Do people like theology?
Sometimes witty titles just don't come to mind. If there is a witty title, it is because it came to me later on. Well, my paper presentation went really well. Good questions asked; stuff mentioned I had not thought of; some critiques that were non-issues (semi-Pelagianism). Anyway, I was surprised at how much fun it was. It was fun to present and talk theology with others with similar interests. But this got me thinking: Do people like theology? Do they think they dislike theology, but actually dislike theologians? Do they dislike the way theology has been presented to them, or the manner in which theology has been taught? Too much/too little exposure?
Anyway, I'd like to hear some perspectives of people who don't often comment and I promise I won't critique. I think theology is incredibly compelling and frequently enhances worship. In this post I don't want to convince why people should love theology or how they actually do in spite of their suspicions otherwise. I am more interested in hearing what turns/has turned people off theology so as not to repeat mistakes.
Anyway, I'd like to hear some perspectives of people who don't often comment and I promise I won't critique. I think theology is incredibly compelling and frequently enhances worship. In this post I don't want to convince why people should love theology or how they actually do in spite of their suspicions otherwise. I am more interested in hearing what turns/has turned people off theology so as not to repeat mistakes.
posted by Aaron Perry at
4:31 PM
28 Comments:
Okay, time for me to be honest, and hopefully I won't be the brunt of some other people's comments.
I have never considered myself to be a deep theological thinker. In fact, if you were to try and put me in the midst of a theological debate, I know I would be terrified. I've tried to consider why this is so...could it be that the word "theology" in itself intimidates me? I must admit that I enjoy reading some theological things because they stimulate my method of thought. Take your posts for example - there have been times when I have wanted to respond, but have feared that my response wouldn't sound quite "intelligent" enough. I think that stems from fear of what other people think of me. I've always tried to be a people pleaser and life in ministry is teaching me that I can't focus on keeping everyone happy because it's impossible.
Ask me to debate on education - differences between Christian and secular - or to talk about the role of a pastor's wife, and I'll jump in with both feet because those are things that I am passionate about and that apply to my life. So then you say, "Well, theology applies to your life," and that's where I need to educate myself.
So where do I start? How do I overcome this fear?
This is my first response, and I'm still thinking about your question. Perhaps after you comment AP or some other people give some input I'll be able to better clarify myself.
If I might ask 2 follow-up questions to your fine post, Sarah:
(1) What sorts of assumptions are at work when you talk about the difference between Christian and secular models of education or being a clergy-spouse?
(2) Are there ways in which those kinds of conversations are theological from the start?
My questions are leading, I know. Here's what they're leading to: in these conversations, I think that you are both assuming theology and doing theology. You're doing theological anthropology.
There's no need to fear the "deep end of the pool." You are already in it!
SGFMB
i think SGFMB hit the nail on the head, Sarah. but, i'll stay out of that. i have a comment and then an education question.
comment: i think theology has to go back to its roots in finding its purpose. not "roots" as in historical theology (although early Christian theologians, both men and women, show this to be their driving force), but "roots" as in what theology is all about. miroslav volf said that we sometimes think theology is about what people have said about God. but it's not. he says, and here i quote, "theology is about God, stupid." many trained theologians will end up being shown to be poor ones because they have forgotten that theology is about God. and knowing God should always be the passion behind theology!
question: are you familiar with the education philosophy called "constructivism"? i heard a paper on it on the weekend and found it quite interesting... what are your thoughts on it?
I go back and forth on this. I do like discussing theology with people that i can understand. (sorry Aaron and Tim) but as a pastor I find most of my time is spent trying to figure out how to make theology as simple as possible. The truth is I've found the church in general has a hard time living up to the simple things in the Bible. (love God with your whole self and your neighbour as well) I finally preached a bit of a deeper theological message recently on the first part of Romans 8 comparing living by the Spirit to living in the flesh. I enjoyed it but it was hard treading keeping everyone with me. I in no way am saying we have to water down the Word to appease the Church but I refrain from using actual theological terms most of the time and instead conceptualize things as much as possible. If people don't understand what I'm teaching than I figure what is the point. On a side note after finishing my 7th year here I am finding more freedom to go deeper in my teaching because of the foundations I've built. (I have no clue how pastors can do the 4 year stint and leave. Having to start from scratch all the time would drive me crazy)
ah...the wisdom of a pastor! thanks, kirk. some of the reasons you highlight in your preaching are why i have not made this blog public to all in my church--though most would not care, some would take issue with some of the thought (mainly b/c they do not have the background to consider its whole context--which is not a bad thing; and some b/c there would be genuine disagreement--which is a good thing, but needs conversation), and i do not want that to become an issue--b/c it's not. but theology does drive everything that i preach--though my language is conditioned and changed in preaching. i expect we're about 100% on the same page here.
let me borrow an illustration from tom wright. (he used it for faith, but i think it can be expanded and used of theology in preaching, too.) a sermon is like an attic. you invite people up the stairs with you and explore the attic--some of it familiar, some of it not; containing some things that we remember from somewhere in our childhood; containing some things that our parents hold dear; some wonder when it was last cleaned--it feels old and unkempt, etc. some, however, love the attic. it's rich and full of memories that compel them to engage in relationship with others who appreciate the attic. just when the people you are showing around the attic think that the tour is over, you show them a window. it can be the smallest window--just a pin hole--but those who look through it can see the most beautiful landscape imaginable. the size of the window does not matter because it is the landscape that is important! some will ignore the window; some will not be listening as you mention it; some will be more concerned with cleaning out the attic and installing a machine to project images on the wall. BUT SOME will look and there find a whole new world to explore once their tour of the attic is over. but they never would have seen outside--at least from this perspective--had they not been invited into the attic.
that tiny window is the theology of a sermon and hte landscape is God. you need to introduce people to the window gently--perhaps hte light from the landscape's sun is bright. you also need to introduce people to it appropriately--perhaps a new window needs to be installed at a different height. but everyone deserves the opportunity to see the landscape. i think you hit the nail on the head with how you said it with new language and time sensitivity and making it simple.
SGFMB and AP,
Just wanted to let you know that I've read your responses and I'm looking forward to responding back. I have to teach today and tomorrow along with some church responsibilities that I need to tend to, but I will respond either this evening or the next (time does not permit me to do so at the moment as my response could be somewhat lengthy).
BTW, I thoroughly enjoyed the attic illustration and Kirk's input.
I'm actually excited about this topic... :)
Actually I appreciated both Aaron and Tim's comments. My fear in being the guy who decides (lead by the Spirit of course) what and how to teach people about God sometimes is that I don't take people deep enough. I've been so thankful to see my congregation become so hungry for the Word. As Tim suggests I do throw the theological terms in when I'm teaching but emphasize the meaning so if they don't remember the word they may at least remember the meaning. Preaching always puts you in a place of teaching these concepts to such a variety of people. No matter how you convey it there are some that won't get it and there are always some that think you should be going deeper. My philosophy is dissapoint everybody than they are so overwhelmed by your ineptitude that they figure someone will do something to get rid of him but if they all think that then you're safe.
In college, found theology class to be so enlightening, so freeing. The terms and categories were, for the most part, helpful. Now in a local church, it does seem like the people settle for a fuzzy picture of God. They see a big fishy thing where, with a little learning they could see a 80' blue whale migrating from Anarctica ingesting tons of krill through it's baleen. There is too large a chasm between the seminary and the church pew, I want to learn to stand in the gap and I feel I am in like company here.
I would like to hear thoughts about how to teach theologically without giving off an academic, intimidating ethos which, at least in my church setting, hinders learning.
i too, think that theology is a misunderstood discipline. i don't enjoy categories and labels, but i AM curious about who God is and what that means for we humans as we are situated in the world. theology, for me, has always been about idenity of, and relationship to, my maker. what baffles me is how people cannot be curious about who God is--especially after they have supposedly surreneded their hearts to him. i don't get it.
like kirk, i generally avoid using terminology and categories. instead i use metaphors, stories, word-pictures and imagine-this-ideal scenarios.
so joe, i suggest trying to communicate the gospel in story form (not a new idea!). situate people in the story. i think people are generally more big-picture thinkers than we give them credit for, we just have to walk with them through the picture.
easier said than done, but that's why imagination is more important than knowledge :)
I am with Sarah's first comment in many ways and I also agree with Jo. I "like theology" in that I love learning about God and discussing Him with anyone willing to talk about the Lord. What I dislike is the feeling of fear/intimidation that comes when entering a conversation formally about theology. Something about formalizing the discussion of God with the label makes it seem like something so far beyond my intellect that I dare not enter in, lest I say something dumb or wrong. It makes talking about God seem exclusive to me, something only the smart guys who write text books can do. I understand that we should feel comfortable with our siblings in Christ enough to talk these things out. The thing is, I always do feel comfortable when we're talking about the Word in Bible study or about the Lord over coffee, which is something I think SGFMB alluded to, but categorizing the talk does something to the conversation for me.
One big thing that "turned me off" from formal theological talks was all the big words and phrases used to formulate doctrines we studied in school. I think those words do an amazing job of capturing the depth of beauty and richness of God and His interaction with us, but they simultaneously make God hard to understand for me. Just some thoughts. I figured if Sarah could be brave and enter this convo so could I!
i would just like to point out how we are engaging in what i am pursuing in my dissertation: we are engaging in conversation and it is functioning in "atoning" ways because it is drawing people into conversation about God to know God--even people who have, by their admission, been afraid before... hmmm....maybe i AM on to something here! :)
Sarah: I am still VERY interested in your take on constructivism.
Lor and Sarah: Fear in entering into theological conversation is not something that goes away--at least all the time. but God invites us all to speak to and about Him.
Bit of a tangent, but important, I think.
"Megachurches, Paradigm Shifts, and the New Spiritual Quest," by David Wells (from his new book, Above all Earthly Pow'rs) is the best argument for preachers striving to be good theologians (which is not the same as preachers preaching theologically loaded, jargon-heavy sermons).
The alternative to a preacher who is a good theologian is a preacher who is a bad theologian. There is no middle ground. And the results are disastrous for the church.
SGFMB
My apologies for the delayed response. My apologies for the long response.
SGFMB
First, I must explain that my assumptions concerning secular and Christian models of education and concerning being a clergy-spouse are still being sifted as I’ve had to deal with various situations over the past three years.
Concerning the difference between Christian and secular models of education, I find myself torn between the two particularly when it comes to grade school education. After graduating with a BA in Christian School Education from BBC, I taught fifth grade for a year at a high quality Christian school in Houlton, ME. Please do not assume that because it was a Christian school that I didn’t have any behavioral problems or students who had difficult home lives as this was not the case. The curriculum there was excellent, for it integrated God into all of the subjects and there was a set time for Bible class. After getting married, I furthered my education at a secular university (which gave me opportunity to compare Christian and secular education for teacher training) so that I could have the opportunity to teach full-time in a public school. I have had an excellent experience at the public school, but it some of the adjustments have been painful and have left me in a state of woe! The hardest thing for me to come to terms with is that students in the grade one Christian school that I taught at can spell better than the third grade students in the public school. In fact, I was told in a staff meeting that I was not allowed to use the word “spelling” in the classroom, have spelling lists or have spelling tests. Instead, we had “word activities.” I still find this appalling. Every few years, at least within the district I am in, new Math books etc. have been introduced with new “techniques.” As a teacher I believe that it is important to be current, but I also believe in the basic necessities of reading, writing, and arithmetic! My niece Sheridan is 4 years old and she can read because she has a mother who taught her phonics. Sheridan knows more than some of the kindergarten students that I taught. So you see I am conflicted. I don’t even have children and I am worried about their education. As Christians we are told to be salt and light, and so I believe that we need Christian teachers in the public schools, but I also believe in quality education. Do I send my children to public school and supplement for the differences at home? Do I try to change the public educational system at least within my district? How can I teach in a classroom where I’m told by someone else what to do with my Literacy and Math time? These and more questions plague me based on my beliefs. I’ve seen what quality education looks like, and I have every intention of giving that to my students whether it be in a Christian or public classroom, but I am still conflicted about what my role should be, and what will happen with regards to children that I do not yet have.
With regards to being a clergy-spouse, I do believe that a wife can make or break her husband’s ministry. However, this should not mean that a pastor’s wife has to be a slave to the church. I am learning that my primary responsibility is to please God and my husband and that although service in the church is important, my family needs to come first. If my family has problems, then I’ll struggle with ministering to my church. Traditionally a pastor’s wife was to sing, play piano, and teach a SS class…the list goes on. Today, many churches (especially smaller ones) still feel this should be the case. I believe that if a clergy-spouse serves in her church, it should be because she has a heart for that ministry, not because she is expected to do so. This is still something I’m battling with. If I were to list you everything that I have done in the past three years since I’ve been a clergy-spouse for my church, you would see that I have struggled with feeling like I’ve had to fulfill the traditional role of a pastor’s wife. I love being a pastor's wife. I believe it is a high calling and I take it seriously, but I also believe that if I serve in my church (apart from assisting my husband with the youth group and young adults which I cherish because we’re serving in that capacity together), it should be because I feel that is where the Lord wants me to serve at the present time not because I feel like I’m supposed to because I’m a pastor’s wife.
So yes, you are right, my assumptions, my conflictions, my questions, are centered around theology – and it took a post to help me realize that! Please pardon my ignorance :)
AP,
I am not overly familiar with the education philosophy called “constructivism,” but I did some reading on the topic and intend on doing some more. I remember being taught at UMPI about using the KWL method: What do students KNOW. What do they WANT to know, and then developing what they will LEARN. In some ways, that method reminds me of constructivism. One paper I read said that in a traditional classroom setting “Teachers serve as pipelines and seek to transfer their thoughts and meaning to the passive student. There is little room for student-initiated questions, independent thought or interaction between students.” I wasn’t crazy about that statement because I don’t consider myself to be a “pipeline” as I do try to encourage my students to ask questions and to think on their own as well as discuss ideas (being a substitute teacher I am somewhat limited to do things “my way”). The paper went on to explain that the constructivist approach enables students to “challenge previous conceptions of their existing knowledge” and that the teacher needs to ask open-ended questions that will enable the students to formulate their own hypotheses. I like some of the constructivist approach, but I’m not crazy about all of it. As I say, I’m still educating myself on this topic. Is the paper you heard available to read on-line? I remember being educated about different educational philosophies, but after having student-taught in four different classrooms (two Christian school and two public), I’ve seen that every teacher has their own teaching style. I believe there is a time for the teacher to “lecture” or give direct instruction, but I also believe there should be times when the students can formulate opinions, search for answers, etc. A lot depends on the grade and the subject area. A good teacher will incorporate various teaching strategies and assessments within his/her classroom because students learn in different ways. As for me, although I am currently finished formal education (at least for now), I am still reading, attending sessions when possible, and doing what I can to better myself as an educator. Please feel free to prick this conversation further, and in the meantime I’ll do some more reading. Any recommendations?
On a side note, thanks for the encouragment with regards to overcoming my fear.
Lor,
Way to be brave :) I can totally relate to your post!
I love God. I enjoy talking about that love for God and I find that doing so inspires worship of God.
I do not enjoy measuring contests... which I believe theological discussions often turn into. It is interesting (though not suprising) to me that "Words concerning God" (Theology) can often turn into very un-Godly conversations.
It is also interesting to me that Theologians (people who talk concerning God professionally) are to a great extent an exclusive reading club... sometimes more interested in memorized knowledge and concepts than relationship in the context of community. Theologians (at least full-time professional ones) most often read and write materials that are only read and written by other full-time professional Theologians. This does not make me upset in any way... it only makes me wonder to the purpose.
As of yet, there has not been any theological term that when clearly articulated in layman's terms I have not been able to understand on at least a basic level. I will be quick to say that it is a very BASIC understanding... but an understanding nonetheless... If full-time professional Theologians desire to minister to the unwashed masses (just kidding around here) such as myself, then they would be best suited to speak in language that is easily understood and not get frustrated with people who are not like them. This takes more time and definately a lot more creativity... but it may be worth the effort. If however, full-time professional Theologians (not talking about pastors who think theologically--I am talking about the ones that people think about when they hear the term "Theologian") are happy to have their reading clubs where they read each other's work and do thier measuring accordingly... I am not bitter or jealous or spiteful that they wish to do so... I would just want to make sure they know that I won't be listening and neither will any other people who enjoy Theology, but who do not have the time or ability to think on the same level as those who do it full-time and professionally.
hey benson. in my opinion there are a few issues at work here. i think you are right that some theology is done via exclusion. of course, every other profession does this, too--including ministry (you did just have ordination interviews, right?), law, medicine, etc. theology should be no different in some respects--only some have the ability to be professional theologians. and as theologians engage in writing for themselves with excellence and humility, then they are engaging in what you call "relationship in the context of community" (they are entitled to their own spiritual fulfillment, yes?).
further, all communities are established by boundaries, and theologians are no different. after having found myself at a conference where only trained theologians could converse, i was amazed at how the presentations and presenters were NOT engaged in any measurement, but driven by a very real love for God and his people. they asked questions about how to engage students more; how to witness to other academics; who and how to read to begin to think theologically about social problems... not everyone from any church could have jumped in and been conversant--and, in my opinion, that is ok.
this is not always a question of intelligence. it is more often a question of calling and vocation. God has not wired us all the same. for instance, the two people who shared on this blog that they usually do not engage in theology conversations are obviously not lacking for any intelligence--one a valedictorian and the other a salutatorian! either of them could pursue theology education if they wanted--though i expect God has other "professional" plans for the educator.
of course, theologians have no monopoly on their practice, as their object of study and devotion has invited all to partake in Him. in this regard, found in God's broader community, theologians ought to help their fellow citizens. and i think some do and most that i've met want to. so, what's the problem?
i think there are a few problems. first, some theologians grow frustrated by what they interpret (many times correctly) to be a lack of effort put forth (i can't say that i read Grider more carefully than i needed to to get an A). many times people do not read anything that is challenging to understand--though they could. second, rabid dogmaticism. some of the most theologically dogmatic people i know are also the worst theologians. third, arrogance. i think a good amount of what you wrote is accurate, although i find that arrogance is not as present among the professional theologians as much as the young bucks who are insecure in their knowledge (myself included from time to time).
does anyone agree with this? want to nuance something? think of a solution?
tim, a couple of things:
1. does quoting augustine lend itself to benson's issue with an exclusive reading club? in other words, does appealing to him for authority merely add to the separation?
2. i think your phrase to be merciful, gentle, and humble, while true, has the opposite ring than the attitude intended. frankly, i think most others should "get it"--and i expect them to if we can have a conversation.
3. what you say about ministry, i think, is spot on.
i'd be curious to hear benson's thoughts on the first two points above...
AP...
I agree, Theologians are welcome to their reading clubs... and this is community.
It is also okay that not everyone can jump into the discussion.
I agree that it is not an issue of intelligence for those who cannot engage (though I can see how one of my statments could have been interpreted this way)
Ignorance of the young bucks definately lends itself to arrogance by times (me included too), but I am not convinced that professional Theologians as a group are as innocent as you suggest... Though I definately know some whose life calling is to "know God" and not just to "know"
Will write more soon.
AP...
I agree, Theologians are welcome to their reading clubs... and this is community.
It is also okay that not everyone can jump into the discussion.
I agree that it is not an issue of intelligence for those who cannot engage (though I can see how one of my statments could have been interpreted this way)
Ignorance of the young bucks definately lends itself to arrogance by times (me included too), but I am not convinced that professional Theologians as a group are as innocent as you suggest... Though I definately know some whose life calling is to "know God" and not just to "know"
Will write more soon.
hey benson, when you do write more, flesh out what the "guilt" is for me. i want to make sure i hear exactly what you're saying.
Just curious.... If those of you who are preachers aren't reading classic Christian literature--and that seems to be the thrust of a couple of posts--just what wells are you drawing on to feed your flocks?
And before you pounce on me to say, "The Bible," I would ask a quick related question. If you aren't reading classic Christian literature, how do you know your interpretation of Holy Scripture is sound? How do you test whether you have in fact departed from the apostles' teaching (cf. 1 and 2 John)?
As a professional theologian who does a fair bit of preaching (and I think Tim is right that the distinction between theologian and pastor is a peculiarly modern and ultimately untenable one), I confess to being worried by the "I am my own standard of biblical interpretation" implied in a few of these posts.
I would not go to a mechanic who made such boasts about his knowledge of cars. Still less a medical doctor who spoke of her own medical training in this way. You guys and gals are supposed to be the doctors of souls and souls are far more important than vehicles or bodies, no?
To put the matter a bit more bluntly, if you're not immersed the in the literature that creates and sustains the Christian language game, how is what you're doing when you preach and counsel different from therapy + bible verses? And wouldn't I be better off just going to a psychologist, since they have a good deal more training?
SGFMB
SGFMB: i think part of the problem benson might be raising--let me know if i am wrong here, benson--is not that he wishes to be alone in interpretation, but that the sources of and guides into Christian classics--i.e., professional heologians!--are not doing their job. they are carrying on their own conversation.
could it be (and this is neither rhetorical nor with an assumed answer) that pastors who consider themselves self-sustaining are not the problem, but the symptom? it does seem to me that as arrogant as it is to read the Bible on my own, it is equally unfair to tell someone to immerse themselves in Christian classics without immediate help.
that is what i mean by augustine being a dividing line.
"1. does quoting augustine lend itself to benson's issue with an exclusive reading club? in other words, does appealing to him for authority merely add to the separation?"
I don't mind the quoting of Augustine... But don't be surprised or put out when you find out that people don't know who Augustine is or get frustrated that they haven't read him (even though I have and quite enjoy him)... People for the most part simply do not have time to pursue the same readings as professional Theologians.
2. i think your phrase to be merciful, gentle, and humble, while true, has the opposite ring than the attitude intended. frankly, i think most others should "get it"--and i expect them to if we can have a conversation.
Thanks for your clarification Tim...
However, I think it is more likely that people will "get it" in terms of understanding the importance of knowing who God is and their relationship to Him (I think this is what AP is talking about) than they will "get it" in terms of understanding why Theologians do what they do... (even though I understand and appreciate what Theologians do)...
Tim, you are right to react to my comment, "it only makes me wonder to the purpose." I placed this in the wrong place... I do understand and value what Theologians who are passionately pursuing Truth have to bring to the Church... What I cannot fathom and 'wonder to the purpose' is Theologians who are more interested in "knowing" than "Knowing God" (something you and AP are not guilty of in my opinion) In fact, there are few people who I respect more in their pursuit of Godliness than AP... Tim, I don't know you well enough to know...but I suspect your pursuit of Theology is pure as well.
AP...
When you say, "i find that arrogance is not as present among the professional theologians as much as the young bucks who are insecure in their knowledge" I agree with you totally... However I have come accross those who (it seems) enter into theological conversation not with the purpose of understanding God and who he is, but rather with an agenda to get their point accross... I think a line is crossed when we pursue debate to win rather than to understand God better... Let me give an example of healthy debate: AP there have been several times on your blog where I have conceded to your line of thought not as a loss, but because you have helped me come closer in contact with what I perceive to be an accurate depiction of God. A classic example of this was our discussion on open theism... I believe this was healthy theology where both sides were seeking to better understand who God is... However, I have read articles and listened to discussions between Theologians that more resembled a fight than a pursuit of relationship with the One True God... This is what some Theologians could be guilty of... (as well as any other number of people) It is when the pursuit of Theology is to "know" rather than to "know God"... Does this make any sense...
Grace. Peace.
You don't need one more comment on here, but I do think people like theology. (Of course, I should qualify that I'm referring to the average North American person who claims at least some connection with evangelical Christianity.) It's basically been said already, but I think people dislike when theology cannot be "for everyone." Theology courses teach us ways to say things about God that we thought and never said. Unfortunately, we theologians tend to learn those words and forget how to speak "real" English.
Why should we love theology? (As if we haven't already figured that out....) Theology informs our Christian experience, and vice versa.
"distinction between theologian and pastor is a peculiarly modern and ultimately untenable one"
I don't think I would ever say that I am not a Theologian... Just not a full-time professional one with a PH.D. in Theology. I am a pastor and as a pastor I am a Theologian (one who enjoys reading Augustine, the Fathers and spends a good deal of time checking his interpretation against others).
Again, I don't have a problem with Theologians having conversations among themselves that only they can understand--that's fine and important... However, I have neither the time nor inclination to enter your discussion...unless it is creatively articulated in a way that I (and others) can understand.
Interestingly enough, 3/4 people who are still engaged in this conversation are either full-time professional theologians or full-time professional theologians in training.
SGFMB: "I confess to being worried by the 'I am my own standard of biblical interpretation' implied in a few of these posts."
Clarification here would be helpful.
Tim: "I want to ask why?"
I'm not sure... I'm still at the table... it was merely an observation on my part. It may have simply been that others had nothing more to add... if it is something else...I cannot answer. Thanks for all your perspective Tim. I find it helpful!
I haven't taken part in the conversation because it's too heady or harsh.
For the record I've checked this blog regularly since I responded a second time, but after a full day yesterday (church pianist, niece's baby dedication...etc.) I ended up having another full day today as I had to teach school, teach piano, and tend to supper, house cleaning and even company!
For the record I've thoroughly enjoyed the conversation, but at the present time I lack the energy to respond to all of the posts that I've missed. I'm just catching up! Should the conversation continue, and the time allow, I will do my best to join in and contribute.
Tim,
Thanks so much! I appreciate your comment. Although I feel a bit "underschooled" as I do not currently have a masters degree, it's nice to know my comments are still welcome :)
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home