Pope Francis: ‘Inside every Christian is a Jew’

CALLING Holocaust denial “madness,” Pope Francis told an interviewer that “inside every Christian is a Jew.”

“Every day, I pray with the Psalms of David. My prayer is Jewish, then I have the Eucharist, which is Christian,” the Argentine pontiff said in a wide-ranging interview published in Spain’s La Vanguardia newspaper.

The pope also took the opportunity to criticize Holocaust denial as “madness”

AND he launched a sweeping attack on the world’s economic system, saying it discards the young, puts money ahead of people and survives on the profits of war.

The 77-year-old leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics said some countries had a youth unemployment rate of more than 50 per cent, with many millions in Europe seeking work in vain.

“It’s madness,” the Pope said.

“We discard a whole generation to maintain an economic system that no longer endures, a system that to survive has to make war, as the big empires have always done,” he said.

“But since we cannot wage the third world war, we make regional wars.

“And what does that mean? That we make and sell arms. And with that the balance sheets of the idolatrous economies – the big world economies that sacrifice man at the feet of the idol of money – are obviously cleaned up.”

Pope Francis says there is enough food to feed all the world’s hungry.

“When you see photographs of malnourished children you put your head in your hands, you cannot understand it,” he said.

“I think we are in a global economic system that is not good.”

The Pope says the people’s needs should be at the heart of the economic system.

“But we have placed money in the centre, the god of money. We have fallen into the sin of idolatry, the idolatry of money. The economy moves by the desire to have more and paradoxically it feeds a disposable culture,” he said.

Francis was also asked about his own security, saying he refused to travel in a bulletproof “sardine can” vehicle because he wants to mingle with ordinary people.

“It is true that anything can happen, but let’s face it, at my age I have nothing to lose,” the 77-year-old pontiff said.

The former archbishop of Buenos Aires was also asked how he would like to be remembered as a pope.

“I have not thought about that,” Francis said. “But I like it when you remember someone and say ‘He was a good guy, he did what he could, and he was not that bad.’ I would be happy with that.”

Advertisements

48 thoughts on “Pope Francis: ‘Inside every Christian is a Jew’

    • “Religion just can’t stay out of politics, can it?”

      No Dabs, it’s not ‘Religion’ interfering in politics. It’s the Spirit of God. You can’t quench His Spirit, no matter how much you may want to.

      “I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the “isness” of man’s present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal “oughtness” that forever confronts him. I refuse to accept the idea that man is mere flotsom and jetsom in the river of life, unable to influence the unfolding events which surround him. I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality.

      I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction. I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right temporarily defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. I believe that even amid today’s mortar bursts and whining bullets, there is still hope for a brighter tomorrow. I believe that wounded justice, lying prostrate on the blood-flowing streets of our nations, can be lifted from this dust of shame to reign supreme among the children of men. I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits. I believe that what self-centered men have torn down men other-centered can build up. I still believe that one day mankind will bow before the altars of God and be crowned triumphant over war and bloodshed, and nonviolent redemptive good will proclaim the rule of the land. “And the lion and the lamb shall lie down together and every man shall sit under his own vine and fig tree and none shall be afraid.” I still believe that We Shall overcome!

      This faith can give us courage to face the uncertainties of the future. It will give our tired feet new strength as we continue our forward stride toward the city of freedom. When our days become dreary with low-hovering clouds and our nights become darker than a thousand midnights, we will know that we are living in the creative turmoil of a genuine civilization struggling to be born.”

      Martin Luther King Jr., another “Is it you, you troubler of Israel?” 😉

      Like

      • Don’t have the time just now to pick this flowery rhetoric apart almost phrase by phrase. Mon.
        But generally will point out that if we’d done god’s will (‘as we ought to’) we’d still be wandering around, ignorant and superstitious ~ and naked ~ in the Garden of Eden, producing kids out of wedlock and not having a clue about how to feed them properly because we’re shirking our parental responsibilities and leaving all that stuff to god’s directives about which fruits we may eat and which we mustn’t.
        (until he gets the shits with his creation and drowns the whole bloody thing!
        …and promises us ‘the fire next time’.)

        The first shred of (metaphorical) ‘clothing’ we got was when we were chucked out of the Garden. Are you lot actually suggesting we get naked again and go back to grazing like any other goat does.

        ….. and NOAH built the Ark. God just sat on high and pissed on everything with his 40-day bladder capacity!

        For better or worse, every single step our species has made in emerging from the dark and the terror and the tyranny in which our ancestors lived has been accomplished by means of the human animal defying the dictates of the
        panoply of gods.

        Every single advancement from the tree-tops down has been achieved despite the gods, not because of them.

        One basic ‘moral’ is:- “credit where it’s due.”

        Like

      • oops! correction: goats ‘browse’ from shrubs and trees etc. (like Adam and the Missus)
        Sheep, etc. “graze” on grass.
        I’ve spent nearly a week heatedly explaining that to various idiots and got my fingers tangled up on the keyboard as a result.
        And will just add (general knowledge for those who may use goats as open-paddock/nature-strip lawnmowers) that goats’ hair is NOT water- nor wind- resistant (like sheep/cows, etc.); they quickly get water-logged and suffer severely without shelter from the elements.
        For the same sort of reasons their shelters must have a floor off the ground.
        It’s an animal-cruelty issue often overlooked.

        Like

    • With the rising suicide rate, children raised under single mothers, babies born to teenagers, killing of babies before they are born in the West; I think religion needs to get back into politics.

      Like

      • ….and Dom:- “With the rising suicide rate, …… killing of babies before they are born in the West;,
        ….do you mean as opposed to murdering them ~ pre- or post-natally ~ in the name (one brand or another) of allah?
        ….or Jesus,?
        or jehova?
        or whoever?

        And as for ‘single-mothers/teenagers’, you overlook the facts that (a) Nature dictates that motherhood should begin at puberty, and (b) that (in the preponderance of species) it’s the mother that raises the offspring ~ alone.

        And, by-and-large, it works!
        That dictate has carried us down the billions of years to the present.
        The interference of politico-religious impositions could well spell the end of our species, as it’s already driven to extinction countless other long-existent species. Most other animals know better than to shit in their own nests.
        (or to prevent pubescent females from breeding while they induce births in women way past their use-by date via the misuse of science…or use up scarce resources in maintaining ‘lives’ that neither god nor nature would preserve, again via the misuse of science.

        The same argument applies to the ‘abortion-in-the-West’ mantra. Where ‘science’ has allowed the production of offspring which both god and nature would have culled, it then becomes incumbent on ‘science’ to also take responsibility for the culling.

        That applicable ‘value-systems’ in doing so are well and truly amiss is a function of the church-state alliance.
        ……a not-uncommon occurrence.

        Like

    • It’s true that Jesus can not be linked to any side of politics, let alone a political party. I used to see political parties as aiming for the one result by opposite means. All were trying to follow the leadings of Jesus, some with sentimental compassion, some with ‘tough love.’ I can’t imagine Jesus being oppositional about that.

      But now?

      Greed seems to be the new god, and I feel Jesus would have spoken out against that, regardless of it being more evident in one side of politics than another.

      Like

    • Well it really means nothing Dabs. A feel good story but I could post a dozen videos of dogs savaging children etc. Animals are animals….some are special but most are just animals with animal instincts…feed me and I’ll be your friend….

      Like

      • Hm,
        well as a devoted cat person, I would have to say that in my humble opinion, our animals ‘love’ us to the very limits of what they are capable of. Would that many humans could do the same. My Jessie and Bruno are little furry sweethearts, and the Pantheist God of the Cosmos did a brilliant job in propogating them.

        Cheers and miaus to all feline loving humans. (or is it meows?)
        Rian.

        Like

      • Hi Rian,

        I wholeheartedly agree with you, and well said, “our animals ‘love’ us to the very limits of what they are capable of”. And may I add that I believe they are far more intelligent than what we give them credit for.

        Cheers

        Like

      • Sort of like wives and kids, d’you mean? 🙂 (…feed me and I’ll be your friend”)

        Rows about money ~ lying about it, the control of it, the lack of it or the mismanagement of it ~ are directly or indirectly the major trigger for family bust-ups.
        And, despite the dodgy dogma (I know you like to feel superior to other wombats), the evidence clearly demonstrates that we, too are ‘just animals with animal instincts.’

        As for the numbers game, check the stats sometime about the number of “dogs savaging children” as compared to the numbers of human animals savaging children (not to mention all sorts of other animals) ~ in all sorts of ways and circumstances.

        Virtually the only real difference is that dogs sometimes attack unexpectedly as a result of having their natures corrupted by humans in may different ways; it’s not in the nature of dogs generwhereas the human animal kills and otherwise ‘savages’ fellow humans as well as ‘other animals’ because it’s part of the nature of the beast. We kill for fun and pleasure, and politics and religion.

        Such attacks are not in the uncorrupted nature of dogs.

        Religion and politics ~ both of which are UNIQUELY human inventions ~ have clearly evolved/been developed to both facilitate and justify that murderous nature of the beast; and for no other reason.

        Compare, for example, the religious mumbo-jumbo and supposed divine intervention of the ‘story of Daniel in the lions’ den’ with this:-


        or this:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hld81D0Vlxo

        “Nature is a part of our humanity, and without some awareness and experience of that divine mystery man ceases to be man.”
        ― Henry Beston, The Outermost House

        Like

      • Sorry, but treating dogs (or lions) like humans is barking mad …
        Atheism is defined as: BELIEF THAT GODS DO NOT EXIST. Definitions are made by what something is (the characteristics it has) definition are not made by what they lack (try defining an apple by what it lacks so you understand how useless that kind of definition is) that is why the definition of atheism is not “lack of belief” but “belief that god does not exit”

        Like

      • That happens to me Dabs. Trying to link to one thing and then something completely different pops up. I hate that. It’s freaky.

        Like

    • We were told on Harry’s Practice last night that dogs lick you because they want attention and the best thing to do is distract them by playing with them. And as you said Dabs, as puppies they lick their mother’s mouth for food.

      Bryan, my Felix (cat) sucks up to me when he wants to be fed, but equally, he purrs with contentment when he’s napping and I sneak up on him and whisper sweet nothing’s in his ear. Maybe it is just instinct, but they certainly know they are loved and are part of the family. They know we belong to them. 🙂

      Like

      • I would not be too sure, Bryan. Mankind is more closely related to Bonobos than African elephants are related to Indian elephants.

        Conversely, many humans seem to lack the ability to think about God, IF we are to believe, as some seem to here, that atheists have no concept of God to think about!

        Like

      • I don’t go for the ‘noble savage’ myth either; particularly as it’s applied to the differentiation between ‘humans’ and ‘just animals’.
        (It’s no more than a pre-dna claim as to the god-given ‘superiority’ , and separateness’ of humans over other animals.)
        You just as wrongly insist that ‘humans are not animals’. Post -dna that’s no longer a tenable claim.
        Nor even ~ depending on an objective reading ~ a biblical claim.

        Certainly other animals “don’t make choices about god”; perhaps they feel no need to because they’re not NEARLY as insecure about themselves
        or their place in the universe as ‘god’s-image’ (or ‘chosen-people’, assorted master-races, etc.) are.
        And ~ clearly evidentially ~ other animals are far better off for NOT making such ‘choices’.
        There were no dogs or cats or wombats or rookeries in the crowd shouting “Crucify him! Crucify him!!”
        ….not even a jewish dog (!!) would’ve cocked a leg on him.
        ……much less denied him three times before the cock crowed.

        And as for not making choices about “much else really”:- look again at the dog in the clip above, and remember that the last
        documented case (which I can recall offhand) of a ‘human’ deliberately taking a bullet to protect his ‘family’ resulted in the awarding of a VC. and huge public accolades and long-term rewards.

        And perhaps you can pinpoint the last time you ~ or any other Image Of God ~ AS A MATTER OF CHOICE ~ ducked around in the freeway traffic to rescue somebody?? —>

        I’ve heard more than one copper say they’d rather depend on their dog than on a colleague or a gun when the chips were down.
        ,,,,and the Vicar wasn’t even in the running!

        Like

      • Getting away from the emotion and looking at the science of differences between humans and other animals.

        Various animals, in particular our closest animal relatives, the great apes, have some sophisticated capacities in even these domains. Nonetheless, the human ability in each of these contexts is special in certain respects. Two characteristics in particular keep re-emerging as critical: our deep-seated drive to exchange our thoughts, our sense of morality and our ability to think about alternative situations and embed them into larger narratives.

        A Harvard scientist presents a new hypothesis on what defines the cognitive rift between humans and animals. He identifies four key differences in human thought that make it unique. Animals, for example, have “laser beam” intelligence, in which a specific solution is used to solve a specific problem. But these solutions cannot be applied to new situations or to solve different kinds of problem. In contrast, humans have “floodlight” cognition, allowing us to use thought processes in new ways and to apply the solution of one problem to another situation.

        Hauser presents four distinguishing ingredients of human cognition, and shows how these capacities make human thought unique. These four novel components of human thought are the ability to combine and recombine different types of information and knowledge in order to gain new understanding; to apply the same “rule” or solution to one problem to a different and new situation; to create and easily understand symbolic representations of computation and sensory input; and to detach modes of thought from raw sensory and perceptual input.

        http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080217102137.html

        Like

      • Dunno where that Korean thing came from. Computer or you-tube acting up recently. Try again:-

        Like

      • Try again, again! (You’re not a Gremlin doing this on purpose, are you….hmm?)

        Like

      • Well doh! “A Harvard scientist presents a new hypothesis on what defines the cognitive rift between humans and animals.”

        Of COURSE there’s a “cognitive rift between humans and animals” they each have their own, different, environments and genetic needs to cater to.
        Drop this clever-dick into a Brazilian jungle or Siberian tundra or the Simpson Desert, the middle of the Pacific Ocean ~ or even a back-street in Richmond ~ without tools or clothes and he wouldn’t last as long as an earthworm….nor even a bacterium.

        Other than that ~ and as one of those …er, ‘INhuman’ bastards who tortures laboratory animals whose whole world is a stainless steel box and paper-pulp pellets ~ I’d be most surprised if he’d ever seen an animal ‘cognizing’ in its natural state. From what you’ve quoted he knows nothing about other animals at all ~ and certainly not enough to deal with them on their own terms. (like ‘liberating’ an aggressive junk-yard german shepherd guard-dog in the middle of the night, or removing a tiger-snake from under the couch, etc. etc.)

        Animals DO learn to adapt and pass on to others what information/skills they’ve acquired , to apply a single experimental solution to several different ‘problems’, to rearrange priorities and to adapt to changes in environments and circumstances ~ some so massive that homosapiens would’ve been driven into extinction. Don’t forget that most other animal species have survived a bloody sight longer than homosaps and found solutions ~learnt as well as invented ~ to survive tests our species couldn’t even imagine.

        The cockroach has been around since before the dinosaurs, and will certainly outlive homosapiens. And do so by learning to exercise various survival techniques and adapting to the most incredible challenges: including nuclear blasts/fallout.

        Man, The Extension Of God On Earth, after years of applying the most complex brain in the known universe, has STILL not succeeded in eradicating the little buggers.

        However, the germs the cockroaches carry HAVE learnt to live with them symbiotically ~ one might even say:- ‘in the best traditions of christianity!’ 😉

        Do the math!

        Like

      • Altruistic love such as demonstrated by animals may be part of the pack instinct you describe, Dabs. So may altruistic love demonstrated by humans.

        I have no idea at what period in evolution mankind gained a spiritual sense, or if Bonobos have one (they are gentler and closer to us than the other great apes.)

        All I know is that the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount deal mainly with relationships. Pack instinct or not, we are led to follow the path of love.

        If the trinity of Wisdom, Love and Power is within us, we usually see these elements in a minor form, (intellect affection, self control) and in unequal proportions. The same with animals, I think.

        Perhaps St. Francis had similar thoughts?

        Like

      • Not as gods, Strewth: as ‘family’. (‘pack’ if you like ~ ‘family’ is only a relatively recent invention. Dogs, atheists by definition, have no concept of ‘gods’, but DO have an ancient pack instinct as the basis for species survival.
        ….and it’s what it’s all about.
        (though I don’t know too many people who’d do the same thing ~ even if they genuinely believed they were going to heaven if they got killed.) I don’t understand why some people have such a problem with accepting the (equally-ranking) kinship between all living things.

        Insecurity is the simple answer. If there’s another it STILL has to be rooted in the world we know; it’s the only one we have.

        Like

      • Kathleen,
        Yes, an hypothetical ‘Fall’ of man is one explanation of these difficulties. But I’ve never felt that it has to be the essential and correct reason. It is still not a theory that our Jewish brothers and sisters have felt the need for. Judaism has never officially endorsed the story of the Garden of Eden in that way.
        Rian.

        Like

  1. “Every attempt to establish the City of Man: from Nimrod and Nebuchadnezzar to Rousseau and Marx, has been doomed to the ash heap of history. Every utopian scheme, because it could not account for the fallen nature of humankind, has come to naught. Every revolution or founding that neglected humanity’s limitations of wisdom and moral knowledge, though conceived in earnest intent, unleashed the horrors of unrestrained human passions when its aims were fully realized. Even today, we find that nothing has changed. Every antitheistic revolution and every socialist dream has failed in its aims and succeeded only in degrading an already depraved moral character. Inevitably, these quests for civilization end either with the sterile narcissism of material idolatry or with the destructive labor camps of devils like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, or Pol Pot. Like man himself, all empires come into being and pass away from it, either through calamity or with a tear and a whimper — even the best of them.” http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/06/the_two_cities.html

    Like

    • !! You sound like a girly version of Alexie, Katie!
      This denigration of man and his endeavours casts serious doubt on the sanity and/or competence of his alleged ‘creator’:- what sort of moron made it so ~ or even allowed it to happen?

      But the equally moronic dogma, based on entirely unfounded wet dreams without any substance at all ~ and DEMONSTRABLY false in dozens or hundreds of ways ~ totally ignores the facts: the realities that are provable
      beyond ANY doubt.

      For better or worse, human nature has gotten us where we’re at: on the doorstep of the universe and looking outwards. Not only has the ‘City of God’ (if it existed) offered nothing of value (quite the contrary!) it offers no hope for any sort of achievement at all. It’s a stationary glob of gobbledegook sprouted by dimwitted hairy old men who didn’t even know there was a world beyond the horizon (let alone the stars: an insignificant afterthought according to Chapter One of the Gobbledegook Book; see Genesis 1:16).

      “The miracle of man is not how far he has sunk but how magnificently he has risen. We are known among the stars by our poems, not our corpses.”
      – Ardrey.
      And there’s more, lots more. It just requires the courage and the Will to look beyond megalomanic ignorance and superstition.
      Or, as the kids put it:- Get a Life!

      Like

    • Yes, we can realise how mankind has advanced in technical knowlege and ability, but I think we acknowlege less the huge strides the world has made in social betterment and peaceful endeavour.

      The past was often horrific in areas beyond our individual experience, and seemed rosy to us. Now so much of such horror comes right at us through today’s media, and seems to be growing, whereas we are in the process of defeating it. We have to be aware of horror before we can act on it. It is painful but good that we can no longer hide our heads in the sand.

      Like

  2. Getting back to the topic at hand – please remember that it was the papacy that made a mockery of the ten commandments by changing the Sabbath into Sunday. And they fling this in the face of Protestant/Evangelicals when the subject of Sola Scriptura (The Bible is the last word in matters of faith). It is the Catholics who point to the protestants that if they are so serious about the bible and the Bible only, they should worship Saturday instead of Sunday.

    And whenever Protestants are challenged why they keep sunday, it is often defended on the basis that the ten commandments are not really in force any more; they have been abolished at the cross.

    Like

    • Google “The Catholic Mirror” Sept 3 1893 – article “Why do Protestants Keep Sunday” in order to see Catholic blasting protestants (now evangelicals) for Sunday worship.

      It is surprising therefore that this Pope talks about “a jew in every Christian”, seeing that every argument against Sabbath worship that the Christian world uses, comes from a Catholic version of theology and not the Bible.

      Seems to me like a political stunt. If we ask the pope why he doesn’t keep the Sabbath as a good “Jew in every Christian” that he claims to be, you will find that this phrase is mean to mean the type of Jew that can fit into Catholic version of what it means to be a Christian.

      Like

      • “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”

        “The force of the argument is this: The sabbath was made on account of man, not man on account of the sabbath. The sabbath, great and important as that institution is, is subordinate to man.”

        “Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.”

        “The sabbath was made for man.” It is the inferior institution, man being the higher, for whose sake the sabbath was appointed. But the Son of man is Lord of all men, and of all things that pertain to man’s salvation; therefore he must of necessity be Lord even of the sabbath; so that when he sees fit he can relax or dispense with its obligations. It is true that for us Christians the first day of the week, the Lord’s day, has taken the place of the ancient Jewish sabbath; but the principle here laid down by our Lord is applicable to the “first” day no less than to the “seventh;” and it teaches us that our own moral and religious advancement and that of our brethren is the object which we should all aim at in the manner of our observance of the Christian Sunday; while we strive to “stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.”

        Pulpit Commentary

        Like

      • Monica, where is Christ’s injunction to change Saturday into Sunday? Nowhere.
        Where is the apostles’ injunction to change Saturday into sunday? Nowhere.

        Had Christ changed the Sabbath in any, way it would have come up at His trial, but the Bible says that whatever they accused Him of, they could not provide the evidence for it.

        If the apostles had changed the day of worship, then it would have been recorded in Scripture, as a major source of conflict between Jews and Paul. But once again there is no proof of this change by the apostles themselves.

        In fact as far as 90 AD the Jewish Rabbis went and introduced a curse in their Liturgy to uncover any Christians worshipping with them on the Sabbath.

        The whole change came in the centuries after 100 AD, with the papal tacit blessing upon it.

        Like

      • Yes, I know what you are saying Davinci,

        You have no argument with me there, but what I do not understand is why is it such a crime? Look, I don’t even attend Church anymore. I’m labelled a backslider by some and I consider my situation to be worse than those who worship together on Sundays instead of the Sabbath.

        Surely God looks at the heart rather than whether we assiduously follow a set of rules? I cannot keep all of God’s commandments. I wish I could, but I find it impossible.

        Like

      • The Sabbath has nothing to do with salvation Davinci,

        And nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ. It was never part of the message of the New Testament church. The message is always one of liberty, never one of restrictions on a particular day of the week.

        Like

    • Sunday never has been the Sabbath – it was always Saturday. Sunday is The Lord’s Day, when persecuted Christians could meet before commencing their weekly work, and of more relevance to them than the Sabbath.

      Like

      • According to Lutheran teaching – “We have seen that the Christians of the first three centuries never confused one with the other, but for a time celebrated both.”

        Like

      • That’d be right!
        Invent and defend a whole new religion just for an extra day off work! 😆

        Like

      • Dabbles,
        actually, as I read in some Christian history some years ago, it appears that for a time in the early stages, Christians totally repudiated any need to refrain from work during the ‘Lord’s day’. Now I think of it, I think I read it in a book on the history of Sunday observance.
        Rian.

        Like

  3. …and from Henry:-
    “We need another and a wiser and perhaps a more mystical concept of animals. Remote from universal nature and living by complicated artifice, man in civilization surveys the creature through the glass of his knowledge and sees thereby a feather magnified and the whole image in distortion. We patronize them for their incompleteness, for their tragic fate for having taken form so far below ourselves. And therein do we err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and more complete than ours, they move finished and complete, gifted with the extension of the senses we have lost or never attained, living by voices we shall never hear. They are not brethren, they are not underlings: they are other nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth.”
    ― Henry Beston, The Outermost House

    Like

      • Yeah. Expresses my ‘feeling’ with better words than I could find.
        There’s no competition between species, nor ‘more-or-less-important’ comparatives.
        But I also reckon that if one chooses to take (as opposed to has imposed) responsibility then one must accept the obligations. Our species ~ pretty-well exclusively ~ fails on that score much of the time.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s