The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Place for books, articles, and websites with content that connect or detail Anabaptist theology
Post Reply
temporal1
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by temporal1 »

Today thread, Page 28
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... &start=270
Hats Off wrote:I just finished reading Ken Miller's Prison Update #17, "The Sermon on the Mount Option" from Plain News. He had just finished reading "The Benedict Option" by Rod Dreher and questioned if going back to Benedict was going back far enough. Why not go all the way back to the Sermon on the Mount if we want guidance!
"Eighty-six years ago E. Stanley Jones, the "Billy Graham" of the 1930's and 1940's, exclaimed, "The greatest need of modern Christianity is the rediscovery of the Sermon on the Mount as the only practical way to live." (Christ of the Mount, p. 14) "The fact is, that the Sermon on the Mount is not in our creeds. As the Apostles Creed now stands, you can accept every word of it and leave the essential self untouched...Suppose we had written in our creeds and had repeated with conviction each time, "I believe in the Sermon on the Mount and in its way of life, and I intend, God helping me, to embody it!" "What would have happened?" Jones asks. "I feel sure that if this had been our main emphasis, the history of Christendom would be different." (p.12)
Ken Miller
Hats Off,
i just read, "Turns out ‘The Benedict Option’ is a Hoax" - was wondering if anyone on forum knew of it? - so, yes. you and Ken Miller. :)
JOHN JALSEVAC
On the restoration of Christian culture


May 12, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – I was a little mystified, having finished reading The Benedict Option (TBO), to discover not only that the book turns out to be in many respects an elaborate – albeit well-intentioned and probably evangelically useful – practical joke, but also that so few seem to have noticed that author Rod Dreher himself admits as much about halfway through, and cheerfully gives up the punchline.

Here is Dreher, towards the end of Chapter 6, quoting Catholic blogger Leah Libresco, a devotee of TBO who has been busy organizing Benedict Option events in D.C.:

“People are like, ‘This Benedict Option thing, it’s just being Christian, right?’ And I’m like, ‘Yes! You’ve figured out the koan!’” Libresco told me. “But people won’t do it unless you call it something different. It’s just the church being what the church is supposed to be, but if you give it a name, that makes people care.”

Merriam-Webster defines koan thusly: “a paradox to be meditated upon that is used to train Zen Buddhist monks to abandon ultimate dependence on reason and to force them into gaining sudden intuitive enlightenment.” Presumably, Libresco did not intend the word in its most literal sense. What she meant is, there’s something of the paradox, the joke, behind The Benedict Option.

And the joke is this: the Benedict Option isn’t. An option, I mean. No more than being a Christian is, for the simple reason that they're very nearly the same thing.

Some of the controversy that has greeted the publication of TBO is, I think, Dreher’s own fault: a consequence of his own aptitude for marketing his ideas and turning them into a movement, a la “Crunchy Cons.” Coin a new term and call it a movement, and one might be forgiven for expecting something new and radical, and therefore threatening. But, as Libresco suggests, there is little that is new in TBO, and if the book is radical, it’s largely with the radicalness of the Gospel. One blogger has boiled Dreher’s book down into 43 concrete proposals, and, with one or two possible exceptions, the final product reads more akin to Practical Christian Living 101, than Rod Dreher's Guide to How to Flee the Coming Apocalypse.

Historic Christianity offers a cornucopia of various “spiritualities” that, upon closer examination, turn out to be nothing more than the Gospel message with slight adjustments in emphasis as a response to specific historical exigencies. Such, I would suggest, is The Benedict Option.

The endemic misinterpretations of TBO, I believe, originate in the first chapter, in which, having surveyed the cultural wreckage, proclaimed the Culture Wars effectively lost, and declared many political battles to be practically unwinnable in the immediate future, Dreher queries: “Could it be that the best way to fight the flood is to … stop fighting the flood?” The tone in which the question is asked, and the proposal immediately following – that Christians consider building “an ark” – suggest that Dreher himself answers resoundingly in the affirmative.

Many of his critics on the Christian right, I think, stop reading there. To willfully cede the public square and hunker down into some new breed of concrete-walled, isolated, pre-apocalyptic Christian communes – that sounds suicidal. Besides, surely we’ve learned by now that these kinds of fear-based, purity-obsessed communities have a tendency to disintegrate into chaotic infighting, occasionally with the mugshots of the community’s “spiritual leaders” gracing the front page of the local newspaper, and a generation of repressed children hungry for Hitchens and Dawkins and to proclaim atheism if only it means liberation from the religious authoritarianism of their youth.

And if that were what Dreher were proposing, that might be a fair criticism. But those who read TBO (and I’m not convinced that many of Dreher’s most vociferous critics have) may be surprised that his idea of building an “ark” is much more likely to take the form, for instance, of a group of co-religious D.C.-dwelling suburbanites organizing a regular Christian book study at a local pub, or strengthening the Newman House on the campus of their local state university, than buying up a plot of land in remotest North Dakota, going off-grid, and bidding sayonara to the corrupt pagans of the New Rome.

Indeed, Dreher would have stern words for the progenitors of the latter project. “A community so rigid that it cannot bend will break itself of its members,” Dreher warns those so carried away by enthusiasm as to make an idol of the community. “Communities that are wrapped too tight for fear of impurity will suffocate their members and strangle the joy out of life together. Ideology is the enemy of joyful community life, and the most destructive ideology is the belief that creating utopia is possible.”

Good advice, that.

So if not heading for the hills what, precisely, is Dreher proposing? Well, admittedly in some cases, heading for the hills: as in the small agrarian community that has grown up around the traditional Benedictine monastery in Clear Creek, Oklahoma. Dreher profiles the community in TBO, and approves. And why not, if that’s what you’re called to? But in a lot of cases, what Dreher is proposing seems to be less radical, and more organic. And in all cases, such as the Tipi Loschi community in Italy, he is careful to emphasize that TBO is much more about preserving and cultivating something good, than fleeing something evil.

Here is Dreher summarizing what he calls the “antipolitical politics” of the Benedict Option:

Secede culturally from the mainstream. Turn off the television. Put the smartphones away. Read books. Play games. Make music. Feast with your neighbors. It is not enough to avoid what is bad; you must also embrace what is good. Start a church, or a group within your church. Open a classical Christian school, or join and strengthen one that exists. Plant a garden, and participate in a local farmer’s market. Teach kids how to play music, and start a band. Join the volunteer fire department.

This is hardly terrifying stuff. One might even call it positively pedestrian. Most of Dreher’s other proposals are in a similar vein: rediscover traditional liturgical worship; revivify Christian ascetical practices such as regular fasting; consider homeschooling if your local school isn’t up to snuff; evangelize through the arts; take care to provide your children with good Christian friends; strive to live close to, and get personally involved in, your parish; strengthen your church’s support structures; renew your connection with the land; develop an appreciation of work as “vocation”; affirm the goodness of sexuality; reduce your media consumption.

Perhaps the most striking thing about TBO on the whole is how little, after the first chapter or so, Dreher talks about the sole differentiating factor that justifies his “Benedict Option” coinage – i.e. building intentional Christian communities. Those looking for a "how-to" guide to creating a Christian commune will have to look elsewhere. Instead, in general, he focuses his efforts on reminding Christians who they are and what they believe, and encouraging them to get serious about living their faith. The thinking seems to be: do this, and “Benedict Option” communities will arise of their own accord.

Here’s the thing that some of Dreher's critics are apt to ignore:
Conscientious separation from the mainstream (“the world”) has always been an inescapable element of Christian spirituality. Live as a committed Christian, and de facto you will begin to stand apart from others, and never more than in our radically secularist age. If you don't, you're doing it wrong. You will also, inevitably, gravitate towards your co-religionists. And not because of an exclusionary elitism, but for any number of perfectly healthy reasons: the need for communal worship, for mutually enriching friendships built upon shared convictions, to encourage one another in the arduous battle for holiness, to name a few. A solitary Christian is an impoverished Christian, and a vulnerable one.

Historic Christianity offers a cornucopia of various “spiritualities” that, upon closer examination, turn out to be nothing more than the Gospel message with slight adjustments in emphasis as a response to specific historical exigencies. Such, I would suggest, is The Benedict Option. To be a practicing Christian is, inevitably, to live as part of intentional Christian community. In response to the atomization of modern life and the growing threats to Christian identity, Dreher has simply placed the emphasis on the word "intentional."

In early Rome, Christians were forced to risk everything to congregate together, often celebrating furtive masses in the dank catacombs. In medieval Europe, however, daily life was so intimately structured around Christian worship, and Christian doctrine so universally accepted, that the sense of “otherness,” even for committed believers, would have been dramatically reduced. The original “Benedict Option” had reached its full flowering, and every medieval town, frequently constructed around a monastery, amounted to a astonishingly vital Benedict Option community.

Dreher’s belief is that Christians today find themselves in circumstances more akin to the early Christians in Rome than to our medieval forebears. Urbanism, a frenetic commodity-based economy that brings in its wake radical instability and rampant materialism, the near-total triumph of the sexual revolution, and the catastrophic collapse of the churches amid doctrinal retreat and scandals: all of these have left many orthodox Christians besieged and isolated.

Unfortunately, in our egalitarian-obsessed society, the suggestion that Christians “stick together” so as to maintain some higher moral standard can strike us as elitist, paranoid, and possibly a rejection of Christ’s evangelical imperative (“Go out to all the world and preach the good news”). Elitism is certainly a risk, and the way to combat that is by nurturing humility grounded in a healthy sense of humor: something I think Dreher gets. But the greater risks at the moment are clearly fragmentation and isolation. These in turn sap Christians’ vital energy, rendering us far less effective as evangelists. It is not elitist to acknowledge that Christianity is a higher standard. Nor can we afford to lose sight of the reality that, rather than any specific political or apologetical initiative, it has always been the personal lived example of Christians adhering to that standard that has effected conversion.

Many of the criticisms of Dreher appear to arise from a failure to read the signs of the times, or of an excessive confidence in ordinary Christians’ capacity to withstand growing external pressure to conform. Consider, for instance, the protests against Dreher’s near-categorical advice to Christian parents to withdraw their children from public schools. Perhaps Dreher was too absolute. Perhaps he ought to have given some allowance for the wide divergence in the quality of public schools. I don’t know. But I do know that those who respond that it is necessary for Christian children to remain in public schools so as to act as “salt and light” to their non-Christian peers are displaying a potentially disastrous naiveté. Either they happen to have unusually saintly children, or they are grossly underestimating the challenges an isolated Christian teen faces in staying faithful in the midst of overwhelming peer pressure.

Those who fear that Dreher’s is a cowardly, defeatist, unevangelical project must consider the conclusion to TBO. There, he modifies his “ark” imagery, which he acknowledges can be misinterpreted. This image he counterbalances with one drawn from Ezekiel’s vision of Jerusalem, with a stream of life-giving water rushing from the altar of the temple, spreading out across the world.

The church, then, is both Ark and Wellspring – and Christians must live in both realities. God gave us the Ark of the church to keep us from drowning in the raging flood. But He also gave us the church as a place to drown our old selves symbolically in the water of baptism, and to grow in new life, nourished by the never-ending torrent of His grace. You cannot live the Benedict Option without seeing both visions simultaneously.

It is worth remembering that Christ himself spent thirty years separate from the world within that most intimate Benedict Option community – the Holy Family – growing in wisdom and stature. Then he opened the floodgates, and his teachings burst forth upon the world. We moderns in the West are all infected to some degree with an Americanist mentality – believing it our duty to change the world through our own frenetic activity. TBO, while perhaps not perfect, offers a necessary corrective, reminding us that our strength and power derive ultimately from union with Christ, and with one another. Contemplation precedes action. That is the powerful symbolism of the bustling medieval town, with the Benedictine abbey at its center.

It may be that I have understated the nature of Dreher’s project, or glossed over particular proposals that are not merely coextensive with the Gospel. I can perhaps understand the dismay, for instance, with which some activist types view Dreher’s take on politics. But those who persist in caricaturing his arguments by claiming that he is advocating political capitulation must, for honesty's sake, contend with his numerous qualifications, both in the book and elsewhere. Writes Dreher on his blog just this week: "I do not call for a withdrawal from politics as usual, but ... a recalibration of our idea of politics, such that we redirect our attention to the kind of politics that matters most."

And finally, to those who ridicule Dreher's belief that TBO is needed to weather the looming stormclouds of Christian persecution, which in many cases will be advanced through the vehicle of what they derisively call The Gay Agenda, I suppose all I can say is: open your eyes.
i would have to read this piece from JOHN JALSEVAC several times.
he has my interest because so many of his points have been discussed on MD-MN, one-after-another.
that, alone, is of interest (to me.)
i have not read The Benedict Option. now i feel i need to read it. :mrgreen:
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by MaxPC »

The book The Benedict Option was written by a Catholic and addressed to Catholics and their families to encourage a closer walk with Christ and to separate themselves from secular culture.

The Rule of St Benedict is a guideline for living a discipleship life with Christ and it quotes frequently from the New Testament. Monasteries all over the world follow this Rule. By using the Benedictine life as an example, the author invokes a 1500 year old Catholic example of a successfully employed Catholic guide to discipleship that will hopefully speak to Catholics. That's why I think the book may be somewhat foreign in concept to non-Catholics, thus confusing them as to the core proposal.
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
temporal1
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by temporal1 »

MaxPC wrote:The book The Benedict Option was written by a Catholic and addressed to Catholics and their families to encourage a closer walk with Christ and to separate themselves from secular culture.

The Rule of St Benedict is a guideline for living a discipleship life with Christ and it quotes frequently from the New Testament. Monasteries all over the world follow this Rule. By using the Benedictine life as an example, the author invokes a 1500 year old Catholic example of a successfully employed Catholic guide to discipleship that will hopefully speak to Catholics.

That's why I think the book may be somewhat foreign in concept to non-Catholics, thus confusing them as to the core proposal.
(for me) it's what's familiar that's interesting ..

this is a blurb on John Jalsevac:
John Jalsevac is the managing director of LifeSiteNews.com. He has a bachelor's degree in philosophy with a minor in theology from Christendom College in Front Royal, Virginia. He has published hundreds of articles in publications including Crisis Magazine, Catholic Insight, The Wanderer, and of course, LifeSiteNews.
Christendom College is a Catholic liberal arts college in Front Royal, Virginia, United States, which is located in the Shenandoah Valley. It is endorsed by The Newman Guide to Choosing a Catholic College. The school does not accept federal funding.
not that LSN is without fault, it's something that shows up in my newsfeed, so, i read it, with interest, along with other things. i don't agree with all they print.

regarding this piece, it touched on so many points that have been discussed on this forum, most often from the Anabaptist POV, it caught my attention for that reason.

there is something about Truth that transcends time+place+circumstances; i believe it's the work of the Holy Spirit, and, thankfully so.

(LSN has had a few pieces on Ken Miller.)
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by MaxPC »

There are two types of reactions to this book in Catholic World at the moment:
1- Bishops and laity who agree with the book
2- Bishops and laity who disagree with the book.

#1 consists of those who recognize that participation in the secular culture is toxic to an individual's Faith walk (similar to the Anabaptist concept of being separate). Many in this type also wish to no longer engage politics.

#2 consists of those who like their mass media entertainments and participating in secular culture. They justify their participation by saying they're "engaging the culture as a Christian presence". Most want to influence political structures and don't wish to give up the political world and its processes.

I find it interesting to see the responses to this book. As for the man who is managing director at Lifesite News with a degree from Christendom : I'll let you figure out whether he's type 1 or type 2. After all, Lifesite is deeply involved in politics and political processes. :lol:
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
temporal1
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by temporal1 »

MaxPC wrote:There are two types of reactions to this book in Catholic World at the moment:
1- Bishops and laity who agree with the book
2- Bishops and laity who disagree with the book.

#1 consists of those who recognize that participation in the secular culture is toxic to an individual's Faith walk (similar to the Anabaptist concept of being separate). Many in this type also wish to no longer engage politics.

#2 consists of those who like their mass media entertainments and participating in secular culture. They justify their participation by saying they're "engaging the culture as a Christian presence". Most want to influence political structures.

I find it interesting to see the responses to this book.

:arrow: As for the man from Lifesite News with a degree from Christendom :
I'll let you figure out whether he's type 1 or type 2.

After all, Lifesite is deeply involved in politics and political processes. :lol:
i'm working on that mystery, it may take me awhile to get there. but, it's an interesting journey. he covers a lot of ground. i'm not jumping to conclusions.

i enjoy the variety of topics LSN tackles. much of it i do not see elsewhere.
esp news from outside U.S. borders.
o. and. there are much worse sites! (claiming to be Catholic.) some i have read and eliminated!
they have to be pretty bizarre for me to eliminate them. :o
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23806
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by Josh »

Rod Dreher grew up Methodist.

Then he converted to Roman Catholicism in 1993.

Right around 2002, he was very unhappy with how the Catholic Church was mishandling their abuse scandals. Amongst other things, he claimed that a large network of homosexuals he called the "Lavender Mafia" controlled the church.

In 2006, he converted to Eastern Orthodoxy.

In 2017 he published The Benedict Option.

In short, MaxPC's narrative on this is completely non-factual, unless Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism are now the same thing.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23806
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by Josh »

Something pretty disappointing in Dreher's book is that he failed to observe how Anabaptists have been implementing the "Benedict option" for a long time. He did look into Bruderhof but barely glanced at Hutterites and seemed to think they are the same thing, which they are not. He ignored how conservative Anabaptists have been forming stable communities and maintaining separation from the world for a long time without becoming cult like. There is a lot of academic literature he could have read and cited from on this.

He seems very focused on something that outwardly looks like intentional community - which is fine - but as folks like Bootstrap and Wayne here will tell you, IC is very hard and has a high risk of turning into a cult. Dreher barely addressed this problem at all.
0 x
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by MaxPC »

temporal1 wrote:
MaxPC wrote:There are two types of reactions to this book in Catholic World at the moment:
1- Bishops and laity who agree with the book
2- Bishops and laity who disagree with the book.

#1 consists of those who recognize that participation in the secular culture is toxic to an individual's Faith walk (similar to the Anabaptist concept of being separate). Many in this type also wish to no longer engage politics.

#2 consists of those who like their mass media entertainments and participating in secular culture. They justify their participation by saying they're "engaging the culture as a Christian presence". Most want to influence political structures.

I find it interesting to see the responses to this book.

:arrow: As for the man from Lifesite News with a degree from Christendom :
I'll let you figure out whether he's type 1 or type 2.

After all, Lifesite is deeply involved in politics and political processes. :lol:
i'm working on that mystery, it may take me awhile to get there. but, it's an interesting journey. he covers a lot of ground. i'm not jumping to conclusions.

i enjoy the variety of topics LSN tackles. much of it i do not see elsewhere.
esp news from outside U.S. borders.
o. and. there are much worse sites! (claiming to be Catholic.) some i have read and eliminated!
they have to be pretty bizarre for me to eliminate them. :o
As with anything, we should use our God-given discernment to parse what we read. :lol:

Dreher is in a bit of transition, spiritually speaking, and he's been looking for a situation that is black and white in values (dare I say legalistic?) rather than the more compassionate approach of Christ.

The theme he addresses in the book is not new. Lay people affiliated with monasteries as Oblates have been creating small communities since ~610 AD in order to help their discipleship walk especially in a toxic secular environment and persecution.

The fascinating aspect of this theme is that these communities for Christian brotherhood/fellowship emerge most vigorously in eras of cultural toxicity. There is nothing new under the sun, or under the Son. :D
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
Judas Maccabeus
Posts: 3878
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:13 am
Location: Maryland
Affiliation: Con. Menno.

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by Judas Maccabeus »

Josh wrote: He seems very focused on something that outwardly looks like intentional community - which is fine - but as folks like Bootstrap and Wayne here will tell you, IC is very hard and has a high risk of turning into a cult. Dreher barely addressed this problem at all.
Unless you have 400+ years of experience at it like the Hutterites, and even than it is hard. I have seen more than a few of these blow up around me.

He was on NPR on a program out of WAMU in DC. Disintegrated into questions about how gays can be integrated into intentional communities. I wished I were not so busy and could have called in.

J.M.
0 x
:hug:
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: The Benedict Option .. (Hoax?)

Post by MaxPC »

Judas Maccabeus wrote:
Unless you have 400+ years of experience at it like the Hutterites, and even than it is hard. I have seen more than a few of these blow up around me.

He was on NPR on a program out of WAMU in DC. Disintegrated into questions about how gays can be integrated into intentional communities. I wished I were not so busy and could have called in.

J.M.
Even in Catholic World where we have active monitoring of communities, they can still form, though are less likely. I think that those communities that maintain a sense of the individual members as being the reason for the group it's less likely to happen.

Even the Hutterites face this temptation at times though. Maintaining a focus on God and the individual helps.

The Oblates I mentioned earlier affiliated with their monasteries but did not live inside with the community of monastics. They generally had homes nearby.

It's all difficult but then the Christian life is difficult. I think it's part of who we are.

As I mentioned earlier, this book is a proposal of a concept to Catholics, by a Catholic invoking a Christian lifestyle that has a history of supporting discipleship. As a proposal, it wasn't meant to be presented as a complete plan. I had the sense that he was reviving old concepts for use on a larger scale, which personally, I don't think will gain wide traction or attraction.

Dreher did converse with a couple of the Plain Catholics prior to the book. He had trouble understanding that it was possible to live this way without having an enclosed community and with interacting with normal parish life. We (Plain Catholics) have only been doing this for ~100 years so perhaps he was looking for a feudal medieval structure from centuries ago rather than a current adaptation?
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
Post Reply