Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Picking Up the Pieces After Discovering the Repulsive Truth About God

The creative side of human knowledge is therefore the creature's analogical participation in the act by which God's archetypal, productive knowledge creatively metes out truth. By a kind of grace, knowledge draws the other into the properly spiritual sphere, thus giving it the opportunity to unfold therein by the power, and the light, of the subject -- before it has to become, in its objectivity, the object of knowledge. --Balthasar

Allow me to explain. While knowledge begins in perception, it does not end there. Rather, "sensory intuition can do no more than introduce the image into the space of the subject" (Balthasar). But then what? How is it that human beings are able to escape the immediacy of perception and rise above it into the realm we call knowledge? -- which, if it is not objective, is no knowledge at all, just opinion at best (and often anti-knowledge or -K).

Furthermore, it is one thing to accomplish this "distancing" with material objects, much more tricky to do so with one's own mind. In other words, for all of us, our consciousness is simply "given" to us, as in any animal.

But man -- potentially anyway -- possesses a "double consciousness" that allows him to distance himself from the objects of his own mind and to analyze and judge them. In short, man is able to attain to objectivity toward himself and the world, which is synonymous with truth.

Which, when you think about it, is a little odd, because it means that, in becoming objective, the subject is back to being a kind of object, as it were. This is confusing, because your typical village atheist or bonehead materialist would claim that he is the one who is being "objective," whereas the Raccoon position maintains precisely the opposite: that the materialist is lost in his ethereal, subjective, and manmode abstractions, whereas only the Man of Spirit dwells in the Real.

Now, the question is, who is right -- besides me, that is?

This reminds me very much of psychoanalytic therapy, which does not just consist of two objects hashing things out for an outrageous fee. Rather, first of all, you must imagine a "bi-personal field" that is co-created by analyst and patient. Everything that occurs in therapy will actually take place in this field, not in one or the other of its constituents per se.

In my mind, I picture a couple of children at play. One of them (the patient) comes in and dumps his bag of toys on the floor. The two of us proceed to play with them. Why this toy? Why not that toy? Hmm, you seem overly attached to this one here. And why is that one always turned upside down so no one can see it? Any ideas why? And why can't I touch that one over there? Why are you hiding it? And why do you keep playing the same game over and over, even though you never win? Or always win in a predictable game that is too easy? And you seem to think I want to steal your toys, even while you are envious of the wonderful toys you imagine I have stashed away somewhere. Etc.

I remember one patient whose transference to me was so intense, that it was impossible to conduct therapy. She essentially "fell in love" in the first session, not in a therapeutic way, but in the usual way. There was no "space" in which to interpret her feelings, because they would simply be met with words to the effect of, "no, you don't understand. I am in love with you. You are perfect." So in this case, what she called "love" was actually a defense mechanism against knowledge. Many women with histories of abuse do this, i.e., disable their objectivity with a kind of intoxicated auto-hypnosis that feels like love, but is in reality surrender to a powerful predator. If I were the predator type, I would have no problem getting dates with this type of woman.

Back on track. Now, there is obviously a world of difference between objectivity toward matter (or the physical world) vs. objectivity toward Mind or Spirit, and if we fail to appreciate the differences, much mischief will ensue. For in reality, science is irreducibly subjective, whereas only religious metaphysics discloses the objectively real, i.e., a realm of perennial truths that simply cannot not be -- for example, the idea that truth exists and is anterior to man. If this is not true, then there is no truth, period.

As usual, Schuon had many useful things to say about this subject. And when I say "useful," I am being coy, for what I actually mean is "true beyond the shadow of a doubt." For unlike the typical pagan logician, he is employing what might be called transcendent logic, or "the logic of logic."

For example, "By 'objectivity' must be understood not a knowledge that is limited to a purely empirical recording of data received from outside, but a perfect adequation of the knowing subject to the known object.... An intelligence or a knowledge is 'objective' when it is capable of grasping the object as it is and not as it may be deformed by the subject."

Even more, we could say that objectivity implies a more general “conformity to the nature of things,” which surely includes the "inner space" of the subject, on pain of eliminating the one place in the cosmos where Truth may be known and loved. For this is none other than "the contemplative withdrawal into the 'heart,' given that 'the kingdom of God is within you.'"

So we should not confuse subjectivity with any kind of sentimental or romantic "perception-is-reality" nonsense. Rather, it is again the expanding space where reality -- which can only mean "truth" -- may be known and loved for its own sake, not for ours. And of course, we must be willing to "die for love," or it's not much of a love, is it? Schuon:

"Objectivity is a kind of death of the subject in the face of the reality of the object." However, "the subjective compensation of this extinction is the nobleness of character," among other things, i.e., serenity, centeredness, radiance, the "peace that passeth understanding," etc.

Not only that, but in the final Oquation, "the transcendent Object is at the same time the immanent Subject, which is affirmed in the knowing subject, to the extent that the latter is capable of objectivity. Objectivity is none other than the truth, in which the subject and the object coincide, and in which the essential takes precedence over the accidental -- or in which the Principle takes precedence over its manifestation -- either by extinguishing it, or by reintegrating it, according to the diverse ontological aspects of relativity itself."

Here again, I think this goes to the very heart of a trinitarian view of things. For this is not to say that in knowledge of God I am identical to God. Again, we are talking about a "non-dual trinitarianism," in which -- in some sense -- we might say that "I and the the Trinity are not-two."

Therefore, to trancelight what Schuon just said, God is a kind of Subject that is purely objective; or, an Object who is transcendently subjective. In God there is no "potential," for he always Is Who He Is. And yet, he eternally generates what he is not (so to speak), which would of course include us. As such, the knower who knows is made of the most precious substance in all of creation, a spiritual substance that is a spark of truth itself -- not the central fire, but then again, not radically separate from it, either.

Thus, looked at one way, we are obviously "not God." But to the extent that God became man (and not just a man, but Man as such), then we may share in God's objectivity and Truth, and therefore, eternity. Again, the “Kingdom of God” is “within you,” but this hardly means it is "subjective," even though it requires a subject to get in -- the subject being "inwardness as such." No subject, no "in." But what we want to enter is the Transcendent Object. As Balthasar explains, "The object's immanence in the subject's consciousness is the prior condition for understanding its transcendence."

Is any of this making sense, or am I just rambling to a polite but uncomprehending choir?

Without the subject, there can be no unity in the cosmos, most particularly, the unity of subjects and objects. Only the subject can heal the ontological wound of subjectivity, not by immolating itself in the world of physical objects, but by its higher flight to their very source. This is not an escape but a spiraling inscape where unity flows into multiplicity and back again.

And this is why perfect objectivity would also have to be perfect nonsense of the type spewed by any great mystic, because only this type of nonsense is "adequate" to an object that always transcends what we can say about it. You could say that human speech will pour off the Logos like water off a duck's back, but that's okay, for if words could actually contain the Divine, then I would be God, and this would be a very boring cosmos. You know how it is -- "Words crack and sometimes break under the burden" (Eliot). But in so doing, we understand that there is a Mighty Big Object against which our words are shattering into pieces -- as in the case of this shattered piece I just wrote.

Really, it's quite a thrill and a privilege to be constantly repulsed by God. It very much reminds me of my son, who, when he greets me, takes a running start and tries his best to crash into me. In turn, I will use his momentum to lift him up in a kind of spiral around my vertical axis.

That image will do nicely.


Van said...

"Rather, it is again the expanding space where reality -- which can only mean "truth" -- may be known and loved for its own sake, not for ours."

Splits the arrow on that One.

Johan, I think this one was for you.

julie said...

Is any of this making sense...

It's making perfect non-sense, but being of the particularly ultra-dense variety it must be chewed and digested s-l-o-w-l-y for proper absorption.

And yes, that last image does sum it up beautifully. Bearing it in mind, I think I'll wait an hour for initial digestion then dive in again :)

Van said...

“Is any of this making sense...”

Objectivity is a willingness to surrender what you would like to be real, to what really is true... without that willingness on your part to receive what you perceive, you bar yourself from union with truth, there is a divide between reality and your consciously formed perceptions of it - you do not allow yourself to reflect it, and darkness is your reward; with your acceptance of what truly is, you are integrated into it (to the depth which you have re-cognized it), you bow to, and reflect within you, what is and is True, and the light is free to illumine you from within.

Recognizing that what truly is, is so far greater than what you could feebly imagine (picture a leftist attempting to command the economy - his ignorance is overwhelming), you are made immeasurably wealthier in even your smallest true knowledge, than you could be with even your most grandiose self imposed imaginings.


in awe

walt said...

Well, some of it makes sense. But I gather that it makes sense to you, and did to Schuon and Balthasar -- so perhaps there's still hope for me!

I find myself back in the preliminaries, still doing warm-ups:
But man -- potentially anyway -- possesses a "double consciousness" that allows him to distance himself from the objects of his own mind and to analyze and judge them. In short, man is able to attain to objectivity toward himself and the world, which is synonymous with truth.

I understand that this is the basis for understanding what follows in the rest of the post. This part, it seems to me, is something that can be verified by oneself, as a starting point.

After that, a kind of "blur" occurs.

Also, learning anything new requires an initial exposure -- or three -- and so the process of absorption goes. As Laozi wrote, "Mystery upon mystery..." -- and this is part of it.

Gagdad Bob said...

Well, if you feel as if your mind is shattered into pieces before the uncontainable truth of the transcendental object, then I guess I've done my job.

julie said...

Yep, I was right - after proper digestion, it makes perfect nonsense.

The only frustrating thing about having the mind shattered by the uncontainable truth is that it always tries so hard to put the pieces back together in exactly the same way. Even though it can't be done, because somehow, there seem to be extra pieces mixed in, and of course the truth is still uncontainable, no matter how much you try to stretch around it. Smash, reassemble, repeat...

Anonymous said...

"...the materialist is lost in his ethereal, subjective, and manmade abstraction, whereas only Man of Spirit dwells in the real."

Who is right? both, no? For how it could be otherwise? Each, according to their soul's maturity sees 'truth'.

Truth, according to one who a 'literalist' is as real, as to one who allegorically can 'see'. Then finally, 'mystically' - in union of those with forms and without forms.

Modern day mystic Bernadette Roberts elaborates (quotes from Wikipedia)

"What the "no-self" event reveals is that union with God is not the end but the beginning of our life with God. The end of the journey comes many years after the union."
"Maturity, possible only through the Grace of God. The Self, the mature human in a state of union with God, also falls away."
"With years of selfless giving, the self is literally eroded away as God consumes more and more of the human being."

When I was a child I spake as child, eh? and nothing was going to prevent my soul - self from practicing standing on air by stepping off a chair - and suceeding:) (in dream) whith 5 of my siblings looking on. Appears,
wv agrees givin' me the green "hepunes" thumbs up... heh...
Yep, it happens:)

I loved going to church in May to Mother Mary Mass (daily service in my hometown I grew up in) . Loved singing and gazing at her serene face-image.
I was 4 when gran tried to teach me prayes, but I proclaimed "I will dance for God!". Gran told me that story when I was sweet 16:).....Is it any wonder then with all that dancing and singing at teen-age time I still thought God's name was "Abraham". Then as an adult I cracked the Bible open for the first time and from then on blamed didst thou God for the mysery in the world bec. he always wanted to smote everything!


Robin Starfish said...

Really, it's quite a thrill and a privilege to be constantly repulsed by God. It very much reminds me of my son, who, when he greets me, takes a running start and tries his best to crash into me. In turn, I will use his momentum to lift him up in a kind of spiral around my vertical axis.

That image will do nicely.

Yes, worth a thousand more words.

Van said...

theofilia replied to "...the materialist is lost in his ethereal, subjective, and manmade abstraction, whereas only Man of Spirit dwells in the real."
with “Who is right? both, no? For how it could be otherwise?”

No. One is rooted in truth, the other is not, and so it is otherwise… and unwise.

“Each, according to their soul's maturity sees 'truth'‘’

No, while each may be potentially able to see truth, but to do so, they must be open and willing to do so, they must choose what is, over what they want; as long as they keep the door closed to reality, they are closed off to truth, and they will try to assert that what they want to be so, is just as real as what actually is so, and that is false from the bottom down.

This is not simply a matter of disagreement and error, it is the absence of even the possibility of either. They will not accept arguments to the contrary, as we see so often with our trolls, for they are closed and locked away from the possibility of truth, from the inside, and though they may go through the motions of argumentation, they will only assert, for force is their only option, pretense is closed to even the possibility of truth.

They could choose to yield their pretenses to Truth, but they choose otherwise.

Anonymous said...

And, on that "smote everything" note...I was miserable when I didn't believe in God. Then one day a silent whisper "what about God?", "what about God?".

"As in, "turn to God?" I thought...Some days later, something welled up in me and nothing was going to stop me from performing self-blessing. In the kitchen chose a goblet, filled it with tap water then lifted it in salute to the bright blue sky. Next, raised it above my head and three times spun 'round drawing a circle (with) "I stand in the light of God" chant.....Then drank the whole thing!

Heartfelt. Heartfelt. Heartfelt. Like a balm for my soul was this 'Christening' moment.

In March 7/99 at dawn, I wrote in my bedside notebook "hagai sage". Then at breakfast asked husband "what kind of name is hagai?", he said "sounds Jewish".

Heck if I knew otherwise, but it bugged me 'enuf to look the name up in the Webster. Lo and behold - there it was! To my great surprise even correctly spelled ahem... Not only that, Haggai turned out to be one of the Old Testament's prophets. So I read his book and by then understood why God "smotes".

But why did I hear that!?

Husband suggested I call a rabbi he once went to hear his lecture at the local university. Don't recal if it was the next day, but soon after I did call his house number. His very pleasent wife talked to me apologizing he was busy with church matters asking to call the following day. I chickend out!
.....there it was, God didn't give up on me.....


Anonymous said...

"July 22/95'" recorded a very long soul-adventure. Here its condenced version . Was watching little girl crouched near the edge of a many stries high drop ... Was fearing she may fall off...She does...Room filled with folks, no one noticed. Nobody cared. I stepped off a rail.... floating above, enjoying the vivid -"jungle like" panorama below, its narrow walking paths (my fav. place to hang out was the forest) ... hearing man's voices.
Next, "everything is murky." Am in a tunnel zooming along until the ceiling get so low and dark I think "I'm atta here" and turn around.
Next, I "fling weathered, heavy" square door open. A wooden boat full of "uncouth men" ... Next, attention - shifting to an ennormous sea creature on the right side of the boat in a likness of a Whale. It's head above the water with eye fixed on me.....
Next, stepped on a low wooden bench and took of....She, who has no name now floating above shimmering, like "Niagara Falls" green water (in river)...About "15 feet" away from the boat she turned around raised her right hand in a benediction gesture casting the Master Key (blessing the folk-men)


Van said...

theofilla said "July 22/95'" recorded a very long soul-adventure."

Hmmm... perhaps if you surfed over to Blogger's home page, you could set up your own blog, free of charge, and have a site more appropriate for your reminiscences?

Just sayin'

Anonymous said...

Is that all You see Van? My "reminiscence" only?


I will leave when Bob kicks me out - hows' that? Meantime, don't read my silliness.


julie said...

Okay, time for a screeching sidetrack of I-wish-I-could-disbelieve. Presented with this evidence, we can either accept the painful truth object that Affirmative Action is harmful to those whom it would "benefit" (and thus accepting, be able to act to dismantle it). Or, we can remain tightly closed and willfully oblivious in order to hang on to the comforting falsehood that by supporting Affirmative Action we're really helping the beneficiaries to achieve, er, something.

End result? The entire nation is laughing at this woman, because nobody had the balls to pull her aside and teach her to be coherent, either mentally or verbally. Furthermore, the entire nation is laughing at Florida for being duped into electing her for office. I can't help wondering if she comprehends that she's being mocked, and if so, why people are laughing? If I had to guess, I'd say yes to the first and no to the second, since to the left the only reason people could possibly make fun of a painfully incoherent Representative with a Communications degree is that she's not white.


I love this country. Looking at it objectively is becoming increasingly painful.

Anonymous said...

Beyond self, the revelation is not of an immaterial soul or spirit but, rather, the revelation of the ture nature of the body as part and parcel of Christ's eternal Mystical Body. This mystical Body dwells in the glory of the Father and its enlightenment is the Holy Spirit. - Bernadette Roberts.


Van said...

Theofillia said "I will leave when Bob kicks me out - hows' that? Meantime, don't read my silliness."

Works for me, and you are of course welcome to click by my comments. Sorry, didn't know how to suggest it without sounding rude, so just said it.

julie said...

Another sidetrack, this one more on-topic, again at Vanderleun's.

True story - my uncle was a farmer. My mom witnessed him doing that same procedure once. I always wondered if she remembered it right (and what the madness was behind the method); now I know.

julie said...

And on to something different yet agin, via the Anchoress, a moment of utter transcendence honoring the Annunciation.

Obviously, I've been sitting at my computer far too long today. Time to go digest some extra rich torte...

Ricky Raccoon said...

“Is any of this making sense, or am I just rambling to a polite but uncomprehending choir?”

I don’t know…once again it all sounds so Eckhardian to me. They had to have been heavily inner the underflowance of Mister Meister.

Back to the post…

Ricky Raccoon said...

“Really, it's quite a thrill and a privilege to be constantly repulsed by God.”

Yes, honored by what is greater than you and to know you can’t make a dent, to know that you can’t. To know it.
Or to not know it.
Those are the choices. Considering the lifeless latter, I’ll take the former.
And besides, what’s not to like?
The "crashing into you" can be a pretty nice ricochet (pardon my french) when it's your son and he knows that you know that he knows that you know..

Ricky Raccoon said...

“Rather, first of all, you must imagine a "bi-personal field" that is co-created by analyst and patient. Everything that occurs in therapy will actually take place in this field, not in one or the other of its constituents per se.”

Reminds of a chess game. The game is clearly not taking place on the board or with the pieces really at all…not if you are watching. It takes place in that space above the board between the two minds. My son is naturally better at this than me. He gets mad when he sees the results of a bad move I’m making now will have a few steps ahead into the game. Of course everyone can do this better or worse than others. But the point may be that we can do this it all, I think.

Ricky Raccoon said...

OT, but if you haven’t seen this clip yet, it’s must-see TV:
Daniel Hannan MEP: The devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government

Ricky Raccoon said...

Oh…and these are flying off shelves, even in this wacky state of CT. Get yours and as many as you can while we still make trees. So far I've read the table of contents :-D but Mark knows what he's talkin bout. Love his radio show.

Anonymous said...

Bob in his excellent post, wrote:

"Really, it's quite a thrill and a privilege to be constantly repulsed by God."

I agree with Bob's position that we are simultaneously pieces of God but think and act like we are not. If we try to rejoin the main mass, we get repulsed.

This delusion we are not God is heavily reinforced by the "material contract," so to speak.

To whit: if deprived of oxygen for even 30 seconds, all spiritual thinking flies out the window, replaced by an all encompassing air hunger.

Same with needs like food, warmth, etc.

The critical need for physical homeostasis trumps the run toward God every time because we are programmed to keep existing here.

Such are the barriers which keep the actors up on the stage and in the play.

Knowing you are a piece of God does not release you from the obligation to live.

We are here to serve ourselves, in essence. We are simultaneously the actor and the watcher of the play.

As if that isn't unified enough, actual division between people is also a delusion, albeit a functional one.

Sheesh. What to do, in light of this situation?

Like Theofilia or Bob via Petey, get in touch with the Boss and await your lines, then perform them to the best of your abiillty until you die.

There ya have it.

Ricky Raccoon said...

About Mark Levin’s book.... If you are a raccoon you already know what’s in it. That’s not the point. If it is good, and I think it will be, it’s to be handed to someone you think needs and is capable of learning what conservatism actually means. Such as your sons, daughters, grand kids, adopted default democrats…

julie said...

This is just beautiful. If you have dial-up, it probably will take too long to load, but if you have the patience, I think it's worth the wait.

Incidentally, the chorus is "I am your air, I am your water," if I remember my Spanish correctly.

And now I suddenly want to know more about Spanish music :)

julie said...

By the way, if you click the link it takes a minute to load, even with broadband. Wait for the music, then have fun.

julie said...

Having been sucked in, yet again, by the obscene simplicity of buying music on Amazon, I couldn't help wondering: Do you actually own most of the albums you put up, Bob?

(wv says your a sophydr; sounds about right :)

mushroom said...

Is any of this making sense, or am I just rambling to a polite but uncomprehending choir?

Personally, I don't mind the uncomprehending part -- I mean, if we got it all it wouldn't be any fun. I am kind of hurt that you might think we're polite.

mushroom said...

Thanks for the link, Julie. "Dirty Jobs" is one of the few TV shows I watch. Mike genuinely respects these folks. I have never cut lambs but I have cut pigs and calves, and I even helped cut a colt once (he was big and it was eventful). My brother did cut lambs -- he was president of the FFA -- and, yes, the teeth thing is part of the deal for them. I guess they are a little hard to hold on to.

I have to stop. I'm making wv squiesse-y. This thing is spooky.

Van said...

Mushroom said "I am kind of hurt that you might think we're polite."

Yeah as if eh... oh ... ahem, eh....


I have no response for that.

Gagdad Bob said...


Yes. I only put up albums that I not only own, but am usually listening to that day. I buy and sell a lot of used CDs on Amazon, and only keep the ones that are absolute necessities in any self-respecting collection of Cosmic-American music. As a matter of fact, I actually make more money on amazon than I spend, because I'm good at spotting bargains.

For example, for a few months last year, Van Morrison's back catalogue was out of print, so his CDs were commanding outrageous prices on Amazon. So I would go to my local used store, pick one up for eight bucks, then turn around and sell it on amazon for $50. Sort of a little game I play called BEAT THE SYSTEM.

julie said...

That's kind of awesome, I have to admit. With mp3s, I like the fact that it's instant gratification, usually less expensive, and takes up no physical space. But. There's no resale value, and while the sound quality is good enough for my purposes I'm sure there's a lot I'm missing. Of course, even if I were listening to cds or records it probably wouldn't sound much different since I don't know how to properly set up my speaker system.

Uncle Prez said...

Is it just me or do I smell $42 burning a hole in somebody's pocket?

jwm said...

Julie: WOOOO! coolest video toy yet! Thanks for the link.


Van said...

lie, I just finished listening to the dirty jobs link…wild! Ya know I remember reading Errol Flynn’s autobiography “My wicked, wicked ways”, and he described doing that very job in Australia… and I’ve always kind of though ‘Nahhh… must have been one of his tall tales…really? Nahhh!’… and there you go.

And btw, of the many, many times I’ve read, heard, watched professor hoity-toity-so-and-so describing Anagnorisis or Peripeteia, I don't think I've ever had it conveyed that meaningfully and clearly!

Not to mention Rowe's pulling out of it and refocusing upon the potential pitfall of ‘follow your bliss’ vs doing what needs to be done, and doing it well.

Heh... Dirty Jobs and der dun dirt cheap!

Van said...

I said "lie, I just finished liste... "

Sheesh, not my day for clicking... should have been

"Julie, I just finished liste..."

Speaking of impolite

Anonymous said...

Van? Have you been drinking?


ximeze said...

I'd love to see Daniel Hannan's expression while he tried to make sense of Ms Gogator's mumblings & got a load of her get-up.

I'd pay good money for dat one right dere.

julie said...

No kdding, Ximeze - his expression must have been priceless.

Back to music, I was listening to The Originals tonight while driving around. They just don't make it like that anymore: pure romance with a relative innocence (for instance singing about marriage, as opposed to a booty call), along with actual singing skill. How lovely; thanks, Bob!

wv is calling me a saphist. Pretty far off the mark, for once...

Gagdad Bob said...

True dat, as Dupree would say. I just love vocal harmony, which is why I love the Beach Boys, Everly Brothers, Temptations, Impressions, etc. In fact, even the Beatles -- people generally don't appreciate how beautifully John, Paul and George harmonized.

In the case of the Originals, Marvin Gaye took them on as a personal project during the time he was "on strike" at Motown in '68-'69, because they wouldn't let him release What's Going On. He taught them a unique vocal style that he had learned while apprenticing in a group called the Moonglows in the early '60s before he was signed by Motown (and he was only signed because he married Barry Gordy's much older sister, but that's another story). If you listen closely, you can even hear Marvin doing some of the harmonies, which, if I recall correctly, require the singer to hold their mouth in the shape of an O, and exhale in a certain way. They sound very "breathy," similar to the multi-part neo-doo wop background vocals Marvin would do on his own albums.

And now on to the post...

Ricky Raccoon said...

Don't forget to remember the Bee Gees.:
Top 5?:

1941 mining disaster
Nights on Broadway
I started a joke
How can you mend a broken heart

Anonymous said...

Theofeelia 10:3? PM...gawesh, if you wana sound like me paleeez take note.
It's all about the right accent, you see. My "Hmmmm" has that bombasticish ring to it in concert with a wink n'a knowing smilish smile:)


Anonymous said...

Uhh, that would be 10:24 missy.


Anonymous said...

10:24 it is = I stand corrected:)