Guest Post: How Can We Be Saviors on Mt. Zion?
By Guest Contributor on Oct 31, 2007
By Eugene Kovalenko
Having been twice excommunicated in such a way as to embarrass my youngest son at BYU (see this recent Mormon Stories podcast) and win the Clifton Jolley award for “Most naïve person of my acquaintance,”, I should like to nevertheless offer a recent insight into one of Joseph Smith’s most famous and unique teachings: becoming saviors on Mt. Zion for each other and our families. How is this possible? Did Joseph really mean that Jesus’ sacrifice was not sufficient for us all? Consider this:
For almost three years now, the local stake president and I have been having a lively dialogue. He initiated it by approaching me one evening at a public concert to invite me to talk. Knowing that I’d been excommunicated years earlier, he believed I was in spiritual distress and wanted to help me find peace. What resulted has been anything but “peace” in our relationship. I don’t believe he has had anyone talk to him as straightforwardly as I have, and he hasn’t liked it. Until a week ago we hadn’t spoken to each other since the past January. But I have not felt good about that. Then, inspired by Dan Wotherspoon’s recent Sunstone editorial, “Namaste,” (June 2007 issue), I resolved to remedy the impasse.
“It is clear to me that neither of us likes or trusts the other”, I wrote to my stake president, “but I would like to change that. I would like to know you better.” The SP responded at once with an invitation to meet. I had made him aware of Dan’s essay and my letter to the editor in reply (Sunstone, October 2007 issue) and had prepared some talking points to tie up loose ends in our past communication.
When we met, one of his continuing observations was of my “pride”. My complaint was of his inability to see his projection of his own pride on me. I wanted him to own it and take it back. We simply did not know each other and had come to a stand-off between egos. Then he said something that broke the log jam for me: he explained that he often feels verbally abused by me. This was a surprise, and I asked him to explain. He said that when he feels such abuse, his response is simply to ignore it. That was important information! Suddenly I was able to see where our fundamental behaviors differed. In contrast to his, my general response to verbal abuse is to take it on!
The following Sunday I attended the local Russian Orthodox parish where I love to sing the old Slavonic liturgies. The priest delivered a mini-sermon during the morning liturgy. His theme was the vulnerability of Jesus and His complete lack of fear. He then extended Jesus’ example to that of poets, painters, and artists of all kinds — including saints whose lives are remembered through their icons adorning the parish walls. During that sermon I was moved to tears from beginning to end and could not refrain from exclaiming at its conclusion, “Amen! The Truth has been spoken!” (This is not something people normally do in Orthodox services.) The priest was surprised but turned to the small gathering, bowed humbly, and with obvious joy quietly said, “Thank you”.
In recounting this deeply moving experience to my wife Birgitta, who had attended another church that morning, I had a sudden insight into how Jesus could take on the sins of the world. He willingly and without blame, accepted the erroneous projections of those who would crucify Him! This, of course is not the whole story, but He took on those projections in order to transcend them, and in so doing, enlighten and correct those who had acted from ignorance.
My complaint of the stake president vanished!
I now was eager and willing to take on his projections. The problem, of course, is how. There are several obvious ways: to react or to counter attack, both of which simply escalate the damage. The best way I thought was to apply the principle of the greatest martial art: Aikido. Its motto: disarm without harm and thereby teach. The new challenge for me became: include and transcend, rather than exclude and ignore. If the stake president’s observations are accurate, I can be enlightened. On the other hand, if they are inaccurate it gives me opportunity to teach — and that requires creativity. Wouldn’t you say that is a win-win? Am I still being naïve? What are ways that some of you have successfully approached such situations?
Hi Eugene -
I think you are still approaching this from a perspective that you are right and he is wrong, and it is your job to convince him of that. He seems also to be engaging you from the opposite view, that he is right and you are wrong, and he must instruct you in the correct way. There’s the rub. Though you state that you believe you can be enlightened, I get the sense that although your animosity toward him has disappeared, you are still not in a place to actually learn anything from him (”I was now willing to take on his projections”). I would guess that he is not either. Perhaps there is nothing to be learned, and you will simply have to agree to disagree. Rather than “disarm without harm and thereby teach,” you may need to turn away and look back with a smile.
One of the most profound things I’ve ever read is an article Robert Rees wrote for Sunstone some years back called “Forgiving the Church and Loving the Saints.” I can honestly say that it changed my entire worldview. I’m sure that you must have read it also, Eugene. I apologize that I don’t know off-hand the issue number, though I believe it was written in the late 1990s. I have the article as a Word document and would be happy to forward it on via e-mail if you don’t have ready access or don’t want to go through the online versions in search of it.
Among other things, in the article Bro. Rees states, “I confess that at times I tend . . . to see myself on the side of truth, wisdom, and good taste, and to be critical of those whose ideas, opinions, and tastes differ from my own. I can be especially intolerant of those who attack my ideas or lifestyle. What helps me is to remember how accepting, forgiving, and long-suffering the Lord is with me. He doesn’t reject me because of my ignorance or sinfulness, or condemn me for my limitations and short-comings. Instead, he stands ready always to forgive me, to urge me to higher standards of ethical and moral behavior, and to be patient with me as I struggle to reach them. We should try to accept others as God accepts us-for whatever we are, wherever we are. His grace on our behalf is always beyond our deserving. As Paul says to the Romans, “God’s act of grace is out of all proportion to Adam’s wrongdoing. . . . [W]here sin was multiplied [through us], grace immeasurably exceeded it . . .” (Romans 5:15, 20, Revised English Bible).”
When I first read that, it hit me like a ton of bricks. I realized that so often I engage others as though they have the same understanding of spiritual or religious things that I do, then I feel frustrated and annoyed when they do or say things that are obviously wrong or, worse, stupid (from my point of view) or when they try to convince me that they are right and I am both wrong and a fool. Once I began to approach others from the viewpoint that they may not have the same level or even kind of understanding I have, without trying to figure out who is right or wrong, suddenly I no longer took offense or attempted to make them change. This makes me a less than enthusiastic missionary for The One True Church aspect, though I do have a testimony that the Church is “true” (I am still working on exactly what that means), and of course I still fall short quite often and think to myself that it’s a good thing that I’m so righteous while others are not (one of my mission companions, who had attended a Pentecostal church before being baptized LDS, used to shake her head after particularly frustrating encounters and say, “This city’s gonna burn, Sister!” I laugh, but sometimes I feel this way too). However, the mindset I try to hold at all times has, on the occasions I’ve been able to use it, enabled me to deflect the thoughtless and well-intended but misguided “advice” of others by allowing me to reject it without rancor or guilt. Let the Lord judge between me and thee, I try to say. Does this make me a savior on Mt. Zion? I’m not sure that that’s what Joseph was referring to, but I feel that the Lord may go easier on some of us on Judgement Day because those we could have offended did not take offense or become defensive, leading to less strife and misunderstanding, and therefore less sin on all sides. I could go on, but I won’t. This is too long already. I hope it gives you something else to ponder, Eugene.
Comment # 1 by Villate | Oct 31, 2007 | Reply
Villate,
I think Gene’s point here is very similar to Rees’s quote. It is perfectly okay for Gene to think he is right if he is open to being wrong (and he admits as much); same goes for his Stake President. I’m pretty sure Gene and the SP will never agree on every point, but Gene’s “include and transend” approach makes it possible for them to (hopefully) agree on more points than the would have had they continued to employ the “ignore and exclude” approach. And for those points for which there can be no reconciliation, they may at least achieve some level of understanding and respect for the other’s opinion.
Naive or not, I think it is great that Eugene has reached out to the SP following their January impasse.
And I’m guessing that the SP got more than he bargained for when he reached out to Eugene three years ago. The SP hoped to heal Eugene’s “spiritual distress” (likely making the naive assumption that excommunication from the church can only result in such a conclusion). But the dynamic here assumes an unequal teacher-subject relationship. I’m hoping the SP learned as much or more than Gene in this ongoing exchange… at a minimum, a reminder that testimony and conscience is a kind of passionate “life force” (as is evidenced when you talk to Eugene), and varied… something that cannot be (and probably should not be) “correlated” along a spectrum of institutionally-determined bullet points.
Comment # 2 by Matt Thurston | Nov 1, 2007 | Reply
Eugene,
Just got done listening to the podcast Dehlin did with your son John. Really enjoyed it. You’ve raised a fine, articulate young man. I’d love to see a podcast where the two of you are interviewed side-by-side about your respective approaches to religion and spirituality. I’d also be interested in learning more of the Kovalenko family religious/spiritual dynamic both now and past.
I’m struck (and impressed) by the way John has defined his faith and his Mormonism on his own terms. So I was a little surprised to see him question the way you have defined your relationship to Mormonism. You both strike me as active “seekers” who approach religion from both an intellecutal and spiritual point of view, with an emphasis on humanism. In fact, the more John spoke, the less “Mormon” he sounded, which is ironic considering he jokingly acused you of not being “Mormon.”
I’ll be interested to see his life unfold and how his views continue to shape.
Comment # 3 by Matt Thurston | Nov 1, 2007 | Reply
Speaking of Aikido, Terry Dobson tells a story of how a drunken thug was disarmed on a Tokyo subway which illustrates wonderfully the main thesis of Nonviolent Communication. As human beings, we all have needs and desires. On a fundamental level, we are all very similar, with similar needs. Peace begins with understanding each other’s needs.
Comment # 4 by Jonathan Blake | Nov 1, 2007 | Reply
Thank you, thank you, Villate, for sharing your experience! Yeah, this having to be “right” business is such a drag! And my martial art metaphor was probably not the best to use. The stake president ran away, still complaining: he doesn’t want to continue our dialogue. I have run after him with a better metaphor. It’s in a dream I’d had when living in Los Angeles over 30 years ago. Please allow me to put it before you:
A small Negro boy comes to me and grabs hold of my right leg. I am surprised and irritated and try to dislodge him. He is tenacious. Determined to get him off, I push on his face with the heel of my right hand as hard as I can. He does not budge. Suddenly I realize what I am doing and compassion floods through me. “Why”, I think to myself, “this is just a child! He is no threat!” And with that I reach down and scoop him up. The boy says nothing, but now sits happily in my arms broadly smiling. All he wants is to be held.
What suddenly seemed apparent to me in disclosing this dream to you is that this might be the inner source of my naiveté! Come on, Jungians, give me your take on this from a Genesis perspective. And then I’ll give you mine.
In early 1976, after having returned to the Church months earlier following a ten-year absence, Bob Rees gave me an opportunity to invent and teach an experimental course at UCLA, where he was Director of the Extension Division. I called the course Creative Dreaming and Spiritual Awakening. It lasted two quarters and was a modest success.
Villate, do send me Bob’s paper. I’m sure I’ll get more out of it this time around. I’ve misplaced the copy he sent me long ago.
Comment # 5 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
Hi again, Eugene -
I’m glad you got some insight, and I’m sorry the Stake President seems to be holding on to bad feelings. Perhaps it’s his way of releasing you, though: “neither do I condemn thee” and all that. I often feel sorry for Bishops and Stake Presidents, since they are in positions where they must hear so many tragedies and negative things, then people expect them to provide answers, when they’re just guys who want to serve and may not know what to do, especially if they have no experience or knowledge of the types of problems people come to them with. I experienced a small amount of this on my mission, and it can be very distressing. Inspiration can only go so far in erasing personal prejudices and working through the barriers we construct against hurt and discomfort. I’ll be happy to forward on the article - shall I use the admin e-mail address on your Web site? I read it (the article, not your Web site!) quite often and have sent it to nearly everyone I know at one time or another, both in and out of the Church, in addition to using it in Sunday School and Relief Society lessons.
Comment # 6 by Villate | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
Villate, send it to enk33@losalamos.com
Small question: why do you capitalize the words stake presidents and bishops when they do not refer to a specific person? I have a theory I’ll tell you someday. Did you not get anything out of my dream about the boy tenaciously holding onto my “right” leg?
Comment # 7 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
The address isn’t coming through, though when I click, I’m redirected to your Web site, so I’ll send it to the admin address there. Let me know if it gets through. As I look at my previous post, I realize that, grammatically speaking, the first mention of the SP should have been capitalized, but not the other two. Usually I’m more aware of that (editor and all), but it slipped past me this time. Does your theory have anything to do with attitudes toward authority? I have a pretty submissive one, I’m afraid, though I like to think I would not do something wrong simply because someone in authority told me to. I’ve never really been in a situation like that, though I have rejected “counsel” on occasion when it seemed ill-advised or based on ignorance or misunderstanding.
As for your dream, as I read your account, my two-year-old was climbing up my side, so I found myself thinking, “What does this guy know about clingy little ones?”
I know you have kids and probably grandkids as well. I get out of it that the feelings of upset or annoyance we experience are often only manifestations of thoughts, people, or ideas that we need to embrace rather than fight, but I’m not sure I understand the significance of the right leg. Do tell what you interpreted from it. I don’t know much about Jungian theory other than what I got from the Police album “Synchonicity” ha ha. I think dreams can tell us a lot about the way we really feel about many things.
Comment # 8 by Villate | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
It’s nice to know the capitalization was just an editorial oversight, but I think your speculation of my speculation was right on — like a Freudian slip. But I’m also glad to see that you are your own person.
I’m going to respond more to your question about family experience when I respond to Matt. (Re: kids, I not only have grandkids, but 10 great-grandkids!) As for the dream, it was only as I was writing to you that it suddenly made all new sense after all these years — since 1975!
Here’s some of what I wrote to the SP:
“I had never before dreamed of blacks [nor had I known any]. The first time I had ever met one in outer life was during Army Basic Training. He beat me up. I was generally fearful of them after that. The day after this dream came, I met for the first time a black man in a positive way. He was “Brother Taylor”, a minister from South Central Los Angeles (Watts) and a great admirer of the Mormons. For reasons I do not remember, I disclosed to him what I have disclosed to you above [about a commitment to a calling on my life]. He believed and hired me to join this ministerial staff. I was the only white in his congregation…”
I believe this dream prepared me to meet and engage “Brother” because of how it affected my psyche beforehand. It helped me transform my aversion or discomfort with standard Mormon projections. The dream illustrates these projections, particularly my trying to peel him off of me with the heel of my right hand against his face (head). Do you get the “heel will crush thy head” association? I associate legs with “understanding”. This shadow figure from within me clinging powerfully to my “right understanding” would not be dismissed! Had it not been a child, I probably would have felt assaulted and afraid as indeed I was at first. But, one cannot dismiss a child in that way and I thank God that I was presented with an image and evoked my compassion rather than my prejudice. With that emotion flooding me, the child now allowed himself to be picked off and up and simply held. He is happy to be held and I don’t have to perform any great feats or do anything special other than to give him love and acceptance. That dream changed me permanently.
Does that not help a little?
For me dreams are a daily revelatory miracle. I simply do not understand why the Mormon community hasn’t made dreams a subject of major study, given its boast of being especially privy to modern revelation. All people, no matter what race, age, persuasion, gender, etc. dream every night. It is a universal experience. I could go on and on, but I’ll stop for now. If you have further interest or questions, don’t hesitate to ask — as I’m confident you won’t!
Comment # 9 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
Villate, I saw something come into my inbox tonight when my wife and I got home, but it seems to have vanished. This has been a weird day. All kinds of things have vanished: keys, tickets, papers. Can you send it again? Maybe tomorrow will be a better day!
ENK
Comment # 10 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
Matt: thanks for your insightful comments to Villate. You are right to ask about how my post relates to my family dynamic. As I began to think about your comments, a new understanding of a favorite scripture came to mind: “…and all thy children shall be taught of the Lord.” (3Ne22:13)
I’m immensely proud of my family. They span and extend beyond the Mormon spectrum, namely: fully active, unchurched, resigned, never been, post, anti and apologetic. Nevertheless, every one is encouraged to be his/her own person — like a mini Sunstone. I celebrate their diversity and honor their independence. We don’t have to agree, but we have learned to be authentic much like in Scott Peck’s stage four community model. We talk and we listen to each other. It has not always been thus.
The turning point was at the suicide of my fourth, middle and most brilliant child, Ivan, at age 35 in 1996. It was a profound and shocking surprise to us all. His siblings and their mothers (except John and his) came to be together. We wept, confessed, forgave and listened to each other deeply for the first time. At the end of a sad, but miraculously joyful week, my oldest son Nick exclaimed, “Ivan’s sacrifice has brought the family together!”
It was an amazing change for us all. Previous to this I had thought our family was dysfunctional. Not so! Everyone seemed to know instinctively what to do and how function. We, as an individually inner directed family community, needed no outside direction or support.
John, who was only 12 at the time, deeply regrets not being allowed to come. But that is now being remedied in a new dialogue sparked by John’s next oldest brother, Michael, who is a professional documentary film director in NYC and is a never-been Mormon. Michael has asked why his father has not said and written more about his UFO story. But that is a subject for a different post.
Comment # 11 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 3, 2007 | Reply
Gene,
Don’t you know that in our community, people will respect you if you 1.) heal the sick; 2.) receive personal revelation on everything from the location of your lost car keys, to the sex of your next child, to the name of your next employer; and 3.) proclaim that you know certain propositions relating to the physical reality and manifestation of angels, golden books, and even God himself… but that if you claim to have seen a UFO we’ll think you are just crazy! (To say nothing about the loopiness of dreaming that Joseph Smith actually appeared to you.)
You are a visionary man in a visionary religion. You’d think such would be a match made in heaven, but apparently you are having the wrong kind of visions.
Comment # 12 by Matt Thurston | Nov 5, 2007 | Reply
Matt: here’s my naivete again. I actually thought our community, i.e., the greater Sunstone community, was sincere about “Faith seeking understanding”. Are you now ducking under cover to say “I’m not really serious about it”?
My never-been-Mormon documentary-film-editor son Michael was an eye witness to the 9/11 Twin Towers attack and took substantial film footage that was featured on many network documentaries. He is serious about what he writes. This past 9/11 he came across some serious footage called The Disclosure Project by Stephen Greer, M.D. It rocked him. [Google it yourself!] So Michael launched a dialogue with our family, most of whom have a Mormon background, because he remembered that his dad had once described an experience long ago (summer 1965) that was witnessed with his Mormon grandmother. His late grandmother would never deny her experience, even after more than 30 years, but she couldn’t think about the implications. His nuclear scientist dad, on the other hand, had his whole world concept turned inside out and upside down.
Fellow Mormon scientist Frank B. Salisbury wrote about this in his 1964 book Truth: by Reason and by Revelation. He was one of five scientists in those days who had the courage to declare that the phenomenon should be taken seriously in the national debate. Many sniggereed. I hope you aren’t one of them. Stephen Greer has carried this torch in recent years. Don’t laugh it off, unless you choose to stay ignorant — and thus unsaved! What was it Joseph once said? “No man can be saved in ignorance” and “A man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge.”
This brings us back to: “How Can We Become Saviors on Mt Zion?” Surely not by excluding and ignoring.
Comment # 13 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 5, 2007 | Reply
Eugene, you misunderstood my comment #12 (or more likely, I didn’t express myself clearly enough). By “our community” I was referring to the mainstream Mormon community, not the Sunstone community — guessing, correctly I think, that the mainstream Mormon community would probably reject your experiences with UFO’s and visionary dreams as the “wrong kind”.
Comment # 14 by Matt Thurston | Nov 6, 2007 | Reply
Matt: you make a good straight man! You are correct, the local SP came back with fangs beneath his fleese to denounce my assersions as “False” in no uncertain terms. I told him I did not respect cowardice. My problem is that I am unable to deny what I’ve experienced and am unwilling to counsel the Holy Spirit.
Comment # 15 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 8, 2007 | Reply
Matt: I just tried to email you at your Yahoo address, but it BOUNCED. It seems to be a Yahoo problem, since all mail I’ve sent to Yahoo.com recipients have also bounced and keep bouncing. Maybe you should get another address?
Eugene
Comment # 16 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 8, 2007 | Reply
Matt: Four of my sons (all with Mormon backgrounds) will be coming to Los Alamos beginning next week and for Christmas and for the pilot Dream Workshop I will be conducting here on 15 December. I hope to have them meet with the local stake president so that he can explain his judgment of their dad to them.
Comment # 17 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 9, 2007 | Reply
Wow! Have I had a chastening response from three people close to me who I know love me: my wife Birgitta, my son Steve who is an executive for Franklin-Covey, and my best friend Rex, a professor of management, whom I have known for almost 50 years. My hypocrisy is revealed and I am shamefaced! None of these loved ones were happy with my veiled threat to confront the stake president’s judgment with the same token. Forgive me, all, for I have sinned! Yes, I confess that my heart had hardened. I had blithely referred to a child in order to make an earlier point about unconditional love and acceptance, but then ignored my own counsel. How embarrassing to stand exposed! But that is part of the saving process, isn’t it? I’m grateful for the scripture: “The Lord chastens whom He loves.”
I had sent a copy of my most recent exchange between the SP and me to several Sunstone bloggers for their counsel. All have been silent so far. They probably don’t trust me to accept their counsel, which may have been a legitimate fear. It took my loved ones to speak the truth in love for me to get the message. I hope I haven’t intimidated other commentators.
My wife is not satisfied. She reminds me of Screwtape’s counsel to Wormwood (C.S. Lewis) “But have you reminded him of how humble he is?
Comment # 18 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 18, 2007 | Reply
Bravo!
Comment # 19 by Rex | Nov 24, 2007 | Reply
Eugene,
Thank you for your story of self-realization and transcendence. What you say is very true. if the stake president cannot take the way you view the world, when you express it with humility and love, then it is he who is bigoted not you. I have found that I try not to go out of my way to “hurt” Mormons anymore for my own pride but when asked I express my feelings and views with love and enthusiasm. Well done mate!!
Comment # 20 by Steve Wellington | Nov 27, 2007 | Reply
Bless you Steve! I need a llittle more work on the “humility and love” part. It’s easy to feel a bit overexposed in these blogs and sometimes hung out to dry. Thanks for your upbeat comment! BTW, are you from UK or Austrailia?
Comment # 21 by Eugene Kovalenko | Nov 28, 2007 | Reply
Dad,
I love your insight that it is the projections that are the sins that one takes upon oneself. I should know, eh? Do you not think that I know what this is like even from my own family?
The SP and his attitudes are symptomatic of the poison hubris of Mormon institutions of all flavors, with perhaps the exception of the Community of Christ. I have been observing this with an interest only in Truth from within and without of the Church ever since you went away…
This is a serious issue and I predict, like the United States is in the process of doing, the Church will fall if the leadership and membership do not open their eyes, hearts, and minds and repent of their self-serving ignorance and hubris.
The only way I believe we can be “saviors on Mt. Zion” is to figure out how to make and facilitate a direct enlightening connection with God and come together with united purpose. The Church teaches that only the designated and authorized “prophet” is entitled to revelation at this level. As you know I disagree and my position is that the Church should be exploring how to do this instead of preoccupying and distracting its membership with meetings and duties.
-ENKMO1
Comment # 22 by Nick Kovalenko | Nov 30, 2007 | Reply
My very dear and oldest son Nick,
I was wondering when my family would begin to speak up. I can always count on you to speak your truth without fear, which sometimes takes on others’ projections!. I loved it when your brother Michael’s partner recently described you as having the heart of a Lion! Your fearlessness and truthfullness, my wonderful son, sets an example for me and the rest of our family in terms of the saving principles of truth telling on Mt. Zion. May your days always be blessed.
After your youngest brother John had been interviewed by John Dehlin in Mormon Stories [see above], he called here to ask if he could come for Christmas! Can you imagine how thrilled that made me? Our family continues to listen to the God of Love instead of to the gods of fear and judgment, thereby continuing to become healthier and happier.
And I agree with you that the Community of Christ is setting a marvelous example of humility and openness that its older and bigger Utah brother would do well to notice and emulate.
Love always, Dad
Comment # 23 by Eugene Kovalenko | Dec 1, 2007 | Reply
Hi Eugene,
You are obviously spiritually advanced and self actualized to a great extent; probably more so than most people out there. Could you be making a mistate by assuming everyone else out there is as intelligent, aware and self actualized as you are? Perhaps you are communicating based on an incorrect assumption that the people you are communicating with hold the same values that you have, when in actuality they do not.
Comment # 24 by Lyle Slaughter | Feb 14, 2008 | Reply
Lyle,
I don’t know if you are replying to a post I made recently in this thread or something else. It seems the last post I put up was not acceptable to the blogger authorities and was removed without notice to me. If this is the case, this is the first time this has happened.
In any case, I want you to know that I do very much assume that the SunstoneBlog audience is intelligent, aware and self-actualized simply by virtue of participating in this blog exchange process. Nevertheless, I cannot hold a candle to my children for their being more aware and empathetic than their father not only with respect to spiritual issues, but to practical matters as well.
For instance, only just this weekend my wife and I met in a quickly arranged family conference near Washington, D.C. where I was confronted and challenged by one of my most accomplished sons who feels strongly that his dad is seriously mentally ill. It was a surprising and initially painful experience, but we all grew from it in ” true community” terms first discussed in this blog post.
Comment # 25 by Eugene Kovalenko | Feb 19, 2008 | Reply