From the Peterborough Examiner:
Anglican Bishop John Chapman is allowing an Ottawa church to offer blessings for same-sex couples who are already civilly married.
“My intention is to embrace a liturgical process that will not discriminate between members of the church on the basis of sexual orientation,” Chapman told a congregation Thursday night at the beginning of the diocese’s annual synod. “This will be Ottawa’s offering to the ongoing discernment that is happening throughout the Anglican Church of Canada.”
St. John the Evangelist, at the corner of Somerset and Elgin streets, will be the only Anglican church in Ottawa offering the blessing as long as one person in the couple is baptized. The church, considered one of the more progressive Anglican churches with a strong connection to the gay community, asked the diocese in 2002 for permission to offer same-sex blessings.
“For me it’s an issue of inclusion,” Chapman said in an interview with the Sun.
Chapman called the blessings “experimental” and said nothing at this point is carved in stone.
“I think this is evolving slowly and that’s been the intent,” he said, noting that changing any philosophy in the church is a measured process.
Chapman said liberal Anglicans in the diocese will likely believe the blessing protocol doesn’t go far enough, while conservative-minded parishioners might think it goes too far. Chapman believes it’s a healthy balance.
The Ottawa diocese started a task force in 1997 with the mandate to encourage homosexuals to participate fully in the church. Parishioners approved a formal motion asking the bishop to approve same-sex blessings at the 2007 synod.
Chapman said although the most newsy item from his address Thursday might be same-sex blessings, he hopes parishioners will heed his plea to fight child poverty in Ottawa.
“I want us to work hard on that this year,” he said, calling child poverty a “heightening problem” in the city.
This is no big surprise or shock to anyone who lives in Ottawa, I’m afraid. The first communion that Bishop Chapman celebrated in Ottawa was at an Integrity event, I rather thought that was the writing on the wall for us.
I can’t say I’m really surprised. Chapman has been signalling that he was going to do this for some time now. What gets me is the hypocrisy of calling this “experimental”. Come on, we all know this is just a strategy of incrementalism.
Besides, what business does the church have offering something “experimental” for what they claim is a marriage and a life-long union. “Hmm, let’s just try this and see if God will bless it.” Does this mean their vows are experimental too?
“I N take you N to be my [partner], to have and to hold from this day forward; for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish for the rest of our lives, according to God’s holy law. This is my solemn vow. But remember, this is just an experiment. I can get out any time I want.” What a mockery of God’s gift of Holy Matrimony.
Well so much for the diocese of outaways….. Wonder which is the next to go that direction. Will it be Montreal or Huron or some dark horse that hasn’t yet moved that way…..may Moxley in NS??
All this is getting to be old news and certainly it is no news that says the ACoC is all gone but the crying… Can’t they ever see the light of day?
“a healthy balance” ? Yes maybe of what is left of his diocese.
If you go to the Diocese of Ottawa website http://www.ottawa.anglican.org/ you can read his entire charge to Synod of which this forms a part.
Thanks Brian. I went to the Ottawa web site and I wondered who was the old hippie in the hat. Is he really wearing a mullet ? Where do they find these people? Oh right.
Sadly it is not hard to find these people, they are the ones who always see where the power is, cultivate the right people learn the current buzz words and schmooze their way to the top,some of those in the pews might be holding off the wall beliefs but those who teach the gospel are held to a higher standard, they must teach the truth.
Scripture is clear. No matter how they try and weasel around it.
Bishop Champman isn’t exactly my favourite person either, folks, but we really don’t have enough information to judge his motives, let’s not get too personal, eh?
As I watch the spirit pf confusion permeate our church discoragement sets in because of a lack of unity in the acceptance of the Gospel by our Bishops and the disrespect shown to the ABC and the rulings of Lambeth. Until the Bishops discipline themselves and throw out of the club their apostate brethern I believe the ACOC will soon become irrelavant to the Christian Church and to me.
Kate I’m not sure what you mean. Are we to wait until this Bishop comes out of the closet? If as you say his first ottawa communion celebration was with integritty than obviously his sympathies (at the very least, must be obvious) I agree we shouldn’t judge the poor man’s motives, but I see no problem with questioning them.
He is quoted as saying “For me it’s an issue of inclusion,” My question to this ACoC mantra is simple – who is excluded? Under the circumstance of the oft quoted (again in the form of the ACoC mantra) of marginalization. Does anyone deserve marginalization? How can the answer to either of these questions be anything but – no-one? If GLBT people fit truedohs charter, and successive governments subscibe to his witty “the government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation” how long will it be before children are sacrificed at the altar of rights and freedoms or as I like to call it the self-help book of individual self-aggrandizing.
What I mean is, let’s not criticize his appearance or assume that he is only motivated by power. It could well be that he is honestly decieved, and thinks that he is following God’s will. In any event, I am all for criticizing his decisions, but his motives are between him and God.
Just reading this I see nothing CHRISTIAN about ANIC. There is a lot of hate flowing out all of your mouths.
Woo to the one that throws stones and live in glass houses. What ever happend to the 1st and 2nd commandents!!!!!!
A strange comment, Max. I see nothing remotely hateful, unless maintaining the teachings of the Church is automatically hateful.
Max (#12 & 13), do you believe that anything is true? Or, do you believe that all truth is relative? Using your apparent logic, I could easily conclude that you are full of hate because you disagree with commenters on this thread. I don’t conclude that, nor do I think you are using logic.
The heading used by the media in such reports is in itself a misnomer. Despite any claim by any bishop or other clergy person that he can “bless” activity that is totally contrary to Scripture is nothing less than apostasy. Such claims lead persons who live in sin to believe that their life style has God’s approval. We do not “bless” adultery, pedophilia, theft, or any other clearly acknowledged sin. The reasoning is quite clear. Denouncing such claims is not hate crime – a lame excuse used by the homosexual lobby for denouncing the truth – but rather a call to the leaders of the church to stand for the Gospel. The Church is not called to follow the whims of society but rather to be a witness to the truth. We cannot claim to be a Christian church if we deny either the authority of Scripture or the uniqueness of Jesus Christ. If so-called bishop Chapman were to do the honourable thing he would resign.
Kate 11, your clarification is clear and once again I joyfully stand corrected.
Max 12,13 – there is no hate on this blog our Kate and David would be all over it if there was. However I will grant you that what you see as hate might be fear. and that’s a fish of a different colour.
ANiC and her parent ACNA are struggling mightily NOT to live in a glass house, except for the need of transparency. What currently assists in the building of our house is the overwhelming requirment to truthfully Serve God. Our house is attempting to be built with love. We have no need of stones for building or for throwing. The fear is caused because of the obvious shift of the ACoC to serving a different master. I would appreciate you expanding on your last sentence in #13.
Frank #16 “We do not “bless” adultery, pedophilia, theft, or any other clearly acknowledged sin.” We have kind of messed with adultery a bit (I hope the jury is still out). My comment is -Not yet anyway. I include “us” in all of Christianity because what happens in one part reflects upon us all.
Point of Order to Tom #2 – these are civil marriages. You only get out with a civil divorce (not too hard, I concede.)
#12 MAX – How is this for being Christian?
Rev. 2:18 “And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: ‘The words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze. 19 “ ‘I know your works, your love and faith and service and patient endurance, and that your latter works exceed the first. 20 But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. 21 I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. 22 Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, 23 and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you according to your works.” – Jesus
#11 “I am all for criticizing his decisions, but his motives are between him and God.”
Are someones motives beyond criticism or querry? If a certain perlocutor is using his position to establish homosexual marriage are we not to ask why? Beyond getting the usual “spirit led, inclusive, justice driven ,scripture culture context ” platitudes one can often identify the why. In a number of cases it is clear that people are campaigning so relentlessly because they have a loved one in this life style, or the individual is ensnared and is desperate for reassurance from the church that this is good and healthy. Or they may be genuinely misled. At least you know what you are dealing with. It is important to remember that many in this life style have suffered rejection throughout their life, and continue to suffer from painful emotional conflict, some have a deep reservoir of unrecognized anger which fuels their fight. God alone knows what the church will look like in 20 years.
Sandra #20 said “God alone knows what the church will look like in 20 years.”
Well Sandra we have it on good authority (Matt 16:18) that the true Church of Christ will be just fine thank you very much and that the neither the Anglican Church of Canada, the Diocese of Ottawa, nor anybody else, including even the “Gates of Hades” will prevail against it. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for those who purport to be “the Church” but in fact by their actions have abandoned it. I for one sleep quite comfortably knowing that God is in control.
All this because I think people who wear mullets are out to lunch? Wow it’s a good thing I didn’t say anything about his glasses.
#20 Not necessarily, but we need to be able to back up what we say. In comment #7 you made some really broad statements about Bishop Chapman’s motives that I don’t think any of us have any way of proving, one way or another. If someone had said something like that on the blog about Bishop Harvey, I’d have been all over it. “Love your enemies, pray for those who persceute you”.
Sorry Kate, I really don’t quite understand where you are going with
this, Why are you talking about his motives, What really matters is what He has done and intends to do. and how it will further damage the Anglican Church Canada. And rising through a hierarchy even an ecclesiastical one does does require a certain list of social skills that may have nothing to do with christian virtues. If we talk about motives, what is the motive behind this blog, is it to uphold the gospel, to expose the excesses of of the church, or to promote Essentials and ACIA. Or is the motive between you and God.
ps. it is late and I have the flu so bad you could probably catch it reading this, my above post was harsh and ill worded, forgive and disregard, God bless you Kate,this blog is an important ministry.
I am not defending Bishop Chapman’s actions. He has treated the priests who have moved to ANiC very badly, as far as I am concerned. I just want to keep the comments charitable, even when we are talking about people we oppose.
1 Kate
This is no big surprise or shock to anyone who lives in Ottawa, I’m afraid. The first communion that Bishop Chapman celebrated in Ottawa was at an Integrity event, I rather thought that was the writing on the wall for us.
7 Sandra
Sadly it is not hard to find these people, they are the ones who always see where the power is, cultivate the right people learn the current buzz words and schmooze their way to the top,some of those in the pews might be holding off the wall beliefs but those who teach the gospel are held to a higher standard, they must teach the truth.
Scripture is clear. No matter how they try and weasel around it.
8 Kate
Bishop Champman isn’t exactly my favourite person either, folks, but we really don’t have enough information to judge his motives, let’s not get too personal, eh?
11 Kate
What I mean is, let’s not criticize his appearance or assume that he is only motivated by power. It could well be that he is honestly decieved, and thinks that he is following God’s will. In any event, I am all for criticizing his decisions, but his motives are between him and God.
23 Kate
#20 Not necessarily, but we need to be able to back up what we say. In comment #7 you made some really broad statements about Bishop Chapman’s motives that I don’t think any of us have any way of proving, one way or another. If someone had said something like that on the blog about Bishop Harvey, I’d have been all over it. “Love your enemies, pray for those who persceute you”.
24 Sandra
Sorry Kate, I really don’t quite understand where you are going with
this, Why are you talking about his motives, What really matters is what He has done and intends to do. and how it will further damage the Anglican Church Canada. And rising through a hierarchy even an ecclesiastical one does does require a certain list of social skills that may have nothing to do with christian virtues. If we talk about motives, what is the motive behind this blog, is it to uphold the gospel, to expose the excesses of of the church, or to promote Essentials and ACIA. Or is the motive between you and God.
26 Kate
I am not defending Bishop Chapman’s actions. He has treated the priests who have moved to ANiC very badly, as far as I am concerned. I just want to keep the comments charitable, even when we are talking about people we oppose.
Kate and Sandra:
You two should have had your own thread on this one. Sandra, I see where you said nothing wrong, except perhaps for your last line in #24 above. Were your comments “UNCHARITABLE”, perhaps a tad, but not much. Were your comments “TRUTHFUL”?? Absolutely.
This blog has had many threads where the wording was ohhhh so very much more ‘uncharitable’ and I likely have been one of the very worst offenders in that regard….BUT, what are we supposed to be standing up for…..??
We can be nice and say that something is a varmint, a vermin, a rodent or a Rat. Mostly the words mean the same thing but the bottom line is that either way, the subject is still a spreader of disease whether it be the bubonic plague or going against the Holy Scriptures and the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Bishop Chapman is still following the pied piper of New Westminster no matter what the tune and we all know where the pied piper is leading this particular pack of vermin. There just isn’t any real nice way of saying it. I think Sandra did her very best and I think, Kate that you are being way to charitable in this case. Just read your entry #1, the words are still there aren’t they?
I have no doubt whatsoever of Chapman’s Motives, whether he is acting as a piper or a rat……..he is still fully aware of what he is doing and if he isn’t then he can’t possibly be in control of his faculties.
Let us find unity in the Word
2 Timothy 2;
20But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
21If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.
22Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.
23But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.
24And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
26And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
………The word of the Lord? …Amen?
And calling someone a rat and a scoundrel advances the Gospel how, Gerry? A lively blog discussion is perfectly possible without decending to the level of name calling.
Gerry [#26],
Many of us have strong feelings about these issues. If, in seeking not to impugn the motives of those we disagree with, we appear overly charitable, there isn’t much harm in that is there?
Winter # 21
Hi Bro – sleep comfortably by all means, but if I may, not to deeply.
More of the Word
Matthew 24;
21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.
Ephesians 5;
27That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
This does beg the question – what WILL the Church look like in twenty years?
PS in the mean time Winter are you attending ANiC Synod in Nov.?
“… you will recognize them by their fruits.” Jesus, and later in the New Testament Paul and Peter, exhorts us to recognize the false teachers in our midst and correct them where possible and shun them until they repent (thus ANiC).
Scripture counsels us to examine ourselves in great humility before we judge others, but it does not exempt us from seeking to come to the correct judgement or from ridding the Church of false teaching.
In this announcement, Bishop Chapman shows forth the fruit of his judgement, and this fruit is a false teaching. From a shepherd of the flock whose bounden duty is to protect that flock, this is unacceptable.
Only God, in all of His persons, can see into our hearts; the rest of us must examine the words and behaviour of others in order to judge.
Kate and David:
No matter the words….I guess one could be polite and say that Bsp. chapman has been utterly discredited. Different words, but the piper still plays the music. So sorry if, in my rant I use words that upset the gentleness of this blog. At least I am standing up for the Lord and not going into false teaching as Bill from Ottawa says. There it is!
One can stand up for the Lord, and not go into false teaching and still remain charitable. One does not preclude the other.
A reminder from the blog rules:
If you wish to continue to post here I would ask that you follow them.
Kate:
I am assuming that #35 is directed to me and no one else. Same could have been done by way of email since you have access to my email address. My disagreement has been respectful, thanks so much.
Blessings,
G.
# 32 Bill – please read my #28 and comment in relation to your #32
Kate; I don’t think Gerry’s DISAGREEMENTS ARE disrespectful. His descriptions of Chapman might be crass, course, and yes disrespectful but lets face the bottom line here. This Bishop has shown himself to be supportive of SSB’s. This means from his position he has the ability to influence others, the innocent in particular.
Our brothers and sisters in the Homosexual community have been given a certain legitamacy, in society first by the removal of certain acts in the criminal code, than in the popularization of Homosexual behaviour in our culture, Gay Pride Days, militant organization “Integritty”, certain emphasis in school curriculem etc. finally the legalization of SSM. These are all things of THIS WORLD and should be left to the Prince that rules this world. SSB’S on the other hand has been brought into our world a place were we are trying to prepare for the Kingdom of God. It has affected many (like a rat carrying bubonic plague) the worse is that it pushes legitamization into a place were self extraction becomes near impossible. Those of us who see this cannot help but be moved. Some, to hate, Many to anger, but these emotions are caused by fear as per my #17 and love cancels fear.
Fear + love + Christ – hate/anger = no buttons to be pushed (I wish that I could walk the talk ). The bottom line Oh I love bottom lines – a portion of the church has moved from Thy Kingdom Come to My World. What to do? my #28 specially the last three verses.
I have noticed a handful of personal attacks lately on this blog (such as the one early in this thread – was it really necessary to comment on someone’s appearance, for pete’s sake?) They may have been meant with humour, but I think we should stick to encouraging one another in truth and humility. That doesn’t mean whitewashing the truth of what is happening in the Church – just that we be tactful about it, and remember that casual visitors may be getting a very different impression of us than we intend.
(Personally, I enjoy satirical humour as much any other person – and some people who post here excel at it, but perhaps that should be left to personal blogs?)
In His grip,
Natacha
#37 – Meekness is not identical to being a pushover. It was originally a synonym for gentleness and humility, not submissiveness. Therefore, when we judge, when we exhort, when we correct we must do it meekly, that is with gentle humility and in obedience to our Lord’s commandments.
Saying nothing is not an option. But we must say it directly and without equivocation. What Bishop Chapman is permitting is wrong on many levels. It is abetting sinful behaviours by the two people who ask for the ceremony. It is leading others away from the Word by casting doubt on the truth of the whole of Scripture. It becomes a stumbling block for those seekers who recognize that Scripture condemns this behaviour. It validates the political convention that Synod has become by empowering the delegates to think they can change God’s rules for our lives. I could go on to give many further examples of how this announcement damages the Church and its Gospel message.
As I am not under Bishop Chapman’s authority, I do not know what actions have been taken to try to privately urge him to correct action. Therefore, this blog, and its comments, serve as a kind of open letter of rebuke to him, if it is ever communicated to him, and as a warning to the brethren that one of their shepherds has fallen away from the doctrine of the Church. We are commanded to avoid false teachers – this is a false teaching at best – therefore we should avoid taking instruction from this man.
22 obituary
All this because I think people who wear mullets are out to lunch? Wow it’s a good thing I didn’t say anything about his glasses.
Obituary: We must be very careful of our wording on this particular thread.
I read on earlier posts on this thread that we really don’t have enough information to judge his motives. AND THAT It could well be that he is honestly deceived. however, according to 1st Corinthians 12, we will be apportioned certain gifts of the Holy Spirit such as discernment, knowledge, wisdom, amongst others. If then such is the case, I would be inclined to think that if one were moving in the gifts of wisdom and discernment that one would see motives divulged and that someone one’s honesty or deception would be very clear.
I cannot see any other conclusion except that Bishop Chapman knows exactly what his motives are (as do many who read this blog) and also that is not being ‘honestly deceived.’ He is part and parcel of the group who are fully intent on leading the ACoC into the abyss by the use of apostasy.
The bottom line of this discussion is whether we, individually and corporately, are prepared to acknowledge we are all sinners and have that constant battle between the old nature and the new nature we have in Christ. As Scripture tells us we are made new in Christ, not persuaded to believe we can “bless” any conduct that arises from our old nature. Each and every one of us has tendencies – notice I did not say singular – to sin and these tendencies result from many issues including but not limited to our upbringing, our personalities etc. When our old nature is in control we are repulsed by any call to repentance and use our reasoning or personal circumstances to seek approval of our actions. We need to take seriously the invitation given at the Lord’s supper, “Ye that do truly and earnestly repent you of your sins and are in love and charity with your neighbours, and INTEND TO LEAD THE NEW LIFE” (capitalized for emphasis), and honestly pray the prayer of humble access, “We do not presume to come . . . trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies . . . that our sinful bodies may be made clean by His body, and our souls washed through His most precious blood.”
It is long past the time for the Primate and the House of Bishops to show leadership in this area. What we are seeing is basically a prayer something like, Thanks Lord for accepting us as we are. I am really happy to know I do not need repentance. That, of course, is nothing by apostasy and it is this disease that has currently captured the ACoC.
You hit the nail on the head, Frank!
Gerry,
I have a friend who attended seminary with and was close to a bishop who is proceeding with SSBs.
I asked him some time ago why he thought some bishops are continuing in this direction. He thinks that the bishops genuinely believe that they are acting to correct an injustice; I strongly disagree that this is a matter of justice, but I do think that that is a likely explanation for the bishops’ determination to go ahead with SSBs.
The impulse to correct a perceived injustice is not in itself a base one however misguided we think it might be; to imply otherwise really does not help our cause, particularly on this blog since it is scrutinised by many in the ACoC.
David #43 The Bishop we are talking about has been quoted as saying “for me it’s a question of inclusion”. see my #10.
Also you said “to imply otherwise really does not help our cause, particularly on this blog since it is scrutinised by many in the ACoC.” Could you clarify this I find it a bit confusing, sorry.
David:
I understand where you are coming from and what you are saying; the only thing I am left wondering about is this:
Are those bishops staying put to try to correct the injustice against the Holy scriptures and the Lordship of Jesus Christ OR are they staying to try to correct the perceived injustice that is being aimed at the GLBT population by taking the Church down the wrong path according to what is written.
There is a Bishop that I know who is no doubt whatsoever a man of God and a Born Again Christian who remains in the ACoC. I have never had the opportunity to ask him why he stays although I perceive it to be that (a) the diocese he is in (he is retired) is a very conservative one and (b) I perceive once again that he is staying to preach the Word to those he can reach and (c) to protect those who are left in the ACoC and be a shepherd to them when it is time to come to ANiC or some other Orthodox Church.
Other than the above, I have no understanding whatsoever as to why any priest or Bishop or lay person would want to remain in what is seen and what is a church that doesn’t recognize either the Holy Scriptures or the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
If these Bishops/Priests feel that the right thing to do is to carry on with SSB’gs, then perhaps it is time that they really sat down and re-evaluated their calling.
Our Social structure in North America and a good part of the world today is so messed up that most now feel that we have to follow what the world is doing and not what our Lord instructs us to do through the Holy Scriptures.
Perhaps my wording is socially unacceptable to many and perhaps there are those who will say I am not a Born Again Christian, I don’t know…….But I will say this…. For Frank’s benefit.
I know Jesus Christ on a personal basis. That doesn’t mean for one second that I am not a sinner, because I am. I repent daily for my sins and ask our Lord’s forgiveness. I don’t intend to turn right around the next day and sin again, however, it seems that it does happen every now and then. I am not prude enough to think otherwise.
Do I get upset by all that is going on….of course I do and of course I am. I am not happy that I have family members who are living in the GLBT lifestyle….Do I hate them? Of course not. I love them but I surely do hate the sin along with the sins that I commit.
Am I about to change my mind about my viewpoint….Not yet. Not until somebody or The Lord can show me that I must.
David #43
The impulse to correct a perceived injustice is not in itself a base one however misguided we think it might be; to imply otherwise really does not help our cause, particularly on this blog since it is scrutinised by many in the ACoC.
Just one more quiestion David:
Since this blog is scrutinised by so many from the ACoC, is this not the place for them to be reading the Truth whether put bluntly by some or so very nicely by others?
They are certainly not going to hear anything about what is going on from their own priests or Bishops, are the?
“Blunt” and “charitable” are not mutually exclusive.
If I call some-one a snake this is an admonition from a descriptive analagy. Sort of “if the shoe fits” Heck guys Jesus did it all the time. As for the bullying and implied threats, Sandra, in her #25 is correct, “this blog is an important ministry” so lets get back to ministering first to one-another (the good guys) and then to those who are caught in the snare of the devil (Vipers)
Stuck [#44],
Going back to close the start of this – [#8] and [#11] – I was trying to reiterate what Kate said in a different way: if we attack the motives of the bishop, we don’t help our case since we cannot know for certain what those motives are.
If we cannot defend what we say, it tends to play into the hands of those with whom we disagree.
47 – now your talkin.