Category Archives: The Church

The Prince of Peace

This post is written by Laurence Vance and copied here today to remind everyone what we celebrate on Christmas Day.  See his entire post on the Lew Rockwell blog here.

Prince of Peace

The Prince of Peace bids men to come to him (Matthew 11:28); the god of war bids men to go fight foreign wars.

The Prince of Peace says it is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:35); the god of war says it is more blessed to kill than to be killed.

The Prince of Peace says to love your enemies (Matthew 5:44); the god of war says to kill your enemies.

The Prince of Peace is righteous (1 John 2:1); the god of war wants men to commit unrighteousness.

The Prince of Peace says to bless them that curse you (Matthew 5:44); the god of war says to curse them that curse you.

The Prince of Peace witnessed a good confession (1 Timothy 6:13); the god of war spouts lies.

The Prince of Peace says to do good to them that hate you (Matthew 5:44); the god of war says to do evil to them that hate you.

The Prince of Peace is the Son of God (Acts 9:20); the god of war is the enemy of God.

The Prince of Peace is the creator (Colossians 1:16); the god of war is the destroyer.

The Prince of Peace died for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3); the god of war wants men to die for no reason.

The Prince of Peace rose from the dead (Acts 26:23); the god of war sends men to their deaths.

The Prince of Peace was sacrificed for us (1 Corinthians 5:7); the god of war wants men to sacrifice other men to him.

The Prince of Peace died for the ungodly (Romans 5:6); the god of war wants men to commit ungodliness.

The Prince of Peace was born of a virgin (Matthew 1:23); the god of war encourages men to violate virgins.

The Prince of Peace came in the flesh (1 John 4:20); the god of war is a destroyer of flesh.

The Prince of Peace glorified not himself (Hebrews 5:5); the god of war glorifies war.

The Prince of Peace is the bread of life (John 6:35); the god of war is the slayer of life.

The Prince of Peace redeems (Galatians 3:13); the god of war condemns.

The Prince of Peace is the light of the world (John 8:12); the god of war plunges the world into darkness.

The Prince of Peace is the resurrection and the life (John 11:25); the god of war is the wounder and taker of life.

The Prince of Peace was made to be sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21); the god of war wants men to commit sin.

The Prince of Peace is the mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5); the god of war is the separator of God from men.

The Prince of Peace is the Saviour of men (Titus 1:4); the god of war is the enemy of men.

The Prince of Peace forgives (Colossians 3:13); the god of war punishes.

The Prince of Peace suffered for us (1 Peter 2:21); the god of war wants men to suffer on the battlefield.

I hope you have a Merry Christmas, not a military one. Worship and serve the Prince of Peace, not the god of war.

Ask Affaircare: How Could You Be So Heartless? Have a Little Sympathy!

AskAffaircare

The Ask Affaircare Series started because our readers have questions. About Affairs. Reconciling. Marriage. Divorce. Christianity. The Bible. And God.  Initially, we tried to answer each question through e-mail, but we quickly realized that there were many people asking many similar questions, so we started this weekly series!

It’s not our goal to make you agree with us, but rather to explore what the Bible says in thoughtful, and clear manner. Additionally, we try to write our answers in a loving but truthful manner (Ephesians 4:15) because we know there is a real person – with real struggles and dreams – behind every single question. Thank for you visiting Affaircare. Keep those questions coming!


Our question today comes from a lady who commented on our “Sample No Contact Letters” page.  She writes:

Wow … Yes, I know that we can disagree, but your response is just about the most heartless thing I’ve ever read. The truth is that the cheating partner has deeply hurt BOTH the spouse and the affair partner. In my case, I was wooed and pursued relentlessly. Yes, I should have resisted and I did try numerous times to end things from my end, but every single time, this man came after me full throttle with beautiful words, love songs, everything he knew to wear me down to opening my heart to him again.

I gave SIX YEARS of my time, my emotions, my heart, my love to this man. Yes, it was wrong and I take full responsibility for that. But to encourage men (or women) to chop someone off without ONE WORD of kindness or apology or at least a simple well wish for the future is heartless. The affair partner is a person too … there is incredible (almost life-threatening) pain on our end too. Many of us are good, loving people who made a terrible decision. I feel that the cheating partner owes us at least a tiny recognition for the fact that we hurt too. That he/she wronged us too by making promises they wouldn’t/couldn’t keep, seducing us with many thousands of hours of communication and love and affection.

In my case, I understood completely (and supported) the decision to end the affair and return to his wife. But the pain inflicted at the end (by the approach you are recommending) caused me to feel so completely worthless that I have considered suicide just to end the pain. I was tossed aside as if I were a $50 whore that he’d spent a night’s fling with … not someone who invested six years of my life, built a strong friendship above and beyond anything sexual, stood with him emotionally through some really challenging times and truly loved him.

As a Christian, I would challenge you to rethink the statement that “all empathy should be toward the spouse.” I believe it is possible to make it clear that the affair is over without dehumanizing and treating the affair partner like a worthless piece of shit. In my case, HE PURSUED ME RELENTLESSLY up until two nights before he ended things. He was pressuring me for video-chat sex two nights before … and you’re telling me that I don’t even deserve a simple acknowledgement or apology that he wronged me as well? I cannot tell you how far that would have gone to heal my heart.

I never see Jesus treating someone with such complete disregard. I agree with no contact .. but not with the detached cruelty expressed in these letters. What would be so wrong with simply saying, “I am so sorry for the pain I’ve also caused you and sincerely apologize for the selfishness that I showed in creating a relationship with you that I should not have. I hope that you will find healing from the pain that I’ve inflicted on you I wish you all of the best for your future” That simple kindness would at least acknowledge that this woman/man is a person too.

To pretend there is no emotion involved in severing a six year relationship is ludicrous. To pretend that the only woman’s heart that matters at all is the wife’s is very simplistic. This man wronged TWO women and we both deserve the decency of that pain being honored … at least with one small sentence of kindness and warmth.

PLEASE reconsider this … I have spoken to so many other “other women” who have also been devastated by this approach. The manner in which our affair was ended is truly the most crushing, demeaning thing that has ever happened to me …. even though I was wrong and sinned, I have value and worth as a human being.

Dear Ms. Have a Little Sympathy,

This is Cindy writing from Affaircare, and I wanted to respond to this one today because this issue is very important to me, personally. The first thing I do want to let you know is that I, myself, was a formerly Disloyal Spouse, so I do not write to you as if I am a blameless, perfect person. I do understand that as human beings, we do sometimes make poor choices and do the wrong thing, as I did it myself!  I also realize that often when we make a poor choice, that the consequence is excruciatingly painful. The second thing I do want to let you know is that we, at Affaircare, do not not want anyone–Loyal Spouse, Disloyal Spouse, or Affair Partner–to believe there is not HOPE. We are nouthetic counselors so that means we engage people in biblically-directed discussions so the Holy Spirit can bring about change in personality and behavior. We use the Bible, and not “psychology” or the popular opinion as our guide.

That being the case, I’d like to start this letter by talking about feelings. Feelings are the perception of a bodily state as pleasant or unpleasant; they are responses to judgments made about the environment or oneself. These judgments trigger body chemistry to orient our body to meet the situation. The body chemistry accounts for “feelings” or “emotions.” Some examples of feelings would be that you feel “happy” or “sad” or “good” or “bad.”

However, one does not “feel” inferior. That’s not an emotion brought about by body chemistry. It’s an expression of a judgment, attitude or conviction about your own self–“I AM inferior”–a conclusion reached about your own behavior, attitudes, character or capabilities. You wrote that you felt like “…a $50 whore that he’d spent a night’s fling with … not someone who invested six years of my life, built a strong friendship above and beyond anything sexual, stood with him emotionally through some really challenging times and truly loved him.” Since it is a self-judgement, though, there is HOPE because the Holy Spirit can bring about change in personality and behavior!

doing-judgment-feeling-doing

It’s important to know what a feeling is and isn’t because when the Disloyal Spouse married their Loyal Spouse, they made very specific promises such as forsaking all others. The entire point of marriage is to say to one other human being “I willingly volunteer to give you 100% of my affection and loyalty, and I willingly volunteer to spend the rest of YOUR LIFE getting to know you deeply and treating you in a loving way.” Because of this promise, Disloyal Spouses actually morally and legally have a duty to their Loyal Spouses. They do not have a moral or legal equivalent to any other human being on the planet.

Unfortunately, with Hollywood showing us that love is a “feeling”–something like “star-crossed lovers who see each other across a crowded room and overcoming all obstacles they fulfil their destiny”–most people have no idea what Real LOVE is. It’s not having another person “complete you” or having your needs met by someone. It’s definitely not looking at your lover’s spouse as an obstacle to overcome either! Real Love is not “love yourself” or “self-esteem” or supporting sin or offering sympathy by feeling bad for you. In fact, Real Love is not a “feeling”! Feelings change and are not dependable! Think about it: day-to-day you can “feel” different just because you’re hungry, tired, or it’s a time of the month. So “feelings” come and go, wax and wane, and roll in and out like the tide, but Real Love is like I Corinthians 13. Real Love is FOREVER–so it just couldn’t be talking about a “feeling.”

Real Love is the ultimate answer to all problems of living–Love is our goal, here at Affaircare! But Real Love is serving and is obedience-based. Real Love is an ACTION–a choice. Between human beings, Love is when you choose to treat another person in a loving way. Between humans and God, Love is obeying God. So if I really and truly love you, I’m not going to encourage you to continue to sin–I’m going to treat you in the most loving way I know, and that’s to encourage you and help you in every possible way to obey God. I’ll only say this once: disobeying God comes with some excruciating consequences. If you disobey and repent, that does not automatically mean that God will take away the painful consequence of the disobedience you chose! So if I love you, and I do, I will do my very best to support you in your obedience.

Finally I know you wish I would support you, and from what you wrote, I don’t think you wish I would encourage or endorse the affair. It sounds like you wish I would tell the Disloyals to send one last love letter to their Affair Partner to say goodbye…or maybe at least offer one last bit of tender kindness to someone who loved them well. I would like to let you know why I DON’T endorse that. It’s for two reasons:

1) Disloyal Spouses have a duty to their Loyal Spouse not to their Affair Partner. Now, I’m not saying that any human being has the right to treat another human being with hatred and harm, but rather that when it comes to consideration, a spouse owes 100% to the person they married. Not even 1% is theirs to give away! Think of it like a person who has had their leg caught in an explosion. There are chunks of leg still hanging there, but the damage is so extensive that the leg can not be reconstructed. So is it more compassionate to cut off the leg in one, swift slice with a scalpel? Or is it more compassionate to gradually cut off a little bit at a time every day over several days?

It’s the same here. The Disloyal Spouse gave away what was not his/hers to give. Taking it away and returning to their spouse is going to cause DEEP pain to the person they have injured (you)! You may wish he gradually cut off a little every day, but that actually just extends the pain. It’s more compassionate to have one swift cut-off and then you can be on your way to healing and learning how to live as an amputee. That’s why I encourage Disloyals to send a letter that cuts it off 100% thoroughly and that gets them back in the habit of giving 100% to their spouse again rather than prolonging the sin of giving some portion to someone else.  But make no mistake, the Disloyal’s and the Affair Partner’s choices  cause harm just like an amputation.

2) Offering “support” and “sympathy” by just feeling bad for you is not a help. A nouthetic counselor will never support sin, but rather point out biblical principles and use kind, concerned, confrontation to bring repentance, faith, and hope. The aim is HOPE through change. It’s not sympathy to stand back and feel bad for you; it is sympathy to ACT. Look at the Good Samaritan. He didn’t see the wounded man and just “feel bad for him”–he ACTED, bound his wounds AND took him to a place that could care for him AND PAID FOR IT! He showed mercy and love by acting. If I were to offer support or sympathize, that would mean there are no better options, and I’d be standing by while you suffer. Instead of standing by, I’m rolling up my sleeves and jumping in to actually offer HOPE–doing something concrete.

So I do understand that indeed you hurt tremendously and that you felt deep feelings and that losing someone you loved is very hard. But I want you the hurt to end. I want you to recover and feel “good” again, and the fastest way to do that is to encourage you to discontinue all connection with your Disloyal right away, and to return to obeying God and living in a way that pleases Him, even if it’s not easy for you.

Faithfully,

 

~Cindy J. Taylor

Praying for Reformation

95thses

Today is Reformation Day, and while most people focus on cute little kids in adorable costumes, today is the day that Martin Luther nailed his “95 Theses” on the door of the Wittenberg Castle church.  In his day, Martin was a theology professor at Wittenberg University and a priest, and he saw the Roman Church telling people that they could gain salvation by buying indulgences.  

It’s the stuff of legend, and many have heard the story–yet how many have ever actually READ “The 95 Theses” that Martin Luther wanted to debate?

Without further adieu, I will let my brother-in-Christ, Martin, speak for himself:

33973-Clipart-Illustration-Of-A-Set

Out of love for the truth and from desire to elucidate it, the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and ordinary lecturer therein at Wittenberg, intends to defend the following statements and to dispute on them in that place. Therefore he asks that those who cannot be present and dispute with him orally shall do so in their absence by letter. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen.


  1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent” (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.
  2. This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.
  3. Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.
  4. The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.
  5. The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.
  6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.
  7. God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.
  8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.
  9. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.
  10. Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.
  11. Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory were evidently sown while the bishops slept (Mt 13:25).
  12. In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.
  13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.
  14. Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.
  15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.
  16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and assurance of salvation.
  17. It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily decrease and love increase.
  18. Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture, that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to grow in love.
  19. Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be entirely certain of it.
  20. Therefore the pope, when he uses the words “plenary remission of all penalties,” does not actually mean “all penalties,” but only those imposed by himself.
  21. Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.
  22. As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.
  23. If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very few.
  24. For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.
  25. That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own diocese and parish.
  26. The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory, not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of intercession for them.
  27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.
  28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.
  29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.
  30. No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of having received plenary remission.
  31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.
  32. Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.
  33. Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.
  34. For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of sacramental satisfaction established by man.
  35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.
  36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters.
  37. Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.
  38. Nevertheless, papal remission and blessing are by no means to be disregarded, for they are, as I have said (Thesis 6), the proclamation of the divine remission.
  39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the bounty of indulgences and the need of true contrition.
  40. A Christian who is truly contrite seeks and loves to pay penalties for his sins; the bounty of indulgences, however, relaxes penalties and causes men to hate them — at least it furnishes occasion for hating them.
  41. Papal indulgences must be preached with caution, lest people erroneously think that they are preferable to other good works of love.
  42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.
  43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.
  44. Because love grows by works of love, man thereby becomes better. Man does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed from penalties.
  45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God’s wrath.
  46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.
  47. Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter of free choice, not commanded.
  48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.
  49. Christians are to be taught that papal indulgences are useful only if they do not put their trust in them, but very harmful if they lose their fear of God because of them.
  50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.
  51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.
  52. It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.
  53. They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may be preached in others.
  54. Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.
  55. It is certainly the pope’s sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.
  56. The true treasures of the church, out of which the pope distributes indulgences, are not sufficiently discussed or known among the people of Christ.
  57. That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.
  58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for, even without the pope, the latter always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outer man.
  59. St. Lawrence said that the poor of the church were the treasures of the church, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.
  60. Without want of consideration we say that the keys of the church, given by the merits of Christ, are that treasure.
  61. For it is clear that the pope’s power is of itself sufficient for the remission of penalties and cases reserved by himself.
  62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.
  63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last (Mt. 20:16).
  64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.
  65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets with which one formerly fished for men of wealth.
  66. The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the wealth of men.
  67. The indulgences which the demagogues acclaim as the greatest graces are actually understood to be such only insofar as they promote gain.
  68. They are nevertheless in truth the most insignificant graces when compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.
  69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal indulgences with all reverence.
  70. But they are much more bound to strain their eyes and ears lest these men preach their own dreams instead of what the pope has commissioned.
  71. Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be anathema and accursed.
  72. But let him who guards against the lust and license of the indulgence preachers be blessed.
  73. Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.
  74. Much more does he intend to thunder against those who use indulgences as a pretext to contrive harm to holy love and truth.
  75. To consider papal indulgences so great that they could absolve a man even if he had done the impossible and had violated the mother of God is madness.
  76. We say on the contrary that papal indulgences cannot remove the very least of venial sins as far as guilt is concerned.
  77. To say that even St. Peter if he were now pope, could not grant greater graces is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.
  78. We say on the contrary that even the present pope, or any pope whatsoever, has greater graces at his disposal, that is, the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written. (1 Co 12[:28])
  79. To say that the cross emblazoned with the papal coat of arms, and set up by the indulgence preachers is equal in worth to the cross of Christ is blasphemy.
  80. The bishops, curates, and theologians who permit such talk to be spread among the people will have to answer for this.
  81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult even for learned men to rescue the reverence which is due the pope from slander or from the shrewd questions of the laity.
  82. Such as: “Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church?” The former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.
  83. Again, “Why are funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continued and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded for them, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”
  84. Again, “What is this new piety of God and the pope that for a consideration of money they permit a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God and do not rather, beca use of the need of that pious and beloved soul, free it for pure love’s sake?”
  85. Again, “Why are the penitential canons, long since abrogated and dead in actual fact and through disuse, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences as though they were still alive and in force?”
  86. Again, “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is today greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build this one basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?”
  87. Again, “What does the pope remit or grant to those who by perfect contrition already have a right to full remission and blessings?”
  88. Again, “What greater blessing could come to the church than if the pope were to bestow these remissions and blessings on every believer a hundred times a day, as he now does but once?”
  89. “Since the pope seeks the salvation of souls rather than money by his indulgences, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons previously granted when they have equal efficacy?”
  90. To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.
  91. If, therefore, indulgences were preached according to the spirit and intention of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved. Indeed, they would not exist.
  92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace! (Jer 6:14)
  93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!
  94. Christians should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, death and hell.
  95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations rather than through the false security of peace (Acts 14:22).

These “95 Theses” may seem irrelevant to our modern society, to infidelity, or to your life….but bear in mind that the thing that will save your marriage is God working in us to completely REFORM us and renew our mind.  You can “try” all you want, and you may even make some progress through sheer willpower, but for things to really, truly, deeply change, God needs to RE-FORM us.

Praying for another Reformation Day, today.

Enhanced by Zemanta