Sunday, January 16, 2000
© 2000 (Private/Phone)
Participants:  Mary (Michael), Howard (Bosht), and Margot (Giselle).
Elias arrives at 1:51 PM. (Arrival time is 20 seconds)

ELIAS:  Good morning!

HOWARD:  Good morning!  How are you?

ELIAS:  As always, and yourself?

HOWARD:  Oh, much better, thank you!

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha!

HOWARD:  I have a list of questions here ... and I’m sorry to have interrupted our session the last time, but I literally could not think.  I did not know where to go, from point A to point B.  I was wandering in the interstitial space of a black hole or something.

ELIAS:  It matters not, and I am acknowledging of you in that you are listening to self and allowing yourself choices that are beneficial to you in the moment.

HOWARD:  Thank you.  I would like to ask a question.  In Hugo’s book, “The Man Who Laughs,” he refers to an individual called a Wapentake, being a summoner of the Queen’s Court, who walks around with a mace and other kinds of authority.  This is the sixteenth century, Queen Anne’s time.  Was there such an individual called Wapentake, or was there another name for him?

ELIAS:  As to your question — is there such an individual with this particular name in this position — no.  As to your question — is there an individual that creates this type of role — yes.

HOWARD:  Well, I have referred to him as a Summoner.  Would that be correct?

ELIAS:  In a manner of speaking, yes, you may be identifying in this manner.

HOWARD:  Would there be another official name for this individual, one that I could use in the book with authority?

ELIAS:  In actuality, Bosht, it matters not.  These are merely labels that you present within your language to be offering a type of concept or idea of the role of an individual.

Therefore, what I shall express to you — in your writing or your creativity and your expression — is to be allowing yourself to attach the identification that is impactful with you and that you associate strongly with, for in that choice, you shall project the energy with the terminology, and it shall be conveyed in the manner in which you are directing the energy.  Are you understanding?

HOWARD:  Yes, I am.  Thank you so much.

There is a thing called the golden scrolls, which I have had access to in the past.  Apparently, as I understand it, it’s attached to yourself in the akashic records, or wherever this greater catalog of self occurs.  It’s referred to as the golden scroll, and when I was about nineteen, I was in the service, going through a very traumatic period of time.  In a prayerful state, I would say, I witnessed an unrolling of something that was golden, with words written thereupon.

Later on, I asked a channel about the golden scrolls, and she — or he, the entity that was coming through — gave to me a limerick kind of poem that was apparently written by myself before this lifetime.  Is there validity to this?  Do golden scrolls for essence expression in focus exist?

ELIAS:  In this, you are offering two inquiries — one in the direction of inquiring to the validity of your experience, and one in the direction of inquiry to the actual existence of a thing.

In addressing to the first question concerning your experience, I shall state to you that you have created an actual experience which is reality.  Therefore, in the experience that you have created, the scroll, so to speak, has been presented as an actual thing, and this is quite real.  This also is, in your physical dimension, an interpretation and your imagery of translation of energy in consciousness in the form of physical elements.

Now; understand that imagery is not a term that I am incorporating as some element which may be elusive or not real within your physical dimension and your reality, for you may look to any element within your reality — a wall, a book, a chair — these are all creations of imagery, but they are also quite solid and quite real within your reality.  They are not what you term to be imaginary or contrived.

Therefore, in like manner, the scroll that you have presented to yourself is not contrived either.  It is real, in the same manner of imagery that your chair or your wall is real within your reality.

They are manifest as things, in your terms, but I shall also express to you that all of these things, so to speak, within your physical reality are translations of energy of consciousness; that the links of consciousness are configured together in a manner to be presenting themselves as a thing in solidity.

In this, I acknowledge to you that the imagery that you created was real.  I am also expressing to you that it is a translation.

As to your second question, in the identification of this type of thing, so to speak, as an actual existence within consciousness in that manner of a solid object, I shall express to you, no.  Within consciousness, there is no actual scroll or akashic records per se.

There are areas of consciousness which, figuratively speaking, hold the energy that may be translated as a recording of information, in the same manner as energy deposits or what you identify as world views or energy centers.  But these are, in actuality, within consciousness, not a thing per se, and hold no solidity.  They are a movement in energy, and in this, there is no actual place, so to speak, in which they reside, for they are not a thing, in a manner of speaking.

But rather, it is an expression of energy in movement and in a quality which may be translated into physical terms and therefore imaged in conjunction with the physical reality, of which any particular given focus may be accessing that information and allowing its insertion into their physical reality.

Now; therefore, what I am expressing to you is that within this particular physical dimension, you have temporarily allowed yourself an accessing of a particular quality of energy which may be translated, in your terms, to hold information, and that energy is inserted into your physical reality, your physical objective awareness, in the manifestation of a thing that is familiar to you and that moves in harmony and in conjunction with the design of your physical dimension and reality.

Were that same energy to be accessed by another focus occupying a different physical reality, it may be imaged in a very different manner.  It may not hold the quality of solidity or be identified as a thing at all.  But they shall create imagery in conjunction with the design of their particular physical dimension, and therefore allow themselves to be accessing the information — or viewing that quality of energy which you identify as holding that information, in a manner of speaking — in conjunction with how they create their physical reality, in very like manner to yourself and what you have created in conjunction with how you create your physical reality, in objective terms.

Accessing energy within consciousness of this type within your objective awareness would be meaningless to you in the manner that it is expressed within consciousness without the translation of imagery, for what you know objectively and what you understand objectively and what you create objectively moves in conjunction with the design of this particular physical dimension and the physical reality which is created within it.  Expressions outside of this physical dimension and its design objectively hold little or no meaning to you.

Therefore, it is quite purposeful — AND quite real — that you create a translation of other forms or expressions of energy in conjunction with your physical reality, and offer yourself that type of imagery.  Are you understanding?

HOWARD:  Yes, I am.  Marvelous!

ELIAS:  Let me also offer you one more aspect of information, in conjunction with this subject matter, that may offer you an element of clarity in this also.

I am not expressing to you that this translation or imaging of what you have created and of this movement of energy is a distortion, for in a manner of speaking, it is not.  In another manner of speaking, it may be viewed as a distortion, as it is not the actual expression of energy in the form of consciousness outside of physical reality.

But let me also offer clarity in this, that it is reality regardless of the form, and the form matters not, for it is an expression of consciousness regardless of the form.  Therefore, in that respect, it is not a distortion.  It is merely a translation.  It is an imaging of energy in a different manner, but it continues to be an expression of consciousness, and in that expression of consciousness, even within the translation and the imagery, it may also be viewed as not a distortion.  Are you understanding?

HOWARD:  Yes.

ELIAS:  Very well.

HOWARD:  Once again, it’s creating your own reality.  I mean, it’s like a little message or bulletin board that I allow myself to view now and then, and I understand it perfectly.

ELIAS:  Quite.  You are correct, and this is not to be discounted, for this IS your reality, and it is quite real!

HOWARD:  I got it ... well, I hope I do!

ELIAS:  Ha ha!

HOWARD:  I have a question regarding the book, and I’ve got several follow-ups if we want to go that way, and depending on the time.

I refer to the Founders, and I wonder now if that would be the Dream Walkers.  Would I be correct in assuming that the Dream Walkers are the Founders in my book?

ELIAS:  In a manner of speaking ... liberally speaking! (Grinning)

HOWARD:  Okay! (Laughing, and Elias chuckles)

Can I ask you ... a little further on here, ‘cause this is a longer, more rhetorical question.  It seems to me that the story of the book comes from other dimensions, perhaps — well, I’ll go on — and melded itself here and now in this dimension.

The source, as near as I can tell, was from a civilization that was into mind games.  I think this was Lemuria.  I feel that they were accustomed to working reality and practicing magic.  I see a priest or a group of priests taking on an idea called polarity, and then out-picturing it to the stars, to Lyra, and then releasing it to see what would happen.

This would mean that those of us who were involved in this experience became so attached to it that we became a part of it, and it slipped in and out of dimensions, playing out various alternate realities, until it returned back home here on earth.  Is this where this story comes from?

ELIAS:  I shall express to you that the story in itself does not necessarily spring from other-dimensional focuses, but a recognition, in part, of what you have created — as essences participating in this particular dimension — within other expressions of this dimension.

Now; in this, you may allow yourself the recognition that other-dimensional aspects may be influencing, and in that influence and within your subjective knowing and recognition of the lack of separation of consciousness and of essence, you also allow an interplay of other dimensions and other-dimensional focuses, and the recognition of some of the similarities in movement — not necessarily in the similarities of physical creation, but some of the similarities of movement of energy — and the explorations of these different dimensions, so to speak.

For within the explorations of the physical dimensions, there is playfulness expressed in which you occupy your attention at times in playing with your reality, and in that, you have created that action in this physical dimension also, in similar manners to other physical dimensions.

Therefore, in the creation of this work, this book, you have allowed yourself a piercing, so to speak, of the veils that are set between the different physical dimensions, and a recognition that the movement that you create in your exploration and your playfulness in any of these physical dimensions — and within nonphysical expressions of consciousness — is quite similar, although may be objectively expressed in different manners.

Therefore, as you have created this type of playfulness in a viewing of the manipulation of energy outside of yourself, in a manner of speaking, physically, you have created a type of foundation within this writing to be identifying of that type of play and that type of expression, which in your very physical terms “evolves,” so to speak; not in the progression of better or more enlightened, but more in a sideways evolution, in a manner of speaking, that you expand your exploration and your playfulness.

And you recognize — as you approach your shift in consciousness and as you begin now to insert your shift in consciousness into your physical reality objectively — that your attention in your playfulness moves from the expression of viewing outside within the creations of your physical reality — and the identification or the association that certain elements of your reality are separated from you and are outside of you, and that they, being outside of you, are influencing of you — and in turning your attention, you are beginning the recognition of that you ARE those elements, and that YOU are incorporating the movements in playfulness and manipulating the energy of the movement.

But the writing addresses to the familiar and what has been known within your reality thus far, in a manner of speaking, in how you have held your attention — in the manipulation of energy and the exploration of this physical creation of this physical reality — in the viewing of elements of it as outside of you.

HOWARD:  Yeah.  I most definitely understand what you’re talking about.  It’s remarkable, the complexity of the mind, and how the subjective awareness or tapping into ... you’ve used the word “playfulness” several times in reference to the book, and I think I’ve finally got it!  I think I finally understand.

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha!

HOWARD:  Thank you so much!

ELIAS:  You are very welcome.

HOWARD:  I have a question ... well, actually it’s a response or an observation.

Recently, I was surprised to learn that Oscar Wilde’s boyhood home was at Number One Merrion Square.  Now, I’m sure you were aware that I was in Dublin for a work assignment about twelve years ago, and I worked at Number Twenty-nine Merrion Square, just down the street.  I can recall passing your home and reading the plaque, but made no connection to the place, nor to Oscar.

It is curious that my current memories of Dublin are of two things.  The first is of O’Dwyer’s Pub, where I spent a lot of time learning to like Harp, and the second is of the place where I was billeted on the Leffy, just down the river-walk from a tavern called The Bridge, where I learned to like Guinness.

I’ve remarked many times to Margot about the space I lived in and how neat it was.  I particularly liked this billet, because around the turn of the century, the original house was the home of a poet whose name I have forgotten.  Being in that space and enjoying the entire experience, I felt like I had gifted myself a serendipitous moment.

I was trying very hard at the time to change my paradigm.  A couple of months earlier, while I was in Kuwait, I had decided I would write my thoughts and insights, and that this action would keep me vital and alive.  It was in Dublin that I wrote some very good poetry and verse, short stories, essays, and I wanted to do more, which I think I have.

So, I would like to know first, what is it about the smell of peat that takes you straight to never-never land?  To me, it’s a fragrance that will send you sailing faster than a bong of pot.

Second, whose house was I living in, and why did I feel at home?

Third, what happened on Merrion Square, especially around your house, that disturbs me?  I did not like the vibes coming from your house.  Even though it was just up the street from where I worked, I never went there except on occasion when I would take a walk, and I never went back.  I get the feeling of shootings and killings, perhaps a mob action.

And finally, the next time Guinness sponsors a “Win-A-Pub” contest, would you be interested in entering a fifty-word poem in the contest?  I think it would be neat to have Oscar’s place on the Leffy!

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha ha!

I shall address to you that you have allowed yourself the opportunity to be tapping into energy and to be assimilating energy in a manner that offers you what you may term to be inspiration.

As to your question of why you have derived inspiration and have held the experience and feeling of comfort in the dwelling that you occupied in this particular physical location, I may express to you that you do also hold a focus in that place, so to speak, in which you have allowed yourself an expression of freedom in your own creativity, and as you draw upon energy within self that is familiar to you, you have allowed yourself to be drawing that familiarity to your objective awareness, and that allows you an expression that is beneficial in lending a validation to yourself in energy, and you subsequently allowing yourself your own expression of ease in creativity in THIS focus.

As to your identification of association with discord or even what may be identified as violence, in conjunction with the dwelling that you identify as the home of the focus of this individual or of that aspect of my essence as Oscar in that time framework, I may express to you in this, what you have allowed yourself to be accessing is an energy deposit, which is quite common within your physical dimension.

As I have stated previously, individuals throughout your globe — all of you — create energy deposits within your physical dimension, and within your physical dwellings, you do create an intensity of these energy deposits, which may become energy centers, in a manner of speaking.  And in this, there are energy deposits in that physical location also, in your dimension, which have been created by the individuals that have occupied that space arrangement — myself and other individuals also.

In that, as you associate this particular physical location and dwelling with a particular focus of essence, you also have allowed yourself, without a thought process and without objective information, an assimilation of energy in the emotional quality of the energy deposit, which holds information, in a manner of speaking, as to a type of general expression of emotional quality which, in a manner of speaking, was expressed within that dwelling in that time framework, of myself and other individuals.

This also is a translation that you have created in your identification of physical terms that shall offer you an association of intensity.

You express physical terms of violence and mob scene, in your words, which you create a specific type of association in emotional quality with, associating that with an intensity of emotional expression or violence.  Within the focus that was expressed by this essence and in conjunction with the choice of family, although there was an expression of encouragement, there was also an expression of what you now would term to be oppression, and in that oppression, there were great emotional qualities expressed.

HOWARD:  Oh my.  I got it.

ELIAS:  In the association with myself, as choosing a tremendous expression of emotional quality within that particular focus, there was a tremendous expression of emotional output in that location.  There was also a tremendous allowance for emotional affectingness by that focus, within the influence of other individuals.

Therefore, I may express to you that that particular focus incorporated a tremendous expression of allowance of influence of other individuals within the family relationship, which translated into a tremendous expression of emotional quality in that particular time framework.

As to your inquiry of an essay, I shall consider your proposal.

HOWARD:  Good!  Wouldn’t that be neat?  The dead guy wins!

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha ha!

HOWARD:  Of course we won’t say anything.  And doesn’t the smell of peat take you there?

ELIAS:  In this, I shall express to you that this is an association that is created within the physical focus of many individuals.

I may express to you that within the manifestation of that particular focus of which we speak presently, there was a similar association, and therefore there is an understanding of what you are expressing.  This is an individual association, but I am understanding of your association in your creation with this particular “fragrance,” so to speak? (Grinning)

HOWARD:  I got a name like three or four minutes ago ... her name was Ann Morrison.  Was that me?

ELIAS:  I may express to you that you have allowed yourself an accessing of a name which holds significance to you, although is not you, for this individual held close friendship to you.

HOWARD:  Was I the poet then that had this house?

ELIAS:  Yes.

HOWARD:  And what was her name?

ELIAS:  YOU may be investigating!  HA HA!

HOWARD:  I’d have to go back there and read the plaque!

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha!  Not necessarily!  You need not be physically incorporating this action, for you hold the ability to be accessing this information! (They both laugh)

Therefore, you stand challenged, my friend!

HOWARD:  Yes, I do!  Well, I thoroughly enjoyed the whole experience.  I’ve told Margot about that place.  It makes me weepy. (Emotionally)

ELIAS:  Ha ha!  And is this not joyful?

HOWARD:  Yes!  Thank you. (Elias chuckles)

I have another question, because I’ve never really asked this before.  But I’ll start out with the presumption ... am I a Dream Walker?  If not, how did I get here, and from whom did I come?

ELIAS:  As to your actual question — are you a Dream Walker — no.  Do you hold the aspect of a Dream Walker, yes.

HOWARD:  Where do I go from here?  Who am I fractured from, or....

MARGOT:  (Interjecting)  Fragmented.

HOWARD:  ... as she would say!

ELIAS:  (Laughing)  Good morning, Giselle!

MARGOT:  Good morning, Elias! (Margot and Howard crack up)

ELIAS:  (Laughing)  You are inquiring of the fragmentation.  Let me express to you, Bosht, this shall not offer you information, for you are attempting to be tracing what you identify as lineage.

HOWARD:  Yes.

ELIAS:  And in this, it matters not, for the mergence and intertwining of essences is so very intricate and inclusive, so to speak, that although I may offer to you a name, so to speak, or a tone translation into a name, this is merely an expression of one identification, and at this point within your movement, this merely serves to reinforce the beliefs that you align with already.

For we shall now allow the movement into a wider awareness that all of the individuals that may hold an actual name of an essence that they have been fragmented from merely hold one small aspect of information, and this is, in a manner of speaking, an insignificant element of information.

I may express to you, individuals that hold the information that they are fragmented of the essence of Patel or Rastin or Elias hold merely a speck of information, in your very physical terms, as to the actual action of fragmentation.  This is not the same action as a birth of a child, so to speak, within your physical terms.  Therefore, you also may not trace your lineage or your heritage in fragmentation to what may be identified as the Dream Walkers in the same manner that you may trace your lineage or your heritage in physical terms, through your familial expressions within your physical dimension.

HOWARD:  I understand.  Well, since it was not terribly important to me ... and others might decide that this is terribly important.  The reason I’m asking this is because on New Year’s or during our ... by the way, wasn’t that celebration that we had on New Year’s wonderful?

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha ha!

HOWARD:  We said, “Hello!  We’re alive, we’re all humans here, and we’re co-creating!”  Y2K was a media event.  That would be my guess.  Everything was wonderful, just wonderful!

ELIAS:  You have accomplished movement into your expression of your new millennium with celebration and joyfulness!

HOWARD:  That is absolutely correct!  And so during this time, I was saying something about an incident that occurred, and Vic said, “Wait a minute.  You changed your name, your essence name.”  The event that I have decided was the catalyst for this occurred twelve years ago.

I was driving home from the bar, quite drunk, and for no reason at all, I came to an intersection ... let me put it this way.  I came to an intersection and immediately applied the brakes because the light had changed to red, although I am now realizing that the light was green and I could have gone through.  I slammed on the brakes, and two cars were drag-racing on the cross street that I stopped at abruptly, and I sat there and trembled and shivered, because had I gone through, I would be most definitely sharing your space instead of this space that I am currently in.  And Vic said, “That’s probably when you changed your name,” or fractured or splintered or whatever.  Is this correct, or a good observation?

ELIAS:  I shall express to you that this is not an identification, in objective terms, of a moment within your linear time framework in which you have fragmented.  This is an identification of a particular moment within your linear time framework in which you have allowed yourself an exchange of primary aspects of self, and also a moment which you may physically, objectively identify as a creation of a probable self and its insertion into a probable reality, but it is not an identification of fragmentation.

HOWARD:  Well, I changed my name, which means something was severed recently.  I said to Margot recently, “I don’t feel I’m the final focus.  I don’t feel I’m the last or the first or anything.  I feel completely holistic unto myself.”  I don’t know how else to say this because this is not an area that I’ve ever gone into before, or even though of actually, until recently.  So I guess the question is, am I the final focus?  Am I the ONLY focus?

ELIAS:  This is your offering to yourself — quite in conjunction with the movement of this shift in consciousness, I may also add — in which you are allowing yourself an objective recognition in your widening of awareness, which offers you more clarity in your understanding of yourself and of the movement of consciousness, of essence, and of focuses of essence.

Now; let me express to you a validation in this association that you are newly creating objectively, for what you are recognizing is a movement more into the reality — not the concept — of you as essence, not as the focus of essence, which is defined or identified as less than or merely a part of essence.

In this, you also allow yourself the recognition that the belief and the misunderstanding has been, to this point, that the designation or identification or definition of final focus in this information is that you shall not remanifest, and if you are defining yourself as not a final focus, you may be remanifesting.  And in this, you are moving beyond this also, in that you are identifying yourself as yourself and not in conjunction with remanifestation per se at all.

THIS is the movement into clarity, in objective terms, in conjunction with the movement and the reality of consciousness and of essence, which I have been offering information to you all in conjunction with, but you have not allowed yourselves an objective understanding or clarity of in many areas yet, and this area of subject matter is one of those expressions of concept that has not held clarity to this point.

In this, what you are recognizing is that the focus IS all of essence and that there is no separation, and regardless that you may be designated as the final focus or not the final focus of essence, you shall not remanifest within this physical dimension, for this would be redundant.

Therefore, as yourself and as all focuses are simultaneous, no focus remanifests, for they are all occurring within the now, and in that now, at the point of disengagement of any focus from this physical dimension, your attention is turned, and therefore is no longer occupying itself in the involvement of the physical dimension in that manner.

This is the action of essence, which you are all of, and this is what you are moving into the objective awareness of now.

I shall express to you that I have stated quite literally that the turn of your time framework, in physical terms, is a turn-point also.  As you have entered this time framework of your new millennium, you also are creating the beginning of your insertion of this shift in consciousness — in physical, objective terms — in your reality.

Therefore, I say again, now it begins, in objective manner and terms, and in this action, you are redefining terms and you are redefining your reality, and this — what you are recognizing now — is another element of an evidence of your individual redefinition of terms and redefinition of your reality, and a recognition of your reality in a different manner.  You are objectively altering your perception, which is an element of this shift in consciousness.  Are you understanding?

HOWARD:  Oh yes.  I would say that it’s a time of gathering — this would be my term, at least that’s the thought I had — of collecting the loose ends, re-establishing oneself, not feeling so scattered.  That would be my feedback to what you have just said.  Now I’ll need to read this — what you have just said — again for more insight.  Thank you so much.

ELIAS:  You are very welcome.

HOWARD:  I have a question regarding my son.  As you know, and I’ve expressed to Mary, we’ve been doing an email thing, and his recent response has caused me to think that I’m not talking to my son; I’m talking to a group of people.  I would like to know, is he using my correspondence in a class?  His scholarship is very good, but I sense it to be non-personal, and the work of his wife and her bible study class and many of his friends.  Am I talking to my son, or to those that he has allowed to be in authority?

ELIAS:  Both, in objective terms.  And in this, I shall alter your terminology and express to you that you are talking AT them, not to them.

HOWARD:  Hmm.  Well, that is for sure!  Because questions that he poses, based upon his claim to have read the book ... I have said to him a couple of times, the answers are IN the book.  I mean, this is my position.  It’s been very frustrating, and I have decided how to proceed, I think.  I will take my own counsel on this.  One last thing.  Margot has suggested — this is where I’m taking her counsel — that I need to know his essence name, that it would be a good thing for me to know so I can deal with it in a subjective manner — his essence name, family of consciousness, alignment, and orientation.

ELIAS:  Very well. (Pause)  Essence name, Rhiengh. (rine)

HOWARD:  Hmm.  That is cool!

MARGOT:  Spell it please, Elias.

ELIAS:  R-H-I-E-N-G-H.

HOWARD:  Whoa!  Good Gaelic name; Celtic.

ELIAS:  Essence family, Zuli; alignment in this focus, Vold.

HOWARD:  Wow.

ELIAS:  Orientation, common.

HOWARD:  Hmm.  Very intense young man!

ELIAS:  Be remembering, there are many aspects of expression that objectively appear to you to be crossing over between these families of Milumet and Zuli.

MARGOT:  Hmm!

HOWARD:  Oh ... is he a braided type of individual?

ELIAS:  No, I am not expressing this.  I am merely offering you a reminder, in conjunction with the information which is held within your game, that these two families, many times in their expressions objectively, appear to be crossing over each other.

HOWARD:  Okay.

ELIAS:  And in this, I may also offer you one more statement to be remembering, that what appears in clarity within your perception and what you view within ease in your perception may not necessarily be expressed as clearly within another individual’s perception.

HOWARD:  That has been graphically brought home to me!

ELIAS:  And BOTH are reality! (Chuckling)

HOWARD:  I do understand that.

ELIAS:  Very well. (Chuckling)

I shall be expressing my affection to you this day, I shall be anticipating our next meeting, and I shall be anticipating our meeting also, Giselle! (Chuckling)

MARGOT:  Thank you.

ELIAS:  I express to you both this day, in tremendous energy of lovingness ...

HOWARD:  Thank you.

ELIAS:  ... au revoir.

HOWARD:  Good-bye.

Elias departs at 3:00 PM.

© 2000  Vicki Pendley/Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

---

Copyright 2000 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.