From Ovadia's blog post
Enfleshing Bilateral Ecclesiology
Bilateral Ecclesiology and the Gentiles Series
What do I want? I know, sounds narcissistic, but the Messianic blogosphere is full of opinions, ideas, preferences, and the occasional demand. Gene Shlomovich recently asked me what my ideal expression of "Messianic Judaism/Bilateral Ecclesiology" would be if I could have my way. Time to cough up the answer.
As strange as it may sound coming from me, I don't want anything that much different, at least at the core, from what has been stated regarding Bilateral Ecclesiology (BE).
- I believe that it's good for traditionally observant Messianic Jews to build communities to serve their own populations and to attempt to bridge to larger Judaism.
- I believe that it's good for Messianic Judaism to enter into a dialogue with "the church" and to help to repair some of the damaged aspects of Jewish/Christian relations (supersessionalism and such).
- I believe that it's good for Messianic Jews to not be required to turn themselves into "Gentile Christians" and to abandon "Jewish practices" in order to worship the Jewish Messiah.
- I believe that it's good to attempt to educate the numerous Gentile-driven One Law "Messianic" congregations regarding what is and isn't Jewish practice, sound doctrine, and solid Biblical scholarship.
Wait! What was that last point?
Within BE's various suppositions, directives, and mandates, there is no provision for addressing the little bits and pieces of shattered glass that represent the numerous One Law, Two House, and otherwise Gentile-driven congregations, home fellowships, and loose associations that litter the national (and perhaps world wide) landscape.
While I don't say this in a critical voice, the original One Law stance of First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ) may have done a disservice to the many non-Jewish Christians who left the church in search of something more "authentic" (and FFOZ has since made a significant course correction, which required a lot of integrity and courage). While many of these Christians left the church out of a sense of disillusionment or a feeling of betrayal, there are others, like me, who feel "called" to follow the beat of a different drummer. My drummer just happens to be Jewish.
This doesn't mean I'd be completely at home in an Orthodox shul. I'm sure I wouldn't be. But there is something about the teachings, studying the Torah portion, reading the commentaries, and praying with a Siddur, that touch something in me that I never found in the church.
So what do I want?
I can see a continuum of "believing" congregation models with three major expressions:
- Messianic Jewish congregations based on the traditional observant Jewish worship, halakhah, and community model. This expression would serve Jews who have a strong cultural and religious Jewish identity and who want to extend that identity into other "Judaisms".
- "Judaically informed congregations" (to borrow Derek Leman's phrase) of either primarily non-Jews who, like me, are "called" to a more Judaically-aligned model of worship and who observe some of the traditions in solidarity with Messianic Judaism, or a more or less evenly mixed Jewish and non-Jewish group who don't have a strong need to worship in an exclusively Jewish community and who want to share direct fellowship and community with each other.
- The Christian church, which represents the vast majority of non-Jews who worship the Jewish Messiah (Jesus Christ), and who, like the congregation Boaz Michael references in his latest blog, seeks an improved relationship with the other two groups, and particularly Messianic Judaism, and is adjusting their theologies and practices to more align with the other groups.
This isn't a perfect model, nor do I expect it to be. The one thing about Boaz's latest blog post that jumps out at me is the following:
The work of First Fruits of Zion wants to see the church change, but this is done through mutual respect, relationship, and love. Only through these attitudes will the message of the Jewishness of the Gospel, the Torah, and the centrality of Israel be able to be heard and understood.
Derek's latest blog post outlines some of the reasons why non-Jews might legitimately leave the church based on some of the modern church's shortcomings, but it would be a mistake to think that any of our religious expressions is perfect or even "better" than the others.
The idea of having different expressions of faith communities is to service different populations, not to establish dominance or superiority, but they aren't exclusive neighborhoods with locked gates. There may be some Gentiles who would thrive in a Messianic Jewish congregation and some Jews who were raised in culturally and observant Jewish homes who might feel very well connected to either "Judaically informed" congregations or their neighborhood church.
An absolute requirement for these three expressions though, is that they establish and maintain a communications and fellowship conduit between them all. As Ovadia states:
Bilateral ecclesiology does not necessitate the social and religious isolation of Messianic Jews from Gentile Christians.If, as a "Judaically-informed Gentile", I want to attend a Talmud class at the Messianic Jewish congregation across town, ideally, I should be welcomed. If a group from the Christian church wants to host a summer picnic (with appropriate foods for the other two groups) for their Messianic Jewish and Judaically-informed brothers and sisters, that should be encouraged and well attended by those groups.
I'm not suggesting "infinite" acceptance of all possible combination of religious expression, since some religious groups within the broadest spectrum of "Christianity" are based on principles and practices that would be considered "cultic" (and we need to be careful with our judgments here because some churches likely see "Messianic Judaism" as a cult). There needs to be a spirit of fellowship between these three expressions based on a commonly held set of core beliefs and a clear understanding that we all serve the same Messiah and worship the same God.
For Messianic Judaism on its end of the scale, the conduit could and should extend into other expressions of Judaism (Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, and such) as part of the BE mandate, though this may end up working more on the level of individual Jews connecting, rather than networking entire Messianic and non-Messianic congregations.
We may think that Messianic Judaism has been around awhile and is a mature entity, but I feel it is still in its early developmental stages. While Christianity and Judaism have been around for a great lengths of time, these faith expressions are also progressing through different "life stages" that will ultimately arrive at a joining point of some sort when and after the Messiah returns.
We are all trying to point to the same goal: Yeshua, Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, the Son of God. We have different ways of recognizing our responsibilities to the Messiah and different methods of honoring God, but these differences shouldn't stand in the way of uniting and binding us together.
There may be many sheep pens, but there is only one flock.
"A Jew never gives up. We're here to bring Mashiach, we will settle for nothing less." -Harav Yitzchak Ginsburgh
26 comments:
James,
The bottom line should always be: What do the Scriptures say.
Last time I checked who wrote the Scriptures I did not find the names of FFOZ, Kinzer, Derek, Gene among the authors.....
James, I like it. I think you're on to something here.
Dan, I think there's more than one worship "style" and perhaps "lifestyle" that fall within the Scriptures. Throughout history, Christian congregations have adopted differing methods of worshiping the Messiah and while some of them may have extended outside the realm of scripture, many more have not. I think there's room to contain worship of Yeshua that looks and acts like traditional, observant Judaism, traditional church services, and a "blending" of the two.
Gene. Thanks. But so far, this is just the opinion of one small person in "the movement". It only is effective if it can be applied across multiple communities.
By the way, I'm not saying anybody should jump at my "vision" as some sort of epiphany, but it does allow BE to operate and provides a clearer path for unity among the different congregations in the body of the Messiah.
Food for thought, anyway.
Vision? More like capitulation I would say......
As Sherlock used to say: Scriptures, dear Watson, Scriptures...
James,
Excellent post! I especially appreciate the reference to IDIC.
I disagree, Dan. What I see is a continuum of communities that includes a more "Jewish" Messianic Judaism, but also includes the traditional church and congregations such as yours and mine. We don't all have to be the same thing in order to serve the same God.
I like the "body of Messiah" metaphor because all the different bits and pieces and organs of a human body serve lots of different unique purposes and the look and work really differently from each other. On the other hand, they're also designed to work together and no one part would really have a purpose unless it was put together with all of the other parts (sort of like a stomach without a mouth or a colon).
I didn't surrender the fort by opening the doors, so to speak. I just opened up lines of communication so that we could all talk back and forth. Walls of the building don't have to crumble and fall apart in order to include other buildings as part of the neighborhood.
Dan, how does anything I've said violate scripture? What "sin", if you will, am I suggesting with my proposal?
As far as the IDIC is concerned, there's a slight nod to the symbol toward the end of the Star Trek reboot film (when young Spock first sits down in the ship from the future). My son had to point it out to me. Missed it completely.
James,
I thought you already agreed that BE is just an otpian dream and cannot be implamented in the here and now. I thought you said something about dissertation that cannot work. How in the world can you communicate with illogical people who see BE as real?
These people will throw anything against the wall, right now it is BE that they think sticks....
James,
Ask yourself what would have happened if Paul would have limited the new congregations he started to Jews and intermarried couples, and told the Gentiles to have their own Churches? since you asked for Scriptures?
Actually Dan, the comments of Gene and Joshua on "Fractured" indicate that major portions of the BE "dream" can't be realized currently, such as establishing more than a few (perhaps) congregations that operate to service a primarily observant Jewish population. It is an ideal, but ideals aren't necessarily bad. Absolute application of ideals however can be bad.
That I'm proposing a model, doesn't mean I think it will be in operation tomorrow. For all I know, the model won't be practical until the return of the Messiah and, by then, it may not even be needed. However proposing a method that allows unlike groups and systems to interact and cooperate is desirable, especially since these "unalike sheep pens" are all contained within a single "flock".
The overriding drive behind everything I've said is so far is to try to establish and maintain an open dialogue where the concept of community between different and unalike "systems" remains open and available.
BE can and perhaps has been seen as advocating for completely closed systems with MJ being one closed system, the church being another and "the rest of us" being yet another closed system. I don't think closed systems are desirable by anyone, but on the other hand, I don't think there's only one viable way to express faith in Yeshua, either.
The church has tried for centuries to convince the Jewish people that, in order to worship the Jewish Messiah, Jews had to become Goys. On other words, they were advocating for only one viable method of worshiping Yeshua and demanding that all people had to be the same in order to do so.
All I'm saying is that, based on the needs of individual communities or people groups, "there's more than one way to skin a cat" (horrible metaphor).
Pie in the sky? Right now, probably. But discussing perspectives and possibilities is better than slamming doors in people's faces and saying "my way or the highway". I just want to keep the doors open and the lines clear.
"Actually Dan, the comments of Gene and Joshua on "Fractured" indicate that major portions of the BE "dream" can't be realized currently, such as establishing more than a few (perhaps) congregations that operate to service a primarily observant Jewish population. It is an ideal, but ideals aren't necessarily bad. Absolute application of ideals however can be bad."
They of course mean without gentiles, right? Where can we find it in Scriptures?
"That I'm proposing a model, doesn't mean I think it will be in operation tomorrow. For all I know, the model won't be practical until the return of the Messiah and, by then, it may not even be needed. However proposing a method that allows unlike groups and systems to interact and cooperate is desirable, especially since these "unalike sheep pens" are all contained within a single "flock"."
Interact? On whose terms, theirs, ours or Scriptures?
"The overriding drive behind everything I've said is so far is to try to establish and maintain an open dialogue where the concept of community between different and unalike "systems" remains open and available. "
The blogosphare is open, we dialoging, don't we? This is the only way for you to dialoge, since they will not accept you as equal, even if you are married to a Jewish woman.
"Pie in the sky? Right now, probably. But discussing perspectives and possibilities is better than slamming doors in people's faces and saying "my way or the highway". I just want to keep the doors open and the lines clear."
Like I have asked before, what about the Scriptures way?
They of course mean without gentiles, right? Where can we find it in Scriptures?
Look up. My list of three basic congregation types strung along a continuum is what I'm proposing as a concept. I don't know if Kinzer would agree, but at least as far as what I'm suggesting, some congregations would be primarily Jewish, some churches would be primarily Gentile, and some groups would be a mix of Jews and Gentiles, not unlike your congregation and mine..
As far as scripture goes, if you're talking about how a worship service is conducted, we don't know much about that. The details aren't recorded in the Gospels or Epistles. We do know that Gentile God-fearers worshiped with Jews in synagogues in the 1st century CE and presumably they continued to worship there after becoming "Messianic" and receiving the Holy Spirit.
On the other hand, there were probably primarily Jewish Messianic groups as well and, as history advanced and word of the Good News spread, primarily Gentile Messianic congregations, which morphed over time to become Christianity.
There seems to be a Scriptural basis, at least by inference, to support different types of congregations based on different population bases, including mixed Jewish/Gentile congregations.
"There seems to be a Scriptural basis, at least by inference, to support different types of congregations based on different population bases, including mixed Jewish/Gentile "
This is not the point. Naturally there would be different kind of congregation according to placemnt or mix of attendies, but in the congregation that had Jewish and Gentile mix, was there any inequality?
This is not the point. Naturally there would be different kind of congregation according to placemnt or mix of attendies
Ah. OK, we've got that part settled.
but in the congregation that had Jewish and Gentile mix, was there any inequality?
In the 1st century CE or now? In the 1st century, I have no idea in absolute terms, but I suspect that there were "issues" between Jews and Gentiles based on the tone of a number of Paul's letters which addressed the struggle of integrating formerly pagan Gentiles into Jewish worship without requiring them to convert to Judaism.
Now? My proposal, and this is where most BE proponents will probably disagree with me, is that each congregation along the continuum will have the right to establish their own values and practices. That means if a mixed Jewish/Gentile congregation wants to treat the entire congregation exactly the same, they have the right to do so. Gentiles can be called up to read the Torah, teach, the whole enchilada, if that's what the congregation wants.
However, if any of the folks in the mixed congregation want to attend services at the primarily Jewish congregation, they'd have to be sensitive to the practices of the Jewish congregation. Gentiles shouldn't expect to be called up to read the Torah if that's not a value the Jewish congregation holds. Of course, Jews who choose to visit the Christian congregation will have to be sensitive to the fact that the church doesn't even have Torah readings and may serve foods not on the "kosher list".
In other words, if you plan on attending someone else's congregation, do your homework and know what to expect. If you don't think you can tolerate their practices, you shouldn't visit.
It would be like me visiting the local Chabad with my wife. I shouldn't expect to sit with her, just because I could in my own congregation. I shouldn't expect to be called up to the Torah, even though I can publicly read the Torah portion in my own congregation. If I visit a church breakfast gathering, I should expect that they'll serve sausages and bacon with my eggs. If I can't tolerate those differences, I shouldn't visit. If I am determined to visit, I should expect to respect and comply to the local practices and culture of that congregation, just as I'd expect someone visiting my congregation to respect and comply with the practices of my congregation.
The MJ, Mixed, and Church congregations are not going to be the same and their rules and practices are not going to be the same. What will exist though, is a method where we can visit each other, have mutual gatherings (conferences, workshops, prayer retreats, picnics). We will be welcome in each other's homes and congregations and we will treat each other with respect and dignity, both as hosts and as guests.
Again, pie in the sky, but I think it's potentially workable and it's an arrangement that doesn't force any one group to change their core values or practices for the sake of any of the other groups. However, part of the shared core values is to make some internal changes (giving up supersessionalism in the church, for example) because it inhibits fellowship and communication.
It's not a perfect arrangement but it's a platform from which to start and it allows groups like yours and mine to operate with autonomy and not be censured by any other group.
Agreed. But this is where we are actually are in the present, aren't we?
Yes and no. Sure, each individual congregation can set their own rules and values, but we tend to keep complaining about "the other guy" or "the other congregation" that's not like us and that *should* be more like us.
I think this is where the perception or presentation of BE could use come tinkering because, even if this isn't what BE proponents intend, it sometimes comes across as giving directives rather than attempting to promote positive change among all congregations through mutual respect, relationship, and love as Boaz Michael recently blogged.
Also, some people from One Law groups or sometimes a non-Jew who is loosely affiliated with "the movement" will walk into one congregation or another (and it's happened in my group) and pretty much demand to be treated such and thus way or try to get the congregation to change their practices or beliefs based on the individual's idea of what is right and wrong.
Going back to Boaz's blog for a second, the Pastor being quoted there was confronted by a "Messianic" person who challenged the fact that the Pastor chose to serve in a traditional church setting. That's not mutual respect, relationship, and love.
While I doubt my proposal can eliminate such occurences completely, we can, by working together among different congregations, reduce them by establishing ourselves as places that can educate those who are willing, in the idea that our particular version of Messianism doesn't make us the "king of the theological hill", so to speak. We can create congregations that can be a gathering point for solid teaching and acts of compassion, rather than some of the chaos that's found among some "Messianic" groups.
I'm trying to do that in my own congregation, both in my Shabbat teachings and by using special courses to get people to think in this direction.
I can't reach or change everyone, but if all of our different groups agree to work together, even a little, for a common goal, we have a much better chance of getting, not just what we feel is important to our groups, but achieving what God put us on earth to establish: His Kingdom.
Oops. I meant to post a link to the PDF for Torah Portion Bo, which contains teachings more relevant to our current conversation, Dan.
Sorry about that.
James,
Great post. I definitely agree with you that there should be a multiplicity of approaches to following Yeshua in community.
That said, here are my thoughts:
- I think that all Messianic Jews (especially in the Diaspora) should seek "direct fellowship and community" with Gentile followers of Yeshua
- We should be striving to see that all Jews have a "strong cultural and religious Jewish identity and...want to extend that identity into other "Judaisms"."
- I have an alternate solution for your Type-2 communities. Plant new churches that explicitly reject supersessionism, that learn from the Jewish tradition (refer to Jewish commentators, incorporate Jewish influence into the consciously-Christian worship, etc.), that are committed to proclaiming the Gospel (both calling Jewish people to covenant fidelity and actually reaching out to and living in the non-Christian world), that that provide a concrete example of what Christian faith without supersessionism looks like to existing churches, and that are spaces where Messianic Jews who make their primary home in synagogues and in Type-1 Communities can come to celebrate the eucharist, worship, and follow Yeshua in a setting that is not specifically Jewish but not anti-Jewish.
Hi Ovadia,
I don't have a problem with your "type 2" congregation alternative as such, but I don't want to simply disgard currently existing "Messianic" groups that are primarily non-Jewish or a mix of Jews and Gentiles and try to "replace" them with something different. If the churches you suggest are planted as you have designed them, they would also be welcome communties along the continuum of congregations.
Also, within any particular congregation, groups should have "autonomy" to create worship styles that fit their community.
I explained this in a lot more detail in an earlier comment to Dan. It means that some congregations will have practices with which both primarily Jewish MJ groups and primarily Gentile Christian churches might not be comfortable. For that matter, Christian church groups might not be entirely comfortable with some practices in Jewish MJ congregations and vice versa.
I don't see one overarching, universal standard of worship practice that will apply to all of these three communities, nor do I see one community (MJ for example) directing the other two communities as to what they can and can't do within their own walls. That would be like a Christian church community trying to tell an MJ (or any Jewish) community how to conduct their business.
The idea is to promote change through mutual respect and love regarding starting with some really big issues like supersessionalism and to develop an ongoing dialogue over time that will eventually result in a closer alignment between all three "Messiah-believing" communities. Like Boaz Michael said, we need to respect the work that God is doing, even if we don't always agree with it.
In the short run, no one party will achieve exactly the response they want from the other two and all parties must agree to be OK with each congregation setting their own internal worship practices, customs, and rituals. It's more important in the here and now to establish and maintain mutually respectual lines of communication and fellowship and have all three types of congregations exist along a single continuum, than to register discomfort because a Gentile in a "mixed" congregation is allowed to publicly read from the Torah portion.
"all parties must agree to be OK with each congregation setting their own internal worship practices, customs, and rituals. "
James, I am all for freedom to conduct one's congregational affairs without any outside interferences. However, on a voluntary relational level I find it quite problematic to communally engage with certain groups which basically take on Jewish identity, Jewish garb, etc. (even Hebrew names), claim to be Israelites and basically have an entitlement attitude to all things Jewish. Many Messianic Jews find this behavior disrespectful (at the very least) and it is and will be an obstacle to true relationships between many Jews and Gentiles in the movement and beyond.
So, for proper ongoing dialog to take place and for healthy lasting relationship to be build, just as Christians in churches are expected to deal with their suppersessionism and anti-Judaism, so should Gentiles in congregations under the "Messianic" umbrella be expected to develop respect for the unique nature of Jewish identity and traditional Jewish norms, including appropriateness of appropriation of certain Jewish ritual, garb and life cycle events (like brit-milah and bar-mitzvah). A "Judaicaly informed" congregation should be expected to be informed regarding these things, to understand and respect the Jewish understanding of these Jewish matters.
I figured this would be the part of my proposal that would be a choke point.
To begin the process of engagement, each group is going to need to accept that the other groups aren't going to be "ideal" in the beginning. That is, you can't start a relationship by saying, "you have to do such and thus before we can even talk". You may not get a church group to initially give up supersessionalism but that is more likely to occur over time as the church group gets to know you and learns to understand why it's such a big deal.
The same goes for working with a "mixed" or primarily Gentile congregation. They (we) might need some time to get to understand your needs and internally agree to make changes that will be more palitable to MJ (though we may never end up being perfect in our "compliance").
Part of "isolating" any "offensive" practices during the beginning stages of the relationship is for each group to worship as they normally do in their own congregations but to conform to the expectations of another group when visiting that group.
If I, for example, visited your congregation, I would agree to respect your culture and practices, wouldn't wear any "Jewish" clothing, wouldn't expect to be called up to the Torah, and would try my darnest not to speak unless spoken to. I wouldn't use a Hebrew name or any of that. I'd just be the friendly Goy visiting a Jewish congregation.
That doesn't mean, within my own congregation, that I wouldn't read from the Torah portion, for example. It just means that I wouldn't expose you to any of my practices in your congregation. Over time, as relationships deepened, our of mutual respect, I can see congregations such as mine making some or even all of the changes you require, but we would have to do so out of our desire to be brotherly and our deeper understanding of Jewish uniqueness, not because you just flat out told us to. I've already told Dan that I'm currently working a part of this plan in my own congregation, but I can't simply order people around. Instead, I'm using education. It's slower, but I think the effects will be lasting.
For this to work, we all have to start out accepting each other as we are and not as we'd like each other to be. If I'm supposed to respect the work God is doing in the church, whether I always agree with it or not, the same has to work for everyone. The door has to swing both ways or it doesn't swing at all.
It's not a perfect world nor is this a perfect solution, but it can get better if we'll agree that no one group can expect all other involved groups to start out the relationship by immediately changing their practices for the sake of the Messianic Judaism. You'll only get that change after relationships have been established and progressed, and we may still be working on it when the Messiah comes.
At least we'll be working on it together.
James, no doubt it will require time for any changes to take place. In fact, I think that in some cases it may take far less time to counteracts whatever the current issues various congregations under the Messianic umbrella have vs the long-institutionalized anti-Torah theology, suppercessionism and anti-Judaism that still pervades many sectors of Christianity in varying degrees.
This is because the Gentiles in messianic congregations are far more dependent on the Jews for their own identity than are the Christians in churches, although, like many movements in Christianity, some of these "messianic" groups have tried to develop their own "biblical Judaism" that doesn't need Jewish approval or involvement, and in some cases even resents Jews and view Judaism as "man-made".
"At least we'll be working on it together."
I am sure that we'll be able to work with some groups, but not with some others. That too is normal.
Agreed, Gene.
I didn't say all people and all congregations would "go for it". Some will "decline" and won't be part of the continuum of congregations. However, like Hillel's response to the "three converts", MJ can be initially "accepting" of what seems to be unreasonable conditions and give people and groups time to come to a better understanding.
That's the topic of my next blog, which I'll write later today.
I've continued this discussion in Overlap, Part 2: The Therapeutic Horse.
Amen, James! However the details may vary in practice, this is pretty much exactly what I would choose too. I hadn't yet managed to formulate it so coherently though. Thanks for explaining my own idea to me ;)
Shira
James,
"nor do I see one community (MJ for example) directing the other two communities as to what they can and can't do within their own walls. That would be like a Christian church community trying to tell an MJ (or any Jewish) community how to conduct their business."
I do think that Judaism (not MJ specifically) has a right to speak about how Jewish rituals, ritual objects, and liturgy can/should be applied.
I think its perfectly appropriate for Native Americans to criticize 'hipsters' for wearing costume versions of Native American tribal regalia, and I think it's perfectly appropriate for Judaism to have a problem when non-Jews want to appropriate Judaism and Jewish practices haphazardly without reference to the actual Jewish community.
If a Messianic Jewish community started styling its leaders "bishops" and dressing them in the regalia of Eastern Orthodox bishops, I would rightly expect the Orthodox and Catholic churches to point out "you have no claim on this title", roll their eyes, and object.
While I agree in principle with what you say Ovadia, simply walking into a congregation and demanding that they immediately change their practices will likely not result in achieving the desired goal. Creating a relationship first and allowing said-congregation to more gently discover the reality for themselves is more likely to work (Hillel as opposed to Shammai).
Another way of looking at it, to quote Mary Poppins, is that "a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down." People and groups who know, like, and respect you are more likely to see your point of view than they will if strangers simply say, "Do it!"
"The movement" is full of "lone wolf" congregations which call themselves "Messianic" but otherwise chart their own course through theological and identity waters". The Shammai approach will lead to a dead end for many of these congregations and, while some people in those groups will never "see the light", there are a lot of good people that could be lost, not just to "the movement" but to faith in Yeshua (Jesus) along the way.
Oh, and even if change does begin, it won't be instantaneous or without effort. My latest blog post provides an example.
Post a Comment