Concerning Life as It Is Supposed to Be

Month: August 2010 Page 1 of 2

Blended Orthodoxy

Many have referenced or forwarded to me this well stated commentary on the rise of Fox News broadcaster Glenn Beck, as a spokesman for Christian orthodoxy. The blindness with which Christians so easily blend the gospel with a political position is a great sorrow to me, and it is one which this commentator, Russell Moore, exposes with sorrowful insight.

The church has walked this way before. Whenever we allow a person to meld Christian language with a political position, in the end, the Christian message will be harmed. All who support movement, in Beck, or any other, explicitly, or even implicitly by providing the audience, will share in the black spot which will befall the church when this blows apart, as every such movement eventually does.

What I have not seen others reference is Moore’s conclusion, printed below.

The answer to this scandal isn’t a retreat, as some would have it, to an allegedly apolitical isolation. Such attempts lead us right back here, in spades, to a hyper-political wasteland. If the churches are not forming consciences, consciences will be formed by the status quo, including whatever demagogues can yell the loudest or cry the hardest. The answer isn’t a narrowing sectarianism, retreating further and further into our enclaves. The answer includes local churches that preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, and disciple their congregations to know the difference between the kingdom of God and the latest political whim.

This is convicting to the church, and challenging to pastors like myself. As many in our congregations mistakingly equate Christian orthodoxy with political conservatism, to critique that conservatism becomes an increasingly dicey proposition when such critique necessarily causes adherents to question the associated orthodoxy.

Nevertheless, we must have the insight, wisdom, and courage to do so, even if such puts us at odds with those who pay our bills.

Scribbling

I think I will change the name of this blog to ‘Scribblings’. Though it’s been some time since my last post, I continue to scribble notes for possible posts.

If all I had to do was post the scribblings, I’d be here with much greater frequency.

At this point I have exactly 100 scribbled but undeveloped blog posts on the computer, several literally scribbled on notes of paper, and one or two in my head.

I have a friend who says that I should not take too much time in preparing blog posts, but that the nature of the medium means I am to just, in his words, ‘let it rip’.

As fun as that would be, it is a scary thought. I can get in enough trouble when I’ve carefully thought about what I want to say. Shooting from the hip for me leads to shooting myself in the foot. Can’t go there.

I’ve not had any time to really even ‘let it rip’ though. In my new world, there is not the margin in my rhythms that blogging once filled. I will find them again.

Jehovah-rapha

Here is the pastoral prayer from Covenant Presbyterian Church in Oviedo, Florida for last Sunday, August 15, 2010, which ruling elder Jon Boardman has consented to share with us. Even if you do not know the stories of the people named, this prayer is a good reflection on our Father’s heart for us.
+++++
Pastoral Prayer
Covenant Presbyterian Church, Oviedo, Florida
8/15/2010

Jon Boardman

Jehovah-rapha – “The LORD who heals”

When Moses led Israel from the Red Sea into the wilderness, the people wandered the desert for three days without water. When they came to the waters of Marah, it was too bitter to drink.

However, God made the water sweet, and the LORD made a decree: “If you listen carefully to the voice of the LORD your God and do what is right in his eyes, if you pay attention to his commands and keep all his decrees, I will not bring on you any of the diseases I brought on the Egyptians, for I am Jehovah-rapha [the LORD who heals].”

God is in the business of turning the bitterness of life into the sweetness of redemption. Our souls are sick, yet God heals us. Sin casts its mortal wound on our souls, but Jesus, the Shepherd and Guardian of our soul, has restored us. He is the Great Physician, the Balm of Gilead, and our Great Redeemer.

Let us seek his mercy and healing hand this morning.

Jehovah-rapha, we come to You this morning in great need of Your healing touch.

With the psalmist we declare: “Praise the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits. He forgives all my sins and heals all my diseases; he redeems my life from the pit and crowns me with love and compassion.” (Ps. 103:2-4).

It is to Your love and compassion we look.

We carry wounds with us that only Your loving, surgical hand can mend.

We have deep spiritual wounds, emotional and mental wounds, and physical wounds. Yet no wound is too great for You to heal.

This morning we pray for those with deep spiritual wounds.

Ours sins are many, but many of us carry sins and guilt that weigh us down and render us hopeless.

There are those in Your midst who live with secrets in their hearts that they even try to hide from You, but You know every area of their souls.

We pray for those who grapple with abiding sin or addictive behaviors.

We ask that you break the bonds of addiction, pornography, gambling, gossip, bitterness, unforgiveness, and hatred.

Often times our hearts are full of rage; they are overwhelmed with doubt; they are rebellious, blemished and lonely.

We fail to come to You because we feel shame for our sin and we feel contempt for ourselves or for You for not freeing us from it.

But You do have the power to free us from both our guilt and our condemnation.

Help us to know and trust the power of Christ and to know the truth that “there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.”

We pray also for those with deep emotional and mental wounds.

There may exist bitterness due to unforgiveness, spite due to betrayal, hardness of heart due to ill-treatment, and deep anxiety due to abandonment.

Many of Your people have been deeply wounded by earthly relationships — by those who have abused rather than protected, by reckless fathers, by indifferent mothers, by jealous siblings, by prejudicial people, by malicious peers, or by careless friends.

We ask that You turn their sorrow into gladness and their fears into confidence.

We affirm the words of the psalmist who said that the LORD “heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds.”

We pray especially for those who are grieving the loss of a loved one.

Bind up their wounds and mend their hearts. We ask that as they walk through the valley of the shadow of death, they would find comfort and confidence in You.

We pray for those who have physical wounds. We know that not all physical illnesses are the consequences of personal sin, but some are.

If there is sin in our lives that brings illness, bring it to light, and help us to repent. Forgive us and heal us.

If the illness is due to other causes, we ask for Your mercy.

We ask for relief from the pain and anguish that disease and illnesses bring to our bodies.

Specifically, we pray for Lisa, Jim, Joseph, Rod’s grandson (Scott), and many of our loved ones who are wounded by such illness.

Turn their bitter diseases into the sweetness of life.

We also pray for our covenant children who face the prospect of being inflicted by so many wounds from sin, the world, and the devil.

As parents we cannot shield them from such wounds, but we trust in our Heavenly Father to protect them and heal them as they are confronted with the harshness of this side of heaven.

As our children return to school, public, private, or home, we ask that they would grow in faith and trust in You.

For all of us, we ask that You heal us and save us.

For You are our praise.

For it is in the name of Jesus we pray.

Amen.

Old Shuttles Never Die

They just fade away into a museum. In the case of the soon to end space shuttle program, museums are apparently jumping over themselves trying to, shall we say, ‘land’ the prize.

This was sent to me by a friend; not sure where to find it on line.

My vote is for the museum at the Wright-Patterson AF base near Dayton, Ohio. I have fond memories of that place.

+ + + + +

Shuttle Diplomacy: Museums Launch Bids for Retiring Space Planes
NASA Offers Orbiters Free, With One Catch: $29 Million in Shipping Costs

By DANIEL MICHAELS

WASHINGTON—The space shuttle fleet’s looming retirement ends an era—and launches a new space race. This one is on the ground, among museums scrambling to land one of the three orbiters.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration says it has received expressions of interest from 21 institutions. The competition has sparked intensive lobbying campaigns, massive fund-raising drives and a sprint for letters of support from astronauts, politicians and the public.

Because NASA has agreed to give the shuttle Discovery to the Smithsonian, one of the museums not selected for the newly retired shuttles will get the Enterprise, a shuttle prototype and a museum centerpiece.

NASA is offering the space planes free to qualified institutions as long as they pay for shipping and handling. The catch: those costs add up to $28.8 million per shuttle, including post-flight repairs and strapping the orbiters to a special 747 jumbo jet. The shuttles also must be displayed indoors, which for most museums means building a giant new structure.

“Everybody would love to have one, but very, very few museums can afford to transport and store one,” says Jay Miller, an aviation historian in Fort Worth, Texas.

Aviation museums haven’t scrambled like this since the Concorde retired in 2003. Then, operators Air France and British Airways received dozens of requests to host the supersonic jetliners. But that decision was simpler because there were 13 Concordes, and the airlines were free to choose the planes’ homes.

The current competition, says shuttle expert Dennis Jenkins, “is going to be stupider than Concorde was because the government is involved.” Mr. Jenkins, an aerospace engineer who wrote an exhaustive history of the shuttle program, predicts that after NASA officials decide, “Congress will immediately go into an uproar and un-decide for them.”

Legislators are already weighing in. New York Senator Charles Schumer in March addressed the Senate to stump for Manhattan’s Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum, which proposed building a new structure next to the aircraft carrier Intrepid to house a shuttle. “It’s time to convince NASA that the Big Apple has the right stuff to showcase one of these iconic spacecraft,” he enthused.

Ohio’s entire congressional delegation in April wrote NASA to push for the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Dayton. Florida Senator Bill Nelson—a former astronaut—has been working on behalf of the Kennedy Space Center.

The shuttles’ exact retirement date remains unclear, and politicians are bickering over what will succeed it. But NASA’s choice of retirement homes could come as soon as this fall, say people familiar with the deliberation.

To get a shuttle, museums must first be able to receive it. That requires a nearby runway where a jumbo jet can land. The shuttle must then be able to move from the tarmac to the museum without dismantling, which eliminates most locations.

France’s Cité de l’Espace outside Toulouse, which boasts the only remaining Soviet-built Mir space station, mulled asking for a shuttle several years ago. Crossing the Atlantic Ocean to Toulouse Airport posed no problem, says spokesman Olivier Sanguy. But driving the spacecraft eight miles would entail destroying and rebuilding highways, bridges, buildings and power lines. “The cost of travel from the airport would be more than the cost of the shuttle,” says Mr. Sanguy. He notes the issue is moot because NASA says shuttles will stay inside the U.S., with geographic distribution a key criterion.

Competitors must also be able to keep the space planes in climate-controlled conditions and away from the elements. Shuttles were designed to withstand extraordinary things like the near-vacuum of space, micrometeor showers and the furnace of re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere. Rain, on the other hand, is a problem. “They leak like a sieve,” says Mr. Jenkins.

The only museum currently ready for an orbiter is the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum. Its Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia, abutting Dulles International Airport, already houses Enterprise, a full-size prototype shuttle that NASA used to test the reusable space plane’s aerodynamics in the 1970s. But most of its insides were cannibalized over the years—and it never went into space.

“It’s not a real shuttle, but it’s unique,” said museum spokesman Frank McNally as he drove a golf cart beneath it on a recent afternoon. “It’s the only one you can see.”

NASA has said it will give the oldest surviving shuttle, Discovery, to the Smithsonian, which is the national repository of space history. NASA will select homes for the other shuttles, Atlantis and Endeavour. Two additional shuttles, Challenger and Columbia, were destroyed in fatal accidents. The Smithsonian will then offer Enterprise to a loser. “We realize we can’t be selfish and keep both,” says Smithsonian shuttle curator Valerie Neal.

Boosters of the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Dayton say they’ve got a strong case for Atlantis, which handled many missions for the Defense Department. The Pentagon helped design the shuttles, supplied many astronauts, and the Air Force even “saved the shuttle program in lean budget years during its development,” says museum spokesman Rob Bardua.

Seattle’s Museum of Flight has an edge thanks to its West Coast location, say handicappers. The museum also has close links to Boeing Co., which bought part of the company that built the shuttles in California, Rockwell International. The museum’s campaign is being led by former astronaut Bonnie Dunbar.

New Yorkers say Intrepid is ideal to fulfill NASA’s goal of giving shuttles maximum exposure, thanks to the city’s status as a tourist mecca and media capital. Intrepid, a decommissioned aircraft carrier, also has space history because it retrieved early astronauts on splashdown, says Executive Director Susan Marenoff. “It’s a no-brainer,” she says.

Bill Moore, chief operating officer of the Kennedy Space Center visitor complex, argues that his engineers can design the coolest exhibit. After all, each of the 132 shuttle missions lifted off from the center. “A shuttle’s not something that should be displayed on three wheels on concrete,” he says, suggesting the center would show its shuttle as it operates in space.

Ms. Neal at the Smithsonian says a key issue will be keeping the shuttles as intact as possible “for reference 100 years from now.” She has asked NASA to keep Discovery’s toilets and galleys installed, even though they won’t be visible to the public.

“Who knows,” muses Ms. Neal. “Maybe one day we’ll have some extraterrestrials come here to look at our space history.”

Jehovah-jireh

We are behind in our posting in general, and specifically behind in posting the prayers from the morning worship service of Covenant Presbyterian Church. We hope you are blessed by these.

+++++

Pastoral Prayer
Covenant Presbyterian Church, Oviedo, Florida
8/8/2010

Jon Boardman

Jehovah-jireh = “The LORD will Provide”

This name is found in connection with a well-known Bible story: Genesis chapter 22, where Abraham is tested by God. As the story unfolds, we learn that Abraham has taken Isaac, the son who is to continue his legacy and covenant, to be sacrificed in the region of Moriah.

Just as Abraham is about to slay his son, the angel of the LORD calls out to him, stops him, and announces that he has passed the test. Then Abraham takes a ram, which he finds stuck in some thorns, and sacrifices it instead of Isaac.

Abraham was not only greatly relieved that day from having to sacrifice his son, but he was extremely grateful that God had provided a sacrificial substitute via the ram. Abraham was confident that God would fulfill His promises and provide for his needs.

The passage tells us that “Abraham called that place ‘The LORD will provide’ [Jehovah-jireh]. What a reassuring name and reality this was for Abraham. And this name continues to be a reassuring reality for us for we know that God still provides for His people today. So let us confidently pray to Jehovah-jireh this morning.

LORD, You are Jehovah-jireh,

and we are confident that You will provide for all our needs.

Forgive us when we confuse our needs with our wants.
Forgive us also for overemphasizing our material needs over our spiritual needs and vice versa OR for overemphasizing our emotional needs over our need for holiness and vice versa.

As Jehovah-jireh, You meet all our needs: for the Scriptures declare that “my God will meet all your needs according to His glorious riches in Christ Jesus.”

So we recognize that You provide for us on every level because You care for our whole being.

We look to You to give us what we need to grow closer to You and to reflect Your glory to the world.

We give You praise and thanks for supplying all that we need in this life to live for You.

We thank you for fulfilling our need for salvation.

You have made ultimate provision for our sins by sending Your son to be sacrificed on our behalf.

Jesus did for us what we were unable to do for ourselves, and now we can know You and have access to You through Your Son. Thank you Jesus!

We thank you for fulfilling our daily needs.

You give us our daily bread and You provide us with shelter and clothes.

We pray for those who struggle to have their daily needs met.

Be merciful and may Your church be Your arm of mercy to them.

We thank you for the many blessings You have bestowed on our church.

You have given us a pastor who ministers the word, a place where we can worship You, elders who shepherd, deacons who serve, staff who manage the daily operations of the church, a worship team who direct our thoughts to You, and volunteers who encourage and care for our children.

We thank You, LORD, that the needs of Your people are neither too small nor too large and neither too mundane nor too spiritual.

You care for Your people collectively and individually, locally and globally.

So we turn our thoughts and prayers toward them.

We thank you for the birth of Aria Dumas and the health of both mother and child.

We pray for your continued growth and protection for the Dumas family and for all families in our church.

We pray for Your provisions to those we support on the missions field.

We ask that You continue to provide the necessary means for them to serve You and that You protect them from the enemy.

We pray for those who serve You here – our domestic missionaries and evangelists.

We ask that You would supply them with the resources to spread the gospel.

Grant them the blessing to see the fruit of their labor and multiply their efforts.

We pray for those who are in need of Your healing touch. We ask that you provide them with Your strength and mercy.

We pray for those who are grieving the loss of a loved one. We ask that you provide them with Your comfort and grace.

We pray for all those in our midst who are enduring financial, marital, relational, psychological, spiritual, and emotional hardships. May they find in You rest for the weary and the grace to help them in their time of need.

Lord, You are Jehovah-jireh, and we place our trust in You.

We pray in Jesus’ name.

Amen.

I’m with My Daddy

With my mind, I eschew the so-called prosperity ‘gospel’, that system of thought teaching that God wants his people to expect good health and financial prosperity, and that the sign of God’s blessing is fitness and riches.

But with my heart, I find I am a card carrying believer. When the script of my life goes contrary to my desires for comfort and safety, I am taken aback. I wonder about God’s love and question his goodness. In the darkness of my heart my assessment of the NORM for the Christian life is prosperity. When it does not come, it can only be that God has failed me.

Such thinking shows that I am a true blue believer in the prosperity ‘gospel’, not in that part of my mind which forms the words I speak and the convictions I articulate, but in that part that feeds my heart and my emotions and my desires and my faith.

This morning I was reading about Peter in Acts 12. Peter is imprisoned, and yet the church prays for him. As a result, an angel comes, leads him through miraculously swinging gates, and into the still night a free man. This is the kind of thing my prosperity trained faith would expect. It is a wonderful thing, and we praise God for it, and we look for similar experiences in our own lives.

Too bad that James did not get to see any of this.

James, the apostle, the brother of John, did not get to see or celebrate Peter’s miraculous release. Herod did not bother imprisoning James. He just flat out killed him.

So, Peter lived out a miracle, and James just died. Both faithful men. Both among Jesus’ inner circle. Both leaders in the church. Both according to my ‘prosperity’ thinking deserving of God’s best. One is simply slaughtered, the other delivered.

James, though, not Peter, is the norm. The norm in a world Jesus described as a place where his people ‘will have tribulation’ is not Peter being rescued, but rather the saints in Hebrews 11 losing meals, body parts, and loved ones. The norm is James.

When I make Peter’s deliverance the norm, then I grumble and question God over every problem in my life (currently: broken timing belt on daughter’s car) and am blind to the plethora of blessings around me (currently: I slept in a comfortable bed last night, with a full tummy, in reasonable health, with a loving family, and a wonderful church, and…).

When, on the other hand, I take Jesus seriously and believe that the world he has overcome is a world in which tribulation is the norm, I am not shocked by James’ death, though saddened, and I am thrilled by not only Peter’s deliverance, but deeply thankful for the smaller and seemingly mundane blessings of food on my plate and daughters who still call me ‘Daddy’.

When I retrieved my daughter from along I-4 on Tuesday as a tow truck hooked on to her dead car, she was talking with a friend on her phone telling her what had happened. “It’s okay now,” she said, “I’m with my daddy.”

That is the gospel we are to embrace, the gospel of a Father’s love displayed in the faithfulness of the cross. In this world there will be tribulation.

But it’s okay, now. We’re with our ‘Daddy’.

Snooty: an Acquired Taste?

I lived for nearly 25 years in Manatee County, Florida which has, as it’s mascot, Snooty, the longest living (in captivity) West Indian Manatee.

PHO-A_home.jpg

I admit that Snooty is not the best looking guy in the animal kingdom, but I never really considered him repulsive. But now I find out that his cousin, the West African Manatee, whose looks are not all that distinguishable, is famous for being overlooked. This article in the NY Times on ugly animals says this:

Assessing the publication database for the years 1994 through 2008, the researchers found 1,855 papers about chimpanzees, 1,241 on leopards and 562 about lions — but only 14 for that mammalian equivalent of the blobfish, the African manatee.

“The manatee was the least studied large mammal,” Ms. Trimble said. Speculating on a possible reason for the disparity, she said, “Most scientists are in it for the love of what they do, and a lot of them are interested in big, furry cute things.”

A Qualified Arbiter?

I want to know WHY I find the essays of one such as Stephen Jay Gould to be more accessible, and therefore of greater power, than that of the essay A Perfect Game by David B. Hart. I know I prefer the one. The question is “Why?”

The literary world will grimace when I invite Stephen King to serve as an arbiter.

Another favorite essayist of mine, whose pen has now grown silent, is Cullen Murphy who wrote for the Atlantic Monthly (and produced, for a time, the epic Sunday comic staple “Prince Valiant“). In a humorous but perceptive essay, Murphy came to King’s defense, I think, when King was taken to task by Harold Bloom for making no contribution to humanity other than “keeping the publishing world afloat”.

King’s book On Writing is more a memoir than a handbook on style (and is therefore a book that many can read and enjoy), but he did make some comments about style that have stuck with me. In short, he, like many stylists, praised the active voice and eschewed unnecessarily complex sentences and tendentious uses of modifiers. (“The adverb is not your friend,” he says.)

I’d like to go through the essays by Hart and Gould, mark the use of adjectives and adverbs, the complex sentences, and the use of the passive voice. My guess is that Gould would have far fewer of each. This would be fun, but I despair having the time to do it.

I’m just a lowly pastor and consumer of the written word. And I may be an arrogant one at that, setting myself in judgment over one who not only thinks, he writes, and not only writes, but writes with sufficient merit to be published. But when good ideas, ideas I want to embrace, are wrapped in obscurity, that makes me sad. I’d like to see them set free.

Judging the Wrapper

I argue that David Hart, in his essay “A Perfect Game”, made a beautiful swing for the fences, but managed only to pop out to first. Others of you no doubt disagree.

Is there a way to judge between the two opinions?

To judge a steak, I compare it to a really good steak, one which I have eaten before, one on another plate before me, or an ideal I have imagined. Though my judgment is ultimately one of taste, I’m certain that a really fine food critic would make his judgment based upon factors of which I would be unaware. The critic’s judgment would either explain why I preferred the one to the other, or I, in deference to the background and expertise of the critic, would be forced to train my taste to recognize the superior quality of the one I did not choose.

Writing is not all that different. If I set Hart’s piece next to other baseball writing, how does it hold up? If I find it in comparison far less tasty than some of the best out there, the objective criteria of my literary elders would either explain why I find it superior or would force me to reassess my judgment.

This question made me think of a man whom I consider to be one of the best essayists in recent generations: Stephen Jay Gould, of both Harvard University and the American Museum of Natural History. These credentials alone suggest that he, too, like David Hart, is a fairly sharp guy.

I was first introduced to Gould through the pages of Natural History magazine in which he would write a monthly essay when I was subscriber 30 years ago. As a paleontologist Gould would often aim his sharp and piercing verbal arrows at the Biblical account of creation. His essays were challenging, sometimes disturbing, and always accessible.

Though I often disagreed with his conclusions, Gould, like a good essayist, did not (to make a paleontological allusion) bury his bones under impenetrable sediment of verbiage, but exposed them in such a way that forced me to deal with them.

Gould was as well a lover of baseball (and of the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees, for which I pity him). I was reminded of this recently when reading the introduction to the book Eight Men Out: The Black Sox and the 1919 World Series which Gould wrote.

To sample writing in which Gould weaves his love for baseball and his contemplations about origins, perhaps this essay, The Creation Myths of Cooperstown, will serve as a ‘second steak’ to set alongside Hart’s The Perfect Game.

I’m not on a crusade do denigrate David Hart. But I am asking if there is such a thing as ‘good’ writing and ‘poor’ writing and how to judge the difference.

A+ Ideas in a D- Wrapper

Two friends, knowing my love of baseball, sent me the very same recent essay A Perfect Game by David B. Hart, in which the author finds in the game of baseball a sublime reflection of the ideal unmatched by any other sport. They knew that my heart would resonate with such a thesis.

Ever since being soundly defeated by a friend in a public debate in which the proposition was ‘baseball is a game superior to football’ I have looked for ammunition to buttress what was even then a sound, but poorly presented, argument. I looked forward to reading the essay with enjoyment.

If only I could understand what he says.

I think I’m smart enough, and though my education is spotty at best I should be able to understand and enjoy an essay on baseball, even if that essay is wed to Greek philosophical reflections. But this essay felt all wrong.

I know that if a man looks at the Mona Lisa and finds it uninteresting, the problem is not with Leonardo or with his painting, but with the looker. I’m willing to accept that the problem here may be me. But maybe, just maybe, the problem is poor writing? I wonder.

Reading Amazon.com reviews of John Coltrane’s magnum opus “A Love Supreme” the other day I found a guy who honestly admitted to not liking and not ‘getting’ this piece which, he said, was unlistenable. But in making his case, he exposed his flank by saying, “I have built a small but quality jazz library the last few months.”

Oops. A few months of song collecting does not make one a jazz critic.

So, similarly, I admit the problem could be me. But I have been reading for some time, and so I hesitate to say this, as an unpublished nobody, that just perhaps the author is just a deep thinker who is a poor writer. In suggesting this to one of my friends, he said that the author IS a very smart man. I said he needed a good editor.

And there the argument rests.

Is there a way of judging style? Are there credible standards by which I could justly award this man a D- without being laughed out of the academy?

Page 1 of 2

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén