Mourning doves and the Church

God has given us, my husband, one of my granddaughters who is living with us, and myself, a gift of two mourning doves. They came early this year and chose the window air conditioner that sets outside but in the window that is just above some of my books.

They have good company; C.S. Lewis and Willa Cather share that space. Dante’s circles of hell and Solzhenitsyn’s First Circle which is also hellish set in their shelves beneath them. And if they could stretch their wings through hard glass they would touch Flannery O’Conner’s The Habit of Being (her letters) and a biography of Edith Stein: The untold Story of the philosopher and Mystic who lost her life in the Death Camps of Auschwitz, a book I have yet to read.

They built a nest from twigs and now at least two tiny eggs can be seen in it when the female flies away to find her food. Their soft mourning sounds grace our morning coffee. Mostly they are quiet and still and we forget they are there.

Unannounced, with only seeming small complaints, they chose a very flat, hard, cold metal surface to build upon. Neither sand nor rock, yet they have survived the first spring storm. They had hardly finished when it blew our way. My granddaughter kept peeking through the curtains at them announcing “they are still there.” And they rode through windy blasts that took out many city trees; it even took out our electricity for several hours.

They exist like the church, on what seems to be a precarious perch. I worry that in a few more weeks the waxwings, while flying in a large grouping, eating the berries from a tree nearby, will frighten them away. Or even that one of the neighborhood cats will find some way to scale the side of the house, (we live on the second floor) and destroy their peace, their eggs or even their lives. But there the female sets protecting her eggs. And somewhere the male is watching and protecting.

God has placed them there for good or ill. No matter, for now they are a blessing. But God has also placed his church where he wants her in various parts of the world. Always for good, no matter how many cats roam the world. In weakness, suffering, in the power of his cross the church is blessed with his grace and promises. The gates of hell shall not prevail. Though storm winds blow or many trees- the mighty- fall- still she will exist eternally in his care.

Is not ordaining unrepentant sinners an essential of the faith?

Is not ordaining unrepentant sinners an essential of the faith? A friend has been blogging on this,PRESBYTERIAN HABERDASHERY , answering the question with a no. And to be fair he says that he would not ordain unrepentant practicing homosexuals, which is of course what the question, at this time in history, is about. So having started this posting with a biblical understanding that same gender sex is sin, I want to look at why I believe, in this case, that not ordaining anyone involved in unrepentant sexual sin is an essential of the faith.

The Confessions and Scripture insist that some sins are greater than others. The Second Helvetic Confession referring to original sin states:

“We also confess that sins are not equal; although they arise from the same fountain of corruption and unbelief, some are more serious than others. As the Lord said, it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for the city that rejects the word of the Gospel.(Matt. 10:14 f.; 11;20.)”

And also The Shorter Catechism: “Q. 83. Are all transgressions of the law equally heinous? A. Some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others. (7.083)”

One of the verses given for the above is Jesus’ remark to Pilate, “You would have no authority over me, unless it had been given to you from above; for this reason he who delivered me to you has the greater sin.” (John 19: 11)

The Larger Catechism states almost the same question and answer as the Shorter but goes on in question 151 to ask “What are those aggravations which make some sins more heinous than others.” The answer is long and detailed with several categories and lists.

But under # 2‘Sins receive their aggravations from the nature and quality of the offense’ one of the categories is “if it be against the … light of nature.” In an endnote, that particular sin is denying the knowledge of God’s invisible attributes, power and divine nature as known by God’s creation. This particular sin as listed in the endnote and detailed in Roman’s 1:20-21 is so heinous as to cause God to turn humanity over to their own sexual lust and many other sins.

The sexual aspects of God’s turning humanity over to lust have to do with same gender sex. The rest entails almost the whole range of human sins including slander, malice and disobedience to parents. So in this case the most terrible sin is denying the true God but the consequences are a whole range of sins including homosexuality. So God condemns and turns us over to our rebellion. And the circle is complete.

Humanity denies God’s power to change humanity, denies God’s mercy, and denies the very particulars of his creation. All of the fine details, the differences between creatures and God, between children and parents, between the sexes are denied and God allows the results. But God gives us over to pick us up again at the cross.

So what about not ordaining those who commit sexual sin and refuse to acknowledge it as sin and so do not repent. How does it touch the essentials such as the deity of Christ, Jesus’ redemptive death on the cross, the resurrection and the Trinity? In everyway such ordination denies essential biblical teaching.

To ordain the unrepentant GLBT person, denies, as above, the power of God as He takes on human flesh and suffers for our sins. It says God through the eternal son is unable to transform or keep through temptation the sinner. It denies the deity of Christ who is able because he is God to overcome death for our sake. It denies the bodily resurrection, because it denies that we are united to Christ’s resurrected body from which we draw nourishment and help. It denies the fellowship within the Trinity because it lets go of the eternal decision within the Godhead to redeem a people who will be set apart as vessels for the Lord. It denies the Holy Spirit who woos us away from that which the scriptures call sin.

Paul in 1 Timothy 1, in his explanation about how the law is good since it is used to catch up the sinner, lists many of those sins listed in the first chapter of Romans: liars, homosexuals, rebels and murderers. But he goes on to point out how he himself was a blasphemer, a murderer and a “violent aggressor” and yet God through his grace showed him mercy. He writes:

It is a trust worthy saying deserving full acceptance that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all. Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate his perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in him for eternal life. (I Timothy 1:15-16.)

So Paul does not deny the mercy of God but instead admits his sin and the saving power of Christ. And so must we all. That is essential.

A time to speak-a time to confess

Noel Anderson has posted on his blog Anderspeak "TOWARD A NEW CONFESSION."

The Declaration, he has posted, was written in 1996 by a group of pastors including Anderson and my first Presbyterian pastor Darrell Johnson. When I saw it on Anderson's blog I was amazed at its relevance for the Church today. Because I believe Jesus is calling the Church to confess I am also placing it on my blog. I pray it will be received by many.

*A PRESBYTERIAN DECLARATION

As forgiven sinners and disciples of Jesus Christ, we are troubled by the deep divide that is rending the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). The division is rooted in two foundational questions:

1. Confusion over the identity of Jesus Christ, as well as the nature and extent of his redemptive work on the cross confirmed by his bodily resurrection;

2. Confusion over the place of Scripture and the extent to which it is the supreme and authoritative standard for our faith and moral behavior.

Among other places, this twofold confusion is manifesting itself in the painful debate over the combined questions of sexuality, standards of behavior, and ordination.

As men and women who have taken vows that we "receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith as expressed in the confessions of our church as authentic and reliable expositions of what Scripture leads us to believe and do," while we "promise to further the peace, unity and purity of the church" (G-14.0207), we publicly declare the following:

1. "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." (II Timothy 3:16).

The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments stand as the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ while providing the supreme and decisive standard for faithful living in obedience to his gospel.

We affirm that the Scriptures have sufficient authority of themselves, not of men; for God spoke to the prophets, apostles, and still speaks to us through the Holy Scriptures. (Second Helvetic, BC 5.001).

We affirm that the historic confessions of the Presbyterian Church are authentic and reliable expositions of Scripture, articulating truthful descriptions of our Triune God, humankind, God's redemptive work through Jesus Christ, and both general and specific imperatives for faithful living in response to and cooperation with our redemption. We therefore submit all insights and experiences to the authority of Scripture.

We reject any and all statements and actions that deny the reliability and pertinence of the confessions as a standard to lead, guide and instruct us in what Scripture teaches us to believe and do.

2. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…And the Word became flesh and lived among us." (John 1:1, 14) Jesus Christ is at once fully God and fully human; of the same substance with God, yet having two natures; "one who is a true and righteous man and yet more powerful than all creatures, that is, one who is at the same time true God." (Heidelberg Catechism --BC 4.015).

We affirm the witness of the Scripture and the historic declarations of the early church creeds, reaffirmed in the Reformation confessions, that Jesus Christ is both human and divine, the eternal Son of God, yet born of a virgin. He entered human life, was tempted as we are, suffered, was crucified, died and was buried, then rose from the grave. He ascended to heaven, exercises final authority over all creation, and is to be worshiped along with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

We reject any and all statements and actions that intentionally or unintentionally degrade, diminish or deny the witness of the Scripture and confessions regarding: the identity of Jesus Christ; his earthly life, ministry and significance; or his position and authority as exalted Lord.

3. "But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.' 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh." (Mark 10:6-8).

"We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until now; and not only the creation but we ourselves…while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies." (Romans 8:22-23).

We live in a rebellious and broken world. This includes our sexuality. We all are broken in our sexuality. There are no exceptions. God's intention from the beginning is that men and women, complementing each other as male and female, would reflect together the image of God in their humanity. "The relationship between man and woman exemplifies in a basic way God's ordering of the interpersonal life for which he created mankind. Anarchy in sexual relationships is a symptom of man's alienation from God, his neighbor and himself." (The Confession of 1967 - BC 9.47).

We affirm that our sexuality is faithfully expressed in many ways, in marriage and in singleness, in sexual love and in other acts of love. We affirm that sexual love is blessed by God, is one expression of our gender complementarity that fully reflects God's image, and is intended only for the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman.

We affirm that men and women may pursue fully satisfying and fulfilled lives outside of marriage, practicing chastity in obedience to Christ, while supported in the struggles and loneliness of life by the fellowship of the church.

We affirm that temptations and inappropriate desires are experienced by all people, but are not sin. Entertaining, nurturing, or acting on temptation and desire is sin. The honoring of sexual boundaries, in both thought and deed, as established in the Scriptures and re-iterated in the confessions, provides an environment within which life and relationships can flourish. This is God's intention for God's Kingdom.

We reject any and all statements and actions that intentionally or unintentionally bless human conditions and behaviors as either gifts from God or faithful responses to God which, nevertheless, stand in contradiction to God's revealed will for human relationships. We refuse to condone what God intends to redeem. Redefinitions of either marriage or sexual boundaries to accommodate culture, experience, political pressure, or even loved ones are further expressions of our brokenness and confusion. Such redefinitions and accommodations deny biblical notions of fidelity and integrity and further alienate us from God, each other and ourselves.

4. "Wretched one that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 7:24-25) "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (I Corinthians 1:18).

The Scriptures describe the saving work of Jesus Christ on the cross in a variety of ways; it is "the sacrifice of a lamb, a shepherd's life given for his sheep, atonement by a priest…a ransom of a slave, payment of a debt, vicarious satisfaction of a legal penalty, and victory over the powers of evil." (Confession of 1967, BC - 9.09.) All of these images together, clearly articulated in the confessions of the church, while not exhausting the meaning of the cross, capture its essential significance which is applied by the Holy Spirit to all those who believe.

We affirm that the saving work of Jesus Christ on the cross is the foundation of our hope. In Jesus Christ crucified we are delivered, body and soul, from darkness to light, from death into life, from bondage to obedience, in this life and the life to come.

We reject any and all statements and actions that intentionally or unintentionally degrade, diminish, or deny what the Scriptures testify to and the confessions articulate concerning the nature and function of the cross. We reject any and all statements and actions that reduce and limit the cross to an expression of devotion, a tragic and unanticipated event, a spiritually irrelevant piece of history, or view it as an act of abuse by a malevolent Father.

5. "And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires." (Galatians 5:24). "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me." (Matthew 16:24).

When the completed work of Jesus Christ crucified is applied to our lives by the Holy Spirit, we begin the process of restoration in all aspects of our brokenness, including our sexuality. This is part of salvation. Our cooperation with that restoration requires on our part an act of the will empowered by the renewing work of the Holy Spirit. This is taking up the cross and following Jesus.

We affirm that in the cross of Jesus there is resurrection power that breaks the hold of canceled sin; heals the trauma of the past; sets us free from sinful behaviors, desires and addictions; and enables us to live faithfully in obedience to Scripture as interpreted by the confessions of the church.

We affirm that Jesus Christ crucified both requires and provides for a re-aligning of the human will in life-giving conformity to the will of God.

We affirm that confession and repentance are necessary for healing, transformation and the affirmation of the true self. We affirm that no matter what the condition or set of circumstances, the Holy Spirit gives many graces sufficient for the day.

We reject the claim that people cannot experience any change at the core of their being. We reject and denounce attempts to deny and even to silence those who testify of their own transformation and restoration in their sexuality.

6. "So if I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet." (John 13:14).

The church of Jesus Christ is a community marked by God's grace and mercy extended to us in Jesus Christ crucified. The church opens its arms to all, declaring and offering the forgiving love the church itself has experienced. At the same time, with mutual forbearance and self-giving service, the church steadily calls its members into holiness and wholeness in obedience to Christ as defined in the Scriptures and articulated in the confessions. The fellowship of the church is the primary vehicle by which the love and power of the Crucified One heals and restores. This is the love and justice of Jesus that does not condemn, yet calls each one out of brokenness, sin and confusion. This is true compassion.

We affirm that the church must be a safe place for each person to work out his or her own salvation in all areas of life, including one's sexuality. We affirm that when the church is faithful to the gospel, the church offers good news and hope for those struggling in their sexuality. We affirm that those who are faithfully wrestling with core issues of sexuality are a gift to the church, representing a prophetic witness within the community.

We reject quick condemnation by some Christians aimed at the specific sins of others while excluding their own. At the same time, we reject the assertion that an individual's internal struggles and lifestyle choices are private matters and no business of the fellowship of the church. We reject the undiscerning sanction of behaviors and lifestyles by the church that the Scriptures, clearly articulated in the confessions, have defined as sin. We reject false notions of love, justice, and compassion that deny the reality of our brokenness, the costly and effective sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, and the renewing power of the Holy Spirit.

We now call the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to engage in prayerful reflection upon and the faithful preaching of the cross. We call the church to develop and provide clear teaching and effective ministries that address the reality of our shared brokenness in our sexuality. We call on the church to recover its own, clear, biblical voice that declares the love, justice and resurrection power of Jesus Christ crucified to the church and to the world.

*This statement is also known as The Glendale Statement, drafted by a croup of pastors in 1996. Their names can be found HERE

My two minute speech on 10-A

My two minute speech during debate on 10-A-(removal of our fidelity and chastity clause): Just as I posted my five minute presentation on Belhar below, I am posting this with the hope it might help someone. With this particular speech I decided that the best action to take was to simply confess Jesus Christ. I was so impressed by all those who stood for Christ and the authority of his word, but in particular by those two pastors who read the scripture for their main emphasis. Here is the speech:

The proposed substitute for our fidelity chastity standards, 10-A, begins by suggesting that our standards for ordination reflect “the church’s desire to submit joyfully to the Lordship of Jesus Christ.” But if we remove the standards that the church is now in conflict over, biblical standards on sexuality, we are rejecting the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

First, to say Jesus is Lord is to recognize him as God, the eternal Son of the Father. That means that the words of Scripture are his words. They should not be rejected, twisted or ignored. When Jesus speaks of marriage being between a man and a woman as he does in Matthew 19 it is his words, but it is also his words in Leviticus 20: 13 as well as Romans and all the rest. So if the Church calls Jesus Lord, and she must, she will obey his word.

Second, the word of God is illuminated within our heart and mind by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would glorify him. That the Holy Spirit would take what is Christ’s and disclose it to his disciples. (John 16: 14-15) He also stated that the Holy Spirit would convict the world of sin, righteousness and judgment. (John17:8)

In the midst of a culture so totally given over to deviant sexuality, to resist the convicting work of the Holy Spirit as the Spirit opens the words of Scripture to the hearts of this generation, is to reject the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

Affirming the Lordship of Jesus, the church must be willing to live a life that is loving and yet counter-cultural, strong in faith yet winsome, holy and obedient. We cannot live that life with contradiction. Either Christ is Lord or he is not. Please vote no on amendment 10-A.

My presentation against Belhar at Sacramento Presbytery

At Sacramento Presbytery's last meeting, in February, before we voted on the three big amendments, two presenters gave a short, five minute presentation, one for and one against. I gave the presentation against the Confession of Belhar. Just in case my presentation has any thoughts that will be helpful I am posting it here.

Adding a confession to the PCUSA’s Book of Confessions is a very serious action. So serious that it requires a two/thirds vote by the Presbyteries and a second vote by the following General Assembly. The Confession of Belhar, within its text, must above all confess Jesus Christ as Lord in order to be a true confession of faith. That is what we must consider as we vote.

On the Racial Justice web page of the PCUSA, one finds information about Belhar which includes this: “It [Belhar] calls the church to a deeper appreciation of the values of unity in diversity in relation to the divisions of race and culture and many other facets of the human condition.”

History: Belhar was written by the Dutch Reformed Mission Church of South Africa in the midst of apartheid; black Christians of South Africa were sinfully excluded from fellowship with their white brothers and sisters. A statement about such horrific conditions was needed, Belhar fulfilled that need. It was faithful in its context. But it is not a universal confession. Although structured in the same manner as the Theological Declaration of Barmen it does not confess Christ in the same manner rather it confesses unity.

Unity: Belhar calls for an unqualified unity. In one place it states: “We reject any doctrine “which absolutizes natural diversity or the sinful separation of people in such a way that this absolutization hinders or breaks the visible and active unity of the church ...” In another place it states, “a refusal earnestly to pursue this visible unity as a priceless gift is sin,” and still further, “anything which threatens this unity may have no place in the church and must be resisted.”While “true faith in Jesus Christ” is mentioned as a boundary it is not defined.

So let me ask, are we, as a church, called to be in unity (that is in agreement) with those who deny the deity of Christ, the authority of scripture, or justification by faith? Unity without qualification could mean that we, as a connectional church, would be denying the faith.

And notice, as I have pointed out, the Racial Justice page interprets Belhar’s unity in terms that not only include unity in the midst of racial diversity but also unity in the midst of “many other facets of the human condition.” But, the human condition is broken and sinful. Unity needs a foundation; a Savior who transforms. We must confess Jesus Christ before we confess unity.

Racism: There are only two small references to racism in Belhar. But both the Confession of 67 and the Brief Statement of Faith speak to racism and diversity in the context of the United States’ particular problems. The Confession of 67 speaks of fair housing, education, work and even political rights. And both the Confession of 67 and the Brief Statement of Faith carefully confess Christ.

The many uses of the Belhar Confession: Because Belhar does not, above all else, confess Jesus Christ, as he is known in Scripture, it may be used for unintended purposes. Insisting on the oneness of Islam, Christianity and Judaism is one suggested use. Others are the ordination of GLBT people, the ‘racism’ of Israel and power sharing. Now you may agree with one or all of these, (certainly the first is not a confession of Christ) but you may agree. Nonetheless you can see the danger of having a document in our Book of Confessions which can, so easily, be used for any particular group’s cause.

Some have countered this argument with the thought that even the Bible has been misused. That is true. But the Bible has corrections within it. One of Belhar’s weaknesses is that it does not.

The need for a Confession from the Southern Cone: Some have suggested that we have no confession from the Global South and Belhar meets this need. But even the racial Justice page admits that the Nicene Creed is a Global Southern Creed. And so is the Apostle’s Creed, since some parts of it were formed in Africa. However, the important point here is that we do not choose Confessions on the basis of where they come from but because it is time to confess anew Jesus Christ. A Confession confesses Jesus Christ that is its purpose.

Please, vote no on the adoption of the Belhar Confession.

About Critics

Those who criticize what is written on my blog are generally helpful. They give me time to pause and think more deeply about what I have written. They give me ideas for further blog postings. They cause me to reevaluate my assumptions. I have a friend on Facebook who either criticizes me on my blog or on Facebook. We are almost always opposed to each other’s values and beliefs but I don’t believe we harass each other, just criticize, and not too often.

Some people wait a long time to criticize, and then it just seems they can’t stand it any longer and they finally write something. They generally do not return that often, undoubtedly from shyness or fear, or perhaps they just don’t care. And sometimes that is disappointing. But there is another kind of critic. I do not totally understand them, but I am trying to. But they do harass.

Several people have been asked not to post on my blog for various reasons. The biggest reason is because of their insulting words. But there are other reasons which I won’t detail at the moment since it is not important to what I want to say. Sometimes people who have been asked not to comment on my blog give me a real laugh. One person came back as anonymous. (Now here is something I haven’t mentioned. I have a feed on my blog. Mostly it is just fun. I love to see where people are coming from. You can see the feed on the front page of my blog if you scroll down. However I do have a page of my own where I can see several things, including city, state and country of the person who is reading my blog)

So this is the funny part. Anonymous, who was someone I had asked not to comment on my blog, came back and on the front you couldn’t see where he was coming from. But on my page I could see where he was coming from and that he was using something called, “Hide My Ass.” Only he wasn’t.

But here is the serious part. Sometimes people become so obsessed with thwarting what you have to say on a blog that they will resort to all kinds of tricks. They will even pretend that they are other people living in other places. And they seem authentic because they appear on feeds to be coming from where they say they are coming from. But instead they use proxy servers.

I know they are the same person for several reasons one being that they generally write the same. I know for other reasons that will be mine alone to know. But I am writing this to say this. If you see critical comments that you know are simply tearing apart language, are insulting and constitute harassment; if I don’t delete it, just ignore it. Write around them and ignore them.

And do something else. Pray for them. I do.

Is it once again time to confess Christ?

Christology, as well as soteriology, issues that in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) have lain latent for several years, are rising once again to prominence but possibly for the wrong reasons. Although the Lordship of Jesus Christ was the big question at General Assembly over ten years ago it has been buried beneath the debate raised by ordination standards. And the many issues floating around redemptive theology, issues about violence, universalism, and pluralism, have abated for the same reasons.

But always just under the surface of the ordination debates, and with the possibility that progressivism will win on questions of sexuality; the bigger foundational essentials of Christianity are emerging in many conversations on various web sites and blogs.

Two important points should be noted about the emerging debates. (1) Since ordination standards were very much connected to the Scripture and the Confessions, loss of the standards also means a loss of the authority undergirding the standards. This makes it easier to begin attacking foundational teaching. (2)Those pastors who have displayed a remarkable distaste for traditional Christianity are now, slowly, rising to prominence among various Presbyterian related organizations, both official and unofficial.

It seems as though some were waiting in the wings for their cue. It is as though Arius has risen from the dead to insist that the church should be more concerned with his and Athanasius’s unity than with the co-equality of the eternal Son and the Father.

John Vest, a youth pastor, as well as a member of the Middle Governing Body Commission writes in his posting “Heterodoxy” that, “The fact that these creeds and doctrines are still debated centuries later is not an indication that heretics and apostates are rejecting the word of God. Rather, it is a demonstration that heterodoxy is a fact of human existence.” He goes on to explain why there is orthodoxy and to place biblical authority under his same disdain:

It is also important to remember that “orthodoxy” was established by the winners of human debates, not handed down to us from on high. (The same goes for the contents of the biblical canon, for that matter.)

Vest is actually saying that the deity of Jesus Christ is a matter of human speculation. In fact, there is for him, and others, seemingly, no longer any revelatory authority at all.

Let’s think about what is being stated with such pronouncements. The Nicene’s statement about Jesus being ‘Light from Light’, ‘God from God’ is only true because a debate was won. And the same would be true of the Reformation Confessions. Justification by faith, accordingly is not necessarily true and even if biblical perhaps still not true. The Theological Declaration of Barmen’s insistence that Jesus is the only Lord we have to hear is only an orthodox statement because the allies defeated Hitler otherwise the statements written by the German Christians about Hitler would be true.

This is the ultimate issue; it doesn’t just affect the life of the church, it decides where there is a church and where there is not a church. It decides where there is right preaching of the word and where there is not. Within this denomination, the Church needs to stand up and confess Christ as the only true Lord and the only true Savior.