Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Dressing for Success in 2007

January 10, 2007

A SERMON BY REV. MARTHA M. SHIVERICK
Fairmount Presbyterian Church
Text: Colossians: 3:12-17
December 31, 2006

Don’t you just love the end of the year? Today is the day we indulge ourselves in looking at the past and weighing it and also looking toward the future and deciding what we want it to hold for us. It allows us the opportunity to stop and assess our lives and to plan for what should be different in the New Year. Are we on track for where we want to be in our lives? Are there things that need improvement or are we comfortable with where and what we are? What do we think about our weight?… Our physical condition?…. Our financial health?…. Our career path?…

What about our friendships and family relationships? Have we built on the positive and tried to change relationships that were damaged in the past? Have we done well on working on the character traits we vowed to change at the beginning of last year such as harboring grudges or our short tempers? What about the commitments we have made to our church and community? Did we follow through on those? Should we have given more of our time and talents than we did? And what about our relationship with God? Obviously some of these resolutions we made about this last year are easier to measure than others and some are easier to own up to in terms of our shortcomings.

But the beauty of December 31st is we all get to come to the end of the year and say…. NEXT YEAR THINGS WILL BE DIFFERENT. I WILL WORK APON WHERE I AM NOW AND BUILD FROM HERE. NEXT YEAR WILL BE BETTER. We do not need to be tied down by our shortcomings but can begin a New Year resolved that things will be better. And no one knows it better than the Christian. We who come to church every Sunday and confess our sins knowing that in doing so, we are given the opportunity to change ourselves with God’s help and be forgiven by God for what ever we have done.

December 31st is all about wrapping things up and moving on. The New York Times Magazine this morning has wonderful articles on influential people who died this past year. I got sucked into reading a few of them this morning before I realized that I had better get going to church or I would be late for this mornings worship service. We here at Fairmount lost wonderful people as well. It is important to recognize that as we move into the New Year. And it is also time to evaluate how things went in this world this past year. In the Wednesday’s Plain Dealer, Dick Feagler’s editorial was about how happy he is to see the end of 2006. He listed the ills he saw in this year from the Brown’s awful record to the ongoing war and crisis in the Middle East. Yes, there is plenty to be disgusted about in the year 2006 but there was also much that was good. The challenge is as we assess the past is that we are able to take with us the good, while shedding the bad.

Another theme in the media this week has been asking what the big news story was in all topics. One morning I was tuned into NPR while driving and the topic was “what was THE political story of 2006?” Was it the political scandals? Was it the November election and the democratic sweep? Was it international politics or national politics? The same question was raised in yesterday’s Plain Dealer when they asked what the big news story in religion was? Listed were the new religious leaders who will hopefully take their denominations and religions into this new millennium by strengthening them and teaching them to keep their faith while respecting other religions in this increasingly small diverse planet. Also listed was the inevitable argument about sexuality and faith and the topic of politics and religion.

As I read the article, what surprised me was that the religious news story that I feel was the most important faith based news did not make the list at all. The story I list as the most important has nothing to do with leadership, sex, or politics but it taught me a huge lesson in living theology and our Biblical understanding of God’s commandment to forgive and the connection between grace and forgiveness. You all remember. It happened in the aftermath of one of the saddest days of 2006. This past October a man entered the West Nickel Mines Schoolhouse and gunned down five Amish school girls. What a nightmare. He did not know the girls and had no particular reason to gun down that group of children. But even in that gruesome story there was beauty. The response of the Amish was a lesson in true forgiveness. Donald Craybill, a professor of Antibaptist Religion at Elizabethtown College in Pennsylvania described that the blood was barely dry on the floor when the parents of the girls sent words of forgiveness to the family of the one who had slain their children. If you remember the story, not only did they send words but they also followed it up with action. Of the 75 people who were in attendance at the funeral of the killer, half of them were Amish. The gesture even went further than a graveside presence when the Amish also set up a fund for the assassin’s family. The Amish take Jesus’ call to turn the other cheek, to love your enemies, and the forgiveness clause in the Lord’s Prayer as a way of life. This is what they practice. And to me it was a lesson to take with us into 2007, a lesson to try and adapt to our own faith practice and life.

The scripture passage from this morning’s lectionary reading lists qualities necessary for living in this new Christian Community formed by Paul and the early Christian leaders. In the list, forgiveness is a virtue all Christians should wear. Paul tells the Colossians that as Christians they are God’s chosen people. And just as the Jews are described as chosen, they too are set aside by God and must live by different virtues. Paul described these new virtues as articles of clothing. They must strip off the old and put on a new person who clothes him or her self in Christian virtues. Paul describes 5 of these. The Christian must wear compassion and kindness, must wear humility and meekness, must wear patience, must wear forgiveness and above all other virtues, as a Christian you must clothe yourself in love.

Exegetical discussions on this passage state that Paul was speaking from the reality that groups of people in close community inevitably have clashes, complaints, and grievances with each other. Paul sees the solution to this to be to bear with one another and to forgive one another. Bearing is fully accepting people for what they are, fully accepting them in spite of their weaknesses and faults, and allowing that they all have a certain worth. Paul believes that forgiveness comes because we know we have been forgiven and this knowledge releases a generosity in us which is required to forgive others.

And what if we decided to try on some of these spiritual articles of clothing in the New Year? What if we say that in our dress for success world, we want to be clothed in Compassion and kindness, in humility and weakness, in patience, and in forgiveness and love? I personally think the hardest article of clothing for us to put on is the one of forgiveness. Do we really want to wear it? Perhaps we can take those other nice virtues and leave the forgiveness one in the dressing room and not even try it on. Miroslav Volf, professor at Yale University discussed the importance of these virtues in an article called “Letting Go” which appeared in the Christian Century Magazine two weeks ago. He said that many Jews have argued that we must not forget evil. And he is right about that. If we forget, we fun the risk that evil will happen again. But Mr. Volf says that it is important to forgive as when we forgive those who have wronged us, we make God’s miracle of forgiveness our own.

But forgiveness is a two way street. That is pretty clearly spelled out to us in the Lord’s Prayer. Forgive, as we have been forgiven. And as Mr. Volf described, “Do we not long to be accepted as we are, warts and all? Could not the world of perfect love be such a world in which we are loved notwithstanding all our imperfections? We do long to be accepted unconditionally? But we also want others to see past our warts and to concentrate on what is beautiful about who we are. I hope that both these longings will be satisfied. At the transition from the world as it is to the world to come, all of our imperfections will be known, and we will be loved nonetheless – and therefore forgiven, reconciled, transformed. And then in the world of perfect love we will shine in all our beauty, our warts completely cured.”

So, today as you spend a little time assessing your past year and then making the inevitable resolutions about what 2007 will look like, think of shedding personality traits that are not positive as if they were articles of clothing. They are not right, so let’s take them off. Then put on the virtues that Paul describes as appropriate for those who are God’s chosen. Let’s try and dress for success by being kind, by having a proper sense of self worth, by being gentle, by bearing with each other, and forgiving each other, and above all, let’s clothe ourselves in love. Happy New Year! Amen.

The Rev. Martha M. Shiverick, M.D.V., M.S.

Advertisements

The Old Man in the Heavens

October 19, 2006

A Sermon by Louise Westfall
Fairmount Presbyterian Church
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
23 July 2006
Texts: Psalm 46, I John 4:7-12,16b

It may be that a “Show and Tell” experience when I was in first grade foreshadowed my call into ministry. When it was my turn to speak I stood before my classmates and announced that there was no Santa Claus. My teacher, Miss Roberts, in what I’m sure was an attempt to calm down the outcries, asked through tight lips, “And what makes you say that?” I responded with cheerful confidence, “Because my dad said so, and he knows everything.” I guess it’s not terribly surprising for a five year old to attribute divine omniscience to her parent (though, come to think of it, I don’t recall my son ever attributing that to me). Developmental psychologists have noted that a child’s first concept of God is derived from his or her parental relationships—those primary persons providing care and nurture and one’s sense of place in the universe.

When I was a child, I spoke like a child. But when I became an adult, I put away childish things. And childish concepts of the Ruler of the Universe. To be replaced by….what? Today’s sermon request took me by surprise. Talk about God. How do you envision God? I know you don’t believe in the old man in the heavens, but what do you believe? I guess I was surprised because on the one hand talking about God is something I do all the time. Have you been listening?—I wanted to say to the questioner. But the more I thought about it, I realized there is a huge difference between talking about God from a theological perspective, trying to interpret God’s Word in scripture, seeking God’s will and way for our church—–and talking about God from the standpoint of personal faith. I think the church member was inviting me to share from my own heart and soul and mind who it is I talk with when I pray, and what I believe that Being does in my life and in the wider world.

Right away this poses a problem. Human language limits the illimitable. Words cannot define the Word who was before all things. When the rebellious Israelites sent Moses to ask the Divine to self-identify, this is the answer he received: I AM. Hebrew scholars love to point out that the literal translation is “I will be what I will be”—a marvelously ambiguous description of an independent deity who eludes every human attempt to capture and contain Him.

Him???! Another example of language limitations. God is no more male than female, but the God revealed in Scripture is personal, and expressed in personal terms. Pronouns denote gender, and the language we choose shapes our understanding of the reality behind it. So if I refer exclusively to God as “he,” I will (unconsciously perhaps) think of God as male. My understanding will be narrowed significantly; my God may be reduced to simply the very best human male I can imagine. God is so much more than a divine Superman. God is an eternal Mystery; the Mystery, it turns out, upon which the answers depend.

So how do we talk about God? We acknowledge the limitation of language, even while employing it. We’ll recognize that all human words ultimately fail to “name” God. We’ll seek a variety of words and biblical images to understand different aspects and attributes of God. [at 8:30, ask the congregation to name some of these] Did you know, for example, that God in Scripture is portrayed as a mother, a midwife, a Rock, the unseen wind that blows, and the breath that animates life? God in Scripture is named the Holy One, the Almighty, Ruler of Creation, the Most High, Abba, which is a familiar reference to father—not unlike “Daddy,” as well as Heavenly Father. Since my own father’s death, I find that I am comforted by images of God as a heavenly Father, protectively hovering over his children, at times questioning their judgment, pushing them to become their very best selves, and providing a strong shoulder to cry on and resources to support them when they fail. That’s one way I see God, but it’s not the only one. Anticipating this sermon, a Fairmount member told of a friend who had God explained to her as “a Big Daddy” up in the sky, someone she went to when things got bad, to climb up on his lap for comfort. The friend was repelled by this image, because she wanted an adult relationship with God—not the one of a pre-school child. [I’m indebted to Dick Schreck for sharing this story from Carol Harris-Shapiro’s book, Messianic Judaism].

We find in Scripture the richest source of knowledge about God. The ancient Israelites interpreted the history of their nation through the lens of God’s covenant relationship with them. They explained motives, drew out meaning, and made decisions based on their understanding of Yahweh, the Holy One. To our contemporary ears, the “God of the Old Testament” sometimes seems like a vengeful, bloodthirsty deity who commands the people to conquer and kill. This God may even appear to contradict the God of mercy and redeeming love revealed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But Reformed biblical theology won’t allow us to make that separation. God is one, and apparent contradictions serve to remind us again that every human description of God is fallible and at best, incomplete. I’ve come to see that the diversity of voices in Scripture and in life offers a broader, infinitely richer picture of God than any one of us, or any group of us, could produce alone.

The Bible reveals a God who is both transcendent – “out there,” different from us, greater than us, a Being beyond our human comprehension—and immanent—“in here,” close at hand, nearer to us than our breath or beating heart, a Being who seeks relationship with us. The Psalm that is our first Scripture reading expresses this tension by painting a picture of a global God, exalted in all the earth, and one who is intimately present to the people as a strength and shelter.
Listen for God’s word to the church in the reading from Psalm 46. [PSALM 46]

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth. When I got confirmed we were supposed to memorize the Apostle’s Creed. Several of my confirmation classmates and I protested against this requirement (it was the sixties after all—the very, very, late sixties!), arguing that reciting it from memory didn’t make us Christians. Though I very much appreciate our church’s confirmation emphasis on assisting each student to create his or her own statement of faith, I also now see the wisdom of learning by heart how the Church down through the ages has understood God. — Not that we will necessarily agree, or accept each statement as true, but because it locates us within a tradition; we belong to a faith family that spans generations and cultures, and every time and place. Our spirituality thus becomes not an individual, private matter, to be invented or designed entirely on our own. We are not able to create in our own image a God who is worthy of worshiping or serving. We need church to help us see God, and to see the divine within each of us. My faith has been nurtured by the congregations of which I’ve been part, including this one. You have helped me understand God better, by the way you reflect God’s image in your actions– and I’m glad and grateful for it all.

It makes sense, then that perhaps no biblical text is more determinative for my personal understanding of God than one in the first letter of John which witnesses both to the nature of God and how we have come to know that love. Listen again for God’s word to you in the reading from the first letter of John, in the fourth chapter, at the seventh verse: [READ John 4:7-12, 16b]

Against the backdrop of Scripture, out of the marvelous mixture of the church’s tradition and teaching, mediated through living persons, interpreted through my experience, I offer my personal statement of faith: who I believe God is, and what God means in my life. Let me say right away that this is my understanding, my weaving of these elements in a way that helps me glimpse what remains a Mystery. You may find yourself puzzled by, or disagreeing with this construction, and that’s fine. In fact, I commend to each of you the process of writing your own statement of faith as an exercise sure to stretch your spirit. (If you need help, ask one of the young people who have been through our confirmation classes!)

One other thing: I have used the word “trust” instead of “believe” to represent my relationship with this deity. “Believe” can sometimes simply mean intellectual assent to some theological propositions, but this statement is instead a response to a God with my whole self, including my questions and doubts. So here goes:

I trust in God….who is pure light. . . .the power of the universe, the source of life. This Being of light illumines every part of creation, so we can see the truth of its goodness as well as the reality of its sickness; so we can see it whole, even in its shattered brokenness. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has never overcome it. I don’t believe Gold is the author of human suffering; I don’t think God’s plan calls for the deaths of children, cancer, warfare, the violence of poverty, and a whole lot of other things that visit misery upon the earth. Some of that, of course, is evidence of human sin, and some of it seems random and cruel. I can’t explain the origin of evil, or why bad things happen to good people. What I trust is that God enters the darkness and makes it light. The Light shines forth as a beacon, showing the way, a path that leads to our heart’s true home.

I trust in God….who is joy. . . .who delights in humanity and desires abundant good for everyone. I think it was Teilhard de Chardin who described joy as “the one infallible expression of the presence of God.” Now joy is not synonymous with happiness, nor is the one dependent upon the other. Yesterday at the memorial service for Ken Horth, we sang as the final hymn “Joyful, Joyful, We Adore Thee, God of glory, Lord of Love” as requested by his family. Though there were tears and sorrow for the loss of this compassionate, gentle man, we could sing for joy because God was there too. Death and grief do not get the last word; even at an open grave ours is a triumph song of life. In my personal experiences of lost relationships through death and divorce, I have found a more profound reality: God’s grace that transforms and redeems, and counters fear with joy.

I trust in God….who is love….who loves the world, and you and you and every one, and… me. It’s almost embarrassing to speak of the Creator and Ruler of the Universe as a Being who persists in reaching out to finite and faithless folk. It seems so…undignified—like a father who runs to welcome the prodigal home, so… elemental—like a mother who will not abandon her nursing child. But there it is. Up close and personal. It was Jesus who most clearly showed us the heart of God to be one of unmerited grace and unconditional love. Not just for the good people, the ones who acknowledge God and worship God, but for everyone. “I don’t believe in God,” says the atheist. Responds the disciple, “Oh, that’s okay. God believes in you.” And will stop at nothing to get you to see it, receive it, relish in it. And return it.

I trust in God…who is love, and whose love prompts our own.
Love calls us to love. Jesus showed us how: working for the good of others with the same devotion that we work for our own. Voila! Life takes shape and is brimming with purpose and meaning. Grace abounds. Thanks be to God!

O THE DEPTH OF THE RICHES AND WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE OF GOD! HOW UNSEARCHABLE ARE GOD’S JUDGEMTNS AND HOW INSCRUTABLE GOD’S WAYS! FOR FROM GOD AND THROUGH GOD AND TO GOD ARE ALL THINGS. TO GOD BE THE GLORY FOREVER. AMEN.

The Rev. Louise F. Westfall, D.Min., Pastor

You Asked for It: Politics from the Pulpit

October 19, 2006

A Sermon by Louise Westfall
Fairmount Presbyterian Church
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
16 July 2006
Text: Luke 4:14-30

On the first day at work in the first church I served as pastor, a terrible truth struck me: I had to write a sermon for delivery six days later. And that would be true every Monday morning for the rest of my….career! Twenty-six years later I’m still at it, and though you develop a rhythm for these things, the weekly sermon preparation and proclamation is never far from mind. Except for these summer requests, my sermons are drawn from the lectionary, a three-year cycle of Sunday readings from the Hebrew Scriptures, Gospels, Epistles, and Psalms. I believe this discipline allows for the whole Bible to speak to our lives, rather than letting the preacher search for biblical texts that support the point she’s trying to make.

For my first sermon, I thought I would follow in the footsteps of Jesus and use the text he did for his inaugural address. We’ve got it all right there in the gospel according to Luke, immediately following Jesus’ baptism, and his time of wilderness testing. In your mind’s eye, picture the young Jewish man, a local boy—Joseph the carpenter’s son– whom everybody knew; his fresh face and bright eyes such a contrast to the lined faces and world-weary eyes of the religious leaders and teachers. See him walking to the front of the synagogue and choosing the Torah portion to read; hear his resonant voice ring out with the words of the prophet. You can easily imagine the approving nods. Then Jesus takes the “seat of teaching”—the place designated for the interpretation of the reading. The congregation listens forward, expectantly…. Listen for God’s word to the Church in the reading from the gospel according to Luke, in the fourth chapter at the 14th verse (page 61 in the chapel/pew Bibles if you wish to follow along). [READ Luke 4:14- 22]

Yes, that young teacher has success written all over him! Except….one of the most important principles of biblical interpretation is to read a text in its context. Often that means reading the verses immediately before and following it. Jesus’ sermon did not end at the point we’ve stopped reading. If only Jesus would have quit while he was ahead! But no, the text continues, [READ Luke 4:23-30]

I learned the very first week on the job that preaching holds inherent risks! And never more so than when God’s Word is applied to the social and political realms of human life. As long as Jesus stuck to the reading and proclaimed its immediate fulfillment, he was applauded and praised. But as soon as he “got political” (in this case, lifting up citizens of pagan nations as role models of faith), they were ready to kill him.

Religion and politics—the two topics famously forbidden at dinner parties and family gatherings. Yet the two are firmly joined at the hip, even in our democratic society in which church and state are, by constitutional authority, kept separate. The separation of Church and State is essential as an organizational principle, but that separation is not meant to divide Christian citizens from politics. On the contrary, Reformed theology calls the Church to bring the biblical vision of justice and peace to bear on political and social realities. There is no separating the various spheres of human life—as if we can preserve a circle over here for our family life, and one over here for job and career, and one here for our spiritual life. God rules over every part of life—the world, and all the people who live in it! Our Presbyterian Constitution includes in its list of the “Great Ends” of the Church “….the promotion of social righteousness,” including ministries to the poor, the sick, the lonely and the powerless; engagement in the struggle to free people from sin, fear, oppression, hunger and injustice; sharing with Christ in the establishment of his just, peaceable and loving rule in the world.” [Form of Government G-3.0300c.(3)] Did you note how the spiritual and material worlds are merged in that calling? Politics from the pulpit???! We can’t avoid it, without falling short of God’s good intentions for the whole creation. It is part of our sacred calling and holy purpose.

But here’s where it gets dangerous, and why I suspect this subject was the single most requested one this summer. While the political dimensions of preaching have always been a matter of debate, seldom has the dialog occurred in a more polarized atmosphere than today. The bitter partisanship of the last national election produced the red state/blue state divide, and created a battleground for claims and counter-claims based on religious values. The Fairmount members who requested various versions of this topic were especially troubled by the divisive tone of the debate, and what they view as the imposition of one particular expression of Christianity upon the government of a pluralistic nation or state. One person mentioned that her reluctance to mix religion and politics had been overcome after she received an unsolicited glossy magazine in the mail emblazoned with the provocative title, “America, Return to God.” The essays in the magazine used a literal interpretation of Scripture to promote a conservative Christian social agenda, and characterized the opposition as godless and immoral. This member describes herself as “Republican,” and she was offended by the implication that one party’s politics were exclusively Christian, and the other’s were not.

I think this is an important point to make. Politics from the pulpit means that we acknowledge the crucial role of faith in guiding our values and beliefs. Politics from the pulpit means considering how those religious values shape our perspective on government policies and practices, and yes, how they influence the way we vote. But politics from the pulpit should never be wielded as a club to impugn the integrity or faithfulness of others with whom we disagree. The word “Christian” belongs to neither political party. We see far too much evidence of Jonathan Swift’s observation that “we have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.” Seems to me a little less self-righteous arrogance, and a lot more humility on all sides would be beneficial. A bumpersticker I saw recently says it well: I’m for the separation of Church and Hate. Friends, if our religion incites us to hate, then it contradicts the one whose most fundamental commandments are to love God and to love one another.

The Reformed theological tradition in which the Presbyterian Church is steeped offers two foundational principles. One is the freedom of the pulpit; a congregation cannot restrict its preachers in how they interpret God’s Word. Obviously, there’s an extreme in which the preacher abuses that privilege and turns the pulpit into a platform for his or her personal viewpoint. But it’s worth that risk, I believe, in order to let the Word of God be heard even—especially!– when it challenges our assumptions and lifestyles.

The second principle is that God alone is Lord of the conscience. Even the strongest statements from the pulpit from the preacher who is faithfully seeking to declare God’s Word, may be rejected by the thoughtful member. There is no social or political litmus test in a Presbyterian Church. Sometimes the charge has been leveled against us that we don’t have firm convictions, that because we don’t dictate to people what to believe or what to do, we reflect a kind of religious “fuzziness” or moral ambiguity. But Presbyterians value a thinking faith, one which questions and probes and holds complex realities in dynamic tension. Neither the General Assembly, the presbytery, nor your ministers are the final authority for faith and practice. God is, as you grapple with what God is calling you to do and to become. Your church stands ready to assist you, but God alone is to be Lord of your conscience. That means you can disagree with the preacher and share your differing perspective as part of an ongoing process to discern God’s will.

Fairmount is amazingly and wonderfully diverse on social and political issues, which means on the one hand that no matter what stance the preacher takes, someone in the congregation is bound to be offended. On the other hand, perhaps we have this gift to contribute to the debate: a mutual search for the common good does not depend upon unanimity of viewpoint. The late, great prophet and preacher William Sloan Coffin, in his “Message to U.S. Churches” argues for the mixing of religion and politics but makes a distinction between their purpose: It is one thing to say with the prophet, “Let justice roll down like mighty waters,” and quite another to work out the irrigation system. The former is a religious concern, the latter a political task. [Coffin, A Passion for the Possible, Westminster/ John Knox Press, rev. ed. 2003, p. 35] We may disagree on methods and particular initiatives to address the problem of poverty, for example, while affirming on the basis of our faith the absolute necessity to do so. Then the discussion and debate around particular actions may be passionate but respectful. Openness that listens to and learns from a wide range of perspectives can yield greater understanding and new possibilities for problem-solving. We may not resolve our differences, but embrace each other as sisters and brothers, seeking together God’s will and God’s way.

Finally, friends, there is no division between the social and spiritual realms: God rules over all. Often God’s Word addressing human realities seems harsh, judgmental, uncompromising. But to muffle that Word for the sake of peace and quiet, from fear of upsetting church members or creating conflict, is wrong, and unworthy of our calling to represent God’s Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. No stranger to either politics or pulpit, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke an unsettling truth, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

So, by God’s grace and with God’s help, we will not be silent about things that matter. Your Session has recently approved a policy statement, giving guidance on how we can pursue social justice goals in the public arena, and do so respectfully and faithfully. Copies of the policy statement are available on information tables at chapel and sanctuary entrances. A copy will be mailed with the August Flyer as well. We owe a debt of gratitude to Elders Dick Obermanns and Tom Allen for their thoughtful work on this statement.

And we pray first, last, and always to be led in preaching and in practice by the Holy Spirit of God. Fact is, no government, no political party, no human system has exclusive claim to God’s vision and will. All human kingdoms are contingent; only God’s is eternal. May God give us grace and courage to live in this world, reflecting the love and justice and peace of that other one.

NOW TO THE RULER OF ALL WORLDS, UNDYING, INVISIBLE, THE ONLY GOD, BE HONOR AND GLORY FOREVER AND EVER! AMEN.

Rev. Louise F. Westfall, D.Min., Pastor