what now?

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

what now?

Post by mac on Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:14 pm

I love computers because they make communication so easy. I dislike their 'primary, visual interface' (aghhhh!) because reading from a screen I find a pain in the a**!

So.....I copied, pasted and printed z's first piece on Austen's description about transcribing for Silver Birch. What an enjoyable and uplifting read once I had the paper in my hand! Later I found myself drifting off into a familiar state of "Why are things so different today - why do we no longer have such guides, helpers, teachers.....friends? (to use another's word for these discarnate individuals)

And then came my answer from a book I've had my nose stuck in for the past few days. Usually I read little and it's a year since I had this same book in my hand. Perhaps that's because the book's here (where I am now) and it wasn't there (where I was in the preceding months). Laughing Wink OK to the point, you're getting bored....Embarassed

As I sat quietly it dawned on me that in a similar way to another wonderful teacher, the time for SB and other teachers of the Modern Spiritualism era came and has now gone. Simple as that.

There's only so much which can be given before one begins to repeat oneself. The information about survival was given at a time which was judged appropriate. Those incarnate, whose evolvement was right for the time, would have been able to draw from this information. Most of the others would not.

Although we have the most wonderful means of communication perhaps ever, society appears still to be unready for the message of the great spirit. Perhaps that's why our spirit-side friends don't try any more with the old, familiar issues? Silver Birch and his cohorts may even now be preparing for a time when the message will be put out again. Who knows when that may be???

I have learned to accept that the time has passed when mediums of the calibre needed to communicate the word of the spirit are amongst us. Those on our discussion boards who knew them - and their controls - are greatly privileged.

The rest of us must be content to look back to an exceptional time and read again uplifting words which came from, and through, exceptional people.

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by zerdini on Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:39 pm

This is the site for information about the pioneers of Modern Spiritualism - in particular the meticulous research undertaken by Jim.

zerdini


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:40 pm

mac wrote:
The rest of us must be content to look back to an exceptional time and read again uplifting words which came from, and through, exceptional people.
If that's true all this is a waste of time IMHO. How do we look back at something we have never seen? We may as well live by the Bible, or any other worthy books that the great and good assure us are true Smile

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:59 pm

Hi Mac, Z and Obi,

Hmm but I still tilt at windmills, as Dylan Thomas said

Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

-- Dylan Thomas

We look at the past to encourage people for the future. A new start on my "Finding The Pathway" course and as I talked about the potential in Psychic and Mediumship it became clear how poorly we have communicated to people about our belief and there was genuine interest in the information I was sharing.

Z is right we print about history but to help illuminate our now. We have allowed our few serious publications and our churches to dumb down and accept in all sorts of things many of which have little connection to spirit and proof. However, we still stand and Psychic News is fighting back. Psypioneer does the same, I expect Two Worlds is too.

We have allowed the training of Mediums to fall back and with the want for instant courses few people are prepared to put the effort in. But there are people who will, are ther the facilitators around with the ability to help them? Are they prepared to work to be able also to coherently explain and understand our history and philosophy.

It can still be turned around, admittedly sometimes it feels there are too few of us and we are trying to hold back an unstoppable tide. However, if the few manage to inspire only 3 each to seek to achieve the same it can quickly turn around.

Yes we may have lost physical mediumship but my memory of my early days in the movement inthe 80's was that Spirit gave a message that the old fashioned chemical days with its danger to the Medium were closing. The proof from good mental mediums was bridging teh gap and a new approach was becoming available. Maybe our problem here is we have been unable to succesfully work with them on this because it is we who hanker for the past. Reading about the first 1852 trumpet seances and the modern one's we find a total lack of progression indeed in materialisation a recent regression. Rather than run seances to repeat what was done maybe it should be a circle with an open mind for spirit to work with.

As we are all a part of Spirit it is clear they will always want to communicate with us and our loved ones to give reassurance we need to encourage our mediums to let them get out of the way and let spirit through.

Just Some Thoughts and Yes I will addd my windmill stamp again.
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Wed Feb 18, 2009 3:20 am

zerdini wrote:This is the site for information about the pioneers of Modern Spiritualism - in particular the meticulous research undertaken by Jim.


Re your above comment, z, have I strayed into the wrong discussion area then?

Or is the above to guide readers to the source of the info I mentioned?

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Wed Feb 18, 2009 3:51 am

obiwan wrote:
mac wrote:
The rest of us must be content to look back to an exceptional time and read again uplifting words which came from, and through, exceptional people.
If that's true all this is a waste of time IMHO. How do we look back at something we have never seen? We may as well live by the Bible, or any other worthy books that the great and good assure us are true Smile


"How do we look back at something we have never seen?" We can 'look back' at a whole range of issues we have never seen.

As one example, I - we - can 'look back' at the first and second world wars even though I have never seen either. I may draw my own conclusions from the meticulous recorded evidence as to whether the verdicts and opinions are true. I don't need the great and good for assurance that one or other version is 'true' - I'll be the judge.

A waste of time? Exactly which bit is the "waste of time" , obi? I don't have the feeling that I'm wasting my time. Wink

If I express disappointment that Modern Spiritualism is not where I wish it was, it does not mean I feel that any part of its message is diminished. But, then, I am a dyed-in-the-wool Spiritualist after all.... Smile

My disappointment is not for the loss of times-past or the loss of any type of mediumship. I don't hanker for things or times which have passed. It stems from my perception that we appear to have so much less to offer now.

I'd love my nose to be rubbed in it by showing how wrong I am.... Neutral

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Wed Feb 18, 2009 4:10 am

Hmm Mac sadly I feel your nose is safe for the nonce
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by zerdini on Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:54 am

mac wrote:
zerdini wrote:This is the site for information about the pioneers of Modern Spiritualism - in particular the meticulous research undertaken by Jim.


Re your above comment, z, have I strayed into the wrong discussion area then?

Or is the above to guide readers to the source of the info I mentioned?

Not at all, Mac.

You are definitely in the right place. If more Spiritualists studied the work of the pioneers they might be inspired to develop the mediumship we know and love instead of the psychic claptrap/New Agey ramblings that pass for mediumship and philosophy. There I've said it now. Laughing

zerdini


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Wed Feb 18, 2009 1:06 pm

Hi Mac

This might ramble a bit....

Well yes you can look back at the wars but in that case you are looking back at a great deal of verifiable evidence not dependent on personal opinion other than for its interpretation: Auschwich for example, the trenches and the devastations of Hiroshima and Nagasaka - all verifiable as places where something definitely happened. How and why they happened is dependent on the descriptions of other people and the volume and nature of the evidence presented (of which there is a massive amount including, importantly, vast amounts of film footage). There can be no doubt these things happened. I don't see the same type of evidence in Spiritualism.

Also, history is written as they say by the victors. Who knows what the real stories behind the major events in the wars were and the reason for them - there are many theories and much folklore.

I don't think the analogy holds at all with spiritualism. Where is the evidence of all the matters relating to spiritualism that you look back to? Where can I go to see this evidence? The answer is "I can't" - I have to trust photographs of often dubious provenance and appalling quality and the testimony of people I do not know and therefore cannot easily assess however great they were in their day. Most of the people attesting to this evidence are long gone and forgotten by the public, if in fact they were ever widely known.

You might mention the principles and spiritual philosophy - we can get that anywhere. I can see nothing new in it that hasn't been delivered as part of one or other major world religion for millennia. I don't think the world needs another rehash of the same thoughts with nothing more to back it up than common sense and dusty reports.

Of the people who have witnessed phenomena first hand and are still with us; they all appear to be advancing in years. Soon there will be few if any who are able to articulate clearly what they have experienced. Their books and reports will slowly retreat into rumour and legend.

Ask today what people think of Oliver Lodge's research - they will ask 'who'? 'Famous professor of physics and scientist' you might answer - he only died in 1940 and I would say he is generally unknown and forgotten already. Interesting, but not of much use to convince a grieving relative of poor education that we survive physical death - they need evidence and the passion of someone who has witnessed it for themselves - or better still an actual demonstration.

Leslie Flint died in 1994 as you know. Now I can speak to someone who sat with him and they can convince me what they heard was genuine. But I can't use that to convince someone else "some bloke called leslie flint could facilitate conversations with dead people" - "how do you know" - "I was there and heard it" - great as opposed to: "Some other person who you don't know told me they heard it" - okkaaaayy.

You're right Mac - you can be the judge and if your participation is only for yourself (which I would not criticise) then that's fine - but your judgement may not suffice for others and I would say that indeed it should not. We need to assess the evidence for ourselves I agree. The evidence is for the most part first hand when we read the reports of others but unverifiable objectively and if we try to convince others using it ourselves it is at best hearsay and they cannot ask questions or challenge it. It is not much more use than reading the Bible frankly.


Last edited by obiwan on Wed Feb 18, 2009 8:19 pm; edited 6 times in total (Reason for editing : crap spelling)

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Wed Feb 18, 2009 1:07 pm

Admin wrote:Hmm Mac sadly I feel your nose is safe for the nonce
Jim - I would avoid using the word nonce too often is it has unfortunate connotations in the UK Laughing

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by zerdini on Wed Feb 18, 2009 1:21 pm

You raise some good points Paul.

There is a picture in the library at Stansted Hall of Gordon Higginson who died in 1992 and was probably one of the finest mediums in the 20th century yet I have known students come into the library and ask "who's that?' pointing at his picture.

Leslie Flint, in spite of giving evidence of survival to thousands of sitters over many many years is hardly known today although he only died in 1994.

Every generation has to make its own enquiry rather than rely on the past.

zerdini


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Wed Feb 18, 2009 3:06 pm

Good comments, guys.


"I have learned to accept that the time has passed when mediums of the calibre needed to communicate the word of the spirit are amongst us."

Would that I were wrong... Crying or Very sad

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:35 pm

zerdini wrote:You raise some good points Paul.

There is a picture in the library at Stansted Hall of Gordon Higginson who died in 1992 and was probably one of the finest mediums in the 20th century yet I have known students come into the library and ask "who's that?' pointing at his picture.

Leslie Flint, in spite of giving evidence of survival to thousands of sitters over many many years is hardly known today although he only died in 1994.

Every generation has to make its own enquiry rather than rely on the past.
I think that's an astute observation.

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:38 pm

Yes it is an astute observation, Gordon Higginson lived and breathed Spiritualism. The burning question is what happened afterwards.

Like many mediums of his time he not only had natural ability but he underwent Mediumship Development and continued to seek ways to improve his work. It was common at the time and even since, I note that Gordon Smith commented in PN about the time he spent developing, both Gordon H and Gordon S worked freely on church platforms (one of our Glasgow Mediums commented on chairing him and his work on a charity demo for her). Yes since Gordon Smith signed with a publisher that has ceased.

My question is, in 1983 when I met Lis, she was working the East London Circuit, Manor Park, Woodford Green, Ilford, Romford etc 22/23 churches. Even then she went to a weekly Mediums development circle with 10 other platform mediums to improve her work (You may claim bias but having seen her work she was/is an exceptional medium and a great trainer through her experience). Many Mediums were in similar groups and the standard meant that there was a waiting list for opportunities for new platform mediums.

My point is that even then the new generation were finding their way by guidance from the past. This is much needed help. What has happened now, I realise that there is much more chance for a Medium who wins a name to earn considerable sums of money so one must doubt that they would want to run a weekly development circle. I suspect this has disconnected many from the very places they learnt in, the Spiritualist Churches and home groups. Training Mediums is an income earning venture better done by many in instant workshops not the grind of weekly circles, albeit all this does is make people think they are now platform mediums. The problem with this is the weekly circle works on features of your own mediumship to develop and integrate on a regular basis giving much greater time to develop properly.

We started an invitational group here and Lis has done wonders in a short space of time, it is all possible if the person has some mediumship talent and the right frame of mind. The other point is to work with those who wish to give back to the movement over time, not merely get a name and shingle to earn money. I have no problem if the earning is integrated with this giving back.

So we can rebuild the quality of day to day Church Mediums over time and possibly find some exceptuonal talent. This has, however, to be done in the old fashioned way of weekly development where the workshops act to provide new insights and techniques to back up the solid day to day work. It may also mean that the exceptional medums may remain much closer to the movement than many of the apparent "Stars" of today. I believe that if you look at it there are still a number of fine mediums that work in this way in England, like Gerard Smith.

There is another point, we all look back at the past, often with Rose coloured spectacles, were all of the Mediums that good. I was new to it all but several Churches mentioned that when Lis was on attendance was well up, people already noted the different abilities and voted with their feet. It happens here now on a regular basis. The important thing is those who attend the same church regularly get to know who is good and who is bad. So those most interested in good mediumship pass that bad day by.

The major names were not that many, in any one of the past decades, I suspect we may still have just as many now albeit some are working in different places and ways. OK on Physical Mediumship I concede we do not see it but, reality is, only the cognescenti really saw it anyway, it was not something generally seen.

So bad, yes particularly as too many Churches are compromising standards, not training well and allowing too much new age material in. However, particularly in the UK you can still see top flight mediumship, which would have been regarded as just that years ago.

My thoughts anyway

Jim
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:24 am

I had hoped that my Jeremiah message might have produced some positive responses which would indicate that matters were in hand and that there was a solid undercurrent of activity.

What I have heard, however, confirms my fear that Modern Spiritualism is not, in my present lifetime, going to be the shining light I would wish.

I can't reconcile the scenarios described in your postings to any of those I have read about from our near past. The discarnate teachers are no longer around and neither are the quality mediums who would be needed by them. In turn there is little to stimulate and challenge those mediums working quietly for the great spirit, little for them to aspire to.

Nowadays psychics think they are mediums, mediums lack the necessary guidance to become efficient and effective instruments of communication. Ego along with the pursuit of fame and money are ever-present distractions. Such things are seen as symbols of success....

On the positive side, there's absolutely nothing to prevent a new Modern Spiritualism coming about in the distant future. Prior to Hydesville what was there anyway?

Perhaps we are simply seeing the first, small, faltering step towards an eventual, wider understanding of survival philosophy et al? Something which our friends 'in spirit' already know will only come about at a future time? Perhaps many more small steps will need to be taken by new generations of mediums working with other teachers?

And perhaps all that is really left for now is to support whoever we can in the best possible ways we can?

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:43 am

Hi Mac,

As we get smaller I find myself heartened to find at the centre more thinking people than maybe I expected to. In Emma Hardinge Brittens 3 cycles she wrote

2nd Cycle 1899-1949

It would record a decline in public effort due to lovers of sensationalism who would lower the standards that had been set up. The phenomena would displace the spirit teachings.



3rd CYCLE 1949-1999

The third cycle would see a new order arising out of the materials provided by the second cycle and Spiritualism would be organ-ically smaller, more compact, enduring and dynamic in character.



This is a quote of Emma's that seems to have not been mentioned often:

That these evolutionary changes would have Spiritualism assume a primary place as a thought-compelling system of facts, science, philosophy and above all, of religion.


The dates may be a bit out but there is hope.

Jim
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:02 am

Admin wrote:Hi Mac,

As we get smaller I find myself heartened to find at the centre more thinking people than maybe I expected to. In Emma Hardinge Brittens 3 cycles she wrote

2nd Cycle 1899-1949

It would record a decline in public effort due to lovers of sensationalism who would lower the standards that had been set up. The phenomena would displace the spirit teachings.



3rd CYCLE 1949-1999

The third cycle would see a new order arising out of the materials provided by the second cycle and Spiritualism would be organ-ically smaller, more compact, enduring and dynamic in character.



This is a quote of Emma's that seems to have not been mentioned often:

That these evolutionary changes would have Spiritualism assume a primary place as a thought-compelling system of facts, science, philosophy and above all, of religion.


The dates may be a bit out but there is hope.

Jim


Hello Jim

Hmmmm.... I'm not one for predictions, no matter who they be given by.....

Maybe you see more thinking people simply because only they have the deep interest needed to stay in-there? By attrition numbers fall and only those like ourselves remain.

I'd like to think EHB had some true insight as to Spiritualism's future but given her 3rd Cycle prediction and timing above, I'm far from reassured.

If there's one thing I'm confident about it's that none of us - Spiritualist, psychic, teacher or guide knows the future because there is no one future. Just many possibilities, one of which will come about by the old, old law of cause and effect.

best wishes

Keith (mac)

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by zerdini on Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:10 pm

Some of the guides are able to see possibilities some of which are fulfilled but overall I agree with you, Mac.

Z

zerdini


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:48 pm

zerdini wrote:Some of the guides are able to see possibilities some of which are fulfilled but overall I agree with you, Mac.

Z

Yes,Z, I agree with this observation.

With their different perspective and an understanding of the intended outcomes for our world, some guides are better able to judge the likely outcomes of the various possibilities.

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Happy Healer on Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:08 am

I hope you don't mind me jumping in and reviving this topic. This very subject is one that my friends and I have discussed many times in the last year.

What we have observed is that we are on the cusp of a new era of Spiritualism. It isn't so much as redefined as it is enhanced. In my circle of 50-somethings, we have all had the same visions of what will unfold. If one has a vision, is it a prediction? If three people have the same vision, is it prophecy?

We believe that the physical phenomena demonstrated in years past has run its course. It was useful for that time and served a purpose for the people in that era. Today's student who seeks evidence of life after death is more sophisticated and views such old-time materialization as hokey and irrelevent. In our view, Spiritualism of tomorrow will have physical phenomena but in ways that we cannot even conceive of today.

We feel a responsibility to keep the foundations of Spiritualist philosophy intact while allowing for adaptations in schooling the younger folks coming to find a home for their gifts. This does not mean diluting the standards needed to groom competent mediums. In our view, it means accepting the fact that the younger students coming to Spiritualism have a higher awareness of consciousness and they are experiencing things at an earlier age than we did. Treating them with an arrogant and condescending attitude will only prolong their despair over what they don't understand or chase them away to unscrupulous egotists. Development circles are essential as well as classwork to hone mediumship skills.

In my circle of friends are many gifted mediums who strongly adhere to spirit communication rather than slipping into psychic messaging. As the old time mediums lose their ability to produce physical phenomena or accept the changing populace, my group knows that we are going to be temporary leaders; the bridge to prepare younger mediums for the new Spiritualism, not to be confused with the New Age Religion.

I've heard it said that we look to our past as our education, we look to our present as our creation, and we look to our future as our inspiration.

I'm sure there's something more to comment on but at this late hour where I am........ Sleep
avatar
Happy Healer


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Mon Oct 05, 2009 9:00 am

Hm. I don't see much of a revival from my perspective. I do hear spiritualist complaints about phenomena overtaking philosophy but it appears to me there is very little 'phenomena' to be seen and a great deal of 'sensationalism'. I see no point in spouting philosophy unless there is a good evidential basis for it in my humble opinion. The philosophy of Spiritualism appears to me to be a mish-mash of other religions and there is plenty of that to go round without good supporting evidence already. Get some good evidential mediumship I say, preferably Direct Independent Voice or continue to see good clairvoyance (if there is any) swamped by grandstanding wannabees like Acorah et al.

I do not understand why Spiritualists want to make something they claim is natural and simply an extension of the laws of nature into a religion - a field tainted by corruption, politics, fraud and petty personal aggrandisement for millennia.


Last edited by obiwan on Mon Oct 05, 2009 9:07 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : spelling mistakes)

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by hiorta on Mon Oct 05, 2009 9:55 am

Indeed obiwan.
What we call spiritualism is no more than an aspect of Natural Law and must fluctuate as todays capacities to understand and realise, fluctuate. The journey is ever onward, though.

There is a risk in unintentionally limiting new growth to old ideas, resulting in stagnation. The Principles, for example, might be best not set in the stone of yesterday, but their concepts allowed to flow with the developing minds of today and tomorrow. Other ways of Spirit manifesting their continued existence is not limited to the methods of the past and can utilise the. means of today to reach the people of today. We all have our own sunsets, but the ism goes on to new tomorrows as it must.
avatar
hiorta


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:38 am

Happy Healer wrote:I hope you don't mind me jumping in and reviving this topic. This very subject is one that my friends and I have discussed many times in the last year.

What we have observed is that we are on the cusp of a new era of Spiritualism. It isn't so much as redefined as it is enhanced. In my circle of 50-somethings, we have all had the same visions of what will unfold. If one has a vision, is it a prediction? If three people have the same vision, is it prophecy?

We believe that the physical phenomena demonstrated in years past has run its course. It was useful for that time and served a purpose for the people in that era. Today's student who seeks evidence of life after death is more sophisticated and views such old-time materialization as hokey and irrelevent. In our view, Spiritualism of tomorrow will have physical phenomena but in ways that we cannot even conceive of today.

We feel a responsibility to keep the foundations of Spiritualist philosophy intact while allowing for adaptations in schooling the younger folks coming to find a home for their gifts. This does not mean diluting the standards needed to groom competent mediums. In our view, it means accepting the fact that the younger students coming to Spiritualism have a higher awareness of consciousness and they are experiencing things at an earlier age than we did. Treating them with an arrogant and condescending attitude will only prolong their despair over what they don't understand or chase them away to unscrupulous egotists. Development circles are essential as well as classwork to hone mediumship skills.

In my circle of friends are many gifted mediums who strongly adhere to spirit communication rather than slipping into psychic messaging. As the old time mediums lose their ability to produce physical phenomena or accept the changing populace, my group knows that we are going to be temporary leaders; the bridge to prepare younger mediums for the new Spiritualism, not to be confused with the New Age Religion.

I've heard it said that we look to our past as our education, we look to our present as our creation, and we look to our future as our inspiration.

I'm sure there's something more to comment on but at this late hour where I am........ Sleep

Having just arrived home from 3 months in the USA I am somewhat surprised to read the positive message here - in the USA things seem every bit as bad as here in the UK.

I would be interested to learn what you have observed which suggests that we are on the cusp of a new era of Spiritualism. I'm on record in several places with my views on this but I'd loved to be proved wrong. There's your challenge....

Unlike my friend the duck, obiwan ( Wink ) I'm a whole-hearted supporter of the Spiritualist movement and all the philosophy stands for. I have very few reservations so you don't need to convert or convince me.... But I do need convincing that whatever you perceive is something genuine and tangible. The aspect of physical mediumship is not any more important to me than any other form of Spiritualistic mediumship.

But I am heartened to hear that your new mediums are ever vigilant to avoid psychism - a constant theme of my postings elsewhere.

So, you circle of friends, please tell me - tell us - what positive signs there are that things are better than I fear.

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:37 pm

Cute isn't he?

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:55 pm

obiwan wrote:Cute isn't he?


Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Laughing Laughing Laughing

mac


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum