dODGEBALL IS “PROBLEMATIC” and other societal woes that make me want to live in the woods.

My favorite magazine to mock: the National Post. And here is an excerpt from their recent garbage dump opinion.

Dodgeball is not just unhelpful to the development of kind and gentle children who will become decent citizens of a liberal democracy. It is actively harmful to this process, they say.

To clear something up: I don’t care about dodgeball. As far as I’m concerned, team sports are basically irrelevant. What disgusts me is that one particular ghastly line, about forming children to be come “decent citizens of a liberal democracy”.

This comes the same week trash heap Vox had queer-mongering walking human disaster Carlos Maza sic his cronies on obnoxious conservative shock-jock Stephen Crowder for his alleged anti-homosexual slurs, to which YouTube responded by the force of degenerate torch-wielder pressure by demonetizing Crowder – another loss for free speech.

Crowder is as annoying as the day is long. Maza is an insufferable casualty of the cult of personality and the repugnant LGBT “community”. Both can take a long hike off a cliff as far as I’m concerned, but the point is clear; these people want a world where there is no exception, and no limit to their power. They want anyone conservative begging on the street. They want to silence voices. This is all meant to be accepted without question, taken at face value with zero argument.

Recently I have abandoned the false idol of social media in an attempt to spend less and less time in front of the One Eyed God, and more time dealing with real folks. It has paid dividends. Narcissists are generally ignored and brushed aside. “What a prick” a normal person would say if some windbag like Maza starting running his mouth, and they would go on with their day. But in a society ruled now by the lowest common moral denominator, these freaks are idolized and held up as messiahs.

One day this palace, too, shall burn. And I will gladly help to bury it and piss on the ashes.




I recently sat down with the Pastor of my Church to talk about self-denial and asceticism.

Asceticism, especially in more liberal branches of protestant churches, is either outright condemned or warned against. This is one of the many things I revile about the protestant approach to worship. My Pastor understood this well, and condoned a path for me emulating an Orthodox schedule of fasting – Orthodoxy is in my soul. I can’t break from my admiration of it. I feel like I am on a constant quest to find the primordial church of Christ. It is in a few place, but heavily obscured by the corruption of mankind.

What I have trouble understanding is how could a Church completely deny and write off these practices? When we worship God, it is not just with our mind’s but our bodies as well. And the world if replete with sin. It saturates every corner of our lives. This is a world where we practice “self love” instead of love for others. This is a world where people meditate or pray to nothing in the hopes of finding an answer, somewhere out in the void. But from what? From whom?

My prayer routine is complex because I am a sinner. I cannot escape from sin. And that is the only thing that matters. Sin alone is what separates us from our maker. The evil in men can’t be understated. I find it repugnant, the mere suggestion that “people are all inherently good”. I have seen no evidence of this. I have only seen people struggle to find the right path, and fail time after time again.

Call it delusion if you will, but I see no other way through but the denial of sinful pleasure. This is not an easy task. It’s impossible, in fact.

I don’t have much else to say on this matter, and I am not suggesting it – I am merely seeing it as the only way I can move forward into a deeper relationship with Christ.

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. Both now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Absolution and The Brotherhood

In the Catholic Tradition, absolution is a common practice. In the Lutheran Tradition, absolution of sins is typically performed during worship service as a congregation, and private absolution may be requested.

I had a good meeting with my Pastor yesterday. I could not bear the weight of my sins from before I was a Christian. For the first time ever in my life, I was held accountable, under God, for the sins I had committed. This was an emotionally difficult prospect. After I returned home, I spent an hour or two in solitude ruminating over the experience. And then I felt elation and lightness like I had never felt before to follow after.

I had some time to reflect, and after discussing my vocation with my Pastor, came to some conclusions about how I can better serve God going forward. I do not know what that will mean for my future writing, but I do know this; I may be able to better serve and act as a counterpoint to the current social climate not by explicitly speaking about Christian concerns, but by directly addressing people in similar circumstances as myself; specifically younger men who are feeling betrayed and lost in a culture which no longer wants them. In a culture which is ever zeroing in on their natural masculine traits, and turning them into emotional eunuchs.

From the beginning this space was intended for men – Christian men at first – to coalesce and find common ground. A blog alone is not capable of doing this, so I feel like I need to expand further outward. For the time being this will act as my “think tank” for what to do, and how to accomplish it. But I need to work outside of the finite space of my Tradition in order to further serve God and the mission.

The crucifom sword is a symbol not accidentally taken out of popular culture. I pulled it from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade; the Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword were men protecting the secret of the Holy Grail from evil men. My Pastor illuminated some ideas for me in a way I could not about existing within the world and not retreating into monasticism, and this was what I intended from the start. This requires more thought to disseminate; but my conclusion thus far is that engaging in apologetics is for apologists. Preaching is for preachers. I am a family man, that is my vocation and the work God has given me. I have the ability to write clearly and concisely and communicate ideas.


Young men need to be empowered. They need to understand what the world has in store for them. They need to seek higher values and not succumb to a culture that wants to destroy them. Like the hardcore movement in the eighties, they need to go “straightedge” in a sense, morally, in order to construct a community around them – comprised of other men facing the same challenges – and empower their family and build a strong moral structure. While I feel personally that this structure is absolute, and descends to us through the word of God, that may not be the most appropriate place to start. There is no way to build a temple in a swamp.

What I need to do to communicate this, to share with other men this idea, I am not sure exactly yet. But it is something I am thinking hard about.

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Thought Vs. Action

Implicit bias is a term used to describe subconscious feelings/attitudes which can influence our behavior. They are subconscious because we may not be aware they even exist; I.E. inherent discomfort around homosexuals, racial bigotry, etc. Because they are implicit, and cannot be easily identified, they are very difficult to correct.

In a description on the Ohio State University website, the following is expressed:

  • The implicit associations we hold do not necessarily align with our declared beliefs or even reflect stances we would explicitly endorse.

This states that despite the fact we might openly and consciously have a developed viewpoint contrary to our implicit bias, that we may still hold subconscious feelings to the contrary. So while I may say “I am not racist” and while in my conscious mind I firmly believe that, there may be an unconscious element to my perspective which is inherently racist, and which was formed through influences in my life without my active knowledge of how they came to manifest.

Tip of the Iceberg

In a debate with conservative Ben Shapiro and Yale students, he discusses this topic and how trying to find a way to solve the issue of implicit bias, should it exist, is like hunting a “ghost of a ghost.” Since it is subconscious, it is impossible in a sense to influence or change it, because it can’t be identified in the first place.  Shapiro states that negative thoughts manifest in us all the time, but that we don’t always act on them. This claim was met with some reservation.

This reservation in my opinion is a very dangerous path to tread because the mere implication that we are in complete control of all of our thoughts in feelings, once again like I have expressed many times, is suggestive of a current theme; that we are better than what we actually are. That we are in complete and total control even of our subconscious mind should we choose to be. And this eventually leads us to the state of hubris which would state that “I am in control of everything in my perspective universe, ergo, I am God.”

Daily we are plagued by evil thoughts. Hourly. Perhaps by the minute. It’s not that everyone is a murderer on the verge of committing some terrible act; these thoughts can manifest in many small ways. A slight pull of temptation when passing another person who is attractive. A moment of frustration in the bank line at a slow teller. A moment of road rage when being cut off. Most of the time, human beings have the faculties at their disposal to control their own behavior so that they don’t instantly react to these evil inclinations. Because it is the way we act that manifests our character upon the world around us, and not the way we think. If thought was equal to action, what a bizarre world this would be indeed.


Of course people are arrogant, and they want the ability and the power to police negative thought. They are starting to believe that our thoughts themselves need constant correcting, and more vainly, that we actually have the ability to do this. The intellect is a sponge of course; it is very easy to be thrown off course. God gave us the intellect to perceive the world, and to enact our free will. But it is a curse as much as it is a blessing, as many of the dualities of nature are. Our intellect can also be our biggest hurdle in the acceptance of His love and salvation. But it is not a disposable thing that we would be better off without, because it also has the power to strengthen our understanding, and to share His word with others, to engage in our vocations, and to appreciate the intricacy and beauty of His Kingdom.

We have evil thoughts because we are the stuff of Adam. Because the Evil One manifests within our lives in many forms which we cannot perceive. But as our free will allows us to deny God, so too does it allow us to act or not act, through the power of God’s Grace.

Matthew 6:22 – The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy, your body will be full of light.

The way we perceive the world influences the thoughts within us. Not long before I experienced the salvation of Christ, I looked upon the world through a blackened eye. I saw the negativity, the way the culture had manifested evil upon the Earth, and I feared, deeply, that my children would be corrupt and torn to pieces by it as I felt I had been. In just a few months, my whole perspective has changed. I see both good and evil on this Earth, and I know of its source, and I understand that one is greater than the other, and that one can prevail. What we take in from the world, we put back out into it.


In short, our actions influence our being. Despite the dark moments of our lives, when evil, hopeless thoughts manifest within us, how we act is the true mirror of who we are, or what our potential is. And these actions, all of these actions, occur within us due to the manifestation of the Holy Spirit. If the good, charitable actions we do are a result of God, then the constant chatter of our thoughts are easily corrupted by the Evil One. This is why through the Word of God, we are shown how to act, how to behave, and why the atheist notion of a natural biologically inclination toward “good” (which nihilists redefine all the time to suit their own agenda depending on what sinful action they wish to partake in that day) is an arrogant absurdity.

Going back to charity, the action of charity comes through God then, if this is true. Because most human beings are not inherently capable of true altruism — it is always in some way influenced by their biological tendency for self-preservation. I would argue that it is only through the Grace of God that true, sacrificial charity can be manifested in its purest possible form. That no matter how much we try, without the God’s intervention, or charitable acts could only be self-serving. We jump in front of a bullet for someone else out of love or honor, but perhaps it is also because we couldn’t bear the shame of not doing such a duty, or couldn’t bear the loss of a loved one due to how it would affect us? But we do act, we do sacrifice, we do good through the Grace of God, regardless of our mind often trying (and succeeding) to convince us to do otherwise.


So how we act is paramount. That is how we move within the physical space around us. Through worship, prayer, and the Word of God, we can “clean up” or thoughts to a degree, because we can at the very least know what is objectively good, what ethics and morals are absolute and not defined by the current social structure of today, which is inherently malleable and corruptible, and meant to suit man’s fallen nature, and not to uphold the Glory of God. But ultimately, our actions reveal to the world who we are. A man with deviant sexual feelings is not an offender until his thoughts are made manifest. A woman full of anger is not a misery to others if she does not allow this anger to cause her to explode into a fit of rage.

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.


I have never held that there is much inherent difference between atheism and random spirituality. While people may not worship golden idols anymore, they have created so many different analogues for them that there is little difference. I read a blog where someone said they “worship at the altar of discipline”, rife with Christian language, about how their god is self-discipline. A friend of mine waxes daily in flowery language about his own spirituality, based on about ninety books by random authors, with no consistent or cohesive viewpoint. The Earth itself will somehow provide everything, or the universe, or “the goddess”, or a combination of these things.


But like atheism, they have all have one thing very much in common; they place the individual at the center of their own perspective universe. Satanism, the actual organized religion called Satanism, is no different. It proposes an atheist philosophy where each individual is their own god, using the symbol of the baphomet as a representative for the adversarial, carnal nature of the fallen man. It may as well be called Adamism for what it represents, which is the state wherein man has internalized his descent and accepted it as the whole of being.

The trouble with human centered philosophy or “spirituality” in the loose sense, unattached to any long standing system of religious tradition, is that eventually everything boils down to the individual. The one argument for this is to say that if the individual is placed in the center, so are the responsibilities of the individual, and the individual is inclined to act within a certain set of ethics in order to coexist with others in the world. The criticism of Satanists towards Christians is that Christian morality is informed, and not predisposed – that without a “golden rule” and a scriptural guideline, the Christian would devolve into anarchy, violence, and immoral acts.


I would correct this by saying that everyone is capable of evil. That the knowledge of good and evil is not enough to prevent evil. This is why the Christian puts these matters in the hands of God, because it is only through God’s grace that the human being has the power to transcend above their original position, not by finding a place at the right hand of the Father, but by the Lord reaching down to meet them. But when the weight of life becomes apparent, eventually the individual has no choice but to collapse beneath it.

Then comes guilt, and shame, and disgust. The illusion of being a Nietzschian “ubermensch” Wolf Larsen-like character is shattered. Our mortality is revealed to us and we become powerless, although through spirituality or an atheist philosophy, we have convinced ourselves we are gods, the center of the universe, and that we are in complete control of our own destinies. This is a road rife with danger because there is nothing to look at beyond, or above us.


My disdain for atheism is matched only by wariness of random “spirituality”. If there is no basis for spiritual thought, no sacred science to justify a sense of the divine, just about any assumption or belief becomes valid and legitimized. The issue with atheists and spiritualists is that they assume there is not an entire vast body of thought, theory, and practice behind the great traditions, especially Christianity. This is complete and utter ignorance, and the typical launching off point for the justification of a marketplace of random spiritual ideas.

To me personally, both viewpoints are equally harmful and damning to the human spirit. There is no inherent benefit choosing to say “namaste” and meditating over choosing to do nothing at all from a spiritual perspective if there is no systematic, established basis for these practices. The Christian does not pray for “health benefits”. The Christian prays and worships and consumes the blood and the body of Christ to further establish a relationship with him, to renew himself daily in the name of God, and invokes the name of the Lord to strengthen his relationship with God. It is only outside of man that man can be saved, but it must be understood how this can be accomplished, and the way is not through a random grab bag of practices siphoned out of various traditions, some more legitimate than others, or from self-help gurus.

If they want salvation for their sinful lives, men should seek the Sacred, not “The Secret”.


Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.


The Nature of Truth Pt. 1

The Bible is the greatest story ever told. This is also the title of a 1960’s film where the story of Jesus Christ is retold with Max Von Sydow in the role. There are certainly far better cinematic retellings of the story of Christ (and as far as Max Von Sydow films go, I prefer The Seventh Seal) but there is little denying, whether one is a believer in Christ or not, that this statement is most certainly true.


It is a large part of Christian apologetics, more specifically, in dealing with deniers of Christ to have to face the many myths, Gods, cults, and legends which sprang up across the vast landscape of human history which are reminiscent of the Christ story. Mortal men being born of virgins, sacrificed, and so on. And it is also a common argument for people to say, “well if Christ is the only truth, the light, and so on, then why are there so many religions to choose from? Why wouldn’t God just negate the rest of them to simplify the whole process?” This question is perhaps more difficult and I haven’t had time to articulate my own reasoning, but it is something along the lines of all major systems of tradition harboring some partial truths, and thus acting as conduits for the realization of Christ. But in this first part it is important to first define “truth” in the first place before this can be addressed.

Although I am a new Christian, and believe the Word of God to be absolutely true, I try to speak from a more general perspective when regarding these things. Because I feel like a direct apology for Christ is difficult to make in a world where atheists and other religious apologists fighting for their own causes have carefully constructed a pillbox of “gotchas!” meant specifically to create unanswerable questions, to trap the Christian into a corner and force them to reduce and homogenize everything into a rational space, and therefore first have to be met halfway between evangelism and rationalization. This will fail for the Christian often because secular thought relies on its own absolute; that truth, human truth, can only be deduced through science and evidence alone. And if something cannot be hypothesized and tested within a material framework, that it inherently has no value.

I would argue the complete opposite. Human truth cannot be found anywhere in natural science. Because science can reveal nothing about the human journey, the human story that our history, our myths, our legends and stories do, or at least nothing of real, primordial value.


Let me explain.

Just this morning, I heard that my uncles appendix had burst. Lord have mercy, I pray that he recovers quickly. The doctors did not initially know it was an appendix apparently, and mistreated it. Had his appendix burst a few hundred years ago, he would unquestionably have died. The appendix and how it fails is interesting. But in six months from now, my uncle will not talk about the biological function of the appendix. He will not talk about what tools and methods were used to fix him, unless they are apart of the greater story of his appendix having burst. He will tell a story, though; he will tell people what time his appendix burst perhaps, or where he was, what he was doing when it did. He might tell people what his thoughts and feelings were when he was lying in the hospital bed. He might tell them how relieved he was when he recovered, and who was there for him, and remember their kindness (or, if he had a cranky nurse, perhaps the opposite.) The story of his appendix bursting will not be about the appendix itself, but about everything he went through as a human being when this occurred. Because this is all that matters about this particular trial he has experienced.

The doctors however will not care about his story insofar as it will not be essential to them dealing with burst appendixes in the future. I mean maybe there will have been an anomaly along the way. One doctor or nurse in particular will certainly remember; because it was not properly diagnosed, my uncle almost died due to that oversight. I’m sure that lesson will be important. But my uncles story is of no use to a doctor dealing with the reality of a burst appendix. The doctor needs science in order to deal with burst appendix, not myth and stories. Science and literature of course fall under the umbrella of classic liberal arts, but one has something vital to say about the human condition and truth, and one only has something to say about the appendix, or related organs and the practice of dealing with them, in this particular instance.

Is it an accident, then, that the story of Jesus Christ has so many comparisons to be made by others that came around the same time, or before it? Joseph Campbell’s works in comparative mythology have illuminated a lot about the things people believe, and the stories which resonate with us, and the comparison of all of them. So can it be stated then, that the story of Jesus Christ is just another formulaic creation made in the tradition of myths which came before it?


In fact, the story of Christ is our story. It is the story of mankind in a way which no other story has been able to articulate it, manifested in reality and to its fundamental completion (in that it says everything that will ever need to be said about life on this Earth) recorded over a period of a thousand years, but extending back far beyond that to before our civilization was made manifest. Christ suffered the agony, struggle, and ultimate redemption outlined in every one of our best stories. Christ became the human condition – God made fully man, but still conscious of Godhood, able to truly experience human suffering (“Eli Eli lama sabachthani?”, My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?) – and many of his trials, lessons, and struggles along the way were highly reflective of the body of human myth which has been documented over the centuries. Because the story of Christ is the story of man, and stories themselves reveal the reality of truth.

Truth and fact are not the same thing. But within the limited scope of the intellect, this is almost impossible to reconcile. When these truths are identified, extracted, and illuminated, most people find them to be deeply resonant and fundamentally “true” regardless of having any objective material evidence to prove this. Science can be factually correct, and not be “true” as it pertains to our uniquely divine human experience. So the greatest story ever told is the culmination and fulfillment upon this Earth of the most primordial of human stories – the very story of the nature of humanity itself.


I may follow up with a second part later.

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Hesychasm and Orthodox Practices from the Lutheran Perspective

(The last couple of posts looking back on them feel a little too politically minded and judgmental. I don’t expect to air out my dirty laundry here often regarding material matters – I’d like this site as it evolves to focus on more of the deeper theology and how I implement it in my daily life and the path God is leading me down than on a systematic criticism of modernity, to what end I don’t think is ultimately that useful. My apologies, Lord have Mercy.)

I have to emphasize that I am a new Lutheran. I have much to learn. And much of what I used in daily prayer and study has been cannibalized from my understanding of the Eastern church, which came before my discovery of Lutheran Christianity. I have read the Small Catechism in its entirety, and am currently working through the Book of Concord.

Before I even knew where to align with, (or more accurately, before God lead me there) I knew that I had an immediate need to express and practice faith and share this with my children. My wife was baptized in the Roman Catholic church, and while she always held a “casual” belief in God, her own circumstances kept her away from this practice. With my new found interest, her own was renewed, though she never lost her faith in the Lord.


Since my primary study Bible was the Orthodox Study Bible, and my experience with the church had up until that point been exclusively confined to Orthodox Christianity, that is where I began. In the morning and night, we recited the prayers listed in the back of this Bible, integrating personal prayer, and also practicing the Jesus Prayer. (a wonderful, staggeringly deep traditional “prayer of the heart” lauded by perennial traditionalists and Christians alike for its deeply primordial quality) This was part of a concept called Hesychasm, one quite easily confused as an esoteric practice, because on the surface it is almost identical in appearance to something like Japa as present in Hindu, Buddhist, and Sikh traditions (and even early Sufism) except that the goal is not to realize a state of emptiness or void, but instead to fill the heart with the perfect love of Christ through the invocation of his name. To what end this vital step in cultivating a state of Theosis is or is not “allowed” by the Lutheran tradition I am not qualified to say, but there is an interesting blog written by Jordan Cooper (AALC) that attempts to reconcile this in some small way. As Cooper points out, and according to Article IV (Justification) of the Augsberg Confession, the Lutheran belief is that salvation can come only from faith; that concepts like works, and by proxy Theosis, are not necessary requisites of salvation in the Lutheran practice, and that this is justified in scripture clearly and in several places. But that does not necessarily omit the possibility of finding a deeper sense of “Christification” (Jordan’s word, not mine) through practices such as these.

In addition to this prayer which I do not recite daily, but rather spontaneously, I continue to use the prayers of the Orthodox teaching as I integrate more and more Lutheran practice into my teaching and family study time. As we become familiar with the Hymnal of the Lutheran Service Book, so do we sing more hymns in this tradition. I find a lot of what appeals to me about the Eastern church is in its aesthetic; there is an unimaginable sense of sacred beauty within those practices. But I am starting to find the unique character and beauty of the Lutheran tradition as well, and it appeals strongly to my “European spirit” as it were – a concept I cannot extrapolate properly, but feel is important (I urged my close friend, who is Russian, to seek out Russian Orthodoxy for this reason. There is a deep resonance in a congregation that has a similar cultural tradition and background – with full understanding of course that Christ passes through and between all races, colors, creeds, and earthly borders, and that none of these should act as barriers to finding a denomination, but may help to inform where this journey should begin, by the good Grace of God.) Learning the specific wording of the Nicene and Apostles Creed as per the Lutheran tradition has become increasingly more interesting as well, and I make sure to note the important and frustratingly complex difference between the Holy Spirit proceeding through the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeding through the Father and the Son.


With the direction of my Pastor, I discussed these (relatively small, in the grand scope of things) matters to clarify a few points, but also came to conclusions of my own. Martin Luther for example had elaborated a strong Marian theology, but it was generally agreed upon that Mary should not be prayed to, nor should any saint. I have not delved into the perspective of Icons, so I am not clear on that point – my vague understanding is that veneration of Icons is not done out of worship from the Orthodox perspective, but out of admiration for Saints (and Saints should be looked upon with admiration and for their wisdom, or at least should be studied with great interest) but it is very explicit that the magnification of Theotokos taking place is rather a glorification, using the exact word in the Intercession, which is worship a priori, and as such I omit that specific wording while keeping the Theotokos section of the prayer intact, and amending the end with the Lutheran Hail Mary until otherwise corrected, as I feel it is not out of place so long as the proper wording is used, and that this recognition of Theotokos is not mistaken for prayer to the mother of our God, the Lord Jesus Christ.

And this is the extent to which I implement specifically Eastern practices, which are evolving (and might eventually be phased out completely as they are replaced with my ongoing learning of Lutheran ones) into my Christian life. I have to be clear here; there has been nothing I have so far found to be objectionable in Lutheran theology, or “inferior” to that of which the Eastern church proposes. In fact, I often find them quite indistinguishable (right up until they aren’t, in which case it is usually regarding an element that appears deceptively minor until it is understood just how critically different the difference present actually is) and find that Lutheran teachings are far more in line with the Eastern church than they could ever be with Roman Catholicism, despite that being the point from which the theology sprang forth from.


At the end of my prayer, and at the end of this posts, I usually end with the line “Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.” the etymology of which is distinctly Greek in origin, but which has no important difference that I can surmise from “world without end for ever and ever”. As I also recite the Trisagion in monotone the way in which I have heard it repeated before, I do this in part out of sentimentality – both because of my respect to the Eastern church for introducing me to Christianity in the first place in a way I could synthesize it properly, and because my deceased father in law has some roots there, having been Greek himself. (My wife’s maiden name is incomprehensible to most – her complexion is decidedly less Greek and more Irish, being pale as the backdrop this is written upon.)

I expect these ideas will evolve and change over time. Meanwhile, one of the pieces I ran across when pondering this one over is here, and talks about Hesychasm from the Lutheran perspective. I found it rather interesting.

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.


The war on faith in the age of quarrel

Create your website at
Get started