Faith employs various tools to better understand the mystery of that which is invisible to our senses. We read scriptures. We pray. We look within ourselves and listen carefully to the unspoken thoughts, feelings and currents we find there. We observe the world around us and find purpose and meaning in it.
Like Science, Faith sees a bigger pattern than can be discerned with the naked eye by beginning with those things that the naked eye cannot discern at all. And yet, Faith differs from Science in one crucial aspect. Science is about finding those patterns. It is about the How and the Where and the When of things. It is not about the Why of things. Faith is about the greater purpose and direction of existence as a whole, and our individual existence. Science focuses on the mechanics of that existence.
Why am I here?
Why am I, at all?
What purpose is there to my life?
What’s the point of life at all?
So, when I see folks dismiss the value Faith for whatever reason, such as because they believe that Science already tells us all about how the universe came to be; I am saddened, for they are not seeing the value of Faith in their lives. They are confusing Fact with Truth…
Science tells us how the Universe started with nothing and came to be what it is.
Faith tells us why.
Science tells us how the Human body functions, and how various aspects of our environment, or our genes, influence our behavior and the quality of our lives.
Faith tells us why life is worth living.
Science tells us of all the wavelengths of light that are to be found in a rainbow, and can even tell us the chemical composition of the source from which that light came.
Faith tells us the Rainbow is beautiful, and how it is a reflection of God’s love for us.
Science helps us understand the World around us.
Faith helps us find hope within it.
Science tells us What we are.
Faith tells us Who we are.
Embrace both.
Copyright (c) 2014, Allen Vander Meulen III, all rights reserved. I’m happy to share my writings with you, as long as you are not seeking (or gaining) financial benefit for doing so, and as long as proper credit for my authorship is given (e.g., via a credit that gives my full name and/or provides a link back to this site).
Thanks to Army Chaplain Jonathan R. Fisher for making this valuable point in his blog.
Being “Open” to others (and their otherness) is simply not enough. “Open” by itself is a passive state. As Christians, whether we are in the pastorate or the laity, we are called to do more than merely be “Open.” Our faith calls us to action, meaning that we must not only be Open, but also Affirming. We cannot simply welcome those who come through our doors, but must also reach out to them beyond the doors of the sanctuaries we’ve defined for ourselves. We must affirm others for who and what they are, right where they are.
Affirmation is not about accepting someone when they come into my territory, but rather about valuing and loving others right where they are even if they never step outside the limits of the space they have set for themselves.
Affirmation is a declaration that everyone is a child of God, and therefore a valuable, wonderful person loved by God for exactly who they are right now; and that we are called to do the same.
Being “Open” AND “Affirming” is not an easy thing to do, because it calls us to accept that we don’t have all the answers, and never will; and that we therefore must be willing to accept and value the presence of God in others, no matter how it is expressed, and no matter how challenging we may find those expressions to be.
I’ll end with this quote from Fred Rogers, from his book “The World According to Mr. Rogers”…
“As human beings, our job in life is to help people realize how rare and valuable each one of us really is, that each of us has something that no one else has–or ever will have–something inside that is unique to all time. It’s our job to encourage each other to discover that uniqueness and to provide ways of developing its expression.”
It would seem that a post about this would be completely unnecessary in the pluralistic world of the Army Chaplain Corps. It would seem that the directive to perform one’s own faith and provide for all the others would make such a statement redundant.
Only it’s not.
Somehow, this needs be said.
So, I am going to say it: I am a chaplain for ALL my Soldiers. All of them. The gay ones. The straight ones. The fat ones. The skinny ones. The conservative ones. The liberal ones. The religious ones. The non religious ones. The connected to church and the far away. The reason driven and the faith-based. The agnostic and the Christian. The pagan, the Muslim, the Hindu, the Buddhist, the whatever-you-happen-to-believe right now. Everyone I can think to mention and everyone else.
All means all.
This last summer, the General Assembly of the Christian Church (Disciples of…
First, as I discussed in that post, “Being Holy” is a process. A process implies that changes are happening as a result of that process. So, when God says “You shall be Holy for I am Holy.” … God is changed by the practice of being Holy, just as we will be changed.
This makes sense from a second point of view, which is that Holiness, based on the commands in Leviticus 19, is about having healthy relationships. In other words, being Holy requires relationship. This makes perfect sense to Christians, since the whole point of Christ walking here on earth as one of us was to bring each and every one of us into closer relationship with God. Christ, after all, was prophesied as being “Emmanuel” – “God with Us” (Matthew 1:23).
Third, relationship is not a one way street. Relationships change both parties. If not, it would be a one way interaction, such as a child might have with a doll – such a relationship might change us, but it sure doesn’t change the doll! Such is not a full relationship, but only a partial or truncated one.
So, when God says “You shall be Holy for I am Holy” in Leviticus 19:2. It means Holiness is a two way thing. We are Holy because we are in relationship with God – You shall be Holy for I am Holy” – and that Holy relationship changes the both of us for the better.
Holiness and relationship both require that God is vulnerable to us, just as we are vulnerable to God – and what could be a greater demonstration of this than Jesus’ death on the cross? Or Jesus as a babe, completely dependent upon his parents for sustenance and support? It would seem, then, that being vulnerable isn’t such a bad thing, it leaves our hearts open for change, and deeper and more meaningful relationships with others.
The Bible asks us to be open to God and God’s movement within our spirits. That movement is a two way street, and that is what is at the heart of being Holy.
Be Holy!
Copyright (c) 2014, Allen Vander Meulen III, all rights reserved. I’m happy to share my writings with you, as long as you are not seeking (or gaining) financial benefit for doing so, and as long as proper credit for my authorship is given (e.g., via a credit that gives my full name and/or provides a link back to this site).
A close friend of mine once lived in a town that was rapidly becoming a mecca for the affluent in his part of the country, ignoring it’s heritage as a community that put significant effort into ministering to those in need.
One afternoon, my friend was crossing the street in a marked crosswalk at a stoplight, when a well-dressed man in his brand new white Cadillac SUV zoomed through the red light as he made a right hand turn. As this driver did so, he hit my friend with his vehicle, knocking him to the ground and leaving him dazed. At that point, the driver stopped, rolled down his window, cussed my friend out for getting in the way, then roared off. (Unfortunately, the driver got away with it; as at that moment my friend was in no condition to read, let alone remember, a license plate number.)
We could say a lot about the injustice of this, highlighting how those with power and position are often arrogant and self-serving, thinking their position and wealth grants them special privileges and consideration; and then contrasting that with the situation of my friend, a man of great talent and a good heart, but who lives on the margins of our economy.
But let’s not go there today; there’s enough of that floating around. Instead, we’ll focus on how this situation is illuminated by the text from Leviticus 19 that is part of the lectionary readings for this coming Sunday.
It seemed appropriate on this, Valentines Day, to reflect on the nature of Love.
In Christian Scripture, the Apostle Paul’s First Epistle to Corinthians (chapter 13) is known as the “Love Chapter.” I quote it in full here…
1If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant 5or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. 7It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. 9For we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; 10but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. 11When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. 12For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. 13And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love.
The thing I observe about Paul’s eloquent prose is that it talks about how Love is at the core of the Christian message. Without it, says Paul, Christianity is nothing, and our words meaningless.
In fact, in reflecting upon the Gospels I do not recall a single instance where Jesus limits the ways in which we are encouraged (or allowed) to love others. Instead, like Paul, Jesus focuses us on the importance and centrality of Love, often being an example to us of how to love others, and how our love for the other must be grounded in our Love of God.
I remember the first time I saw a young couple passionately kissing, when I was an early teen, I think. It was a new thing for me – an unfamiliar sight, something I was not comfortable with, something that unnerved me more than a little bit. I remember thinking “Ewwww!” … I’m sure most of us have had similar experiences!
Sermon: “Letting Go”
The Here and the Hereafter 