I offer a few reflections that are my attempt to process the election. I started these reflections before its results. My goal here is to offer a space of calm reflection. I realize that some have deep-seated fear and anxiety regarding the outcome of a President-elect Donald Trump. I will not re-litigate the election. I want to see if we can listen to the voters. Since the election has not ended on election day, I am extending my remarks. Victor Davis Hanson offers his reflections on the mythologies of the 2016 election. Newt Gingrich offers his interpretation of Trumpism. Hoover Institute had a discussion of the relationship between conservative intellectuals and Donald Trump. It also had a discussion with Kellyanne Conway, the first female to head a presidential election.
Regardless of our thoughts about Trump, it masks the depth of the defeat experienced by the Democrat Party. As we shall see, Republican victories in the 50 states reveals that the Democrat Party has largely become a metropolitan party. A Hillary victory would have masked the depth of the defeat. Now, we see it clearly.
As I write, some people have taken to the street to protest. The protests arise from a view of Trump typified by a theology professor at Princeton, who posted a 1922 news piece in which the writer suggested that Hitler was not serious about his anti-Semitism. If you have such a view, if it corresponded to reality, would stimulate even such a political conservative as me to demonstrate against, although never with violence. I do not want to add fuel to that fire. Rather than increasing fear, anxiety, and anger, as this theology professor seems to want to do, I want to help people calm down. Thus, the reaction of demonstrating with violence, of beating up people who did not vote your way, concerns me.
An attempt to discredit the results of this election persists.
One approach is to focus on the popular vote. I briefly say here that the rules of the election were known to all. We have 51 elections occurring at the same time. We do so for practical and historical reasons that we learned in sixth grade. Where Hillary and Donald went head-to-head in terms of their personal presence, Donald won.
As I write, Jill Stein failed in what assume was her objective to turn some states from Trump to Hillary after a recount. So far, Trump has gained votes in Wisconsin and they discovered voter fraud in Detroit which would decrease the number of Hillary votes. In my view, this is part of the Liberal-Progressive attempt to discredit the election results.
As I write, the next step in discrediting the election is to focus on Russian hacking. I have no problem with studying any Russian attempts to influence the election. If there were attempts, we need to know about them. The motive of those pursuing this line of attack seem obvious to me. They also mask the content of the revealed emails from John Podesta. If you will think logically for a moment, these emails revealed that the fix was in within the Democrat Party primary to make sure that Hillary won. In reality, Bernie never had a chance. As to the source, is it more likely that a disgruntled Democrat who simply wanted a fair nomination process leaked these emails or is it more likely the Russians did it?
The next step in discrediting the election is the attempt to get electors on December 19 to change their votes. There are often faithless electors who vote a different way than their state directed them. At this point, I know of one from Texas. I do not expect this attempt to succeed.
I might as well say it. Losing builds character. It takes an adult and mature approach to the world to accept defeat graciously and learn what one can from it. Maybe some people, in the age of everyone getting a trophy, have delayed losing until too late in life. Losing happens. The mature response is to listen to those to whom you lost. Such a response requires some spiritual maturity and a prayerful approach to life and fellow citizens. The response of violence to those with whom you disagree and burning the flag are typical responses of Leftist totalitarians in other countries. The response of blaming someone other than oneself for a loss is not the path to learning. People who disagree with the outcome of this election need to pause, calm down, listen to what their fellow citizens are really saying, and learn. However, David Harsanyi has an excellent reflection that the Democrat-Liberal-Progressive never loses an election. If so, they will refuse to lean anything from the depth of their defeat.
Another thing happening as I write a few days after the election is the peaceful transition of power. Hillary has urged people to give the President-elect a chance. President Obama has met with him and was quite gracious. I realize the picture during the election was that he was a racist and misogynist. During the election, people made much of certain KKK fears. Finally, President-elect Trump gave such persons plenty of ammunition for such accusations in his words. I do not defend his behavior or his words. I just ask a question. Would Hillary and President Obama be so gracious if they really believed the worst things said about President-elect Trump? Would they willingly offer a peaceful transition of power to someone who was the racist and misogynist many came to believe President-elect Trump was? In happier times, the Clintons and Trumps were friendly enough to attend the same parties in NYC. Trump had given money to her campaign. As I will share in a moment, I do not defend Trump. I do want to urge people who have such fears to step back and look at what is happening. If Hillary and President Obama can be gracious in defeat, maybe others can be as well. At least, one can keep their fears and anger at bay, wait and see how the President-elect actually governs, and if necessary, give birth to new political opposition. That is the democratic process at work.
A good reminder, given the bitter nature of the campaign, comes from John Wesley.
“October 6, 1774
I met those of our society who had votes in the ensuing election, and advised them
1. To vote, without fee or reward, for the person they judged most worthy
2. To speak no evil of the person they voted against, and
3. To take care their spirits were not sharpened against those that voted on the other side.”
A possible timely word to those tempted to respond with anger toward those who voted differently than you might have liked. Mat 5:44-5 Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven ... Rom 8:17-18 Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.
As I said, I have had a need to process this election. Thus, I want to express to myself and to a potential reader why this election has caused so much disturbance for me. After all, I did not like Trump before the election. His speculations about the birth certificate were a deal breaker for me. When he announced his candidacy, he said and did things that I thought would eliminate from the crowded Republican field of candidates. As a political conservative in the mold of William F. Buckley and George Will, I have not had anyone whom I could support with joy in the general election. I felt homeless politically in my country before. I have felt homeless politically this year because of the candidates nominated on both sides. I voted early and privately with my wife, which was for me a way to get the duty out of the way.
From a Christian view of the providence of God, we can have faith or trust that God will work through it all to bring glory to God. As Paul in Romans 8:28 put it, God causes all things to work together for the purposes of God. I have learning how anxiety is often a symbol of our lack of control. I have been learning a lesson in what it means trust God as the future remains unknown. Trust in God in the way seems toward the goal seems winding and full of detours is difficult. If you trust in the progressive or conservative political ideology, you have placed your trust in the wrong place. In a democracy, an important part of elections is at least try to take off your ideological glasses, look at your opponent, and listen to what their votes actually say rather than what your ideology says they meant.
One thing we often forget, though, is that God may act in judgment upon this nation. The Bible also gives us many examples of deeply flawed individuals through whom God worked. One thinks of Samson and King David.
I would now like to start the process of listening to the voters.
I want to listen to the struggle within the Republican Party. The battle between "Establishment" and "Nationalist/Populist" in the Republican Party is real. Even with Republicans to some degree controlling the agenda in Washington, the Party is divided. The talk radio of which I write used to have commitment to conservative ideas of governance. Many have abandoned that notion in favor of Trump. The anger at those they consider Establishment Republicans is intense. This creates an interesting dynamic, for the people have kept establishment Republican politicians in power while electing an anti-Establishment President. It will be interesting how these people work it out. They have some common ground in policies, but also many in which they differ. Free Trade, secure borders, and foreign military involvements are among the differences within the party right now. Here is a place where those with conservative political ideas need to listen. At the presidential level, after all, political conservatives lost in this election in a big way. I have been for free trade, and still am, but I am willing to listen to some new ideas. I think it makes sense to secure the border, to provide work visas, to speed the immigration process, and provide a path citizenship, but such a position in the Trump vision seems out of place. I think reform of entitlements is essential to getting the budget under control, something Donald says is off the table.
I have much to learn at my advanced age (65). I am happy that I do not have to put up with another Clinton and the corruption they bring. I am not happy with the election of Donald. I am happy with the election of the House and surprised-happy with the election in the Senate. For those fearful of Trump, I would remind you that many Republicans share the concern! I do not believe that Republicans will simply tow the Trump line. I believe they will provide a check on some of the more outlandish things he has proposed.
In fact, here is a reminder of the checks and balances of our system. The President is not a dictator. We are a nation of laws. We have government workers, the Congress, and the Supreme Court who would hinder any President from doing the worst that opponents fear. Slate has a long article that I hope can calm down the reader anxious about such matters.
I found an article by George Will just before the election to be helpful in asking the right questions as to what voters were actually saying in this election. The numbers below are readily available on the Internet. They depend on the accuracy of exit polls. An article by Karl Rove also helped with the data.
George Will says that in the 17 elections since World War II, the winner has averaged 385.4 electoral votes, the loser 145.1. My prediction was that this election would end close to that total, with Hillary the winner. I went to bed early, my wife staying up until 2 AM, assuming that Hillary would be the next President.- I have never been so wrong about an election. I honestly thought that with the last week, it looked as if some of the trends toward Trump had stopped. It looks as if Trump will receive 306 electoral votes with about 48% of those who voted. This is the fifth time in history that the winner of the Electoral College also lost the popular vote. It is the 14th time that the winner didn’t receive 50% of ballots. This is a good reminder - 52% of the electorate did want either candidate the Democrat and Republican Party put up for election this year! It is also a good reminder that the electoral college still serves its purpose. Some deep blue states have large populations and go so solidly for the Democrat that two states, NY and CA, would largely run the country. This would not be healthy. It is also much harder to rig the election when we have 51 separate elections rather than just one. Charles Blahous offers that the electoral college is a moderating influence upon American elections According to one article, about 57 percent of eligible voters cast ballots this year, down from 58.6 percent in 2012 and 61.6 percent in 2008, which was the highest mark in 40 years. Turnout still remained well above levels for most presidential election years from 1972 to 2000. The drop in turnout was uneven. On average, turnout was unchanged in states that voted for Trump, while it fell by an average of 2.3 percentage points in states that voted for Clinton. Relatedly, turnout was higher in competitive states.
Will also says that Republican nominees’ popular-vote totals this century are: 2000 (George W. Bush) 50,455,156 (47.9%); 2004 (Bush) 62,040,610 (50.7%); 2008 (John McCain) 59,934,814 (45.7%); 2012 ( Mitt Romney) 60,932,152 (47.2%). Measure Trump’s total accordingly, bearing in mind that there are 10 million more eligible voters in 2016 than in 2012 and nearly 20 million more than in 2008. - So far, Trump has 61.9 million (46.5%). If Will was thinking that Trump would drop below the Romney totals, it appears he was wrong. These totals make me wonder if many people stayed home. I can only speculate as to why they did. In this case, the non-voter may have done so intentionally, not liking either candidate. Some of these persons voted third party and they had a significant impact upon this election, given how close it was (1.7 million separating Hillary and Trump, with Hillary getting the most). The pool of eligible voters rose 5.5% compared with four years ago—to 227 million from 215.1 million, according to the Census Bureau. Yet the number of ballots cast increased only 1.5%, to 131.2 million from 129.2 million. The votes cast for the two major parties fell in absolute terms. In 2012 the Republicans and Democrats took 126.9 million votes. This year? Only 123.7 million. Third-party candidates grabbed their biggest share since 1996: 5.5%, which translates into 7.5 million votes.
George Will writes of the swing states. I would note that many of these states saw the winner gathering less than 50% of the vote. He provides the numbers for Romney in 2012 and I provide the numbers for Trump. Texas, 4,569,843 (57 percent; Trump 4.6 53%); Florida, 4,163,447 (49 percent; Trump 4.5 million 49%); Pennsylvania, 2,680,434 (47 percent; Trump 2.9 million 49%); Ohio, 2,661,407 (48 percent; Trump 2.7 52%); Michigan, 2,115,256 (45 percent; Trump 2.2, 48%); Virginia, 1,822,522 (47 percent; Trump 1.7 45%); Arizona, 1,233,654 (54 percent; Trump .9 50%); Colorado, 1,185,243 (46 percent; Trump 1.0 45%); Nevada, 463,567 (46 percent; Trump .5 46%); New Hampshire, 329,918 (47 percent; Trump .3, 47%). - Trump lost Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada in this group. Trump clearly out-performed Romney. Will was clearly wrong in thinking Trump would underperform Romney.
I have never seen the sure Democrat and Republican sates listed. This list shows why the electoral college is, at present, in favor of the Democrat candidate, no matter who the Republicans nominate. Here is Will's list:
● The “blue wall” consists of 18 states and the District of Columbia (90% for Hillary). The total electoral votes of these states is 242. The criteria is that they have voted Democrat in at least six consecutive elections. I have included Hillary's numbers, thinking that any of these states that went beneath 50% in an election like this might not be part of the blue wall anymore. California 62, Connecticut 54, Delaware 53, Hawaii 61, Illinois 55, Maine 47, Maryland 59, Massachusetts 60, Michigan 47, Minnesota 46, New Jersey 55, New York 58, Oregon 49.9, Pennsylvania 47, Rhode Island 54, Vermont 61, Washington state 56, Wisconsin 47. - Of this group of states, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin went to Trump. This means that what Trump said would happen actually happened. He believed he could change the electoral map. Thus, George Will was wrong here.
● The Republicans’ “red wall” (in at least six consecutive elections) consists of 13 states with 102 electoral votes. The numbers are for Trump. In this case, the one state that is below 50% is because the state had a strong conservative who presented an alternative to Trump. Alabama 63, Alaska 52, Idaho 59, Kansas 57, Mississippi 58, Nebraska 60, North Dakota 63, Oklahoma 65, South Carolina 55, South Dakota 61, Texas 52, Utah 47, Wyoming 62. - These states remain Republican. In addition, Ark 60, Georgia 51, Indiana 57, Iowa 51, Kentucky 62, Louisiana 58, Missouri 56, Montana 56, Tennessee 61, and West Virginia 68, and surprisingly, Ohio 52, are candidates for a future composition of the red wall.
-Trump was able to break the Democrat blue wall, Hillary did not break into the red wall. Thus, Will was again wrong in his suggestion that some of these states would abandon Trump.
Among the concerns was that Trump would bring down the rest of the Republican ticket. We have a mixed bag here. The Democrats lost the House in 2010. In 2014, they lost the
For whom will the under 30 voter cast their vote? The last Republican to win this vote was Reagan. 37% for Trump.
The secular voter is growing and supports the Democrat Party. - That trend continues, with Clinton receiving 68% of the "no religion" vote, which was 15% of the electorate. In related news, Trump received 81% of the evangelical vote. He also won other categories of Christian, Protestant, Catholic, and Mormon. He did not win the Jewish vote, with 24%. I am well aware that some Christians, especially on the political left, find it discouraging (mild term) that self-identified Christians voted for Trump.
Republicans have carried the white college educated vote. Will that continue? - George Will was right here. Trump significantly outscored on the non-degree part of the country. Trump won the non-degree voter with 52% of their vote and he received 43% of the college degree voter. However, is this bad? Republicans may well be re-shaping their country-club image. Only 18% of voters had a high school education or less, down from 24% last time, according to the exit poll. Mr. Trump received 12 million votes from them, 2.2 million fewer than Mr. Romney. Mrs. Clinton got 10.6 million votes, 5.8 million fewer than Mr. Obama. Those with a two-year degree or some college grew to 32% of turnout, up from 29%. Compared with 2012, Mr. Trump gained 3.8 million, and Mrs. Clinton dropped 350,000. Voters with a B.A. also increased to 32% from 29%. Among them Mr. Trump gained 260,000 and Mrs. Clinton gained 2.9 million.
Romney gathered 17% of the nonwhite vote. Will that increase or decrease? - My surprise here is that Trump gathered 21%! 8% of the African-American vote went to Trump, which is more than Romney's 6%, but within the range of the normal Republican vote. He also received 29% of the Hispanic/Latino and the Asian vote, while Romney got 27%. He won the white vote 58 percent to 37 percent. In 1984, whites made up 86 percent of the total electorate. That number was 72 percent in 2012. And 70 percent in 2016. Both candidates this year won fewer white votes—Mr. Trump 1.6 million and Mrs. Clinton 2.3 million—than four years ago. 11% of the electorate was Hispanic, a 1% increase over 2012. Mrs. Clinton received nearly 9.4 million Latino votes, up 180,000 from Mr. Obama’s total in 2012. But because Mr. Trump won 29% of Hispanics, up from Mr. Romney’s 27%, the president-elect won 4.2 million Latino votes, roughly 690,000 more than Mr. Romney. 12% of the electorate was Black. On gender he received 54% of the male vote and 47% of the female vote. However, with white women he received 52% of their vote. If one wants to read this data as "white" revolt, one can. I think that is on the surface of the matter. Morning Joe had an interesting discussion of this matter. In my view, this is much more a reaction against political correctness and the prejudices of the Left against anyone who disagrees with them. A majority of people stood up to say No, with 52% of the people voting against Hillary, the candidate who would continue President Obama's legacy. What I find striking is that Trump's numbers are better than Romney when it comes to both non-whites and women voters. This ought to give one pause as to the racist and misogynist accusations. George Will makes a good point in his article after the election that several states that have been Republican are changing in their composition of minorities, such as Arizona, Texas, Nevada, and Georgia. Those who are politically conservative need to find a way to persuade minorities that their ideas are better than the liberal approach if they really want to improve their lives. Given the numbers in Washington DC for Republicans, the way they actually govern, if it proves to set the country on a better course, will likely be persuasive to many minorities.
-I will look forward to the comments of George Will. He has largely been wrong so far as to what he thought would happen with Trump at the head of the ticket. In his article after this election, he pointed to some things Obama has done that this election wants rolled back, such as executive orders, Obamacare, and the Iran treaty. He then wrote, "The simultaneous sickness of both parties surely reveals a crisis of the U.S. regime. The GOP was easily captured, and then quickly normalized, by history’s most unpleasant and unprepared candidate, whose campaign was a Niagara of mendacities. And the world’s oldest party contrived to nominate someone who lost to him." In another article, he refers to the difficulty that those who have been conservative will have with this "conservative of convenience" in Trump. As with many "never Trump" people from the conservative side, he remains unimpressed with the liberal aspects of his agenda, especially on trade, but even more, the anger that seems to drive much of the Trump campaign.
A few thoughts on the victory of Donald Trump.
- A hint of this outcome was Hillary was not breaking 50% in swing states or nationally. Trump would have an awful week, but her numbers did not change from her 45%. Trump numbers would fluctuate. Further, if Trump was as bad as his opponents said he was, she ought to have broken the 50% marker a long ago. Very simply, many dislike Hillary and her corruption. They wrestled with the obvious deficiencies of Trump.
- Given the accusation of racist, hating women, and other hates, maybe around 3-6% of the Trump vote was silent. They did not engage a fight with family and friends who took such views of Trump. Many of these were blue collar voters, whose unions told them to vote Hillary. They did not. The economic appeal Trump made apparently won them over.
- It looks like Hillary will get more of the popular vote than Trump. 52% did not want either Bill or Hillary. Many (43%) intentionally stayed home.
- Nationalism/Populism won, not conservativism or liberalism. This was an election against the establishment/elite, especially NYC/WashingtonDC/LA/SF/Entertainment/MSM/Progressive culture. Nationalism and Populism may feel like racism to some, but it does not have to be.
- I think I was wrong because I really thought people would choose the safe route of Hillary vs the risk of Trump. I also thought the Clinton machine was unbeatable.
- I hope that people who focus on race and hatred of women will pause and re-consider their view of those who voted for Trump. I have already suggested that the peaceful transition to President-elect Trump that President Obama and Hillary are making is a positive example at this stage. In addition, I invite you to reflect upon what happened in certain states to push them into the Trump column. Try to imagine the painful reality of this election cycle in general that led many persons to stay home. They did not vote. Some were liberal and some were conservative. They are politically active in general, but did not think they had a candidate for whom they could vote. Try to imagine what it would take for someone who wants their vote to count, but instead votes for a third party candidate they know will lose, not out of arrogance but out of conscience. Try to imagine the feeling of disenfranchisement that led to higher vote totals in rural America and the lower vote totals among millennials and African-Americans. Many persons were just tired of 12 (since Bush) years of salary stagnation, no growth, bail outs, executive orders, lies, deceit, false unemployment numbers, increase on government dependency, surrender in the nation’s security, and back room deals with Iran. To think that mass immigration is risky and destabilizing is not racist. Urging the support of traditional marriage is not degrading of other forms of domestic partnerships. Education may well need more rigor, discipline, and selection. We may need to deter crime through its punishment rather than its indulgence. Pornography may well damage civility. Objecting to abolishing national borders and sovereignty (nationalism) is not the same as degrading people from other lands. Objecting to the violent intervention into foreign countries does not make one weak on national defense or security. Here is another way to re-think the racism accusation. Historically, the white working class has been the backbone of the Democrat Party. Republicans have won the majority of college-educated whites. Trump reversed this, losing the college educated vote but winning the white working class vote. Many of the counties in which the white working class live favored Barack Obama by double digits. On Tuesday, they favored Trump by double digits. The Democrat Party lost the white working class this election (this is hardly permanent) because of its courting of campus leftists and affluent cosmopolitan whites. In the process, many Democrats went directly to labeling the Trump voter as racist. I will grant that those who are conservative, which I distinguish from Trump, have a lot of work to persuade more minorities of the superiority of politically conservative ideas. The advantage the Republican Party has is that it has the power into enact its agenda. If the result is success in economics and peace, that will in itself persuade people. Testimony to this is the success of the Reagan years that turned the votes of the young voter to the Republican Party in the 80s.
- President Obama showed he could energize people to vote for him. People still approve of him. He did not show an ability to transfer that energy to others. The Democrat Party has lost seats throughout the country and Hillary losing now are examples.
- Hillary was a worse candidate than many people thought she was. By that, I mean the baggage of corruption she carried, the indebtedness to Wall Street, and her husband's scandals with women, all factored into the picture. Her experience was bad experience. I am not sure pundits realized how deeply people disliked her. This was as much a defeat of the Clintons as it was a Trump victory. Mr. Trump received about 317,000 more ballots than Mitt Romney, but also a slightly smaller—0.5%—percentage of voters. Mrs. Clinton received 3.5 million fewer ballots and 3.4% less than President Barack Obama. Mr. Trump didn’t win because he greatly expanded the GOP, but because Mrs. Clinton lost a significant chunk of the Obama coalition. Compared with 2012 she dropped 1.8 million African-Americans, one million voters age 18-29, 1.8 million voters aged 30-44, 2.6 million Catholics, and nearly 4.5 million voters with family income of $30,000 or less.
- I am amazed that Trump took on the Clinton and Bush dynasty, the establishment of both political parties, the media establishment, the entertainment industry, and essentially created his own movement. I do not know how it will end. Clinton outspent Trump 3-1 and raised more than a billion dollars. She received this money from Wall Street, Silicon Valley and the great American gilded fortunes of Goldman Sachs, Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, Facebook and Google. These were not silent supporters. They were quite vocal and obvious in their support.
- As always, post-election analysis will keep trying to sort through lessons from losing for the Democrat Party. One prominent explanation is to focus upon Clinton as an unappealing corporate crony. If this interpretation becomes dominant, the likely outcome is to push the Party toward Bernie Sanders (75, 79 in 4 years) and Elizabeth Warren (67, 71 in 4 years), and thus, further to the Left. Michelle Obama anyone?
- As I write in December, President Obama and Hillary have become unhelpful in the peaceful transition of power. It is understandable. The depth of the Democrat defeat and the possibility that success on the part of the Trump over these four years could mean the decimation of their ideology naturally leads them to desperation. In this case, it means backing attempts to dispute the legitimating power of the vote America has taken. The danger of introducing Russian involvement and the undermining of the electoral college does not matter in this battle for power. Given how gracious both were immediately after the election, I find this disappointing.
- As a conservative, I find myself pleasantly surprised at the nominees for the Cabinet and Staff. What I am witnessing is that Trump and his cabinet are people of action as over against people of thought or intellect. These are people who will get things done. Charles Krauthammer offers his analysis of the appointees at this point. He was no friend of Trump during the nomination or election process, but seems impressed with these appointments.
Here is a prayer I have found helpful.
We come with troubled hearts to this place of prayer, O God.
We have elected a new leader for our country. Many are pleased, but others are
worried. But you are our refuge and strength, an ever-present help in trouble.
Because you are always near, we have no reason to fear, even when our world and
our lives seem to be falling apart, crumbling beneath our very feet. In the
midst of danger and destruction, violence and vice, malice and malady, you are
a rock of faithfulness. You are a refuge in which we may find shelter, a port
of safety from the storm and a mother's comfort from our fears and anxieties.
Hide us now under your wings; cover us with your mighty hand. When the oceans
rise and the thunder roars, we will soar with you above the floods, above the
clouds, beyond the turmoil and chaos of this world. We will be still and know
that you are God, and in you we will find rest for our weary hearts, and hope
for our souls. Lord God, we are fully aware that we do not live in a perfect
world. So open our eyes to what can be, O God. Let us be a people of faith-full
action. May we ourselves be the answer when we wonder what to do; enable each
of us to be a person who blurs boundaries of exclusion into circles of inclusion.
Let us be a people of hope so that where darkness exists, we might bring light.
Let us so live our lives that Jesus would say of us, "Here is a woman;
here is a man; here is a child of great faith ... here is a person of great
love." We beseech you, God of grace. Let it be so. We pray in the name of
the one who showed us what a life of love and perfection looks like, Jesus the
Christ who taught us to say when we pray ...
No comments:
Post a Comment