The Hospitality of Now and Here.

September 30, 2018

berlin trees I am fascinated by how often, though an utterly  shy and introverted person, I manage to find myself in deep conversations with strangers who stop to chat. Conversation often turns to sharing the things that matter – family, love, a sense of meaning, our sources of joy, the things we find ourselves reaching for and believing in though they have no immediate or apparent instrumentality – but yet more deeply seem to beckon to us with a promise of purpose – and how this is surely richer than mere function.

And so it was, that I sat on the park bench before one of the immense and magnificent oak trees in Canterbury Gardens this one summer Sunday morning, my paints and journal beside me, my prayer liturgy in my hand and mid-contemplation drinking in the expanse of green before me, and canopied fresh, breathing shade far overhead, all the way across and beyond me, more meters than I can throw a tennis ball. As I was captivated in this living moving cosmos of greens,  an elderly man shuffling a little as he walked, paused and first looked my way. I could feel him study my face and then follow the path of my emerald eyes greening their way to the verdure of the tree.

After a moment he began, “There are magnificent trees here – look at this one!”

Indeed, a safe thing to say, as I already was enraptured by this particular tree.

“It’s very beautiful. I’m looking at all the moss growing so high up the trunk. It’s unusual to see moss that far above the ground. It must be so cool and shaded and damp.”

“Yes,” he agreed, “It’s unusual. and I hadn’t noticed.”

A small gentle comfortable silence falls between us, like dew drops on soft moss.

I turn to him, taking in his face for the first time. “Do you walk in these gardens often?”

And our conversation takes off.

He tells me in that brief polite factual way strangers converse, that he  moved into the area only a year ago, and then returns my question. I tell him of my childhood move here and that it has over the years continued to be a place I return to, then the conversation moves back and forth, in a flow that can’t be recorded in writing.

We speak and he unfolds stories of moving, of life’s shifting ground underneath him, of fragile loved ones, of difficult choices and agency, of finding new safety and help in neighbours, of confronting his own physical limits, of  the things he now looks forward to, anticipating life still coming at him, finding new company, and new rhythms to sustain old and dear relationships.

I have a few little cameo stories to share on  some of those themes too, but mostly I listen. Honestly I am captivated and inspired.

After about 20 minutes he continues on his way, having passed many smiles and nods of agreement between us, and I realise I am late for church. Formal church. Planned church. Dependable church.

Though I think that much of where I have been sitting and the conversation I have been having has been holy speech in the Cathedral of the Cosmos.

Is it Easy Church? Or perhaps Harder Church?

I don’t know, because ergonomic measures of effort don’t seem to fit the nature (see what I did there?)  of conversation, even more than the spoken words the way that as humans we shared time and space and sense.

Whether found in Proper Planned Church or in Spontaneous Sacralised Space, the blessing of the hospitality of here and now – place and time together, is a great gift among humans; especially those of us who live our everyday critically conscious of the measurements of minutes and pressures of possession as the markers of value, success, status, and for some the criteria against which  to battle even for survival.

This stranger and I welcomed one another in this simple hospitality of here and now,  with the equality of being that comes from neither of us owning the ground we stood on, both being travellers, guests, borrowers, and yet, also, welcomers, givers, sharers, enrichers of the other. Equally transient, equally present, equally vulnerable, equally brave.

This time, freely shared and preciously encountered in the gardens between me, the praying painter and he, the parkinsons pedestrian (though how irrelevant are those labels!), and the tree, deeply watered and  widely drooping with freshness – this was a moment of spirit, of creation, of incarnation. A moment of trinity. Trinity – not a doctrine or a propositional shibboleth – but a call. A call to meet one another in the shade of more than we can know or understand or generate or control.

These encounters happen when we arrive and locate our selves in relation to one another in this very present moment and place. There is a beautiful and liberating equality of being. All the wrestles of power and voice and authority and legitimacy and leadership and reaction and resistance and role that have plagued our faith and gatherings for centuries were dissolved.   There is no powerful man with the luxury of prepared words, nor the demand of the crowd for critical distance. There is no role of responsibility or pseudo parent, nor the passive aggression or hungry enthusiasm that brings fleeting, deceptive buoyancy, orswift crushing decimation to vision and call.

This encounter in the gardens, by this tree of life, was unencumbered grace.

The price for this sweet liberation, this pure sincerity, this genuine gift – uncomplicated and immediate, transparent and unconditional – is its impermanence.

The man who stopped and looked deep into my face, who followed my gaze to the beauty of the creation I was devoted to, who met my wonder with a proclamation of his own praise, who confessed his weaknesses and fears, and heard mine, who opened his heart story and gently received mine, who walked on in peace, just as he had arrived – ah this is the cost. There is no repeating. There is no fixing. There is no rescheduling.

That moment of trinity is gone.

But there are many more trees in the cathedral of the cosmos. Arms outstretched, harbouring thriving life all up and down its lines and wrinkles,  out along its branches and bumps.

Our faith communities must wrestle with the rhythms of meeting regularly, meeting as we have agreed to do, keeping our covenants of care and consistency with one another. Chance encounters with old men by even older trees in creation’s cathedral  is no substitute for gathering regularly and reliably, showing up for one another, and asking what our overlapping lives can express in the kingdom of God that can’t be expressed by an individual. The answer to this is  – almost everything of the good news of God’s living hope can only be expressed collectively.

But in our gatherings, we have much to learn from the serendipitous encounter by the tree.  Learnings about simplicity, about other, about common ground, about strengths and weakness and respect, about leading and listening in conversation, about art and nature and movement and story and spiritual sincerity. About who we really are as spiritual and human gift to one another.

Professionally I have focussed on the problem of freshness and longevity in spiritual life; ageing and being age-deprived; the absence of emotional and behavioural maturity among older followers of Jesus and the meaning that christian orthodoxy attributes to the life and ways of the child. I particularly pursue what makes for freshness and sustainability in ministry – whether indeed that can be attained.

I am constantly drawn back to the rolling of seasons of planting and plenty and fallow peace, before flourishing continues.

I wonder what further explorations of the hospitality of here and now – and the trinity of spiritual encounter – might help to release among burdened congregations and burnt out leaders, all the anxious, frustrated, exhausted, disempowered saints – those in the pulpit and those in the pews and those in Ikea or the cricket club or the backyard.

By what rhythms can we find one another? Day by day, week by week, month by month, or in seasons of outward growth and inner dark waiting? Gently soft rustling stalks and leaves, and heavy fruiting. What rhythm and patterning shapes our community life together. Or are we trapped in working our faith life on a schedule and order that pays its dues to the incessant uniform repetitions of  industrialisation?

“There are magnificent trees here – Look at this one!”











Googling the Prime-minister, generalising gender, and grating generationalisms

September 25, 2018

Eagle hunter, grandson and mother. Mongolia. ‘All Secure’, Tariq Zaidi.

Journalist Annabel Crabb, challenges readers to google high ranking male politician’s names and ‘juggling’ and ‘children’. Her point is that men are not asked how they will ‘juggle’ their demanding work roles and family life. This question is regularly discussed in relation to women. Crabb calls out this gender disparity of accountability, and unexamined expectations of women as responsible for child-rearing.
This speaks not only to assumptions about men and women, but to the view of children as ‘burdens’ and ‘work’ – and lower-class work at that.
The privileged classes know that the more menial and distasteful a task, the more essential it is. Belgium carried on for over 500 days without a government being formed.
Australian parliaments have all but abandonned doing any actual work of governance, in favour of party politics and leadership shuffles – meanwhile life goes on.
The care of children – so essential for the wellbeing and flourishing of society – is thus regarded as a menial, low status, unskilled task (hear all the parents who have been well bested by their two year old in the simple task of going to bed recently laugh out loud).
So the alignment of women with children underscores both the perception of women as best fit for low status – but essential – tasks, and the perception of children as a low status task.
Nevertheless, the realities of parenting and working with children in our midst are also artificially obscured. Many men and women accomplish all of their daily work with children present. Children are generally more flexible and adaptable than adults in this arrangement.
The model of child as burden and women as best beasts of burden also depends on a mythology of caring for children as a 24/7 intensive single-focus role. Anyone who attempts parenting in that way will do themselves and mental health injury and most likely have frustrated and thwarted children. This is not recommended by anyone who understands what makes for healthy childhood development. Children are not best raised by mothers or fathers but by communities.
My professional life has engaged the field of working for better thinking and practice in communities around the experience of age relativised against the affirmation of all humans as whole persons and equal contributors and participants and dependents on human community. I listen carefully to the experiences, expectations and interpretations of people of different ages in their endeavours to relate to one another in a society that has gone mad with obsessive generationalism. 
I hear stay at home mums struggling to control their children – a futile and unworthy aim in itself, yet one they feel an intense obligation and unrealistic ambition for. I hear their isolation, trying to tough out hours of life in a house  geared for anything but health, play, creativity and relationship as the sole adult with a child or two or three. I hear their reticence to accept company and help from older women and men, mostly for fear of judgement of their parenting (as if it were a scored examination) and backed by a fair degree of judgement for the older generations and their ethics and style of parenting. In all of this intensity around the care and nurture of children, the personhood of children is decidedly absent. The story of children as investigators, initiators, workers, discoverers, skill acquirers (at the most phenomenal rate of adaptation and application) as spiritual and relational, as lovers and sensors is suppressed.
In Crabb’s aspiration for interrogating our male political leaders on family life and work interaction, the personhood of children is still marginalised.
Gender equality – a cause I support noisily too – is the point being pressed.
But can we press this point without regarding the connected issues of whole personhood articulated in other columns of the intersectional matrix. I think we can’t, and I think we ought not.
The notion of balancing work and family or juggling work and family, artificially disintegrates the person. I am always a mum, and always a scholar, and always a colleague, and always a culpable consumerist. The binarisation of work and family is not a self evident binary – but like most binaries, one that is socially constructed to privilege on over the other. A deliberate disintegration and opposition of two things presented as competing agendas or forces (in much the same way binaries of gender and race are configured as artificial antagonisms) where in fact they are mutually co-contributive parts of a life of health and thriving.
As I have protested many many times before, the whole paradigm of ‘having’ children itself is a moral travesty. Speaking of children as if they are things to have, possessions is dehumanising and sets people up for being surprised and frustrated when children are not able to be coraled like possessions. When children exercise their humanity it makes for existential angst in the adult parent.
Further to this, describing some adults as having children and some as not having, implying a system of haves and have nots is both a deplorable reiteration of classism, and a misappropriation of who we are in belonging with one another, not to one another. In most formulations, the expression of having children is an extension of the idea of one’s spouse as property – those who have a wife, might also have children. We are in a tragic hell of relational poverty in this situation. This betrays a rubric of considering a number of human persons, including children, including various ethnicities, including certain politicisations as units of currency and the means for political-economic bartering, rather than whole, essentially contributing and justifiably dependent persons. 
The discourse of child care and women, is of course about anything BUT the welfare of children, and rather about affirming certain kinds of power and liberating certain behaviours from healthy accountability.
If we are to initiate the most pressing conversation with our Prime-minister concerning the welfare of children, it is not going to be about his own, but the children of immigrant and asylum seekers, incarcerated indefinitely, illegally, and immorally off shore.

A poem for threadbare hearts

September 20, 2018


it goes way back

this tight wound thread

constricting the heart

and tangling the head

spooled round every nerve,

and  bone

winds round each touch

that’s ever been known

binds up body and soul

shapes how they’ve grown

each memory that’s joined

by puncturing stitch

with the merest tug

no wonder we twitch


the urge to cut

to slice through flesh

attempt to sever

ties that enmesh

or to take a point

that’s sharp and prick

and pierce the layers

with needle stick


but neither skin deep

nor in muscle is found

the end of the thread

to be unwound


so so far back

in the kernel of soul

lies the start and the end

that connects to the whole


yet also there – within –

an ancient  spool

waiting long

since cosmos was cool

with unmade waters

and destiny dark

and sun and spirit

were barely a spark

the shape of one

on which would wind

all the threads

of humankind

the spindle of God

centripetal core

all ends all threads

love’s gravity draws


we fray and twist

twine and knot

caught within

our own  damn plot


we try a little love

to weave

but warp threads break

and warped hearts leave

and neither better

is the weft

where truth is thrust

when trust  has left

Yet we are worked by spinner God

whose fingers tiny swift and deft –


gently hold and wind and reel

and gracious yet our fibres feel.



















And on the seventh day

August 27, 2018

africa woman

Let there be rest

Be overwhelmed by so much blest

 Reminisce humming tunes old and dearest

 Lazy grazing over yesterday’s fest

Go not too many steps away

Carry no load at all today

Delight in creation’s beauty

for beauty’s sake alone

Seeing what has past,

its very goodness known

Time for holding all love has meant

Let go task and measure and judgement.

Your sabbath I would be

A gift that comes around regularly


in six

and year of jubilee

when all regrets are set aside free.


Sub-plot specialists

June 11, 2018


There are times when you lose the plot
The plot of your own story.
And the best you think you can hope for is
to find yourself a secondary character
in the subplot
of someone else’s story.
Some of us have so much
difficulty developing our own plot line
with any consistency or conviction,
that we make an art form
out of weaving in and out of other plots.
Sub plot specialists.

Perhaps this is in fact a vocation.
Maybe some of us aren’t called to be main characters.
But to appear in cameos,
delivering an essential line here and there,
that shift the action in some different direction,
or explain something that was unclear,
or to mirror the grand narrative in a smaller, more accessible form
– and bring its claims and hubris back down to human proportions.

The subversion of the subplot.
The subliminal meaning-making of the subplot.
The substitution of earthy commoner for elevated elite in the subplot action.

Secondary characters who carry subplots are typically more colourful, not the fine lady, but the crone or the gypsy, not the nobleman but the valet or the sergeant.
The servant, the thespian, the cook, the lover, the fool, the cripple, the musician, the shoe maker, the traveller.
The child.

The child is always a subplot.

These are the characters
that move
that come and go.
They are revealers of other people’s truths.
They are lightning rods and catalysts for tension and resolution.

They are time sensitive – timely and timed out.

The child. The child is always a subplot.

Poking open hearts
to uncover the deepest of human vulnerabilities, fears and loves.
Posing questions of motive and meaning from the side.
Creating problems for the cunning and contriving strategists.
Carrying innocently inconvenient scandals for the virtuous.

So in stories upon the stage and the page, so in our very lives.
Sub-plots specialists.

there is a whisper though,
that we are all subplot specialists
in a vast story of immense complexity and proportion
and sovereignly separate cosmic character
Reading ourselves as children
is the wisest way of knowing our character
and finding our cues for the drama of life.


soundbytes and stunting sensitivity to the experience of children.

June 1, 2018
Facebook. I shouldn’t look.
A friend posted a quote from a book. A Christian book, a big selling influential Christian book,  by a contemporary theologian of great reputation. It’s a good book. I’ve read it. It was helpful in lots of ways. Definitely read it if you haven’t and buy it and pass it around to others.
I’m not dismissing the book because of this one quote, but this was the quote that was shared, given profile, and so then discussed and reinforced on facebook.
It appears that a good church upbringing will do many marvelous things for you, but one of the unfortunate things it also does is convince you that Jesus is to be worshipped but not followed.
– Alan Hirsch,  ReJesus. 
Ah, man. I can’t tell you how infuriating this kind of generalisation is.
It’s a good sound-byte.
But I am about to object (some of you won’t be surprised) because its an example of the way the faith experiences of children are dismissed, scapegoated and marginalised in theological discourse in ways that don’t help us understand our own cultural practices well.
Again, I have to ask how we manage to malign the young with language we would not dare use for other minorities or marginalised group. Is there a context christians feel more disinhibited in deprecating that the experiences of childhood?
So my questions, I admit are running on frustration and fury. Forgive me. I know you would if I were prophetically calling out for reconsideration of the way we spoke about gender, or race or ability.
It’s a small soundbyte from a wonderful book – but it is the kind of comment, and the discussion that it spawns, the stunts our sensitivity to the actual experience of children in our midst – even as we use them for theological mileage.
‘Good church upbringing…’ what is that, I wonder?
Who is Hirsch talking about?
Who does he diagnoses as worshipping Jesus and not following him, and on what basis does he judge this?
What kind of spiritual elitism judges the human who follows the script on Sunday, as expected, and whose discipleship through the week is most likely hidden, like a pearl of great price or salt or yeast in dough. The faithful lives of disciples are not easily assessed by a church that gathers once a week for a one-way communication process.
The rubric for evaluating people as worshippers or disciples is not easily drawn.
I had a childhood in the church – a very good church upbringing.
The message ‘I shall not offer unto the Lord that which costeth me nothing” was so often repeated it rings in my ears still.
What was faith formation growing up in the church?
It was daily dying to self. It was giving all you had – in real and practical terms – to follow the crucified Christ. It was holding up all of your daily life-style decisions to the light of scripture for revision and re-evaluation.
I’m sure others had different experiences of church-upbringing; and I can’t see what informs Hirch’s claim about the experience of children in faith communities, but I am sure there is a far greater diversity of formative practices and outcomes than this
off- hand quote suggests.
So – just as anecdotally – from the perspective of decades out the back in the hall with the young disciples I offer an alternative view. A view not from the platform, but from the pew and from the short legged tables and the carpet square and the craft cupboard and the pages of the Bible with icing sugar smears.
The orientation of ‘upbringing’ – by which I mean the experience of children in churches has been – to a fault- centred on discipleship. Following Jesus, prayer and engagement with the bible and the way it shapes our everyday actions is the common stock in how we ‘process’ children in faith communities. If there’s a critique to be brought more commonly it is that children are excluded from the worshipping life of the church, denied the sacraments and the contemplative moments of life together. And routinely the discipleship formation experience of children hits difficult waters in the conversion experience orientation of youth ministry. Suddenly children who thought they were following Jesus for a decade – whose prayers were sincere, who were endeavouring to shape their lives on the sermon on the mount at our behest, are told they are rotten rebellious sinners far from God. What is the impact of discrediting their discipleship?
So I offer this alternative diagnosis. It is not the upbringing/child-raising practices that misdirect faith posture towards “worship-against-discipleship”, but the transition from discipleship-oriented faith formation of the young, to the worship orientation of the adult community.
I write thinking of children and young people.  But also I write thinking of the adults I know who had church upbringings. Adults who no longer identify with a church. Who don’t ‘worship Jesus’ – but the legacy of their childhood is  faith in following the teachings, the ethics, the kingdom of God that they learned as young disciples of  Jesus.
Some of them are yet our best prophetic voices, calling the church to return to faithfulness to the architecture Jesus revealed.
What of them? Their church upbringing has precisely left them following Jesus without worshipping him.
What do we make of that?

The Royal Wedding, the Royal Commission and other travelling unravellings.

May 30, 2018

High above the Tasman Sea between Christchurch and Melbourne, the man next to me in 12B was in conversational full flight. I’d heard about his wife’s illness and artistry and his kids interests and academic strength, his business partners, the staff he’d let go, his parents, his interest in singing and photography and electronics and farming.

When the inevitable question of my profession came up, he was not deterred at all when I self-identified as a theologian.

He was on the trail of my philosophical leanings and wanted to know if I knew who Noam Chomsky was, because his son had recently exchanged emails with Chomsky. I was suitably impressed.

He knew  to ask if I had a specific faith myself – and what that might be, not taking western christendom’s legacy as a given. He talked about the female vicars he knew, in fact, the lesbian vicar he was friends with. By this time he was two white wines worth of relaxed.

He wanted to know what I did when I was writing or talking ‘theology’.

He asked about the conference I’d been speaking at, sorting out if I’d been preaching (no) or speaking (yes); if I called the assembly a congregation (no) or an audience (yes); and he wanted to know how many ‘hallelujahs’ I’d used (none) as a test of whether I was indeed preaching (no) or speaking (yes).

He asked what I thought of the preacher (Bishop Michael Curry) at the Royal Wedding last week, and we talked about different flavours of religion, and genres and of

Bishop-Michael-Curry-Royal-Weddingcommunication, and how these could align or get out of tilt. He felt that Curry might  have used a few more “Hallelujahs” himself -though conceded that there were enough British Propriety Feathers ruffled as it was.



All of this was jovial and shared at 36,000 feet in easy relaxed smiles and banter and anecdotes and laughter.

Then as we talked more about the specific areas of my own theological interests – the way our theology works itself out in the way we treat the vulnerable, and particularly the young and the aged  and those not afforded the luxury of physical or mental prime and the religious self sufficient hubris that often characterises it. I spoke about the days of reckoning that have come upon the Australian church, as the history of child abuse has been unmasked publicly, at length in the proceedings of the Royal Commission. I spoke about the responses of institutions. We need more than simply greater protective legislations and procedures – though of course these are not to be neglected.

At the heart of our history of child sexual abuse are the flawed beliefs we have about who children are. That they are only becoming human. That they are not yet formed. That they are – to be blunt – less. So we do things to them that we think matter less, than what happens to adults.

Our terrible theologies have born poisonous fruit. We have espoused that either that children are innocent and unblemished, so are immune from perpetrating abuse upon one another – thus we neglect their supervision and accountability.

Or it’s been held that children are, along with all humanity, utterly depraved, but being yet too young to be able to respond with conscious will to accept the saving  grace of Christ,  must be given over to bear the brunt of sin – in the hope of forgiveness and redemption later.

And flowing on from this, our practices that closet children away, because we consider them no asset, or even worse, a distraction in the pursuit of holiness and the right worship God, has left them vulnerable to inadequate leadership and resourcing for safety and flourishing and honouring.

None of this is controversial or surprising to anyone. There church is coming unravelled in the eyes of the public – and rightly so. Some significant unstitching and re-making is in order.

My fellow traveller knew exactly what I was saying on a practical level. Though like many people he had never thought about the way our beliefs, our theology, might help or hinder good practice. He was taken by the importance of this.

A pause – this extraverted electronic engineer, excited to be flying to Australia on a business junket had bubbled away for a couple of hours of conversation with barely a breath till this point.

Then he unravelled a further story.

He spoke of how the issues of child sexual abuse had come close to him personally. His 11 year old daughter had recently revealed to him that she had been sexually abused over a period of several years – since she was about 8 –  by an older cousin, taking place in the midst of family gatherings, holidays and celebrations.

snap. #metoo.

I listened as he spoke of the pain of the disclosure, his wife’s denial, his courage to face up to his brother (whose son was involved) and speak of such difficult things. The role wise and steady Grandma, his mother, had giving him strength for this task. He spoke of the school processes, of counselling, and how he has a commitment with his daughter to check in once a week and have a conversation about this with her, not to let it drift into the distance as irrelevant. He acknowledges that there is still work ahead for every one.

For his daughter, for him and his brother to reconcile fully, for the young lad who enacted the abuse. What brought about such actions in this young person’s being?

What was motivating and informing him?

As we travelled across the deepest part of the sea, I listened. I heard a story I knew part of  so thoroughly already myself. I hear a story that might have been straight out of any social worker’s files, out of any text book on abuse. Classic. Text book. Predictable. Common.

Most sexual abuse happens in this way. Not in churches or scout groups or swimming clubs or dance schools – though plenty of it happens there. Most abuse happens in families. Most perpetrators of sexual abuse offend for the first time in their early teenage years.

My fellow traveller had come to know this – to know the devastating ordinary of his daughter’s damage and his family’s experience. His family is not a terrible family, a troubled family in the cliched sent we might think. They are happy and healthy and honest, supportive and functional, generous and loving, with a good seasoning of old time Anglican love thy neighbour and community service. They are normal. Their experience is normal.

My work in theology endeavours to reveal the places where our decent and respectable beliefs cover up practices of evil and harm.



The way we read the story of family in the Bible is a large area for revision.

We must not pedestal Abraham – whose own anxieties about power placed his wife at risk and his son almost under the knife.

We must not sugar-coat Jacob, deceptive, manipulative, raising a family of violent, vindictive brothers.

We must stop considering the rapist David a godly example to follow.



The Biblical narrative of family is far from ideal.

The Biblical narrative of family is full of real.

My fellow traveller carried a great gift in his story – he knew his family was a good rich resource of love and life, but this didn’t blind him to the possibility and impact of wrongdoing within it. As we tell the biblical stories of family, and as we speak of family in our communities, we need this wisdom. This real. This possibility that all is not well – even in ‘good’ families. We need this to combat the culture of shame that inhibits timely disclosure by victims, and appropriate support and help for perpetrators. We need this to    shut down judgement that divides communities and labels some families as ‘dysfunctional’ and others as ‘exemplary’.

#metoo tells us simply that abuse happens anywhere and everywhere. That those who act wrongly are not monsters in the first instance, but terribly terribly ordinary, thought their unrestrained actions and access to power will in time tragically disfigure them.

As we landed and finished our conversation, the man in 12B – still we hadn’t exchanged names – returned to the thread of conversation about my work speaking at conferences about theologically informed practices with children and families.

He left me with a charge:

“Next time you speak, I want there to be at least one big Hallelujah.”

Although I don’t know his name, he had used the name of his daughter, Hazel, throughout the journey.

So I will.

I will raise a Hallelujah for Hazel. For  hope in the honesty of hurting and healing families.