Prayers for Mark Palmer please...
We prayed for Mark's wife, Jen, a few years ago when it was found that she had cancer... Since then Mark has gotten remarried... he recently found out that he has a tumor, and treatments are beginning... sigh.
Please pray for healing for Mark, for strenght for his wife Amy, and God's peace for their son Micah.
Here's a link to Mark's blog: http://www.livejournal.com/~palmerlp/
Friday, January 28, 2005
Thursday, January 20, 2005
what I'm wondering about today...
how do we cooperate better?
how do we work with and network existing initiatives and organizations who are working toward these things?
is there a need for a central information and resource center (website? brick and mortar hq? what?)?
how do we work together better and start cooperating instead of competing? how do we start thinking and operating as 'the church of west michigan'? how might we work cooperatively with other groups for the sake of the world around us?
just thinking about the implications for practice from a theology of "inaugurated eschatology"...
just thinking about the implications of Isaiah 65:17-25 and the prayer, "your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven"...
how do we cooperate better?
how do we work with and network existing initiatives and organizations who are working toward these things?
is there a need for a central information and resource center (website? brick and mortar hq? what?)?
how do we work together better and start cooperating instead of competing? how do we start thinking and operating as 'the church of west michigan'? how might we work cooperatively with other groups for the sake of the world around us?
just thinking about the implications for practice from a theology of "inaugurated eschatology"...
just thinking about the implications of Isaiah 65:17-25 and the prayer, "your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven"...
Monday, January 17, 2005
Sunday, January 16, 2005
Sorry I Missed Jim Wallis
I wish I had been able to hear Jim speak. As I reflect on the past four years (since 9/11), I think the three most clear tactics of the current administration have been: 1) to perpetuate and stir up fear (not only the "War on Terror," but also with Iraq, during the election, and now with Social Security, 2) to position themselves as the champions ('saviors?') against those fears, and 3) to trade (even using the language of 'political capital') on those fears, acting unilaterally and without accountability (even casually dismissing challenges to its false pretenses for war by blaming bad intelligence).
Besides apparent arrogance and deception, the thing that really bothers me is the use of fear-mongering as a tactic for political strong-arming. Not a new tactic, to be sure, but certainly not reflective of the politics of the reign of God. What are we teaching ourselves about where to look for solutions, let alone salvation?
Jesus' response to Israel's nationalistic agenda pointed out the folly of trying to make a solution for themselves. What they needed was to trust God through the time of testing--to trust that God would act to rescue them. Their responsibility was to re-present the way of love and blessing to the world around them--to embody the justice of God rather than to mete out their own form of it. Let evil do its worst, but do not share in it; then God will vindicate you as the one who is right. That's what Jesus did by going to the cross--he trusted God through the worst that evil could do, and that God would vindicate him and his way of being Israel. Indeed, his way of being human.
Of course, governments are all flawed because the people who make them up are flawed. Of course, protecting its citizens from those who intend to do them harm is an important role of governments. It is complex both practically and ethically. But for me and my fellow disciples of Jesus, we must choose not to be led by fear to make 'solutions' for ourselves that cause us to participate in the cycle of evil. Our 'Way' is to let evil do its worst, trusting God to deliver us through it. That doesn't mean that we don't challenge evil--it simply means we refuse to participate in it for the sake of so-called security--or for any other reason.
I wish I had been able to hear Jim speak. As I reflect on the past four years (since 9/11), I think the three most clear tactics of the current administration have been: 1) to perpetuate and stir up fear (not only the "War on Terror," but also with Iraq, during the election, and now with Social Security, 2) to position themselves as the champions ('saviors?') against those fears, and 3) to trade (even using the language of 'political capital') on those fears, acting unilaterally and without accountability (even casually dismissing challenges to its false pretenses for war by blaming bad intelligence).
Besides apparent arrogance and deception, the thing that really bothers me is the use of fear-mongering as a tactic for political strong-arming. Not a new tactic, to be sure, but certainly not reflective of the politics of the reign of God. What are we teaching ourselves about where to look for solutions, let alone salvation?
Jesus' response to Israel's nationalistic agenda pointed out the folly of trying to make a solution for themselves. What they needed was to trust God through the time of testing--to trust that God would act to rescue them. Their responsibility was to re-present the way of love and blessing to the world around them--to embody the justice of God rather than to mete out their own form of it. Let evil do its worst, but do not share in it; then God will vindicate you as the one who is right. That's what Jesus did by going to the cross--he trusted God through the worst that evil could do, and that God would vindicate him and his way of being Israel. Indeed, his way of being human.
Of course, governments are all flawed because the people who make them up are flawed. Of course, protecting its citizens from those who intend to do them harm is an important role of governments. It is complex both practically and ethically. But for me and my fellow disciples of Jesus, we must choose not to be led by fear to make 'solutions' for ourselves that cause us to participate in the cycle of evil. Our 'Way' is to let evil do its worst, trusting God to deliver us through it. That doesn't mean that we don't challenge evil--it simply means we refuse to participate in it for the sake of so-called security--or for any other reason.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Jim Wallis...
Today I had the opportunity to hear Jim Wallis (of Sojourners) speak at Western Seminary. He has a new book coming out this week... As I listened to him speak today, I got chills running through my body.
When I listen to him, I hear a strong & compelling voice. I also hear somebody who is about the things of Jesus.
Part of his challenge was this: If we as Christians in America are about the ways of Jesus, then why are we not taking the commands of Jesus in regard to being peacemakers seriously? Why have we been seduced into believing that pre-emtive strikes around the globe are our way of being America? As if this is our best way of existence.
In addition, he noted that George Bush is a committed Christian; he is living a transformed life. He is a follower of Jesus. Where he is wrong - he has bad theology.
Food for thought for now...
Today I had the opportunity to hear Jim Wallis (of Sojourners) speak at Western Seminary. He has a new book coming out this week... As I listened to him speak today, I got chills running through my body.
When I listen to him, I hear a strong & compelling voice. I also hear somebody who is about the things of Jesus.
Part of his challenge was this: If we as Christians in America are about the ways of Jesus, then why are we not taking the commands of Jesus in regard to being peacemakers seriously? Why have we been seduced into believing that pre-emtive strikes around the globe are our way of being America? As if this is our best way of existence.
In addition, he noted that George Bush is a committed Christian; he is living a transformed life. He is a follower of Jesus. Where he is wrong - he has bad theology.
Food for thought for now...
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
Steve Camp on McLaren's "Generous Orthodoxy"
Last night I was reading thru Doug Pagitt's recent blog entries. One in particular drew my attention. It's entitled The Battle Begins - Take Your Battle Positions. It's an article suggesting that 2005 will be a year in which the emerging church conversation, and Emergent in particular, will get hit by evangelicals pushing against emerging efforts. It's certainly worth a read.
With all that said, one of Doug's links in the article points to the website of Christain musican Steve Camp. Throughtout the article Steve is less than appreciative of Brian McLaren's recent book, "A Generous Orthodoxy."
I was ticked reading through what Steve has posted in web-land. So, I postured for battle. NO. Wait. I despise that terminology. I attempted to posture for healthy brotherly dialogue.
Out of a small chance that Steve might actually reply to my e-mail, I took a few minutes and crafted a short letter. Over the past 24 hours I've gotten two responses. I've had to delete a lot of Christ-less thoughts that I've typed. In the midst of experiencing my own brokenness, I've gotten two responses that I believe are worthy of your time... if nothing else, they suggest that words of kindness and real concern trump battle postures.
Of course, I believe that was also part of the gospel message. So, we shouldn't really be surprised. If it is God's way, it is good.
The five e-mails to date follow:
On 1/4/05 2:32 AM, "RandyBuist"wrote:
I write this letter to Steve Camp… I hope it finds his inbox.
Mr. Steve Camp,
I’ve been a fan throughout the years. I was a student at Calvin College in Grand Rapids (so I know Calvinism & reformed thinking) back in the late 1980’s when I saw you in concert.
Tonight I was directed to your website regarding Brian McLaren’s “Generous Orthodoxy.” (For background, I am a dad, an apprentice of Jesus, deeply committed to orthodox Christianity, and a church leader.) I was struck by part of the websites greeting at the top, “..it’s all about Him.” Then I was reading through your review of McLaren’s book, and I read your penned words, “His words are familiarly vacant of genuine biblical truth and principle.”
I wonder if you have ever met Brian? I wonder if you have ever conversed with Brian? As a brother in Christ, I would hope that you could answer yes to both of those questions prior to writing the words that you did. Your words imply that you know the heart of the author. As a follower of Jesus, that kind of judgment, without ever sharing a meal with the one you accuse, seems dangerous… dangerously slippery in your terms.
Back to that Calvin concert back in the 1980’s… I remember a lady a few years older than yourself coming up to you after your part of the show. (I believe Steve Taylor followed you.) That woman challenged your choice of clothing for the night. She suggested it was a bit too revealing. Thinking back, I believe it was a black outfit – maybe all black with spandex? Regardless of the outfit, she had also drawn quite a conclusion about your heart as a result of your clothing choice. I remember overhearing the conversation, and I remember thinking, “She doesn’t really know the heart of Steve.” I didn’t draw a quick conclusion based on one aspect of your person, and neither should you without spending enough time to know the heart of Brian.
I have come to know Brian well enough to know his heart is passionately chasing after the heart of Jesus. He’s also helped many people experience and live within the story of God. For any of us to flippantly write things about fellow brothers in Christ does nothing to further the cause of Christ. When John Calvin burned Armenians at the stake, it did nothing for the cause of Christ either. Nothing. I would hope you seriously re-evaluate your position.
In His Grip,
Randy Buist
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Camp [mailto:stevecamp@audienceone.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 9:00 AMTo: RandyBuistSubject: Re: in love...
Dear Randy:
Thank you for your kind and gracious email. I very much appreciate the words you shared and thank you for taking me down memory lane a bit too. (I have never worn spandex... But I used to wear black jeans or sweats when performing with a band.)
About this article concerning Brian McLaren’s beliefs, books and convictions. Being in public ministry for many years now, if I release a CD or even a book, articles, interviews, etc. if someone disagrees with me or doesn’t like a certain song or something, do they have the duty to come to me in person first, have coffee with me, site one on one with me to hear my heart before they can write or say anything about my convictions or beliefs? Of course not. They should have heard my heart in all of those writings and I must be willing to stand by the message represented in those things. If I am not willing to take whatever constructive criticism and encouragement that comes from releasing those views, then I should not be in public ministry. Even if someone is heated, caustic, abrasive, rude or downright vulgar in their response to me, I still can learn from their words and the Lord will use it in my sanctification in conforming me to Christ. God is sovereign and I trust Him in those things.
In the same way, I have read several of Brian McLaren’s books, been on numerous websites reading his words about his beliefs, and have also read several interviews he had done as well. I do my homework and believe in going right to primary sources in trying to understand someone’s doctrinal convictions and beliefs. It is incumbent upon me to do so. I never made a comment about Brian’s personal life, nor would I. He is probably a dedicated Dad, a loving husband, a good friend to many and a sincere gentleman. I did comment very positively in the article about his ability to communicate, his winsome manner that comes through his material, etc. But what I was most surprised about after reading well over 1,000 pages of material and then rereading much of it was his lack of biblical foundation in virtually everyone of his doctrinal suasions and moorings. He has to stand by what he writes and believes and must be willing to take careful scrutiny to heart in that process. He is a public communicator and I hope that would read my review-and there is more coming-and honestly look at what he believes by several of us who are deeply concerned for what he propagates as being orthodox Christianity. This is serious dear brother and he should realize that the character of God, the gospel, the atonement, ecclesiology, etc. are not play things for his amusement.
I hope that one day I can meet Brian and have a chance to get to know him personally. That would be my joy and privilege. But he also must stand up and be counted for what he believes; and what he believes has serious concern.
I know that you must respect D.A. Carson; John MacArthur; John Piper; R.C. Sproul; Al Mohler; etc. All of these dear brothers differ slightly on secondary or tertiary points of doctrine. But on the essentials they are absolutely unified—even though coming from different doctrinal systems and viewpoints. The concern for Brian is that on the essentials of the faith he is wavering and in some instances—uncertain, unclear or even heterodox.
If you know him as well as you say you do, you are in a wonderful God-given position to encourage him to sound doctrine and to even define his beliefs according to the Word of God rather than by his own feelings, experiences, the culture, etc.Thank you for taking the time to dialogue. Again, I appreciate you and your words.
Grace and peace to you,
Steve Camp
2 Cor. 4:5
On 1/4/05 11:16 PM, "RandyBuist"wrote:
Steve,
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I’m not going to disagree with your points of contention. I’m not sure it would be beneficial for either of us.
I will point you in the direction of a thoughtful review from the theological realm, from Professor Craig L. Blomberg of Denver Seminary. It would be worth your time to read. Here’s a link to the site: http://denverseminary.edu/dj/articles2004/0300/0302.php
Two significant concerns for your further consideration: I understand your perspective regarding criticisms. I recognize God’s sovereignty and ability to speak through even those with the nastiest of intents. Still, this doesn’t give us permission to speak however we chose. Foremost, your disregard for Brian’s last name is disrespectful regardless of his beliefs. I am not sure people ever deserve to have their name mistreated. There is something about our names that runs deep within us, and attacks become personal the moment names are involved.
Secondly, given your status within the evangelical community, I don’t believe your current review as it currently reads, is healthy for edification or building up of the body in any way. I’d encourage you to further reconsider your position in light of love for one another and especially our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.
In His Grip,
Randy Buist
-----Original Message-----From: Steve Camp [mailto:stevecamp@audienceone.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 12:48 AM
To: RandyBuistSubject: Re: in love...
Dear Randy:
I do appreciate you brother and I thank you for your forthright and yet gracious words.
I don’t know if you noticed or not, but out of respect for your previous correspondence I did remove any play on words with Brian’s last name. My attempt at Limbaugh/Hannity tongue and cheek humor maybe would have played better on radio than in print. That notwithstanding, I made the change so that the content of the article could be read without that discoloration. FYI: Most people did take it in good stride, but the fact that several did not was convicting and as a servant of the Lord I had no option but to remove the offense.
I have also made some minor, yet I think, significant updates on other sections as well. Evidence that none of us have arrived in our sanctification...amen?
Grace and peace to you,
Steve
PS – I will read the review of Professor Blomberg tomorrow. Thank you in advance for your recommendation.
My response at 1 a.m.was simply:
Thanks Steve.
Good night.
randy
... and additional e-mail from Steve in the 25th hour...
Dear Randy:
One brief additional thought before I call it a day – would you consider contacting Brian McLaren and ask him out of Christian love to withdraw his materials for the sake of unity and peace within the evangelical community? You must admit, his writings along with a few others have been more disruptive than edifying.
I would propose that Mr. McLaren come to Nashville to meet with me personally to discuss (have a conversation about) his books and the theology they represent. Secondly, I could assemble from around the country a panel of other ministers, lay leaders, authors, theologians and musicians to come and meet with him to converse about his writings and the doctrinal concerns they evoke. Would he be open to such a meeting and the dialogue that would flow from its gathering? If so, I would withdraw my article and reserve further commentary about his beliefs until we had the opportunity to meet in person.
I realize the probability of this taking place is rare, but it is worth the mention. Whatever influence you could have in this area I would be deeply grateful.
Yours for the Master’s use,
Steve Camp
Col. 1:9-14
~ And I know the theological differences are great. Yet, how do we dialogue with fellow brothers? We must find ways... we must.
Last night I was reading thru Doug Pagitt's recent blog entries. One in particular drew my attention. It's entitled The Battle Begins - Take Your Battle Positions. It's an article suggesting that 2005 will be a year in which the emerging church conversation, and Emergent in particular, will get hit by evangelicals pushing against emerging efforts. It's certainly worth a read.
With all that said, one of Doug's links in the article points to the website of Christain musican Steve Camp. Throughtout the article Steve is less than appreciative of Brian McLaren's recent book, "A Generous Orthodoxy."
I was ticked reading through what Steve has posted in web-land. So, I postured for battle. NO. Wait. I despise that terminology. I attempted to posture for healthy brotherly dialogue.
Out of a small chance that Steve might actually reply to my e-mail, I took a few minutes and crafted a short letter. Over the past 24 hours I've gotten two responses. I've had to delete a lot of Christ-less thoughts that I've typed. In the midst of experiencing my own brokenness, I've gotten two responses that I believe are worthy of your time... if nothing else, they suggest that words of kindness and real concern trump battle postures.
Of course, I believe that was also part of the gospel message. So, we shouldn't really be surprised. If it is God's way, it is good.
The five e-mails to date follow:
On 1/4/05 2:32 AM, "RandyBuist"
I write this letter to Steve Camp… I hope it finds his inbox.
Mr. Steve Camp,
I’ve been a fan throughout the years. I was a student at Calvin College in Grand Rapids (so I know Calvinism & reformed thinking) back in the late 1980’s when I saw you in concert.
Tonight I was directed to your website regarding Brian McLaren’s “Generous Orthodoxy.” (For background, I am a dad, an apprentice of Jesus, deeply committed to orthodox Christianity, and a church leader.) I was struck by part of the websites greeting at the top, “..it’s all about Him.” Then I was reading through your review of McLaren’s book, and I read your penned words, “His words are familiarly vacant of genuine biblical truth and principle.”
I wonder if you have ever met Brian? I wonder if you have ever conversed with Brian? As a brother in Christ, I would hope that you could answer yes to both of those questions prior to writing the words that you did. Your words imply that you know the heart of the author. As a follower of Jesus, that kind of judgment, without ever sharing a meal with the one you accuse, seems dangerous… dangerously slippery in your terms.
Back to that Calvin concert back in the 1980’s… I remember a lady a few years older than yourself coming up to you after your part of the show. (I believe Steve Taylor followed you.) That woman challenged your choice of clothing for the night. She suggested it was a bit too revealing. Thinking back, I believe it was a black outfit – maybe all black with spandex? Regardless of the outfit, she had also drawn quite a conclusion about your heart as a result of your clothing choice. I remember overhearing the conversation, and I remember thinking, “She doesn’t really know the heart of Steve.” I didn’t draw a quick conclusion based on one aspect of your person, and neither should you without spending enough time to know the heart of Brian.
I have come to know Brian well enough to know his heart is passionately chasing after the heart of Jesus. He’s also helped many people experience and live within the story of God. For any of us to flippantly write things about fellow brothers in Christ does nothing to further the cause of Christ. When John Calvin burned Armenians at the stake, it did nothing for the cause of Christ either. Nothing. I would hope you seriously re-evaluate your position.
In His Grip,
Randy Buist
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Camp [mailto:stevecamp@audienceone.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 9:00 AMTo: RandyBuistSubject: Re: in love...
Dear Randy:
Thank you for your kind and gracious email. I very much appreciate the words you shared and thank you for taking me down memory lane a bit too. (I have never worn spandex... But I used to wear black jeans or sweats when performing with a band.)
About this article concerning Brian McLaren’s beliefs, books and convictions. Being in public ministry for many years now, if I release a CD or even a book, articles, interviews, etc. if someone disagrees with me or doesn’t like a certain song or something, do they have the duty to come to me in person first, have coffee with me, site one on one with me to hear my heart before they can write or say anything about my convictions or beliefs? Of course not. They should have heard my heart in all of those writings and I must be willing to stand by the message represented in those things. If I am not willing to take whatever constructive criticism and encouragement that comes from releasing those views, then I should not be in public ministry. Even if someone is heated, caustic, abrasive, rude or downright vulgar in their response to me, I still can learn from their words and the Lord will use it in my sanctification in conforming me to Christ. God is sovereign and I trust Him in those things.
In the same way, I have read several of Brian McLaren’s books, been on numerous websites reading his words about his beliefs, and have also read several interviews he had done as well. I do my homework and believe in going right to primary sources in trying to understand someone’s doctrinal convictions and beliefs. It is incumbent upon me to do so. I never made a comment about Brian’s personal life, nor would I. He is probably a dedicated Dad, a loving husband, a good friend to many and a sincere gentleman. I did comment very positively in the article about his ability to communicate, his winsome manner that comes through his material, etc. But what I was most surprised about after reading well over 1,000 pages of material and then rereading much of it was his lack of biblical foundation in virtually everyone of his doctrinal suasions and moorings. He has to stand by what he writes and believes and must be willing to take careful scrutiny to heart in that process. He is a public communicator and I hope that would read my review-and there is more coming-and honestly look at what he believes by several of us who are deeply concerned for what he propagates as being orthodox Christianity. This is serious dear brother and he should realize that the character of God, the gospel, the atonement, ecclesiology, etc. are not play things for his amusement.
I hope that one day I can meet Brian and have a chance to get to know him personally. That would be my joy and privilege. But he also must stand up and be counted for what he believes; and what he believes has serious concern.
I know that you must respect D.A. Carson; John MacArthur; John Piper; R.C. Sproul; Al Mohler; etc. All of these dear brothers differ slightly on secondary or tertiary points of doctrine. But on the essentials they are absolutely unified—even though coming from different doctrinal systems and viewpoints. The concern for Brian is that on the essentials of the faith he is wavering and in some instances—uncertain, unclear or even heterodox.
If you know him as well as you say you do, you are in a wonderful God-given position to encourage him to sound doctrine and to even define his beliefs according to the Word of God rather than by his own feelings, experiences, the culture, etc.Thank you for taking the time to dialogue. Again, I appreciate you and your words.
Grace and peace to you,
Steve Camp
2 Cor. 4:5
On 1/4/05 11:16 PM, "RandyBuist"
Steve,
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I’m not going to disagree with your points of contention. I’m not sure it would be beneficial for either of us.
I will point you in the direction of a thoughtful review from the theological realm, from Professor Craig L. Blomberg of Denver Seminary. It would be worth your time to read. Here’s a link to the site: http://denverseminary.edu/dj/articles2004/0300/0302.php
Two significant concerns for your further consideration: I understand your perspective regarding criticisms. I recognize God’s sovereignty and ability to speak through even those with the nastiest of intents. Still, this doesn’t give us permission to speak however we chose. Foremost, your disregard for Brian’s last name is disrespectful regardless of his beliefs. I am not sure people ever deserve to have their name mistreated. There is something about our names that runs deep within us, and attacks become personal the moment names are involved.
Secondly, given your status within the evangelical community, I don’t believe your current review as it currently reads, is healthy for edification or building up of the body in any way. I’d encourage you to further reconsider your position in light of love for one another and especially our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.
In His Grip,
Randy Buist
-----Original Message-----From: Steve Camp [mailto:stevecamp@audienceone.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 12:48 AM
To: RandyBuistSubject: Re: in love...
Dear Randy:
I do appreciate you brother and I thank you for your forthright and yet gracious words.
I don’t know if you noticed or not, but out of respect for your previous correspondence I did remove any play on words with Brian’s last name. My attempt at Limbaugh/Hannity tongue and cheek humor maybe would have played better on radio than in print. That notwithstanding, I made the change so that the content of the article could be read without that discoloration. FYI: Most people did take it in good stride, but the fact that several did not was convicting and as a servant of the Lord I had no option but to remove the offense.
I have also made some minor, yet I think, significant updates on other sections as well. Evidence that none of us have arrived in our sanctification...amen?
Grace and peace to you,
Steve
PS – I will read the review of Professor Blomberg tomorrow. Thank you in advance for your recommendation.
My response at 1 a.m.was simply:
Thanks Steve.
Good night.
randy
... and additional e-mail from Steve in the 25th hour...
Dear Randy:
One brief additional thought before I call it a day – would you consider contacting Brian McLaren and ask him out of Christian love to withdraw his materials for the sake of unity and peace within the evangelical community? You must admit, his writings along with a few others have been more disruptive than edifying.
I would propose that Mr. McLaren come to Nashville to meet with me personally to discuss (have a conversation about) his books and the theology they represent. Secondly, I could assemble from around the country a panel of other ministers, lay leaders, authors, theologians and musicians to come and meet with him to converse about his writings and the doctrinal concerns they evoke. Would he be open to such a meeting and the dialogue that would flow from its gathering? If so, I would withdraw my article and reserve further commentary about his beliefs until we had the opportunity to meet in person.
I realize the probability of this taking place is rare, but it is worth the mention. Whatever influence you could have in this area I would be deeply grateful.
Yours for the Master’s use,
Steve Camp
Col. 1:9-14
~ And I know the theological differences are great. Yet, how do we dialogue with fellow brothers? We must find ways... we must.
Monday, January 03, 2005
Let us pray.
Let us band together and pray for the entire situation that hit the other side of the world last week in the form of Tsunamis.
I've been sick for a couple of days; I'm currently recovering on the couch. Perhaps I am more aware of suffering after a miserable day yesterday... I've been struck while watching CNN today. Sadly, I think this is the fist time that my emotions have been overcome with sadness.
Let us pray. Let us grieve. Let us give. Let us be Christ people.
Let us band together and pray for the entire situation that hit the other side of the world last week in the form of Tsunamis.
I've been sick for a couple of days; I'm currently recovering on the couch. Perhaps I am more aware of suffering after a miserable day yesterday... I've been struck while watching CNN today. Sadly, I think this is the fist time that my emotions have been overcome with sadness.
Let us pray. Let us grieve. Let us give. Let us be Christ people.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)