Don't Start Threads Focusing On Marriage In Here.

[FutureCarmeliteClaire]

[quote name='faithcecelia' timestamp='1325124958' post='2358991']
Claire, that was never the intention, just to highlight that if we are encouraging religious vocations at very young ages we should also be encourging discernment of marriage at the same age. I wouldnt want to lose you
[/quote]
I know what you mean now. I thought that you were saying that we are too young to discern, which is kind of weird... So, this makes sense now. Yes, we should be encouraging marriage at a young age as well. Presumably anyone who is old enough and mature enough to be on a public forum is old enough to use discretion and participate in appropriate discussions for their age.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='faithcecelia' timestamp='1325124227' post='2358972']
I guess one way to think of it, if feeling disappointed that the Church considers celibacy 'a higher calling', is that marriage is held in high enough esteem within the Church as to be its own sacrament, whereas religious consecration is 'only' an extention of baptism. They are equally valid without being identical.
[/quote]

The martial state and the expression of human sexuality for procreation and mutual comfort etc. is the natural state of the human being created by God. To live in celibacy for the sake of The Kingdom is a state above nature or "supernatural" - above nature. This is why it is said to be a "higher calling". If I embrace celibacy and think that I am in any way higher or better etc. than those in the natural state God has equally created (as He creates those states above nature) my ego is getting in the way and tripping me up in a major way. God grants The Grace to live in the state above the natural state to whomsoever He May for that person's personal sanctification and to build up His Church. It is a great honour and dignity to be called by God.........anywhere or to anything!

Some religious may have once desired marriage and its joys and consolations - just as some of the married may have once desired religious life and its joys and consolations.

I have a beautiful prayer here prayed daily for our priests from the Congregation of The Clergy "Grant that they may be faithful to their commitments, zealous in their vocation and mission, CLEAR MIRRORS OF THEIR OWN IDENTITY, and living the Joy of the Gift they have received" - this prayer can apply to any vocation. God creates a particular and unique person - we have our warts and all and we are absolute unique each of us - a one-of! - and He needs and desires this particular and unique person (His one-of creation) in a certain way of life and grants all necessary to live that way of life for their own santification and to build up His Church. To God, all Glory - the very great glory and the most minute of glory.
If dUSt wants only threads commenced on religious life and priesthood in Vocation Station, fair enough. It is the term "Vocation Station" therefore that problems me in that it is limited to three vocations in The Church. But what dUSt says goes!

Edited December 29, 2011 by BarbaraTherese

[Cherie]

[quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1325126423' post='2359020']

but for those of us who are still discerning (or living the life, as Sr Marie does), then the focus for us is the Vocation of religious life, not marriage.
[/quote]

And that is, has been, and always will be the MAIN focus of VS. By a landslide. No one is proposing changing that, or making VS a place where marriage is treated on an equal footing with consecrated life.

I think the point is that some threads started with the topic of marriage in regard to discernment are fitting here, as in the example I gave. Therefore, a rule for not starting topics with the subject of marriage, while certainly not the end of the world, may not be best. It could possibly exclude a lot of valuable information for those with an authentic RELIGIOUS vocation, and aren't necessarily geared ONLY to those who are leaning toward married life.

The attraction to marriage is natural. Many of those with an authentic religious vocation do feel drawn to it even if it's not their calling. Those threads could possibly provide, at least anecdotally, some advice and information these discerners would find helpful.

I've probably commented way too much. But I really don't think there needs to be a big problem about this. "Much ado about nothing" comes to mind.

[Nunsense]

[quote name='MaterMisericordiae' timestamp='1325126885' post='2359027']
Being that I am one of the ones who recently discerned out of marriage, I feel that your post hit the nail right on the head. I have been a member for a long time and have contributed many posts, but I feel like I am excluded from this particular (and favorite) sub-forum because I am no longer discerning religious life. If one posts on an already active thread about marriage, their post looks to be the one hijacking the discussion and/or it gets lost in the shuffle.

I am one of the ones that thinks that if we aren't allowed to post topics here discussing marriage, then start a sub-forum for discerning married life. I don't post serious topics about vocations in Open Mic, because, like JoyfulLife said, they tend to devolve into some weird discussion. In fact, I cannot recall one single topic I started there where it wasn't hijacked.

I may have to be a less active member now...
[/quote]

MM, I don't know if you edited your original post or if I just can't find it, but since it referred to me by name (I get email notifications) then I feel it appropriate for me to respond as you seem to think I have personally attacked you in some way.

I certainly would not like you to post any less MM, and I have followed your own discernment with great interest and have been encouraged by your courage and strength. I certainly did not have anyone particular in mind when I made my comments about pride, as there have been a few people on here who have started discerning religious life and ended up feeling called to marriage or another form of life instead. When I used the word 'pride', I also did not mean what you obviously understood, although I can see why it would be misunderstood because the word 'pride' can be inflammatory, as can 'higher' if not understood as intended.

In this sense, pride is the sense of self that gets hurt or offended when we are disappointed, and I meant this as a very human response to feeling that one has somehow 'failed' in some way. I know about this personally because I have experienced this sense of loss that comes from hurt pride as often as anyone else. Any time we are rejected or dismissed or ignored or marginalised, we can respond with hurt pride. That isn't the same as thinking one is better than others kind of pride. I apologise if I did not make myself clear on this point. I sometimes forget that we don't all understand the same things by the same words.

To get beyond the sense of hurt pride takes almost saint like behaviour and of course we are all called to this level of sanctity, but speaking for myself, it sometimes takes awhile to get enough distance and detachment to do so. I have probably been rejected more times in my life than most of you here (because I am so much older) and it doesn't get much easier over time, I think I just recover a little faster.

As for the whole marriage/religious life debate on here, the higher than or better than and why can't we post here, and I feel excluded etc etc etc... if we take some of the emotion out of the whole thing (as we try to do when we are rejected), then we can see that dUSt has made a very simple request, that we can agree with or disagree with but in the end, it is his decision. He asks that we do not START any threads focused on married life in the VS. But there are existing threads here already and so far he hasn't made any comment about these... so go for it until and unless he stops it there too!

Please don't stop posting altogether over something that really isn't the end of the world.

[Nunsense]

[quote name='CherieMadame' timestamp='1325128041' post='2359056']
And that is, has been, and always will be the MAIN focus of VS. By a landslide. No one is proposing changing that, or making VS a place where marriage is treated on an equal footing with consecrated life.

I think the point is that some threads started with the topic of marriage in regard to discernment are fitting here, as in the example I gave. Therefore, a rule for not starting topics with the subject of marriage, while certainly not the end of the world, may not be best. It could possibly exclude a lot of valuable information for those with an authentic RELIGIOUS vocation, and aren't necessarily geared ONLY to those who are leaning toward married life.

The attraction to marriage is natural. Many of those with an authentic religious vocation do feel drawn to it even if it's not their calling. Those threads could possibly provide, at least anecdotally, some advice and information these discerners would find helpful.

I've probably commented way too much. But I really don't think there needs to be a big problem about this. "Much ado about nothing" comes to mind.
[/quote]

You are right, there is a very good thread about discerning marriage vs religious life already started, and maybe that would be a good place for everyone to post about this topic from now on. It will become very 'hot' and be a great place for those discerners who still aren't sure to go and get good advice about both.

[BarbTherese]

[quote]The attraction to marriage is natural. Many of those with an authentic religious vocation do feel drawn to it even if it's not their calling [/quote]

This has some truth. However, when God calls, He also provides the attraction to the particular call. For example, I feel no attraction whatsoever to marriage nor to religious life. This does not mean that I am not natural, unnatural. It simply means that God is not calling me to these vocations - I have not the Grace of these vocations. I have a different attraction, a different vocation and call, and all The Graces necessary to live it.

On another point entirely. I cannot see why a vocation to religious life and a vocation to marriage should not be treated on equal footing. Both are calls and vocations from God - both are holy. True, religious life is the higher calling in an objective sense theologically but Grace will be granted to live out that call. Does this mean more Grace for the religious vocation than marriage. No, it simply means different kinds of Graces. God is The Author, the Alpha and the Omega. Without marriage, we would not have either religious vocations nor vocations to the priesthood - The Church and mankind would be dying. All the vocations are mutually dependant and complementary. They, each in their own way, build up the Mystical Body of Christ on earth, The Church. It takes a special Grace from God to faithfully live the religious life to death. Just as it takes special Graces from God to commit faithfully to the one marital partner until death.
The Church has pointed out to us very clearly that the lay person has a very specific and very important vocation. Ours is the specific task of being the leaven in society - of living out The Gospel and our Love and allegiance to Christ right smack-bang in the mist of the world. We are not called out of the world, we are sent to it into it. Our vocation to holiness commences with our baptism, and the specific way we are to unfold that holiness is that particular lifestyle, or vocation, to which God calls us which is at once The Grace necessary to live it in all its circumstances, great and small, joyful and difficult.

Edited December 29, 2011 by BarbaraTherese

[OnlySunshine]

[quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1325128104' post='2359059']
MM, I don't know if you edited your original post or if I just can't find it, but since it referred to me by name (I get email notifications) then I feel it appropriate for me to respond as you seem to think I have personally attacked you in some way.

I certainly would not like you to post any less MM, and I have followed your own discernment with great interest and have been encouraged by your courage and strength. I certainly did not have anyone particular in mind when I made my comments about pride, as there have been a few people on here who have started discerning religious life and ended up feeling called to marriage or another form of life instead. When I used the word 'pride', I also did not mean what you obviously understood, although I can see why it would be misunderstood because the word 'pride' can be inflammatory, as can 'higher' if not understood as intended.

In this sense, pride is the sense of self that gets hurt or offended when we are disappointed, and I meant this as a very human response to feeling that one has somehow 'failed' in some way. I know about this personally because I have experienced this sense of loss that comes from hurt pride as often as anyone else. Any time we are rejected or dismissed or ignored or marginalised, we can respond with hurt pride. That isn't the same as thinking one is better than others kind of pride. I apologise if I did not make myself clear on this point. I sometimes forget that we don't all understand the same things by the same words.

To get beyond the sense of hurt pride takes almost saint like behaviour and of course we are all called to this level of sanctity, but speaking for myself, it sometimes takes awhile to get enough distance and detachment to do so. I have probably been rejected more times in my life than most of you here (because I am so much older) and it doesn't get much easier over time, I think I just recover a little faster.

As for the whole marriage/religious life debate on here, the higher than or better than and why can't we post here, and I feel excluded etc etc etc... if we take some of the emotion out of the whole thing (as we try to do when we are rejected), then we can see that dUSt has made a very simple request, that we can agree with or disagree with but in the end, it is his decision. He asks that we do not START any threads focused on married life in the VS. But there are existing threads here already and so far he hasn't made any comment about these... so go for it until and unless he stops it there too!

Please don't stop posting altogether over something that really isn't the end of the world.
[/quote]

I want to apologize for my original post. The reason why I edited mine is because I went back and read yours. I realized that I took it out of context. I was hoping you hadn't read the original one because I didn't want to offend you since the intent of yours was not offending me. I understand what you mean by pride, though, because it seems that it is one of my greatest weaknesses. Again, sorry about that. I have to remember to take everything with a grain of salt (especially since it was hard to read due to the posting problems; it appeared in bold print).

I won't be gone altogether, but I do feel as though I want to take a step back for a while. I'm job hunting now which is taking up a lot of my time. Thanks for explaining your previous post.

[Nunsense]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' timestamp='1325131056' post='2359098']
This has some truth. However, when God calls, He also provides the attraction to the particular call. For example, I feel no attraction whatsoever to marriage nor to religious life. This does not mean that I am not natural, unnatural. It simply means that God is not calling me to these vocations - I have not the Grace of these vocations. I have a different attraction, a different vocation and call, and all The Graces necessary to live it.

On another point entirely. I cannot see why a vocation to religious life and a vocation to marriage should not be treated on equal footing. Both are calls and vocations from God - both are holy. True, religious life is the higher calling in an objective sense theologically but Grace will be granted to live out that call. Does this mean more Grace for the religious vocation than marriage. No, it simply means different kinds of Graces. God is The Author, the Alpha and the Omega. Without marriage, we would not have either religious vocations nor vocations to the priesthood - The Church and mankind would be dying. All the vocations are mutually dependant and complementary. They, each in their own way, build up the Mystical Body of Christ on earth, The Church. It takes a special Grace from God to faithfully live the religious life to death. Just as it takes special Graces from God to commit faithfully to the one marital partner until death.
The Church has pointed out to us very clearly that the lay person has a very specific and very important vocation. Ours is the specific task of being the leaven in society - of living out The Gospel and our Love and allegiance to Christ right smack-bang in the mist of the world. We are not called out of the world, we are sent to it into it. Our vocation to holiness commences with our baptism, and the specific way we are to unfold that holiness is that particular lifestyle, or vocation, to which God calls us which is at once The Grace necessary to live it in all its circumstances, great and small, joyful and difficult.
[/quote]

Barb, once again I don't want to turn this into a debate, but dUSt's original post was not about not treating marriage on an equal footing with married life or that the lay state is not important. He simply pointed out that 'he' set up this phorum for the distinct purpose of discussing the religious vocation and priesthood, not to focus on marriage. Your post seems to imply that wanting to reserve a section of Phatmass for this purpose is somehow unfair.

There are phorums for raising children, phorums for debating controversial topics, phorums for just being immature, but we can't have a phorum for religious life and priesthood? I see nothing in the original post that says we cannot mention marriage (dUSt even explains that this is okay as part of a thread but not as a focus of a thread) or the lay state or anything else. All he has asked - and I don't know why this doesn't seem to be clear here - is that we refrain from STARTING a thread with the FOCUS on married life.

Since we already have a thread about discernment of married life vs religious life, is there any reason why that can't be a good place for these kinds of discussions? I just don't get it really. VS isn't a phorum about beer (although some seem to have confused it with one) or a phorum about raising children, or a phorum about married life - it is a phorum about discerning religious life or priesthood. There is nothing judgmental about that. It is dUSt's intention here that matters as he set up the phorum. All we have to do is to cooperate a little.

[dUSt]

I am in the diocese of Ft Worth. When I click on "Vocations" on the Ft Worth Diocese website, this is what it says:
[i]"[/i][i]The Office of Vocations helps raise awareness and encourages a positive response to the call to religious life and the diocesan priesthood."[/i]

[Nunsense]

dUSt, maybe this thread needs to be closed so as not to keep the emotional state so high? It will all settle down eventually but right now it seems to be a very sensitive topic to a lot of people. Just a suggestion though. I appreciate your decision and support it.

[dUSt]

I went to the Vatican website and clicked on "Vocations" in the site map. It brings up a list of messages from JPII regarding World Day of Prayer for Vocations. The latest message was 2005, and there is [b]no[/b] mention of married life. John Paul II only talks about the priesthood and the consecrated life:

[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/vocations/documents/hf_jp-ii_mes_20040811_xlii-voc-2005_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/vocations/documents/hf_jp-ii_mes_20040811_xlii-voc-2005_en.html[/url]

I think I'm in good company. Love y'all.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1325132309' post='2359111']
Barb, once again I don't want to turn this into a debate, but dUSt's original post was not about not treating marriage on an equal footing with married life or that the lay state is not important. He simply pointed out that 'he' set up this phorum for the distinct purpose of discussing the religious vocation and priesthood, not to focus on marriage. Your post seems to imply that wanting to reserve a section of Phatmass for this purpose is somehow unfair.

There are phorums for raising children, phorums for debating controversial topics, phorums for just being immature, but we can't have a phorum for religious life and priesthood? I see nothing in the original post that says we cannot mention marriage (dUSt even explains that this is okay as part of a thread but not as a focus of a thread) or the lay state or anything else. All he has asked - and I don't know why this doesn't seem to be clear here - is that we refrain from STARTING a thread with the FOCUS on married life.

Since we already have a thread about discernment of married life vs religious life, is there any reason why that can't be a good place for these kinds of discussions? I just don't get it really. VS isn't a phorum about beer (although some seem to have confused it with one) or a phorum about raising children, or a phorum about married life - it is a phorum about discerning religious life or priesthood. There is nothing judgmental about that. It is dUSt's intention here that matters as he set up the phorum. All we have to do is to cooperate a little.
[/quote]

Hi nunsense, again I may have worded earliest posts poorly in which I have no problems with the decision by dUSt. I think if dUSt ordains that the Vocations Forum is for religious life and priesthood only and that threads are not to be intitiated on the subject of marraige is not at all unfair in any way. Since those early posts of mine and reading other posts by other members, the suggestion for sub forums, I thought, and in the Vocations Forum, is a good idea. Sharing thoughts only, and having no authority on Phatmass, a Vocations Forum that will only have threads initiated on religious life or the priesthood alone is limiting the concept of "vocation" as outlined by The Church. But that is simply my concept, while dUSt remains in "the driver's seat" as the authority on Phatmass.

In short, I have now, nor have had, any problems with dUSt's decision and am very happy to comply - if I do have problems with the term "Vocation Station" strictly limited to religious life and priesthood only as subject of initiated threads. Sub forums strikes me as a good idea as discussion generally on Phatmass, and dUSt's discretion may indicate. My problem is not with dUSt's ruling, but with the term used as the title of the forum.

My comments re religious life and marraige and "equal footing" was a comment on a statement in anotherPost and apologies for not quoting that post - which can be found here: [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/117820-dont-start-threads-focusing-on-marriage-in-here/page__view__findpost__p__2359056"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/117820-dont-start-threads-focusing-on-marriage-in-here/page__view__findpost__p__2359056[/url]

Edited December 29, 2011 by BarbaraTherese

[Nunsense]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' timestamp='1325133539' post='2359131']

In short, I have now, nor have had, any problems with dUSt's decision and am very happy to comply - if I do have problems with the term "Vocation Station" strictly limited to religious life and priesthood only as subject of initiated threads. Sub forums strikes me as a good idea as discussion generally on Phatmass, and dUSt's discretion may indicate. My problem is not with dUSt's ruling, but with the term used as the title of the forum.

[/quote]

Well, this is another agree to disagree thing I guess since I love the title of Vocation Station. If I were googling religious life, I would use terms like vocation and discerning religious life, but if I were interested in marriage forums, then I would probably use terms like marriage, wedding, parents, husband/wife etc, and not vocation. If I were looking up careers, then I might use the term vocation but it wouldn't be my first choice.

As dUSt's last couple of posts showed, even dioceses and the Vatican use the term vocation to refer to priesthood and religious life mainly. To take away the title from this phorum simply because it can also mean a vocation to married life (and even to a career for many people), doesn't make sense when it is most commonly known as meaning priesthood or religious life.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1325132727' post='2359121']
I went to the Vatican website and clicked on "Vocations" in the site map. It brings up a list of messages from JPII regarding World Day of Prayer for Vocations. The latest message was 2005, and there is [b]no[/b] mention of married life. John Paul II only talks about the priesthood and the consecrated life:

[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/vocations/documents/hf_jp-ii_mes_20040811_xlii-voc-2005_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...oc-2005_en.html[/url]

I think I'm in good company. Love y'all.
[/quote]

Traditionally, this is the World Day of Prayer for Vocations to the consecrated and priestly life - and not intended as a day or statement that defines "vocation" as only to religious life or the priesthood:
[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/vocations/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20090120_xlvi-vocations_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...cations_en.html[/url]


In the following Document, the word "vocation" in relation to the lay state in the world is mentioned over 60 times.
[quote]
[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_30121988_christifideles-laici_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...s-laici_en.html[/url]



[color=#663300]POST-SYNODAL
APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION
[b][i]CHRISTIFIDELES LAICI[/i][/b]
OF
HIS HOLINESS
JOHN PAUL II
ON THE VOCATION AND THE MISSION
OF THE LAY FAITHFUL
IN THE CHURCH AND IN THE WORLD[/color]



[i]To Bishops
To Priests and Deacons
To Women and Men Religious
and to All the Lay Faithful[/i]
[b]INTRODUCTION[/b]
1. THE LAY MEMBERS of Christ's Faithful People [i](Christifideles Laici), [/i]whose "[color=#ff0000][b]Vocation and Mission in the Church [/b][/color]and in the World Twenty Years after the Second Vatican Council" was the topic of the 1987 Synod of Bishops, are those who form that part of the People of God which might be likened to the labourers in the vineyard mentioned in Matthew's Gospel: "For the Kingdom of heaven is like a householder who went out early in the morning to hire labourers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the labourers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard" ([i]Mt [/i]20:1-2)
...................
[i]You go into my vineyard too. [/i]During the [i]Synod [/i][i]of [/i][i]Bishops, [/i]held in Rome, 1-30 October 1987, these words were re-echoed in spirit once again. Following the path marked out by the Council and remaining open to the light of the experience of persons and communities from the whole Church, the Fathers, enriched by preceding Synods, treated in a specific and extensive manner the topic of the[color=#ff0000] [b]vocation and mission of the lay faithful[/b][/color] in the Church and in the world
....................
[i]At the same time it insisted on the [color=#ff0000][b]unique character [/b][/color][/i][color=#ff0000][b][i]of [/i][/b][/color][i][color=#ff0000][b]their vocation[/b][/color], [/i]which is in a special way to "seek the Kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and ordering them according to the plan of God"(14). "The term 'lay faithful'" -we read in the Constitution on the Church, [i]Lu[/i][i]men Gentium-[/i]" is here understood to mean all the faithful except those in Holy Orders and those who belong to a religious state sanctioned by the Church. Through Baptism the lay faithful are made one body with Christ and are established among the People of God. They are in their own way made sharers in the priestly, prophetic and kingly office of Christ. They carry out their own part in the mission of the whole Christian people with respect to the Church and the world"(15).
.................
.[/quote]

[PhuturePriest]

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1325089244' post='2358528']
I know marriage is a vocation, but this board is for phuture nuns and priests.
I know the name is "Vocation Station", but if you read the fine print under the description, it specifically indicates religious life.
Being married is great, but this board was created to foster and encourage religious vocations, which is a superior calling.

Thanks.

If you don't like it, then leave and go find a spouse who cares about your feelings.
[/quote]

Now, you say "Nuns and Priests". That leaves me out, since I want to be a Friar.

[dUSt]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' timestamp='1325135502' post='2359145']
Traditionally, this is the World Day of Prayer for Vocations to the consecrated and priestly life - and not intended as a day or statement that defines "vocation" as only to religious life or the priesthood:
[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/vocations/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20090120_xlvi-vocations_en.html"]http://www.vatican.v...cations_en.html[/url]
[/quote]

I'm not arguing that marriage is not a vocation. I'm simply pointing out that I'm using the same naming conventions as the Vatican. The Vatican calls it the "World Day of Prayer for Vocations", even though it's focus is on the priesthood and consecrated life. I call this board the "Vocation Station", even though it's focus is on the priesthood and consecrated life.

Don't try to convince me, convince the pope.

[vee]

if people dont like this vocations phorum go to another, like Catholic Answers or... well..... um.....

[Nunsense]

[quote name='vee8' timestamp='1325136889' post='2359164']
if people dont like this vocations phorum go to another, like Catholic Answers or... well..... um.....
[/quote]

No comparison at all - been there, checked it out. Too full of beer photos and people with no sense of kindness at all

[BarbTherese]

[quote]dUSt, on 28 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

I know marriage is a vocation, but this board is for phuture nuns and priests.
I know the name is "Vocation Station", but if you read the fine print under the description, it specifically indicates religious life.
Being married is great, but this board was created to foster and encourage religious vocations, which is a superior calling.

Thanks.

If you don't like it, then leave and go find a spouse who cares about your feelings.
[/quote]

..............ahhh the fine print............... and if great leader, you wish the forum to be called "Vocation Station" with fine print, then such it is! And I agree with you all the way, marriage is a vocation. As for a spouse - no sane male would for a moment consider me!
LOL

Oh and apologies sincerely for misunderstanding your referral to The World Day of Prayer for Vocations - and I absolutely get[b] your [/b]point and reasons ..............

Edited December 29, 2011 by BarbaraTherese

[LadyOfSorrows]

Blah

Edited December 29, 2011 by LadyOfSorrows