An Idea for Doctor Who at 50

Sometimes thinking can be like what I imagine fishing to be like. You can be sat there quietly contemplating nothing of significance, when all of a sudden an idea floats down the stream of thoughts that bites on your hook and all of a sudden you get all excited and start reeling it in like mad... eager to land your epiphany before it escapes into the murky waters of obscurity and amnesia.

A thought like this hit me just this afternoon (you can blame the bank holiday). I have no idea where it came from... I just knew that I needed to grab on and hold tight when it hit me. I had been watching a 5 minute summary video of all the Doctor Who episodes that have taken place to date and had been reading an introductory article that had been posted on my Facebook wall, which mentioned the upcoming 50 year anniversary.

Rumour has it that Steven Moffat has something special and massive in the pipeline, when one considers the way that next year's Doctor Who series has been spaced out to overlap with 2013 (presumably making the anniversary year a bumper one), you really get the impression he is making BIG plans. This led me to thinking about what I'd like to see in a 50th anniversary special... and how if it were a multi Doctor story, you'd get past the difficulty of Christopher Eccleston vetoing any further performances as The Doctor. For the 50th anniversary something REALLY special needs to be done. 50 is the one that every generation that has seen Doctor Who... will be around at the same time. If you go as far as 100, hardly anyone who watched at the start with William Hartnell will in probability be alive. So now is the time to pull the stops out.

And that is when... all at once, in a congealed mass.... it hit me.

A multi Doctor story doesn't have to feature all the actors getting together. They could do an 11th Doctor story (possibly a crossover with the Tenth Doctor), where The Doctor has to deal with an enemy who has been interfering in events behind the scenes in his previous adventures.  The production team could film the live action segments as per normal and then create sets cleverly dressed up to look like some of those used in classic episodes. They could then green screen Matt Smith (and whoever accompanies him), into the background of several re-edited scenes from classic episodes (ideally one from each of his 10 predecessors). It may sound crazy and if it is executed poorly, it won't come off well and it will be rubbish... but if they get it right, everyone will be ecstatic.

Is it really that much of a stretch? I don't think so... after all, in The Impossible Astronaut, the production team did indeed dabble with the relevant technology in a scene involving Laurel and Hardy. In fact... could this little snippet actually have been an experiment on the part of the production team to see if they could push the envelope for such a project... on a BBC budget? I hope so.

Matt Smith as The Doctor, integrated into vintage footage of Laurel & Hardy

It isn't the first time it has happened either. The first time such a technique was used so seamlessly in the mainstream as far as I can recall, was the film Forrest Gump. Here's an example of it in a famous scene involving Tom Hanks actually interacting with footage of JFK:

The same technique was also used to great effect on television shortly after in the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine anniversary tribute episode, Trials and Tribble-ations:

So in conclusion then, it can be done. I don't know if Moffat plans something quite so bold and ambitious with Doctor Who's 50th, but especially in the still relatively recent passing of Nicholas Courtney and Elisabeth Sladen,  wouldn't it be a wonderful way to pay tribute to ALL the people who have contributed to the legend of The Doctor (on and off screen), since 1963?

Redemption - Doctor Who: Let's Kill Hitler

The Doctor reappeared on our television screens tonight after an anxious wait of a couple of months... and he was back with a bang.

I had mixed feelings about A Good Man Goes To War (the mid series climax), there were many parts about it that I felt were fantastic but the ending felt a little disappointing and disjointed for me. Maybe I'm biased and I just didn't like how the big reveal was handled or where it was going. However I have to say that on its return, the latest Doctor Who episode pretty much blew my socks off.

It started with a hectic drive through a cornfield as Amy & Rory raced to rendezvous with the Doctor (who has as yet failed to rescue Melody); this was immediately followed by the arrival of "Mels", a lifelong friend of Amy who hast stolen a car with the intention of meeting The Doctor. There was a nice bit of foreshadowing here as Mels had driven through the "Leadworth Crop Circle" (the word Doctor inscribed in the corn by Rory's driving as he tried to attract The Doctor's attention), and crossed out the word by driving in a straight line.

Foreshadowing as Mels' driving crosses through The Doctor's name.

Mels then holds The Doctor at gunpoint and forces the TARDIS crew into an unscheduled journey which results in them materialising in Berlin, 1938 after a stray bullet damages the TARDIS. This ends up being a timely intervention for Hitler who is about to be "given Hell" by a squad of time travelling, miniaturised humans who travel around the universe in a humanoid robot "tesselator" meting out so called justice on history's worst criminals.

There are a few moments of humorous awkwardness (as could only happen when you travel through time and inadvertently save one of history's worst war criminals and end up locking him in a cupboard for his own protection), before we discover that Mels has been mortally wounded by a bullet and spontaneously begins to regenerate (honestly Steven Moffat has clearly gone for trecord for the amount of regenerations in a single series), as she takes the familiar form of Alex Kingston, we understand are at the beginning of River Song's story.

This is not the River Song we are familiar with however. This River Song is an assassin who is still well and truly under the programming of The Silence and still operating under her birth name of Melody Pond. The Doctor having foreseen the arrival of Melody takes steps to preserve his life... by disarming and hiding weapons; this proves in vain however, as Melody utilises a deceptive kiss laced with a slow acting poison. Melody runs away and causes havoc in a nearby Berlin restaurant as Rory and Amy give chase in a bid to apprehend her... closely followed by the tesselator whose crew perceive Melody Pond as a greater threat than even Hitler because she killed The Doctor (as seen in The Impossible Astronaut).

As they arrive on the scene of the restaurant they see all the panicked diners fleeing for their lives... in their underwear. Before they are able to act on this however, the tesselator miniaturises them and imprisons them inside itself at the mercy of its crew.

The tesselator begins to unleash its punishment on Melody, but is interrupted by The Doctor's lavish arrival and subsequent insistence that this stops. The crew of the tesselator cannot comprehend why The Doctor in his dying moments is displaying mercy to Melody when he possesses the knowledge that she is his murderer. Eventually they ignore The Doctor and proceed to give Melody "Hell". The Doctor in desperation and agony appeals to Amy and Rory to save her... which they do... but this in turn puts them in peril. The Doctor is in so much pain and is so weak that he is unable to do anything to save them... he desperately calls out to Melody to change her ways and save her parents. The TARDIS materialises within the tesselator in the nick of time... but its pilot is not The Doctor... it is Melody who has been taught by the TARDIS (and is indeed also a child of the TARDIS), who has heeded The Doctor's words.

As the Ponds rematerialise inside the restaurant, The Doctor's life ebbs away. He appeals to Melody to find River Song and pass on to her his final message and then breathes his last. Melody does not understand who River Song is... but Amy uses the tesselator to transmit an image of River Song... which convinces Melody that she is in fact one and the same. Realising the level of her mistake and understanding who The Doctor really is and what he means to her, River draws upon all the remaining regeneration energy inside her body to resurrect The Doctor.

"Hello Sweetie." River has a change of heart and brings The Doctor back to life.

I loved the central overarching theme of this episode... it was all about redemption. As Melody, River is exactly the ruthless, pathological killer that the Silence raised her to be and who the daleks were terrified of. Yet in spite of this, The Doctor still cares about who she will become and wants to prevent her from being harmed/killed. It doesn't matter what judgement or punishment others want to subject her to on his behalf, he sees her actions as answerable only to him. The following exchange perfectly sums this up:

The Doctor: What do you want with her?
Captain: She's Melody Pond. According to our records, the woman who kills The Doctor.
The Doctor: And I'M The Doctor... so what's it got to do with you?

This for me resonates very well with the central message of the Christian gospel. Our bad actions, our mistakes, our wrongness... these things are responsible for the death of Christ. He willingly underwent the crucifixion as a payment for the things we have done wrong... and all through his ministry and life, he made it very clear that we were not to judge others for the things that they get wrong... because in the final analysis all wrongs committed were committed against him. Even his dying words expressed to his Father in heaven, bore testimony to this:

Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”

Luke 23:34a

In tonight's Doctor Who episode, Melody/River is very much the enemy and yet The Doctor sees past that... he sees her personal value - what she means to him as a person... and the individual she will become. In the same way, when we don't know God and are gravitating in a world without him and knowingly or unknowingly in rebellion against him, we are described as his enemies. However... just like The Doctor, he doesn't hold this against us and instead chooses to see our value to him and the untapped potential he has for us:

"For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!  Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation."

Romans 5:9-11

In the Bible when a person changes direction... they often gain a new name. Perhaps the most radical example of this is Saul of Tarsus. As much as Melody Pond had been conditioned to kill The Doctor... Saul had been trained to persecute Christians and we first meet him nodding in approval at the stoning of Stephen - the first Christian martyr. After having a personal encounter with the divine Christ, Saul did a complete U turn and became an apostle and apologist for the very belief he persecuted.  He became known as Paul.

The taking of a new name is symbolic, it speaks of gaining a new identity... one that is free from all the baggage that went before. So in Doctor Who, Melody Pond takes the name of River Song and in the Bible, Saul takes the name of Paul. We too have a heavenly name; we may not know its pronunciation... but it exists nonetheless (this is a theme that Max Lucado explores at length in his famous book "When God Whispers Your Name). We can begin to know it if we listen to God and allow him to work in our lives.

In both the case of River Song in Doctor Who... and Paul in the Bible, we see that there is a price to pay in return for our redemption. River passed on all her remaining regenerations in order That The Doctor could live again; Paul realising the great debt that had been paid on his behalf committed his life to God in a very special way.

It's interesting that in both fiction and real life, we see a recurring theme - that the price of a person's redemption comes at great personal cost to another... one that usually demands a life. It's equally interesting that the beneficiaries of said sacrifice (be they fictional or actual), often feel an obligation to give something back to the individual or individuals who paid the price for them.

What sacrifices have been made for you, that have positively changed the direction of your life? What are you doing or what will you do in response to those sacrifices that honours the person/people who made it? Do you recognise what I consider to be the greatest sacrifice of all and what does it mean to you, personally? These are just some of the questions I hope you reflect on having read this article.

If you have any thoughts about tonight's episode of Doctor Who yourself, or if perhaps if anything I have said here has given you something to think about that you wish to share, I'd very much love to hear from you.

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."

2 Corinthians 5:17-21

Community

I've been doing some thinking with regard to various things and want to revisit my previous post on the topic of the recent riots. As I mentioned before, I do see them as a symptom of something far larger... an inconvenient truth that is being swept under the carpet because it presents us with something ugly that we ALL need to deal with.

It was very interesting to see the different responses of Tony Blair and David Cameron with regard to their perception of the social problems at the heart of the issue.  Cameron put it like this:

"The greed and thuggery we saw during the riots did not come out of nowhere," he said. "There are deep problems in our society that have been growing for a long time: a decline in responsibility, a rise in selfishness, a growing sense that individual rights come before anything else."

However Blair countered this by stating Britain, as a whole, is not in the grip of some general "moral decline"and that:

"The big cause is the group of young, alienated, disaffected youth who are outside the social mainstream and who live in a culture at odds with any canons of proper behaviour. And here's where I don't agree with much of the commentary. In my experience, they are an absolutely specific problem that requires deeply specific solutions."

In my own view, there is truth in both their perspectives... just not the complete truth. I do believe we have witnessed a moral decline in our society... but I think it is wrong to put this down merely to a blurring of the borders between right and wrong. I believe it is down to a shift in perspective of who matters. Western society has become decadent... and as we are increasingly dazzled by the sights and sounds of this material world, the still small voice of calm that speaks of mutual dependency and connectedness can get drowned out.

It is interesting how materialism actively encourages us to gravitate away from "us" and more towards "me". Just look at the products out there and how they have become named in such a manner as to glorify the self:

iTunes, iPlayer, iPad, iPod, iTeddy, iDog, iPoo (yes... there apparently really IS an app for that... ugh!), i Robot (well.. maybe one day, we can hope), and the Independent's sister newspaper simply called "i".

Everything it seems is i... i... i... or actually... is it really "ME! ME! ME!"?  

It is at this point that I rather sheepishly look at the header of my own blog and ask myself if I am enthusiastically hurling stones whilst standing in a glass house. I don't think, but do call me on it if you disagree.

Community means looking beyond ourselves... together.

Yes, there has been a rise in selfishness... but I believe it is wrong for us to lay the blame solely at the door of disaffected youth. Is it not true that bankers and rogue traders have demonstrated a selfishness unique to them... one that led to the economic crisis we find ourselves in now? Is it not also true that the MPs guilty of misusing expenses for personal gain were also guilty? Or what of the energy firms who continue to push up prices regardless of the damage it causes to people who can scarcely afford to keep themselves warm in the winter months. Or how about greedy property tycoons who allow for house prices to inflate to such a level that only a select few can afford to live in them... and then they wonder why there is a crash because people can't reconcile their finances with the amount the property prices have risen to. The tendrils of self centredness creep in to every part of society and try to choke each one of us into turning away from the importance of community. Some are more affected than others, but make no mistake... it crouches at the door of all of us and we must do what we can to reject it or at least keep it in check.

When treating an illness, a doctor may prescribe more than one medication. One kind will deal with the root cause of the illness... whilst the other will act as symptom relief. It occurs to me then, that we too must do something to treat the wounds of our society. The problem of disaffected youth is a symptom problem and not a root problem. As Blair suggests, it does require a specific solution... but any work done to resolve it will be undone within less than a generation, if we do not at the same time treat the pandemic.

We've seen part of the bigger solution in the way many people have rallied to clean up, repair, restore and help victims in the wake of the riots... but it needs to go beyond this.

Community needs to be more than reactive. Community needs to be proactive.

We need to look beyond our cliquey little cells and our ivory towers and mingle. We talk about disaffected people or uncultured people, or irresponsible people... but how can anyone learn a culture unless someone shares it with them? How can someone belong... if others are not daring enough to go out there and invite... not from afar but shoulder to shoulder?  I know what it is like to stand on the outside looking in... and I'm ashamed to say that I know this from a Christian perspective. If *I* feel that way and am part of the family of Christ, I can only imagine how someone who has no connection to the Church feel when all they see is a closed door.

One of the things I hate about modern politics is how it has become more and more about focus groups - looking at the specific wants and needs of particular groups and currying favour with them in order to gain power. I think this is counter productive; if we value any part of society over another... it breeds isolation and disaffection and groups with very different aims or attitudes begin to come into conflict.

Community must rise above this, it must be so much more than this. We need to draw the threads back together and learn that our actions have consequences for everyone else and not just a select few people who we meet regularly.

Community... it's a big word... isn't it? As it should be. If we truly value it, we must stop thinking in terms of our private universes. It is not enough just to think of yourself and/or your spouse and/or your children. Yes... these things demand time and maintenance but I put it to you that by robbing others of your own input in their lives, you in turn rob yourself of the help that can come from them in return.

Christ summarised the Law in two concepts - loving God above all and loving your neighbour as yourself. The apostle John went on to say that anyone who loves God but mistreats his brother man, is a liar. Now in the Old Testament, God gave his people a hard time through the prophet Malachi. He cautioned them that the difficulties they experienced were because they were not giving him what they owed him... but that if they changed their hearts and fulfilled their obligations, he would pour forth his blessing in amazing ways.

In a way, I want to draw all the points in that last paragraph together. Those of us who call ourselves Christians do our best to try and live in a way that pleases God, we try to give him the worship, the love, the time and resources befitting of a relationship with him. However... if we do that and don't invest time, resources and love in our brother man - our community, isn't that counter-productive? As much as Malachi's people robbed God directly... are we not doing the same indirectly when we neglect to benefit the lives of those around us?

One can be the loneliest number... and yet when we learn to use that number in the right context it is the least loneliest. The spirit of true community means understanding that we are all one... not just in times of crisis, but all the time.

We are one.

Disobedience vs Disorder

I've been way too quiet on my blog in recent weeks, so I thought what better time to enter the fray again, than when the nation is up in arms with regard to the recent riots.

In fact I was partly inspired to write this article on the basis of a Freudian slip. Sunday's preacher had intended to describe the riots as civil disorder... but he accidentally described them as civil disobedience.  Nobody really noticed it except me... and he admitted it was slip when we spoke after the service.

A rioter stalks the streets against a fiery backdrop of disorder

There's an extremely large gulf between disorder and disobedience. If we categorised the English city riots as civil disobedience, we put the perpetrators  in the same bracket as activists such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Being somewhat a fan of the philosophies of the latter two, the contrast is glaringly obvious.

Gandhi developed a philosophy called Satyagraha which influenced the politics of civil rights campaigners such as King. Satyagraha as a philosophy is designed to nullify antagonism and injustice without causing harm to those who are the source of the antagonism or injustice. One of the founding principles of Satyagraha is that when appealing against a perceived unfairness in society, protesters should go to great lengths to uphold the other laws in society.

Gandhi and Martin Luther King utilised civil disobedience to demonstrate
the rightness of their cause, without resorting to violence, anarchy or disorder

What unfolded last week then, was clearly not Satyagraha or civil disobedience... it was blatant  lawlessness.  People stormed the streets to unlawfully take what they deceived themselves into believing was their deserved  slice of pie. Properties were destroyed, livelihoods ruined, passers by deceived, beaten and mugged... people fleeing for their lives and in some cases... losing their lives.... and for what?  Had this been a  genuinely political movement, order would not have been restored  by a change in the weather, or the threat of more severe law enforcement... because when people believe something deeply wrong is worth fighting against... no cost is too high. What we saw was mere opportunism.

I am not certain the perceived catalyst for the events was entirely justified either. Whilst the death of 29 year old Mark Duggan at the hands of police marksmen was deeply tragic and the apparent misinformation to the press by the Metropolitan Police inexcusable; the fact remains that the man had an activated firearm in his possession, one that had a bullet loaded into the firing chamber. It is illegal. He had NO business carrying that weapon... and if you are going to walk around with a illegal, loaded gun... there are going to be dire consequences if/when the authorities discover that fact.

Some commentators have been quick to point out that it is the dire poverty of the perpetrators that fuelled their actions... and yet we see that it is not just the most deprived in society who are being brought to justice for the crimes. In fact, I would argue that there is a moral pandemic at the heart of our society... and wealth, or lack of it is not the root cause.

It is said that nature abhors a vacuum... and while this is true, I believe the same can at least equally be said of the soul (if not more so). Shun God and you leave the door open for other things to creep in. Each of us if we took a frank look at our lives could admit to areas or things where we know there is a lack of submission or deference to God. On an individual basis, this is bad enough... but what happens when a society neglects Godly principles? Are we seeing the first fruits of this now

The set readings at church on Sunday had been abandoned in favour of ones that better suited a talk on the week's events. This was the chosen epistle:

Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

Romans 8:5-11

The passage talks of those who live according to the flesh (living just for this life, without God's direction), as having their minds set on what the flesh desires. Are we going to be snobbish and suggest that this is a malady that only affects the poor? Of course not! Without divine guidance there is a strong temptation become like spoiled little children. We see what we want and if we can take it, we grab it... if we can't take it, we become envious... bitter and resentful. This isn't just about material goods either... it extends right out and permeates our interests, relationships and personal ethics. Without the Spirit's guidance

The Gospel reading was equally poignant but not touched upon in the sermon:

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."

Matthew 7:1-5

I think this verse is particularly important as a response to some people's reactions to the riots. A recent Downing Street Petition has requested that any rioter claiming benefits should have all their benefits removed. I don't think this will solve anything. If poverty is a part of the problem, then how will making people destitute change their ways? It won't. It will encourage further violence. It would be like the perceived wisdom of water putting out fire... except that this would be like trying to put a chip pan fire out with water... it would have the opposite effect and would instead be explosive.  There were people far away from the cities... even in my Facebook feed, who were calling for the police and army to use LIVE ROUNDS on children. As terrible as the crimes committed were, do we really want to start shooting people dead in the streets? When people start acting in a feral, inhuman manner... do they really cease to be people? Or do we merely just say that to put distance between us and them... to comfort ourselves - that we are part of a quasi different species that is not associated with others who commit such acts? People are people... and you will never solve a human problem by treating another person being as anything less than human. It isn't easy. I think those found guilty of rioting/looting need to have punishments that reflect what has happened collectively and also point out the error in their perception. I don't think looting a shop in one part of London should be marked as a separate crime to the murder of a mugged individual somewhere else... because they were interconnected crimes... one facilitated the other. Irrespective of the length of jail sentence, It might be an idea to see the crime of manslaughter/murder added to the criminal record of those involved in any part of the riots. They need to know that their actions had consequences that resulted in someone losing their life. Or... having taken the spotlight away from the situation in the Horn of Africa... perhaps they should be sent away as unpaid aid workers for a time. If they truly feel they have nothing, perhaps they should understand what nothing truly means... in another context.

I have been deeply moved by Tariq Jahan's response in the wake of his very personal tragedy. Mr Jahan is a Muslim from Birmingham and during the riots, three young men were run over by a car and murdered. Mr Jahan helped administer CPR on the scene and discovered that one of the boys was his own son, Haroon. He had more reason than most to fly out in rage and curse those who stole his son from him... and yet, it was he who was appealing for calm and for the rioters to see reason and turn away from their actions.

In conclusion I'd like to reference my Bible notes from today. Selwyn Hughes has been discussing the positive example of the Early Church in Antioch, and how modern Christians should seek inspiration from that particular community in seeking how to relate to the world today... and how to rejuvenate the modern Church.

Today's reading came from Colossians:

Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.  For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming. You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator.  Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.  Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.  Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.  Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts. And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

Colossians 3:1-17

The early Church knew in a very special  way, how to connect with people. It appealed to people from diverse backgrounds, cultures, ethnicities and classes... and made no distinction. There are people out there who belong to nothing and nobody... or at least feel that way. We need to stop thinking of ourselves as we used to be and remember that we are all part of Christ's body. If we don't stop valuing our cliques more than our communities... how will we ever be able to reach out to them properly and with Spirit filled sincerity?

" Jesus paid much too high a price for us to pick and choose who should come"

Casting Crowns