« Whatever | Main | Brave new world »

June 26, 2007

Comments

Kate

So, somehow sincere people seeking an active faith that makes a visible difference in peoples lives are "anti-cultural", "aesthetic(ally) stupid", "iconoclastic", "inherently heretical", and "anti-sacramental"?

Has the writer no faith that the sincere seeker of Christ will inevitably find He who he seeks?

Some Christians are so bitter, hateful, and alienating in their attitudes towards other Christians as to confirm every accusation of legalism and empty ritual aimed at traditional churches. Bah.

I would love to see what Fr. Longenecker has to say about this sort of useless rhetoric.

Patrick Rothwell

I have very little personal sympathy towards Pentecostalism, but the sheer arrogance and bigotry of that broad brush post is both annoying and typical for that cranky blog.

Ted

Are you all reacting too quickly?

I mean, after all...what would a civilization and culture rooted in the pentecostal/charismatic branch of Christianity look like? What would they build? What art would they create? What religious ritual and symbolism would emerge from it?

Frankly, I see his point. His point is that a religion rooted in personal experience can't build or maintain a culture. Is he wrong?

Fr. Mike Fones, OP

I am reading Ramsay MacMullen's "The Christianization of the Roman Empire." MacMullen was honored for a lifetime of scholarly achievement at the 2001 annual meeting of the American Historical Association with the Award for Scholarly Distinction. The award citation called him "the greatest historian of the Roman Empire alive today." He's no historical lightweight.

Part of his study on the growth of Christianity in the Roman Empire during the times of persecution prior to the Edict of Milan in 312 focuses on what could only be called "pentacostalist and charismatic" elements of the early Church.

Ordinary Christians, including slaves and women, frequently were called upon by their pagan neighbors to pray over people under the influence of the demonic, or sick with disease. The exorcisms and miraculous healings were demonstrations of the power of the Christ, whom they proclaimed to be crucified and risen from the dead and the only Son of God. It was these signs and wonders that led to conversion to a faith that was illegal and could possibly lead to one's denunciation to the state.

Furthermore, one only has to read the Scriptures themselves to find evidence of the charismatic in the growth of the early Church. Moreover, these manifestations of the Holy Spirit became the springboard from which Christ's redeeming death and resurrection were proclaimed, and the call to conversion and baptism was given.

Read, for example, Acts 2:14-41; 3:1-4:4; 10:1-49; 14:8-18.

St. Paul refers explicitly to the manifestation of the Spirit in this passage in his letter to the Corinthians:

"I came to you in weakness and fear and much trembling, and my message and my proclamation were not with persuasive (words of) wisdom, but with a demonstration of spirit and power, so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God." 1Cor 2:3-5

I am not a member of the charismatic renewal, but I will not deny the powerful way in which the Spirit works in the lives of those who are open to Him. I have seen this with my own eyes. To deny the efficacy of what is essentially beyond our control is to sound ominously like the scribes and Pharisees who denied the good that Jesus did, and who attributed his cures and exorcisms to the Evil One.

Julia

The *only* form of Christianity that is growing overseas and in countries like China and India (where I spent 20 days last fall) is pentecostalism. In interviews, even the non-charismatic evangelicals admitted as much. One of the hottest evangelists in India is the Catholic charismatic healer Fr. Matthew Naikomparambil (sp?), out of Kerala. As I was interviewing him in 1994, he got a call from Mother Teresa who happened to be in nearby Cochin. She wanted to meet *him.*
Get used to it, folks.

Fr. Mike Fones, OP

Ted, I hadn't seen your comment when I was working on mine. I would suggest that if you want to see what a Church built on personal experience and intentional relationship with Christ would look like, look at the Catholic Church - especially the lives of the saints. They are what should be the norm for us, not a "super elite." And all you need do is read their writings to know their faith was rooted in personal experience of CHRIST.

That, perhaps, is the issue. The "personal experience" of the saints, and intentional disciples in general, is an experience of the grace, love, and power of Jesus Christ. If it is not, then sure, it won't last. But if it is rooted in Jesus, then even Hell itself will not prevail against them, much less the dismissive sniffs of religious aesthetes.

Kate

I believe that this outpouring of the Spirit, and the attraction this holds for many, is a correction to the dry useless cultural Christianity held by so many. But, as I stated above, Christ seeks those who seek him. The real error with the writer's comment, and with Ted's thought expirement, is that it denies the action of grace in the life of the sincere believer. I think the charismatic movement does excellent work inspiring people to seek Christ alive and powerful in their lives. I think that the Spirit and Christ alive and working in people's lives ought to lead, in the end, only to Truth, and thus to the historical Church and all the riches therein.

But if you give up on this form of Christianity from the start, you belie your lack of faith in God's providence and plan for each believer.

John Mary Catholic Charismatic

Thanks, Fr. Fones...

I am a member of the charismatic renewal. A number of years ago, a good friend and brilliant theologian (PHD)teasingly said to me, "You do realize that the charismatic renewal is seen as the armpit of the Catholic Church!" Many of my dearest friends are very gifted theologians, scripture scholars, etc. (with PHDs) and unapologetically charismatic. They are also beautifully, creatively and humbly orthodox, and very respectful of the many authentic lay movements in the Catholic Church.It is true that some charismatics are 'little people' (and I happily count myself in this category...I only have a lowly MA in Theology)and not extremely sophisticated (I also happily count myself in this category!) I look forward to the day when members of all the lay movements can humbly rejoice, not only in their own unique beauty, goodness and gifts, but also in all the beauty, goodness and gifts of the many authentic beautiful, good and gifted lay movements. What a witness this would be to the whole world of the unity of the Body of Christ in the Catholic Church. Isn't this worth working towards and praying for?
Peace, John Mary Charismatic Catholic

Ted

Fr. Mike:

Here's the difference - if you look at the reality of contemporary Pentecostalism, especially globally, it is nothing like apostolic Christianity. The glue of Apostolic Christianity was Eucharist (read 1 Corinthians) and the authority of the Apostles - their teaching and pastoral authority.

This is not what contemporary Pentectostal movements are based on. They are based on individual experiences of the Spirit. That is not enough to sustain a culture - which is what the blogger at CLS was talking about.

Look at the reality of the global scene. These movements, which seem so impressive at first, have a tendency, within a few brief years, to veer off into Prosperity teaching, magic, not to speak of cults of personaliaty and very wealthy purveyors of the "teaching." There is nothing there to "hold" the truth - no liturgy, no eucharist, no apostolic authority. Things start of well, but them seem to invariable veer off in either bizarre or (in the case of the US) culturally complacent (really, is the megachurch movement anything but a pseudo-baptized version of self-help? Will future historians gbe able to tell the difference?) social entities.

You can talk all you want about the growth, but where is it going? I think that's the ultimate point.

It also disturbs me a bit that one can see this form of Christianity as a model, when it veers so dramatically from the shape of apostolic Christianity. They are not the Church. They are a form of Christianity but they are not the Church.

John and Mary's comment inadvertently bears this out. Think back to the origins of the charismatic movement in the US, 40 years ago or so. Is the "shape" of that Christianity still existent? What's happened to all the communities that sprang up? What's happened to all the charismatic prayer meetings? Here and there, perhaps. But in and of itself, the charismatic movement did not "hold" the truth of Christianity - as John and Mary points out - it is the insitutional Church that, much to some people's regret, apparently - perform that function. Weirdly enough, Mother Angelica embodies that transition. She started out charismatic, and look where she ended up. The charismatic part was not sufficient.

And frankly, if you look at sociology of religion, this is a given. Charismatic movements and styles of spirituality don't last. They veer off into what the main group would call "heresy", they lose energy they subdivide, and are eventually reabsorbed into the greater tradition.

Looking at history, I really can't see an argument with this.

Benedicamus

Here, Here, Ted. I'm with you. And what about contemplative prayer? The current liturgy, as it is usually performed, does not leave much room for it. At various charismatic events I've witnessed a complete absence of it- no silent, still place where the soul can talk to God. It seems that modern man is not really praying unless he is "doing" something exterior. St. Julian of Norwich, pray for us!
And no, we do not still celebrate every aspect of the liturgy or Christian life as we did pre 300 AD. No deaconesses, no agape-feasts, no nude baptisms for adults. As Fr. Laux once wrote- As the needs of the Church change through time, so, too do the gifts we receive. And anyone who seeks these gifts without the Church or the Sacraments- well, best of luck to you and an A for effort, but sorry, no dice.

Rich Leonardi

There is nothing there to "hold" the truth - no liturgy, no eucharist, no apostolic authority.

Regardless of the tact of the CLS blogger, there's a large nugget of truth in Ted's statement above. Moreover, the charismatic movement's frequent -- and stretched -- comparison of itself to apostolic Christianity, especially in liturgical matters, smacks of the archeologism criticized by Pius XII in Mediator Dei.

Scott


I'm with Ted and Rich. Perhaps the CLS blogger could've phrased it differently, but the point is made, however gruffly.

Can we honestly and genuinely sever ourselves from our liturgical tradition and still claims our Catholic identity? Isn't that the rub? As Rich points out, the first requirement is to understand how we view liturgy and liturgical tradition. It's not a conglomerate of various practices scattered through history, rather one, singular organic 'thing.'

John Mary

Read Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa on the Catholic Charismatic Renewal....

Sherry Weddell

The Church has already spoken definitively over and over, through the Second Vatican Council, formal papal teaching, and through her saints, Fathers and Doctors, and through Scripture itself.

The "charismatic" and the charisms are an essential part of the Apostolic tradition and to place the charismatic in opposition to the sacramental is contrary to the formal teaching and experience of the Church.

This one is really, really NOT up for grabs, folks. The Church has already spoken on this one – in the clearest, most definitive terms.

That's why the Church *formally* teaches that calling forth the charisms and vocations of the whole Christian community is an essential part of the hierarchical office.

In their spare time, priests are called to “recognize”, uncover with faith, acknowledge with joy, foster with diligence, know, appreciate, judge and discern, coordinate, put to good use, and have heartfelt esteem for the charisms of the laity (Lumen Gentium, 30; Presbyterorum Ordinis, 9; Pastores Dabo Vobis 40, 74, Christifideles Laici, 32)

By "charismatic" what do we mean? The whole dimension of the Church's life, spirituality, and mission through the centuries that is a fruit of the direct inspiration, the charisms, and the actual graces of the Holy Spirit.

Under this would fall the inspired vocations of most founders of religious orders and the lives, spiritualities, teachings, charisms, and miracles of the saints, canonized or not, including Doctors of the Church like St. Catherine of Siena, whose entire ministry and abiding influence was "charismatic" (as opposed to hierarchical) in this larger sense.

Can any particular "charismatic" inspiration, including various apostolic initiatives or movements, be wrong-headed or become distorted and shear off into heresy, or be badly implemented? Of course. Are all apparent "charisms" true works of the Holy Spirit? Of course not.

That's why the Church insists on discerning such things on a case by case basis. But she has always known since the beginning that the charisms and the charismatic was a non-negotiable part of the Church's life. One might as well talk about repudiating the Holy Spirit because Christians throughout the centuries have done stupid or illicit things in the Spirit’s name.

As Irenaeus famously pointed out in the second century in response to the misuse of prophecy in Montanism, "They are truly unfortunate who, realizing there are false prophets, take this as a pretext for expelling the grace of prophecy from the Church." (Against the Heresies)

Ted: The Catholic charismatic renewal is, in fact, growing and very dynamic in large parts of the global church (the majority of Catholics aren't western anymore!)like Latin America and Asia and Africa. In the US, it is much smaller than it was in the 70's but still quietly going about its business around the country.

(Last weekend, for instance, I was hosted by a couple who are long term members of a charismatic covenant community which is very active in the diocese of Phoenix and has been strongly supported by Bishop Olmstead, for instance).

As I have discovered in my travels, a huge number of priests, religious, and lay leaders around the country have spent time in the charismatic renewal in the past. Their experience in the Renewal is why they are serious about their faith today and why they discerned. And many of them are serious contemplatives. Long time leaders of the renewal like Ralph Martin, are making teaching upon the contemplative aspects of faith a primary focus these days. In a real sense, the renewal has moved largely into the mainstream Church, as it was always supposed to be.

Rich: We must distinguish the Catholic charismatic renewal, which is formally recognized by the Vatican as an "association of the faithful" and is completely orthodox in their adherence to the magisterium, the liturgy, and the sacrament, and the whole Independent/apostolic Christianity movement which is a whole ‘nother kettle of fish. The new “Independent/Apostolic Christianity is entirely a great-grand child of the Reformation (and in reaction to evangelical Protestantism as experienced in the last half of the 20th century) and has *no Catholic roots at all*.

fr.franklyn mcafee

A few years back I heard a lecture by a professor from Duchesne U. who was close to and an admirer of the catholic charismatic movement.She said that these "movements"such as the Charsmatics,cursillo etc.are awakening movements.They wake upthe christian and stir up the Spirit within him and open him up to the Spirit's promptings.However,she said,one cannot sustain a spiritual life on such movements.They open you up and then you are ready for more traditional forms of spirituality such as reading the great spiritual treasures (John of the Cross,Teresa of Avila,Thomas aKempis,gregorian chant etc).

Ted

Sherry, again, inadvertently demonstrates the truth of the point.

Spiritual movements - reformation/revival movments - come and go in the Church. It is part of the cycle - the necessary, natural cycle. But those movements seldom last, unless they have been institutionalized in religious orders and even then they evolve.

Note what Sherry says - individuals have been inspired and renewed by the charismatic movement in the Roman Catholic Church. Agreed. But where is that movement now? Where will it be in the West in twenty years - the African, Carribean and Hispanic presence in the Church in the West might make the difference there, but in large part, I think it will die out. I've not been in a place where there's any kind of Catholic charismatic activity in years, while three decades ago it was the going thing. As Sherry said, individuals are renewed - and then are absorbed into the institution, and the movement dies out in its original form.

That's okay. That's natural. The reason it dies out is because as a movement it cannot contain or express the totality of the Faith. It just can't - because it's a movement centered on a particular angle.

The point of the original post from CSL was about Protestant pentecostal and charismatic movements, and the comments have moved away from that. I think that was the point of the original posting from CSL - that these movements, separated from the Living Tradition of apostolic Christianity - cannot sustain or hold the historic Christian faith. That's not about aesthetics, Father. It's about the content of faith - of apostolic faith.

You can't have apostolic faith - that is, faith given to the apostles by Jesus, and then to us - without Eucharist. Admiring these movements for what they do, but forgetting that important piece of the puzzle is worrisome.

Fr. Mike Fones, OP

Please, brothers and sisters, don't presume that I wish to sever ourselves from the liturgical tradition or the teaching magisterium of the Church. What I protest is the dismissal of the power and activity of the Holy Spirit within and as a constitutive element of the Church, which is what I perceived the original posting to be about.

Protestant Pentacostalism is not a model for Catholics to imitate, but we must recognize and celebrate and expect the Holy Spirit to be at work, sometimes in surprising ways within the Church. Part of the role of the clergy is to help discern the activity of the Spirit and not stifle it.

In an address to lay movements that gathered in 1998, Pope John Paul II said,

"With the Second Vatican Council, the Comforter recently gave the Church, which according to the Fathers is the place "where the Spirit flourishes" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 749), a renewed Pentecost, instilling a new and unforeseen dynamism.

Whenever the Spirit intervenes, he leaves people astonished. He brings about events of amazing newness; he radically changes persons and history. This was the unforgettable experience of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council during which, under the guidance of the same Spirit, the Church rediscovered the charismatic dimension as one of her constitutive elements: "It is not only through the sacraments and the ministrations of the Church that the Holy Spirit makes holy the people, leads them and enriches them with his virtues. Allotting his gifts according as he wills (cf. 1 Cor 12:11), he also distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank.... He makes them fit and ready to undertake various tasks and offices for the renewal and building up of the Church" (Lumen gentium, n. 12).

The institutional and charismatic aspects are co-essential as it were to the Church's constitution. They contribute, although differently, to the life, renewal and sanctification of God's People. It is from this providential rediscovery of the Church's charismatic dimension that, before and after the Council, a remarkable pattern of growth has been established for ecclesial movements and new communities."

If we marginalize new communities of the lay faithful or charismatic Catholics, if we instinctively distrust anything that is beyond our own spiritual experience, then we do damage to the Church. Not only that, if clerics like me refuse to consider the possibility that the Holy Spirit is at work in people in my parish, and do not help them discern what is of the Spirit and what is not (perhaps because of my own ignorance), then am I not at least partially to blame - and partially responsible - if they veer off into odd and unorthodox positions?

Screaming Dustbuster

On the opposite end of the cultural-criticism continuum, we've got Samuel P. Huntington, in his book Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity asking:

"Would America be the America it is today if in the 17th and 18th centuries it had been settled not by British Protestants but by French, Spanish or Portuguese Catholics? The answer is no. It would not be America; it would be Quebec, Mexico or Brazil."

I don't know if he's right, fellow Catholic Americans, but he makes an interesting point. And I know for sure that I wouldn't want to live in Quebec, Mexico or Brazil.

Sherry Weddell

Ted:
Spiritual movements - reformation/revival movments - come and go in the Church. It is part of the cycle - the necessary, natural cycle. But those movements seldom last, unless they have been institutionalized in religious orders and even then they evolve.

Sherry’s response:
Of course, some movements only last a decade or a generation (they were speaking to a specific issue or need that was urgent then) but others, like the Dominicans are 800 years old and the Benedictines are much older. And what did the Vatican Council urge historic orders to do ? Re-discover and reclaim their charisms. Of course, movements and orders evolve. So, for that matter, has the doctrine and the understanding and discipline of the hierarchy and the liturgy. What does that have to do with the perpetual validity of the charismatic through the ages?

Ted:
Note what Sherry says - individuals have been inspired and renewed by the charismatic movement in the Roman Catholic Church. Agreed. But where is that movement now? Where will it be in the West in twenty years - the African, Carribean and Hispanic presence in the Church in the West might make the difference there, but in large part, I think it will die out.

Sherry’s response:
You’re already too late. The Pew Trust has discovered in their research that the majority of Catholic Hispanics in this country are already deeply charismatic in their spirituality and assumptions (no doubt, encouraged by the flourishing of the renewal in Central and Latin American) and Hispanic Catholics are soon going to be the majority in this country. If you want to say that among *Anglo* Catholics in the US, the charismatic renewal is at a pretty low ebb, you’ll get no disagreement with me. But we are about to become a minority.

Ted;
I've not been in a place where there's any kind of Catholic charismatic activity in years, while three decades ago it was the going thing.

Sherry:
While I’ve been in hundreds of places in this country over the past ten years where charismatic activity (often without any formal connection with the Renewal) is happening all the time. I’ve also been in dozens of places where the formally recognized renewal is still very active.

Ted:
That's okay. That's natural. The reason it dies out is because as a movement it cannot contain or express the totality of the Faith. It just can't - because it's a movement centered on a particular angle.

Sherry:
Uh, no body ever claimed that the charismatic renewal or any other “charismatic” movement in the Church was supposed to contain the whole of the faith. The Renewal as we know it is the States was a completely jerry-rigged network that sprang up to try and contain a grass-roots spiritual experience that happened first. The point I’m trying to make is that the “charismatic” as such is an intrinsic part of the Catholic faith at all times and for all generations, regardless of how that is expressed in any time and place.

Ted:
The point of the original post from CSL was about Protestant pentecostal and charismatic movements, and the comments have moved away from that. I think that was the point of the original posting from CSL - that these movements, separated from the Living Tradition of apostolic Christianity - cannot sustain or hold the historic Christian faith. That's not about aesthetics, Father. It's about the content of faith - of apostolic faith.

Sherry notes:
But the original post did equate aesthetics with the Christian faith and explicitly included Catholic charismatics in that judgement.

“These sorts of movements are anti-cultural and aesthetically deadening, even their Catholic variants tend toward an aesthetic stupidity that is anti-Christic.”

When you talk in sweeping terms about the heretical nature of the “charismatic” without clearly distinguishing that you DO NOT MEAN the valid, Church authorized forms of the charismatic, then you have to be ready to have it pointed out that your statement itself is directly contrary to Church teaching.

If you want to say that you don’t think that movements like Independent/Apostolic Christianity, *which are entirely Protestant in origin*, won’t last long because it doesn’t contain the totality of the faith, make your argument. I

may not agree with you for other reasons (since hundreds of millions of people don’t vanish overnight) but you won’t have any quibbles from me about what they lack. No one is saying for a second that they possess the fullness of the apostolic faith. No one here is saying you can have that without the Eucharist.

But if we are going to think with the Church, we must discipline ourselves to make the same distinctions in this area that the Church does.

And now I must leave this discussion because I’ve got loads of things to do.

Rich Leonardi

What I protest is the dismissal of the power and activity of the Holy Spirit within and as a constitutive element of the Church, which is what I perceived the original posting to be about.

It's not so much a dismissal of His power as a sense of humility before it. Far too often, I think, some Catholics presume that whatever they happen to be experiencing is the work of the third person of the Trinity.

Cindy

Fr. Mike,

If you're not pushing protestant Pentecostalism as a model, why do you keep harping on it?

Cindy

There is a big misperception here: beauty is not the same thing as aesthetics. And truth and beauty are two of the names of God. Pentecostalism and evangelical Christianity appear oftentimes to take leave of both, often denigrating Catholicism because of its appreciation and intrinsic love of beauty. Of course, aetheticism can be the measure of a dilettante, but that is not the case here. And in this case, as many others, pentecostalism and evangelical Christianity are wrong. A Europe that depended on pentecostalism and evangelical Christianity for its resurgence would be a barren void. And it would not be truly Christian.

Kathleen Lundquist

Folks, let's take a deep breath:

Some of us are arguing at cross purposes with two (or more) different definitions of the word charismatic. Sherry W. delineates above from Church documents a definition of the word which encompasses all that we experience in the Church and in our own lives through the direct working of the Holy Spirit. I.e., the graces that flow from our baptism. Stuff like that.

Others are functioning with a definition of charismatic that brings to mind a raucous gathering of (Christian, well-meaning, but) frightening, in-your-face people who, out of a distinctly Protestant/Montanist and anti-liturgical mindset, pray improvised, emotional prayers and sing nothing but praise choruses too loudly and too long. It's obvious that the CLS poster had this definition in mind. This definition hijacks the word's deeper meaning in the context of the whole of Church history and teaching.

We must reclaim the word charismatic and work with the concept according to the Church's teaching. We must not quench the Spirit, but test everything.

People really do experience God in the (Protestant) charismatic movement; I know, 'cause I did. When I became a Catholic, I learned to reframe and reinterpret my experiences in accord with the Church's views on worship and liturgy. (This supports your theory, Ted - but one thing the Protestant charismatics taught this old Baptist was to kneel down in the presence of God. The first Catholic parish I belonged to didn't kneel during the Consecration; they gave some lame excuse, but I knew they were wrong.)

However, I am still quite charismatic in the sense that I know what my spiritual gifts/charisms are, and my exercise of these gifts as part of my lifestyle and personality cause me to know God, grow spiritually, and be a conduit of His graces to others, having received His graces through the Sacraments. This is the sense in which all of us are charismatic, i.e. all of us are gifted by the Holy Spirit to accomplish some aspect of extending His Kingdom, the Church, on earth.

Cindy, I understand your concern about Protestantism creeping into the Church, especially in light of so much recent suffering due to the hamfisted implementation of Vatican II directives, but please reread your copy of Dominus Iesus. Protestant churches and other religions have limited amounts of truth, but the truths they have are real. Let's not forget that. It's precisely because their truth is incomplete that they need us to be in dialogue with them.

John Mary

So if I read some of these posts right, being a Catholic charismatic in Quebec must be about as bad as it gets, right! Just so happens that I was at a Catholic charismatic prayer meeting in the province of Quebec last night. After a most liturgically correct and deeply moving, beautiful Mass with equally inspiring homily, the priest, fully vested (amice,alb,cincture, stole,maniple,chasuble)) in record breaking heat, exposed the Blessed Sacrament (cope,humeral veil) and led us in prayer, silence, adoration and benediction with such reverence and dignity that I felt I had died and gone to heaven. I have traveled all over the US, and seen and experienced the beauty and glory of the Church there in the parishes, as well as the charismatic prayer groups, communities and other lay movements, and I rejoice in the Lord's Merciful love for my fellow Catholics in the US. I invite all of you to come and experience the Mercy and Glory of Our Lord at work in this beautiful province of Quebec at the International Eucharistic Congress next summer. You may be in for a surprise. The Lord has not forgotten Quebec. And there are many, many, holy and hidden Catholics, lay and clergy, persevering in very difficult circumstances here. One of our greatest boasts and causes for joy is our communion with the Catholic founders and foundresses of this place, for whom we are eternally grateful and to whom we feel quite close.

Peace, John Mary

The comments to this entry are closed.