Probate records consulted: Index of Wills, Archdeaconry Court of Surrey 1752-1858 and Index of Surrey Wills & Admins Commissary & Peculiar Courts 1752-1858; Archdeaconry Court of Surrey Wills (Dioces of Winchester) 1725-1750; Archdeaconry Court of Surrey (Diocese of Southwark) 1728-1730; Commisary Court of Surrey 1697-1728; Surrey Will Abtracts 1470-1856 (OriginsNetwork)
Surrey Will Abstracts 1470-1856
Thomas Stary 1561 [SW/6_285]
Thomas Stary (X) of St Olave Southwark, sick 14 Jan 1560/61 (to be buried in the churchyard)
to my eldest daughter Sarah [? Sarah Stary] a bedstead with featherbed and bolster lying on said joined bedstead; to my daughter Ellen [? Ellen Stary] three hatmakers' basins of copper and a brass kettle commonly called a walking kettle; my wife [unnamed] to be exec.
Witnesses: Thomas Harrold, curate; John Holdesworth
Proved: 31 Jan 1560/61 to exec. [DW/PA/7/6 ff.224r-224v]
Mark Harrison 1632 [SW/12_149]
Mark Harrison of St Saviour Southwark, sick 16 Mar 1631/2 (to poor of Clink Liberty 10s)
to my cousin John Harrison 10s and to four children of his 5s each; to my cousin William Harrison his brother 10s; to my cousin Judith Iremonger, widow the 8s she borrowed from me; to Catherine Wooders, widow 5s; to my cousin Joan Burch, Judith's daughter 5s; residue to my wife Margaret Harrison, exec.
Witnesses: Thomas Butler; John Sterry; Thomas Bell
Proved: 10 Apr 1632 to exec. [DW/PA/7/12 f.76v; DW/PA/5/1632/44]
Anthony Sterry 1633 [ SW/12_176]
Anthony Sterry of St Olave Southwark, cooper 17 Mar 1631/2
to my son Peter Sterry my messuage, etc. called the Black Bear, Horsleydown Lane, St Olave with all wainscot portions therein and all my inheritance of same; to my son Nathaniel Sterry all my messuages in my tenure in Mill Lane, St Olave Southwark with wainscot portions therein but gift to Nathaniel to be enjoyed for life by my wife Juliana Sterry; residue to wife, exec.; if both my wife and sons die house etc. to my brother John Sterry
Overseers: brother John Sterry (£1 for a ring)
Witnesses: Robert Windsor, writer; Michael Peack his servant; John Lamperd
Proved: 26 Jan 1632/3 to exec. [DW/PA/7/12 ff.93r-v; DW/PA/5/1633/108]
(Also in Surrey Probate Record to 1649 -BRS)
Thomas Weston 1636 [SW/12_464]
Thomas Weston (X) of St Saviour Southwark, gardener, weak 24 Nov 1635
to my son in law John Stirrey £4 and to his wife my daughter Margaret Stirrey (who has already had her portion) £4; to my grandsons Thomas Stirrey, John Stirrey and Joseph Stirrey children of said John and Margaret £4 each; to my daughter Ann Weston £5 at marriage or 21; residue to my wife Ann Weston, exec.
Witnesses: John Wells; Henry Holt; William Richbell, writer
Proved: 17 Feb 1635/6 to exec. [DW/PA/7/12 ff.251v-252r; DW/PA/5/1636/112]
Leonard Tattersall 1663 [SW/20_307]
Leonard Tattersall (X) of St Saviour Southwark, chandler, sick 24 Dec 1658
to John Tattersall and his wife £1 and to their child 10s; to Thomas Tattersall and his wife £1 10s over what he has had already; to Sarah wife of John Tattersall 'my brother's child' 10s; to Leonard son of Robert Tattersall £1 2s piece of gold and all my books; Robert Tattersall, exec.
Overseers: Thomas Steed; George Sterry, neighbours (a pair of gloves each)
Witnesses: Frances Crowder; Edward Dedford, scr.
Proved: 30 Oct 1663 to exec. [DW/PA/7/14 Q.23; DW/PA/5/1663/79]
Charles Calfe 1665 [SW/19_86]
Charles Calfe (X) of South Lambeth, gardener 15 0ct 1665
to my wife Catherine Calfe, exec. and son Charles jointly 2 acres of garden ground and house with three rooms and a shed; to my son Francis Calfe three acres of garden and if he marries at his marriage day two rooms upright over each other
Overseers: George Sterey of St Saviour Southwark, nailor
Witnesses: Samuel Sterey (X), Thomas Vale Proved: 31 0ct 1665 [DW/PC/5/1665/32]
Philip Graves 1666 [SW/20_883]
Philip Graves of St Saviour Southwark, shipwright, sick and weak 30 Oct 1665
all to my brother John Graves and sister Elizabeth Sterrey wife of George Sterrey, execs.
Witnesses: Peldeth(?) Saword; Richard Freame
Proved: 14 and 18 Apr 1666 to execs. [DW/PA/5/1666/38]
John Sterry 1672 [SW/21_103]
John Sterry of St Saviour Southwark, cooper 21 Jul 1671
to my grandsons Samuel and Benjamin Sterry, linen drapers £10 each out of freehold tenements on the Backside, St Saviour and then freehold to my son Joseph; to wife Joan all household goods; residue to son Joseph, exec. Witnesses: Edward Brooker; Francis Bunting, scr.
Proved: 21 Feb 1671/2 to exec. [DW/PA/7/15 Q.5; DW/PA/5/1672/72]
James Collins 1677 [SW/25_169]
James Collins of Sutton, yeoman 28 Mar 1676
to my wife Joan Collins a featherbed, a bolster, feather pillow, two pairs of flaxen sheets, b2, a green rug, a brass kettle, an iron pot, a brass skillet with use of room in her widowhood; to my son William Collins all my messuage in Sutton for life and after to my grandson William Collins with remainder to my grandson James Collins; to my son Henry Collins £50; to my son Thomas Collins 10s; to my daughter Mary Collins £50, a bedstead, a featherbed and a bolster in my chamber and its trappings and my brewing furnace; residue to my son William, exec.
Overseers: kinsman James Collins, jnr. and James Best of Cheam, yeoman (5s each)
Witnesses: Edward Seddon; Nicholas Sterrey
Proved: 30 Jul 1677 to exec. [DW/PC/7/1 QQ.10-11; DW/PC/5/1677/20] (£140 11s 6d)
Dorothy Wheelewright 1686 [SW/25_768]
Dorothy Wheelewright (X) of St Olave Southwark, widow, sick and weak 31 Jan 1683/4
to Joshua son of Joshua Burle of Hornchurch, Essex, mercer my two tenements in Romford, Essex in occupation of Thomas Oakefeild alias Scotford; to my nephew John Sterry £5; to my niece Hannah Sterry £10; to my nephews Richard, John and Mathew Baker 1s each; to my nephew Robert Baker £1; to my former servant Alice wife of Philip Lopton £2; to nephew William Dawkins 1s; residue to my nephew Joshua Burle of Hornchurch, mercer, exec.
Witnesses: John Tidman; John Allen; Susan Richards (X)
Proved: 3 Jun 1686 to exec. [DW/PC/7/1 Q.56; DW/PC/5/1686/42] (died about a week ago)
Richard Post 1691 [SW/23_207]
Richard Post of St Olave Southwark, barber, weak 1 Oct 1690
to my daughter Martha Post £4 p.a. which my son Benjamin Post to pay during lease of house I live in; to my son Jacob Post £100 at 21 which £100 three months after I die to my brother Thomas Huttson and friend Richard Dimond in trust for son; to my son Jacob my old house adjoining house I now live in (paying to my son Benjamin £1 10s towards ground rent) and they to apprentice Jacob; to my son in law Thomas Hill 5s; to my grandson Thomas Padley son of John Padley £50 at 21; to my sister Ann Huttson a broad piece of old gold worth £1 3s 6d; to my brother in law Thomas Huttson 10s and my best cloak; to my nephews and nieces Emanuel Huttson, John Huttson, Thomas Huttson, Elizabeth Huttson and Mehatabel Huttson 5s each; to my sister Joan Burtwell a £1 3s 6d piece of old gold; to my brother William Burtwell and to their three children William Burtwell, Ann Burtwell and Elizabeth Burtwell 5s each; to my son John Padley and Mary Padley £2 6s and to John my best cloth coat lined with Bengal; to my brother in law Thomas Smith at Margaret's Hill 5s; rest of clothes to my son Jacob; all household goods to my children Benjamin, Martha, Mary and Jacob; to my brother Thomas Huttson and Walter Miers £20; to my friend Robert Rainer a £1 3s 6d broad piece of gold; to my uncle Robert Lock £1; to my son Benjamin house I live in and £50; residue to my son Benjamin, daughter Martha and son Jacob; son Benjamin and son in law John Padley of St Olave Southwark, execs.
Overseers: brother Thomas Huttson; friends Stephen Crisp; Walter Miers; John Feild
Witnesses: Charles Payne; John Allin; John Sterrey (X)
Proved: 22 Apr 1691 to execs. [DW/PA/7/16 Q.17; DW/PA/5/1691/98] (£508 16s 6d)
George Long 1705 [SW/26_765]
George Long (X) of St Saviour Southwark, cooper, sick 22 Feb 1704/5
to my wife Elizabeth Long £30 and furniture in my lodging chamber except the press and chest there, also to her my best silver tankard and 12 pewter plates; to my daughter Elizabeth Long £25 and my second best silver tankard; to my granddaughter Elizabeth Russell £30 out of £50 owed me on bond from her father John Russell at marriage or 21; to my grandson George Russell £10 out of said £50 at 21 with remainder to his brother Jonathan Russell; to my said grandson Jonathan Russell out of said bond at 21 with remainder to his brother George Russell; to my granddaughter Elizabeth Russell a silver tankard at marriage or 21; to my brother Henry Long and his wife 5s each; to my son in law John Russell 5s; to my wife's son Thomas Gregory and his wife 5s each; residue to my son George, exec.
Witnesses: George Sterry; William Bingham; Samuel Hilliard, jnr.
Proved: 17 Apr 1705 to exec. [DW/PA/7/18 Q.29; DW/PA/5/1705/52]
Alice Elles 1717 [SW/29_185]
Alice Elles of London, widow 17 Nov 1713 (to be buried in St Mary Overy Southwark)
to John Mason £1; to Ann Stery £1; to John Webe £1; to Henry Holt £1; to (Mr) Hunt in Crutched Friars £1; to John Gesse £1; to Mary Cook £1; to John Elles £1; to James Torland £20; to Richard Torland £20; to Catherine Torland £10; to John Torland and William Torland her sons £5 each; to Elizabeth Holt £10 and to her daughter Elizabeth £5 and her son Henry Holt £5; residue to John Humfreyes of London, periwigmaker, exec.
Witnesses: John Skynner; Ann Weblay
Codicil 19 Jan 1714/5: I have left to my cousin Catherine Thurland [sic] £10 she is now dead and
legacy now to her two sons and if James Turland dies to his brother Richard and if Elizabeth Holt dies to her children
Witness: John Gase
Proved: 31 Jul 1717 to exec. [DW/PA/5/1717/32] (d. last Monday in St Saviour Southwark)
(Also in Archdeaconry Court of Surrey (Will Abstracts) 1716-1721)
Thomas Sterry 1726 [SW/33_61]
Thomas Sterry of St Thomas Southwark, tallow chandler 3 Jun 1723
to wife Elizabeth freehold messuage in Water Lane, Bermondsey and leasehold messuage; to son Samuel £100 his uncle Thomas Wasey left him at 21; to son in law John Gobsill and his wife Mary £5 each; after death of my wife leasehold houses in Fair Street and Artillery Lane, St Olave as follows: to son Thomas house and yard Clenton and Chilman now have and house in Artillery Lane Winter has and stable there Chappello holds; to son Wasey house, yard and workshop Copper now has and house in Artillery Lane Richard Rutt has and house in St Thomas I live in; to daughter Elizabeth wife of Benjamin Reeve of St Saviour, blueman bakehouse and yard Henry Allen has and house Robert Reeve holds of me; to son Samuel house Thomas Anderson holds of me and room William Hedges has and cellar Elias Symes has and room John Bentham has and house in Artillery Lane (widow) Howard has, house of easement at end of Artillery Lane to be used in common; re house Isaac Levy lives in and house Joseph Hickman holds rents to be divided between my four children; freehold estate which I bought from Henry Wilson in Water Lane, Bermondsey after the death of wife first to son Thomas houses and ground (widow) Bowry lives in and house and ground Susanna Dewley lives in and house and ground Thomas Bacon lives in (£17 p.a. in all); to son Wasey house and ground James Cannadee has by lease of £8 p.a. and house and ground Robert Wells has at £4 10s p.a. and house and ground Samuel Motley lives in at £4 10s p.a.; to daughter Elizabeth Reeve house and ground Jacob Perkins lives in and house and ground John Woodworth lives in and house and ground William French lives in and house and ground Samuel Foyller lives in (£17 p.a. in all); to son Samuel houses and ground (widow) Farrier lives in at £4 8s p.a., house and ground John Archer lives in at £4 p.a. and house and ground John Wright lives in at £4 8s p.a. and house and ground John Grant lives in at £4 p.a. and house in Three Oak Lane, St Olave John Beazley late held at £5 p.a. (£22 p.a. in all) sharing the bridge belonging to the houses in Water Lane of 10s p.a. and keeping same in repair; residue to wife Elizabeth, exec. with sons Wasey and Samuel
Witnesses: Mary Bright; Martin Watson; John Bright, scr.
Proved: 19 Apr 1726 to execs. (who affirm as Quakers) [DW/PA/7/20; DW/PA/5/1726/127]
(d. within a month)
Ann Webber 1738 [SW/34_546]
Ann Webber of Bermondsey, widow, weak 29 Jul 1738
to friend Ann Jostling £1 1s; to my friend Wasey Sterry, jnr. 10s 6d; residue to my son John Johnson of Bermondsey, house carpenter, exec.
Witnesses: William Coake; Hannah Hammock (X); John Shuckford; Peter Shuckford
Proved: 6 Sep 1738 to exec. [DW/PA/7/23; DW/PA/5/1738/116]
William Chaplin 1740 [SW/32_270]
William Chaplin of Lambeth, gardener, weak 12 Apr 1740
residue to my friend Benjamin Sterry of St George Southwark, seedsman, executor in trust for my wife Elizabeth Chaplin. Witnesses John Cock, Francis Preist (case of Benjamin Sterry vs Robert Sneed pretended creditor). Proved 6 Jun 1740 to exec. who affirms as a Quaker. Died last May. [DW/PC/7/3; DW/PC/5/1740/5]
(Also in Commissary Court of Surrey: Will Abstracts 1729-1762)
Mary Ealand 1744 [SW/36_549]
Mary Ealand of St Thomas Southwark, widow, infirm 22 Nov 1744
to my daughter Mary Gray wife of Robert Gray 1s; residue to my daughter Ann Ealand; friend Wasey Sterry of St Thomas Southwark, distiller and daughter Ann, execs.
Witnesses: William Clark; William Adams
Proved: 27 Dec 1744 to execs. (Wasey affirms as a Quaker) [DW/PA/7/25; DW/PA/5/1744/26]
Samuel Massey 1751 [SW/37_528]
Samuel Massey of Wandsworth, victualler 5 Jun 1751
all to my wife Dorcas Massey, exec.
Witnesses: Beaum Beaumont; Nuce Sterry; Richard Greening
Proved: 6 Jun 1751 to exec. [DW/PA/7/27; DW/PA/5/1751/60] (died this morning)
John Keeler 1755 [SW/38_278]
John Keeler of Wandsworth, gardener, very weak and infirm 10 Jun 1755
all to my wife Mary Keeler, exec. for life and then to my son William Keeler and then to my next son John Keeler and then to my third son Joseph Keeler and then to my son Charles Keeler
Witnesses: Nuce Sterry; Simon Temple; John Jordan
Proved: 9 Aug 1755 to exec. [DW/PA/7/28; DW/PA/5/1755/49] (died last Jun)
Elizabeth Vickers 1766 [SW/39_263]
Elizabeth Vickers (X) of St Olave Southwark 11 Jun 1766 (stone over my grave)
to William son of William Breach and Mary Breach and Catherine Robinson a diamond ring each; to Wasey Sterry £5; residue to my servant Elizabeth Percival, exec.
Witnesses: William Breach; Rachel Hall
Proved: 22 Nov 1766 to exec., sp. [DW/PA/7/29 ff.210r-v; DW/PA/5/1766/70] (died this month,
widow) <14 Feb 1767 transferred to Prerogative Court of Canterbury>


Thursday, January 14, 2010
On Sunday, January 24th, we begin a series in worship that focuses on local issues. Actually, they are simply human issues. Mental health and depression is this week's focus. We are going to continue the theme of baptismal identity which began last week in the music that the choir shares this week. We will open with an introit, "The Baptism of Christ" by Andrew March and will also sing the verses for the hymn "You are Mine." These upcoming worship experiences should be significant and memorable for all who are involved. Hope you can be a part of it.


Caspar Olevianus on Justification and Good Works
168 Q: What kind of antidote to this accusation does faith find in the sacrifice of Christ?
A: It is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which originated and developed out of His voluntary obedience, or perfect love of God and neighbor. Since the One who suffered death kept the law perfectly and thus was not liable to death, I believe that such a death was complete payment not only for the evil I have done but also for the good that I should have done but failed to do. The latter is also sin and has also been erased and paid for with the obedience of Christ’s death (Phil. 2; Rom. 5; Gal. 3,4; 1 John 1)
169 Q: How would it be however, if we countered this accusation of Satan before the judgment seat of God with a kind of righteousness that derived partly from the suffering and death of Christ and partly from our good works?
A: We could not do that without great danger both to the honor of God and to our own consciences. First of all, if we should add something, however little, from our works to the righteousness that Christ has obtained for us by His suffering and death, then we could still have reason to boast in ourselves. But faith certainly and completely removes all boasting from us and ascribes it to Christ alone (Rom. 3:27, 4:2; Jer. 9:23; 1 Cor. 1:31). Therefore, we must never add even a fragment of our works, no matter how big or small it is, to the obedience or righteousness of Jesus Christ. Otherwise faith would present Christ’s righteousness before the tribunal of God as though it were not complete in itself but needed to be supplemented by us. This is what the holy apostle Paul teaches in Philippians 3:7-10.
Second, if we were to mix our own works together with the merits of Christ, we would not have a peaceful conscience. Believer’s obedience and good works are still sullied with the stains of the flesh and are imperfect; much that is sinful still clings to their good works. Thus if their works were presented before the judgment seat of God, they would of necessity be liable to the sentence that God has already pronounced in His Word, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them (Gal. 3:13). It is, therefore, easy to see that if we should depend in part on our works, even a little, our consciences could never be at peace or assured that we are justified before God and can stand in His presence. Instead they would be assured of our condemnation. As Scripture says, “As many as are of the works of the law [that is, of the opinion that they are wholly or partially justified before God by these works] are under the curse” (Gal. 3:10). Therefore, says Paul in Romans 4:16, we are freely justified through faith “so that the promise might be sure.”
The entire doctrine of justification, then, has two goals on which we should focus our attention: (1) that God alone be given the glory for justifying us (Rom. 3,4); nothing remains of which even the greatest of saints can boast, not even Abraham himself (Rom. 4:2); and (2) that our consciences be peaceful and steadfast (Rom. 4). These two goals of our justification are fundamentally altered, however, if we should add our own works, wholly or in part, to the righteousness that Christ obtained for us and freely given to us. It is only right, then, that we let the perfect righteousness that Christ obtained for us by His death suffice for us. Then we shall not be robbing Christ of His glory and shall have peace and quiet in our consciences. For it is impossible that the perfect, eternal righteousness of Christ, freely given us to be ours through faith, should lack anything before the judgment seat of God. We have absolutely nothing to worry about if we hold on to this righteousness with a genuine trust.
170 Q: You are not saying, then, that good works are useless?
A: They do not serve to make us right with God, either wholly or in part, but they do serve this purpose: after we have been freely and graciously justified through the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, we show with good works that we are thankful to God the Lord, so that God might be praised through us. That is the reason we were originally created and then redeemed, as Zachariah teaches in Luke 1:74,75: “That we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness that is pleasing to him all the days of our life.”
Good works are also useful because by the example of our good works we win others to Christ and keep those already won from falling away. The longer they are kept close to Christ, the more they are built up.
– Casper Olivianus, A Firm Foundation (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1995), 115-116
A life of gratitude is a reaction to the gospel believed
The Christian’s expression of gratitude is never at odds with the gospel, it is the natural reaction to it. Ursinus says this “Those who are grateful, acknowledge and profess that they are certain of the good which they have received.” What he is saying is that as a Christian looks to the gospel, to the objective work of God in Christ to save him, he has faith and the consequences of that faith are that a gratefulness starts to get expressed in and from him.
For example, if I gave you a million dollars, and said to you, “Go do with this whatever you want, I love you and want to bless you with this”, would you be grateful to me? The false Christian really doesn’t believe in all that he has in Christ, he doesn’t really understand or believe the gospel, and so he doesn’t express gratitude. He either does nothing in response to the gifts of righteousness, eternal life, and a heavenly inheritance, or he plays the part of a Christian, follows some good works principles and by them attempts to earn those things from God.
Only the true Christian expresses gratitude, and the gratitude is based on the knowledge of what God has done for him in Christ. This is how the gospel is central to good works. The more we believe, the more we tend to react in gratefulness. The source of all we do is the Holy Spirit working faith in us by the preaching of the word about the objective saving work of Christ on our behalf. So, it’s all from God. This is why all sanctification is gospel-centric, and gospel dependent. It is what we believe is true, that we already have everything in Christ.
Another way they blunder in regards to a grateful life is that they turn faith and works into a sort of assembly line, mechanistic process. It’s almost like baking a cake where they would have you take faith in Christ, add the right amount of works, mix thoroughly, bake at 350, and voila, salvation cake.
No, that’s not it. The American idea of everything as a production line, where performance and results are measured, analyzed and optimized for maximum output is not the right way to approach the faith and works dynamic. They speak of works being “required”, then don’t see them as a reflexive response of gratitude to the gospel, but they instead separate them from that and expand them as part of a sanctification process that is to be increased by focusing on them. They see the gospel as a helpful fuel for driving works, they have hijacked these things into their optimization strategies which include “spiritual disciplines” that are part of the formula for increasing production, and the more visible production the better. That gets called the mission. This divorcing of Christian gratitude from a robust and deep understanding of the gospel is the blunder where they turn the Christian life into a burdened down, faith killing, self-focused treadmill.
The cure is to return to confessions like the Heidelberg Catechism and seeing that the Christian life lived is an effect of a heart of gratitude. The cause is the Holy Spirit working in us, convincing us of the richness of what we have in Christ. Gratitude has an original thing that the Christian has looked to that brought it into existence in their hearts and minds. The Christian has believed something is true, and that true thing was such desirable good news to him that it brought about the gratitude as a reaction. Gratitude is not based on any imperative. The pastor can’t just say “be grateful” and have gratitude happen. The pastor has to tell us something to be grateful about. In order to be any help to us, the pastor must have seen something in the work of God in Christ that he believes is such good news that he has a passion to tell everyone about it. It is that good news that is central to all a Christian does or does not do.
So, the Christian life isn’t a call to “do more”, it’s a call to “believe more”, and then the doing is a reaction to that. God desires that we be grateful. We desire Christ and so God causing us to believe in what we have in Christ which bears the fruit of gratitude which is expressed in good works and a desire to obey. We fix our eyes on Christ and believe, and we are grateful in our life’s response.
The Mosaic covenant was a mixed covenant: a covenant of works for Christ, and a covenant of grace to the Israelite
In the past week I have seen where three separate people from the Reformed world that have all said that the Mosaic Covenant was exclusively a covenant of grace. I believe that they are wrong about that, and it appears based on some confused views that come from a more contemporary Reformed tradition influenced by people like John Murray, Norman Shepherd, and by others like John Piper. The theologians coming from that side of the issue have historically had problems with the covenant of works, or with tying Christ’s righteousness under the law to anything Adam was supposed to fulfill, and that can lead to some confusion and even mixing of law and gospel categories. I believe this confused view is now held by many in the Reformed world, and I wanted to at least get my own insignificant two cents in on this issue and see if I could perhaps put a finer point on what I think the Westminster divines were actually saying, and if it’s really accurate to say that the Mosaic Covenant was a covenant of grace.
My position is that it is s a mistake to simply call the Mosaic Covenant a covenant of grace, because God’s rescue of Israel seems to be part of the Abrahamic covenant, which was a covenant of grace. God remembered his promise to Abraham. The moral law presented in the Mosaic covenant can be said to be a servant of that covenant in that it taught Israel by leading them to Christ, but the law is not of faith (Gal 3:12).
When looking at the Mosaic covenant, it is also important to distinguish between the entire nation of Israel, and the individual Israelite.
The land and the law were a return to a type of Eden. “Do this and you will live” is a promise of eternal life if a faithful Israelite obeys the law perfectly the way Adam was supposed to. No one could, so it was a curse. At a national level, failure to obey received the sanction of ejection from the land. This is a picture of ejection from the garden and dwelling with God. The land was where man was to dwell with God in peace. It was a picture of or type of heaven.
For the individual the Westminster Confession of Faith does point to some aspects of the Mosaic Covenant and calls them part of the covenant of grace.(WCF 7.5) Particularly the sacrificial system, but they do not say that the Mosaic covenant itself is part of the covenant of grace. They say “during the time of the law” that the covenant of grace was delivered “administratively” via promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances that forsignafied Christ to come. Not all of that was in the time of Moses. For instance, King David lived in the time of the law, and there were promises made to his lineage. There were also prophecies made by Isaiah hundreds of years after the Mosaic covenant. Also, circumcision was given to Abraham 400 years before Moses. Generally, what they were speaking about is in the time of the old Testament, and we should note that the Mosaic covenant is not the sum of the old testament.
Just as in the garden, which was a covenant of works for Adam, we see the gospel promise of a seed of the woman (Gen 3:15) and we see God fashion coverings for them after they sin (Gen 3:21). So, we could say that “in the time of the Garden” the covenant of grace was delivered in that promise and in that sacrifice and covering, but we don’t call Adams’ time in the garden a covenant of grace. So we should reject any ham-handed approach that looks at WCF 7.5 and concludes that they were saying that the Mosaic Covenant was a covenant of grace.
However, since to the individual, the Mosaic covenant includes the law as a tutor serving the covenant of grace, and therefore parts of it that administratively deliver the covenant of grace, we could say it is a mixed covenant. It held forth the promise of life for perfect obedience under the law (COW), but it also offered up a substitute in the sacrificial system (COG) where the Israelites were also fully justified by Christ, though He had not come into the world yet to fulfill all righteousness under the law and be the lamb of God.
Since it is such a picture and return to that garden environment, it understood to the individual Israelite as a republication/restatement/post-lapsarian offering of of the covenant of works, but one that they could not fulfill, it was not presented to be their hope, but their hope was in the promises of God to Abraham and that they belonged to God who had first called them His people before presenting them with the law. From the perspective of the covenant of redemption it is an an environment for one to be the second Adam to enter and fulfill all righteousness in. It therefore required an unobtainable perfect obedience to the law that drove them to look to sacrificial substitutes that brought them grace in Christ.
The whole of Israel, the land, and the law should also be seen as that required post fall environment for Christ to be that second federal head who passes the probation earning the way back to the tree of life, and fellowship with God for the elect. Christ overcame Satan, not in the plush confines of Eden, but in the harsh wilderness of promise land (the second fallen Eden environment). So in that way for Christ it was covenant of works to keep. It was not grace to Him, it was by works of the law that He was to earn a perfect record of righteousness to impute to the elect.
On a national level the Mosaic covenant is explicitly about ejection from the land, but on the individual level, there was a call to “do this and you will live”. That is if by works, you love God with all your heart, and your neighbor as yourself, you will live. This was speaking ultimately of eschatological life, and though the promise was to all Adam’s offspring, only one who was fully God and fully man could have done it, and He did do it and was raised again from the dead vindicating His record of perfect righteousness. In that regard the Mosaic covenant is substantively a post-lapsarian type of the covenant of works.
It is substantively a covenant of works to Christ because as Christ said it was all about him (John 5:39). It was all about the promised seed of the woman. Born of a woman, born under the law to redeem those under the law (Gal 4:4-5). Christ earned heaven by His works in order to save us by grace alone through faith alone. Christ fulfilled the covenant of works to save us (and the Israelite who looked to the substitute, to Messiah) in the covenant of grace. So, for the individual Israelite, substantively, he was offered Christ dressed in His gospel. Yet for Christ it was not by grace. There was a works principle to fulfill, a probation to keep, eternal life to earn.
Reformation or Transformation?
What’s the Mission: Transformation or Reformation? (originally posted on Aquilla Report 12/17)
The effects of the covenant of works, requiring personal righteousness, explains the continued human strivings for perfectibility and utopia.
The covenant of works established with Adam and all his offspring explains why the line “making the world a better place” or some variant pops up in just about every single high school or college graduation speech. It also explains why the goal of many churches who either deny or ignore the doctrinal implications of the covenant of works wind up proclaiming a sort of indistinct moralism of doing good in the world, or transformation of self or the world as the mission of the church.
The truth is that as Adam’s offspring, we’re all made for performance based approval, for works based righteousness. So while the secular world is busy proving their righteousness by virtue signaling or joining in on whatever political, social, or ecological movement is most popular this week, churches that emphasize transformation of either self or the world, often join right in. As a result, the mood in the church can roller-coaster up and down with the state of the secular world depending on how much we’re told that those issues are the latest crisis.
I’m not trying to diminish the seriousness of any of the things in this fallen and broken world that Christians might feel called by God in which to be engaged. But what I am asking is why there seems to be a sort of addiction to a cult of righteousness. There are a lot of assumptions today, both on the left and right that “my positions are not only right, they’re righteous,” and hence they are unassailable. Discussions, reasoning with each other, we’re past all of that, because my position is for good (“righteous”), those that oppose my positions are for evil (“unrighteous”). This is the view now, both inside and out of the church.
I suggest that the fact that people (both secular and within the church) hold to views as morally unassailable, which either absolves them of guilt, or deems them as righteous, makes sense. This state of the culture is not really an accident, but a carefully crafted, focus-grouped, sociological manipulation. It’s a sort of politically inspired weaponization of human nature, of the desire of all of Adam’s offspring to be declared righteous, to be declared good and approved of. This is what Adam was made for, what John Calvin (1509-1564) called “obedientiae examen,” (a trial of obedience). “God’s promise of eternal life as long as he should eat of the tree of life, and on the other hand fearful denunciation of death the moment he should taste of the Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil.” [a]
This is the covenant of works, on which we find a requirement of personal righteousness.
In Reformed history, this covenant of works has also been called the covenant of life[b], or the covenant of nature [c]. Zacharius Ursinus (1534-83) co-author of the Heidelberg Catechism in his Larger Catechism Question 36. said of the difference between Law and Gospel is that:
“The law contains a covenant of nature begun by God with men in creation, that is, it is a natural sign to men, and it requires of us perfect obedience toward God. It promises eternal life to those keeping it, and threatens eternal punishment to those not keeping it. In fact, the gospel contains a covenant of grace, that is, one known not at all under nature. This covenant declares to us fulfillment of its righteousness in Christ, which the law requires, and our restoration through Christ’s Spirit. To those who believe in him, it freely promises eternal life for Christ’s sake.” [c]
Contrasting the covenant of works (nature), and Christ fulfilling it in order to save us in the covenant of grace through faith alone, Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) explains why it is also called a covenant of nature:
“It was called the covenant of nature not as if it sprung, of itself and naturally, from God’s nature or that of man. Rather, it was called that because the foundation on which it rested, that is, the moral law, was known by man in nature” [d] In other words, the law of God is natural law, which is as Calvin teaches “that conscience which God has engraved upon the minds of men.” [e]
It’s this natural law, written on the conscience of all men, which the Westminster Confession of Faith declares binds all of Adam’s offspring to “personal, entire, exact and perpetual obedience.” It’s this natural conscience, and a demand for righteousness that all mankind is trying to answer, and which is only truly answerable by the good news that Christ fulfills all righteousness on our behalf and imputes his righteousness to us who believe. Apart from that relief unregenerate man will seek to fill that demand of God for a positive righteousness with things he does, and so will Christians.
This is where we see the common nature of all mankind and the desire at the core of our being to be declared just, to be declared righteous. This is why many of today’s secular movements, even those opposed to nature itself, don’t just demand tolerance but also validation and approval for their views.
This is why churches committed to “making the world a better place” and world transformation find common support with unbelievers also committed to societal transformation. It’s also why the issue-of-the-day in some churches is often the same issue making its rounds in the secular news. Their goal is also transformation, albeit through political means. So we find Reformed churches in a sort of unspoken partnership with the world in what is just, what is righteous, what is significant and therefore what “the mission” is.
I’m not saying that these issues are not just, or unjust, or right or wrong, but that it seems like the church is confusing or mixing the great commandment, to love God and neighbor (law), with the great commission (gospel).
There should always be a distinction between law and gospel, and yet as the covenant of works is either denied or ignored in transformation focused churches, the gospel gets mixed and distorted. Phrases like “living out the gospel” where the good news is something we (the new humanity) do or manifest to the world, fits right in lock step with that old Adam in us. We sense that there’s something undone that we need to complete.
I’m not going to address Reformed Christians who think that there is some sort of mandate for Christians to fulfill, but what I am saying is that in our culture today, that mission seems to put today’s Christians in lock step with natural man with a common mission for the world. It also has a tendency to fill churches with unbelievers who find the sort of confident moral clarity of making the world a better place as mission, to be attractive. Love your neighbor as mission, and sprinkle a few “Jesus died for your sins” in there and you find a real sense of fellowship among Adam’s offspring, regenerate and unregenerate.
It’s the other half of the good news that Jesus fulfilled all righteousness under the law that too often gets left out of these churches. The part that Ursinus stated was not known by nature [c]. That news doesn’t fit in the natural categories of the unregenerate mind. This foreign announcement of an alien righteousness, given as a free gift, is too often not proclaimed in Reformed churches as part of the good news. Because if a human-based transformation is the mission then a message of alien righteousness really doesn’t fit the narrative. Yet a sense of something left undone or mandated for us to accomplish or complete by our own merits does. Under that narrative the sense that we, by our own commitment to obedience and taking our Christian duties seriously are to be filling in our part.
Without a righteousness under the law found in the covenant of works fulfilled by Christ, there is little underlying basis for the doctrine of imputed righteousness. It becomes more of an ungrounded and empty phrase. As I listen to sermons coming from some Reformed and Presbyterian churches, when they even proclaim the gospel of what God has done for us in Christ, there is a sort of assumed sufficiency found in proclaiming Christ’s passive obedience, and his active obedience is not proclaimed as part of the good news at all.
This is a sad state of many Reformed churches. That while they deny the errors of Federal Vision theology or New Perspective of Paul theology on paper, functionally they have absorbed the same error as them with regard to Christ’s active obedience. Meredith Kline (1922-2007) pointed out the fruit of those diminishing or denying doctrine of Christ’s active obedience having fulfilled what Adam should have, when he wrote:
“There is simply no room in their system for a divine justice functioning positively in reward of obedience, no room for an accomplishment of righteousness by anybody that might be imputed to somebody else. The resultant tendency is to confuse justification and sanctification in a new legalism in which the role of good works, which was not permitted entrance through the front door, now sneaks in the back door. What Christ could not do is left for us to do, somehow.” [f]
This view of the gospel, that at least functionally denies the fulfillment of righteousness, seems to make a type of Christianity that is much more compatible with natural man. As a result, we see how well the emphasis in Reformed churches on transformation agrees so well with culture’s transformation movements: what is righteous and just, and therefore determines the nature of “the mission.”
The Reformed church must return to proclaiming what the Westminster Confession of Faith calls Christ’s “obedience and satisfaction”[g]. It is both his active and passive obedience that justifies us, and so a faithful pastor must continually proclaim to the believer that he is to rest in Christ’s righteousness. This is a foreign announcement of an alien righteousness. The unregenerate cannot and will not rest in Christ righteousness on their own; but this is the good news that must be continually preached in the church. If this isn’t preached we will continually go back to what is natural to us; that is, a belief that Christ might have died for my sins, but I’ve got to do something, too; I’ve got to do my part. This is a form of Arminianism on the other side of the cross. The cure for it is a proclamation of a gospel that focuses on the imputed righteousness of Christ.
As the Great Awakening preacher, George Whitfield (1714-1770), proclaimed:
“Never was there a reformation brought about in the church, but by the preaching the doctrine of an imputed righteousness. This, as the man of God, Luther, calls it, is ‘Artienlus statntis out cedentis Eichlesin,’ the article by which the Church stands or falls.”[h]
Isn’t this really what a theologically Reformed church should be about, that we are not “transformers,” but “reformers”? If you are Reformed, then proclaim imputed righteousness. Include it in your gospel! Proclaim what God has done in Christ, in history to save sinners like you. Proclaim what both Luther and Calvin called that marvelous exchange of our sin to Christ, and his righteousness to us. This is the only good news. As we center on this truth, and fix the eyes of our members on this truth, it will free them to live a life of gratitude.[a] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 2.1.4
[b] Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 20
[c] Zacharias Ursinus, Larger Catechism Q. 36
[d] Herman Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmatiek, II. 528-29
[e] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 4.20.16
[f] Meredith G. Kline, Covenant Theology under Attack, https://www.opc.org/new_horizons/Kline_cov_theo.html
[g] Westminster Confession of Faith 11.3
[h] George Whitfield, The Lord our Righteousness, http://www.biblebb.com/files/whitefield/gw014.htm
The bible is about the way back to the tree of life and dwelling with God forever
Some think that Israel and the physical land is the promise through Abraham, but that’s not it at all. That’s not the promise. Abraham was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. (Heb 11:10) It’s heaven that he was looking forward to.
It’s not about some physical land. That land was just a picture (a type or shadow of the reality) of heaven, the place where we dwell with God in peace without having all the separation that all the walls and curtains were from the holy-of-holies in the earthly temple. It’s not about the way back to that picture. It’s about the way back past that cherubim with that flaming sword. (Gen 3:24) Back to that tree of life, to eternal life. That’s what we see in Revelation 22:2,14,19.
What is the way? (The Hebrew is ‘derek’) It’s the same word in Isaiah 40:3
A voice cries: “In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD; make straight in the desert a highway for our God
We see in Christ’s announcement in John 14:6
“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
We see that Christ also declares that the whole bible is about Him:
“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me”
So as we search the scriptures, we should see that it’s about the way, back to God the Father, not in a probationary status the way Adam was, but with eternal life secured by Christ’s obedience and sacrifice on our behalf. Christ’s life, Christ’s death, Christ’s resurrection, and ascension, and exaltation.
Christ said He has gone to prepare a place for us:
“And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also.”
That is nothing less than that city Abraham was looking for. That “city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (Heb 11:10)
So the promise to Abraham and His offspring, and in Christ, we are sons of God. We are Abraham’s offspring. We are heirs according to promise. We see this in Galatians 3:26-29
“for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”
So this is what the bible is all about. The way back to God as our beloved father, to that eternal city, the eternal dwelling place with God, secured. The bible is one true story of this redemption of a people in Christ, through Christ, who is the way the truth and the life.
Law and Gospel – Death and Life
When the law is proclaimed as simply a moral precept for you to look at and try to do, then we often wind up looking inward rather than at the completed work of Christ on our behalf. It’s important to understand why Christ fulfilled the law. Because as He made clear, it has to be fulfilled perfectly (Mt 5:48) . James says that if you fail at any little point, you’re guilty of breaking it all. (Ja 2:10). The law is like a mirror, it shows us where we fall short, but there’s no power in it to clean ourselves up. When churches that are preaching these sermons focused on you just trying a little harder they wind up having to continually lower the standards of the law.
When a Christian under this starts to look at himself and the law, and sees that he is not doing it, he he can start to wonder if he’s really a Christian at all. So, he gets’ depressed. The whole church can start feeling these doubts and fears and they need some comfort. So, these pastors start delivering these therapeutic sermons, and lowering the law down to help these people not feel so rotten. This is often what happens under moralistic preaching. Either that or self deception, and pride set in.
The problem is not that the law needs to be relativized and lowered. It needs to be preached as absolute law, with perfection as the standard. Then we need to hear that so it kills us and our efforts to make ourselves clean by following the law. Then our only hope is to look to our perfect law keeper. We need to rest on the righteousness of Christ, merited on our behalf. That’s what gives us power against sin, and the proper motive to seek to love neighbor knowing that the law’s perfection has been kept for us.
Only that proper law/gospel distinction will keep us from this moralistic, therapeutic deism that most American churches are caught up in. That law that crushes us and all of our attempts to perfect ourselves and forces us out of this self-focused self-justification mindset to rest in the Christ-focused gospel of Christ’s perfection on our behalf.
Every son or daughter of Adam is already in a relationship with God
The whole world is already in a personal relationship with God. Either one that is a curse, or one that is a blessing. This is what Paul is explaining in Romans 1 & especially Romans 2. The gentiles have the law written on their heart:
For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. -Romans 2:12-16
John Calvin notes that:
Now, as it is evident that the law of God which we call moral, is nothing else than the testimony of natural law, and of that conscience which God has engraven on the minds of men (Calvin, Institutes 4.20.16)
So we see that all those who are not Israelites, (which is basically everyone at this time) are still in a relationship with God, through the law written on the heart, where their consciences bear witness, either accusing or excusing them. They will be judged on that day also, and if we go on to Romans 3, it’s not good news…
He concludes that both Jews and Greeks (that’s synonymous with all gentiles, or everyone in the world) are under sin. (3:9) , and then in a quote of Psalm 36, he concludes that no one is righteous, no one seeks for God, no one does good, and among many other things they just don’t fear God. (3:10-18)
If there is any doubt that this is a blanket condemnation of the whole world, and that they will be judged by the moral law which is by nature written on their hearts, Paul concludes:
Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. -Romans 3:19-20
The whole world is held accountable, and by works of the law, no human being will be justified in God’s sight.
This is the covenant of works that we find in the Westminster Confession of Faith 7:1-2, and while there are some who say that all covenants that God establishes are gracious, it’s really confusing to say that.
Of course God doesn’t have to establish a covenant and promise blessings and eternal life based on the fulfillment of it, so yes, that is gracious of Him to do that for Adam and all his offspring, but at this point, the law is a curse to all Adam’s offspring. Paul calls the law a curse (Gal 3:10-14) , because as James notes it must be perfectly kept (James 2:10) to be any good to us. It must be perfectly and personally obeyed as our confession says (WCF 7:2) Does that sound like good news, or gracious? It sounds not only conditional, but like a curse, because we can’t meet the conditions of it and are all doomed to die a first and second death unless someone comes and fulfills it for us.
That is exactly what Christ came to do. He came to fulfill the law (Mat 5:17). He came to be born of a woman (so He could represent man) , born under the law (to perfectly keep it) to redeem those under the law, so that we might have eternal life, as adopted sons of God (Jn 3:16;Gal 4:4-5). We could sum it up like this: That Christ came to fulfill the covenant of works to save us in the covenant of grace through faith alone.
So everyone already is in a relationship with God. Both the covenant of works and the covenant of grace are still in place across both the OT and the NT. People are either in one or the other covenant. One is of grace, but the law is not of grace. Its promises are conditioned on the perfect personal fulfilment of the law. Perfectly loving God and neighbor. As Paul teaches in Romans 7:10. The very commandment that was intended to bring life, actually brought death. But thanks’ be to God for Jesus Christ our savior who fulfilled everything for us, and secured eternal life and the blessings of God for us who believe. Our relationship with God in Christ is all of grace, and we are family forever because of the work of Christ on our behalf in His obedient life and His atoning death. That’s all good news.
God teaches us the right perspective by teaching us the right questions
God doesn’t just leave us to speculate the proper perspective to have of the bible. He teaches us what the point is by giving us the kinds of questions to ask:
- “What must I do to inherit eternal life?”(Luk 18:18)
- “What is the greatest commandment?”(Mat 22:36)
- “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?”(John 6:28)
- “What must I do to be saved?”(Acts 16:30).
These questions are in the bible to teach us that these are the questions that Christ came to be answer to. In other words, we are taught a lot about what the bible is all about by the kinds of questions that God allows to be put in it. I would argue that they are questions that are at the heart of the human experience.
Questions 1-3 were asked before Christ had completed his work on earth. He came to accomplish 1 and 2, and so the answers to those are basically to personally perfectly obey the law of God (Mat 5:17;Gal 4:4-5). Calvin notes that the moral law is written on the conscience of mankind in creation, and so our confession states that God deals with all of Adams offspring in this way, by requiring perfect personal obedience from them with eternal life or death on the line (WCF 7.2)
Question 3:“What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Everyone of Adam’s offspring wants to do some works for God and be approved by it. Afterall, Adam was made for works. Jesus answered the question this way: “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
I think that his answer potentially has a double meaning. On the one hand that God is the one that creates the faith in us by which we believe in Christ and are justified, so it actually is God’s work. On the other hand, we are to believe in Christ who is our justification. So, He is simply telling us the gospel of how we are saved. We are saved by believing. We are justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. So this is the whole work of God summed up. Have faith in Christ and the sufficiency of His work on your behalf. This answers their question along the lines of what they should be doing to be doing the work of God. Believe in Him.
And now we come to the final question of the Philippian Jailer who asked “What must I do to be saved?”. This question is after Jesus has already lived a perfect life under the law that we could not, and died the death for our sins in our place, and now we are “saved” by Christ through faith alone in Him alone. That is basically Paul’s answer “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
So there is a reason that we don’t move on to new perspectives on the bible, because God gives us the perspective by giving us not only the right answers, but the right questions to ask. So we don’t need to change the emphasis to a new perspective, or seeking to get our joy by following and obeying Christ. We follow and (imperfectly) obey Christ because of what He has done for us. These questions and the answers to these questions recovered and stated in Reformed confessional Christianity make the focus of the bible, and the central focus of the Christian faith clearer. There’s no need to move on from that.
CHRIST’S OBEDIENCE & SUFFERING MERITED A DEBT-FREE/GRACE-ALONE STATUS FOR HIS PEOPLE
Christ’s whole life was one of suffering because unlike the first Adam, he was born into a world corrupted by sin. We see the contrast of his temptations in the wilderness. How much they differed from the plush confines of the garden that Adam was tempted in. He was 40 days without food, and physically weakened, yet, He overcame and sent Satan away. His whole life was one of suffering, and yet all the while obeying the father. In John 8:29 we see that He said “And he who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to him.” This is the difficulty that Jesus had to face under the covenant of works in a postlapsarian world. This is why our confessions speak of His obedience and sacrifice (WCF 8.5;11.1,3). The cross was the culmination of His suffering life. He was a man of sorrows, despised and rejected by men, acquainted with grief (Isa 53:3). Christ’s was a conditional relationship where His obedience was required as a covenant of works under the law (Mat 5;17; Gal 4:4-5) to earn (as a man) the promised reward of eternal life (Luk 10:28) and the blessings of God.
Through faith alone, our relationship with God in Christ is now one of grace. It’s not a debt, or “owing God something” type of relationship. It’s all grace, so we seek to obey out of gratitude, we seek to obey from the heart (Rom 6:17), out of love, and joy for what has been accomplished for us, what has been secured, and what waits for us (1Pet 1:3-5). The law is said to be still binding of all man, but our confession makes clear that it’s not as a covenant of works (WCF 14:6) , but as a guide to the will of God and that we might see our continual need of the perfection of Christ and His obedience on our behalf.


I am a thirty-something wife to my beloved, and mother to my ten year old sweet angel. I am home (at last!), embarking on our first year of homeschooling … a desire that God placed in our hearts a few years ago and has been faithful to allow. I am passionate about many things, and find myself stirred and inspired to learn and grow and seek. I love nourishing my family and pursuing health through how we eat and how we live … for me, this means whole, real food (most of the time!) and seeking daily to learn how to be the best steward of these earthly vessels!
I love relationship. I am married to the man of my dreams, a gift that I am thankful for daily! He is the love of my heart; a man after God’s heart who lives a life of integrity, service, humility and love. And I get to be his bride! I am mama to my most precious Maddie and love her with a love that aches and explodes within me. She is a joy and my heart. I am blessed to have so many dear, amazing mama friends to share life with; to pray and laugh and encourage and be real. And we live near much of my family, which is a treat that I appreciate.
Most of all, I long to live a life that speaks of the power of the GOD that I serve. He brings life to death; restoration to brokenness; light to darkness. His Word is life and as I seek Him, He is faithful to be found.


We are excited to announce a brand-new ministry on Wednesday nights called “Quest!” for ages PreK4 – 5th grade. This will include a large, high-energy worship gathering in the main worship space. This time will be followed by small group gatherings led by our incredible volunteers to teach the bible story and memory verse for the week, and then rec time in the gym. Quest will begin on August 22nd. Each week will be from 5:50-7:30.
We are so thankful for the opportunity to minister to your children! See you soon!
Please read each question in the registration carefully. If you have any questions about registration, contact firstname.lastname@example.org.


Pastor Jordan Weaver is a licensed minister with the Assemblies of God and has worked for many years to help resource and counsel cowboy church plants across the nation. He has worked as the Cowboy Church Fellowship Field Representative for four years and prior to that worked for his father, Russ Weaver, pastor of Shepherd’s Valley Cowboy Church, and his uncle, Randy Weaver, pastor of Lonestar Cowboy Church of Montgomery, Texas. In May 2012 Jordan and his family were called to Bend, Oregon to open the doors of Shiloh Ranch Cowboy Church. In addition to being a full time pastor, and his work with the Cowboy Church Fellowship, Jordan is a professional rodeo cowboy and travels with his wife Lacey, son Jhet and daughter Kodi Shea, competing in rodeos.
Lacey Weaver was born and raised in Bend, Oregon and studied Psychology at Oregon State University (Go Beavs!). Two of Lacey’s greatest joys in life are being a mother to her six year old son Jhet and their three year old daughter Kodi Shea while serving alongside her husband, Jordan. Needless to say, throughout the years, the people of Central Oregon have had a tremendous impact and influence on the lives of Jordan and Lacey. In May of 2012 they moved to Powell Butte, Oregon from Texas to open the doors of Shiloh Ranch Cowboy Church. Lacey is thrilled to be back home:)
We are not from a “cowboy background”, in… pause for effect… “any way, shape or form!” It would seem to us there would be ZERO reason we should’ve been welcomed into such an awesome church fellowship. Yet it seems the “cowboy way” includes being cool with hanging out with a man raised in both Los Angeles, CA & Seattle, WA (read: sunburned but rain soaked, bodysurfing, Nirvana/Pearl Jam devotee) AND a born green and yellow DUCK football fangirl from “hippie” Eugene, Oregon. If this is true… than anybody from anywhere with any type of “history” will be greeted and accepted as we were. Shiloh Ranch Cowboy Church IS our family’s home and IS our extended and ever-growing family. You can read the Box Family Facts here.
I grew up in Eugene, Oregon…so yes, I am a DUCK fan! I graduated from George Fox University in Newberg where I met my amazing husband, Scott (see worship pastor). We have two incredible kids, Ainsley and Titus. My most rewarding job is being their mom and teacher. I have homeschooled both Ainsley and Titus since kindergarten. In 2009, we moved from the Portland area to Redmond and have fallen in love with the people, pace of life, and the weather. We began attending SRCC in 2013. Although we are not cowboys, we have been welcomed into the community and truly feel at home. I am an organizational/structural crazy person. I love to bring order to things and am excited to use my administrative giftings to serve the SRCC community. Scott and I have been in church ministry our whole marriage and feel blessed to serve together at SRCC.
I was raised In Tumalo and graduated from Redmond High School. Jerry & I have been married 21 years and have lived in Powell Butte for the last 15 years. I work at the Powell Butte Community Charter School as an Educational Assistant, PBIS Specialist (behavior support) and Special Education Assistant since 2001. Prior to that I was blessed to be a stay at home mom to our boys. Jerry owns and operates a Drywall business. Jerry and I were raised living a country lifestyle and have been fortunate to raise our children the same. Thus making Shiloh Ranch Cowboy Church the perfect fit for our family. I am deeply blessed to strengthen my relationship with The Lord by serving in Children’s Ministry.


A bit of a brick wall with my 2nd GGF William R Heenan. I am pretty sure he was born about 1834 in New York City. So I decided to start looking at Catholic churches that were in existence at that point hoping I could perhaps at some point locate a baptism certificate. Here is what I found:
Church of St. Joseph in Greenwich Village – St. Joseph’s Parish was founded by Bishop John Dubois in 1829. The church was built in 1833–34. Early church records indicate that St. Joseph’s first congregants were predominantly Irish-Americans.
St. Mary Church (Grand Street, Manhattan) – Established in 1826 to serve Irish immigrants living in the neighborhood. The church itself was built in 1832-33. Before their sanctuary was built, services were held in a former Presbyterian church on Sheriff Street. The original portion is the second oldest Roman Catholic structure in the city, after St. Patrick’s Old Cathedral, which was built in 1815.
St. Paul Church (New York City) – Located in the East Harlem neighborhood of Manhattan. Bishop John Dubois decided to establish a parish on 117th Street and asked Rev. Michael Curran to take charge. His knowledge of Gaelic served him well among his widely scattered parishioners. The cornerstone of St. Paul’s church was set June 29, 1835. St Paul’s Parish began its existence in 1834 embracing the whole upper area of old New York from New Rochelle to downtown Manhattan. At that time Harlem was little more than a wilderness.
Church of the Transfiguration, Roman Catholic (Manhattan) – The church was built in 1801 in the Georgian style of architecture for the Zion English Lutheran Church, a Lutheran congregation. The building was sold in 1853 to the Roman Catholic Church of the Immigrants parish, which had been founded in 1827 by the Rev. Felix Varela y Morales to minister to the poor Irish in the Five Points.
St. Patrick’s Old Cathedral – Built between 1809 and 1815. The cornerstone of St. Patrick’s was laid on June 8, 1809. Construction took just under five years, with the sanctuary being dedicated on May 14, 1815. In 1836, the cathedral was the subject of an attempted sack after tensions between Irish Catholics and anti-Catholic Know-Nothing nativists led to several riots and other physical confrontations.
St. Peter Catholic Church (Manhattan) – The original church was built in 1785-86. It was used for worship until 1834 when it was replaced by the present structure. FatherWilliam O’Brien was the first pastor. In August 2015 the St. Peter’s parish mergedwith Our Lady of the Rosary.
Side Note: The first New York chapter of the Ancient Order of Hibernians was established in 1836 at St. James Church.


"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."1 Corinthians 13:4-7
These beautiful words from the "Love Chapter" got me through Oncology and Bleeding Disorders Week. I went into it expecting it to be hard on my emotions. Granted it was at times, but I had a great friend help me see that these kids are just the same as any other at Camp. They are just as special and just as beautiful. I should not have been so easy to....eh judge...about these campers. I was feeling sorry for them. Why? I have no idea. My friend knocked some sense into me and helped me see the truth. I'm glad she did too, because my week went so much better because of it. Thanks girl! : )
It was hard to hear about past campers who would not be returning or about those who were not doing well. Gloriously, all of my girls were in remission!!! Something I truly praise God for.
The week wasn't rough emotionally, but it was rough when it came to my job. Monday one of our girls went home because she was running a fever...we were very sad to see her go and what made it difficult was seeing her sister take it hard. We lost our leading counselor Tuesday morning because of sickness, then Wednesday night we lost another counselor who had to go to a wedding. So, that left me and another counselor to 4 girls...but then our camper that had left came back....so 5 girls. The other counselor I was with led an activity in the mornings so I was all alone Thursday! It wasn't too bad though...it truly tested my "counselor ability" haha. Luckily we had 4 volunteers who were absolutely amazing! Thanks girls!!! The week ended up being so fun and I'll never forget some of the precious memories.
Back to my above verse. I found myself remembering the words to these verses during certain situations while I was working. If a girl was grating on my nerves(never) I would remember that "Love is patient." If I felt like showing off that I was the only counselor I would remember "Love does not boast." If a camper would not listen to me I would remember "Love is not easily angered."
I would pray these verses at night asking God to let me be patient with my girls, let me be kind no matter what. I did not want to envy the love campers had for other workers, I did not want to boast about my abilities, and I did not want to be prideful of anything(If I was wrong, I was wrong). I did not want to be rude to any camper/counselor/volunteer, I did not want my job to be something I used for personal gain, I did not want to get angry with a camper because they did something against me, I did not want to hold a past wrong against a camper/counselor/volunteer. I wanted to stray from the evil around me and find solace with my Lord. I needed to protect my campers, trust in God to get me and them through, hope in the Lord for their lives, and persevere through the hard week.
Trying my best to live out these verses day to day has made me such a better person and counselor. God threw this upon me and I'm so glad He did. I needed a wake up call to why I am really at Camp. It is to love. To love with all I have and to serve with all I have.
I can't wait to LOVE my kids this next week. Please pray that I will LOVE them the way Paul told the Corinthians to love. Like that of Christ.


Are you fed up with the low quality singles you keep meeting on mainstream dating sites? Don’t worry, you can avoid those duds by joining our local Christian matchmaking service right here in Medford, Oregon.
We are a professional Christian matchmaking service in Medford and we have the largest and most diverse database of love-seeking Christians professionals.
working with a professional Christian matchmaker is going to make dating easier and help you connect with vibrant individuals that want to find love and start a meaningful and long-lasting relationship.
Our Christian dating service here in Medford, Oregon has quickly become the go-to place to find love and now everyone that is tired of online dating sites is purchasing a membership at our firm to find love in a private way.


Eqhesians 6:10 is a brand that focuses on the Christian roots of the Q Anon movement. Q has posted scripture many times and constantly encourages us to pray. Yes, we turn the p in Ephesians into a q, its a subtle and tasteful way to honor Q yet stay within the bounds not defacing or distorting the Bible.
The Whole Armor of God
Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm.
Ephesians 6: 10-13
We pray the way we have designed our clothes honors God while paying tribute to those who are God’s agents among men as we fight the satanic forces of darkness which have been striving to enslave humanity for centuries.


$15.00 plus S & H
"Roger Lehman presents the body of Christ with a powerful message to awaken the forerunners and the revivalists for such a time as this. In this book great, biblical warriors spring to life and inspire us to take up our spiritual weapons and make way for a great spiritual awakening. Read it, and become one of them!"
Eagles' Wings Ministries
"Roger Lehman has presented the Body of Christ with a wonderful teaching geared to move us toward Revival! "The Deliverers: Apostolic Strategies for Spiritual Awakening" is a book that will motivate the younger generation to "ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it." The older generation will be encouraged to lead the younger as they offer themselves as fathers and mothers. Buy it! Read it! Enjoy it!"
Dr. Brian Simmons
The Passion Translation


Sign up to hear from us! Discover specials, sales, and events!
Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Matthew 22:37-39
COPYRIGHT ©1980 - 2022 IRENE ZEVGOLIS CHRISTIAN, IRENE Z DESIGN, LLC.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NO PART OF ANY & ALL GRAPHIC DESIGN WORK & WEBSITE MAY BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, STORED IN A RETRIEVAL SYSTEM,
OR TRANSMITTED IN ANY FORM, BY ANY MEANS, ELECTRONIC, MECHANICAL, INCLUDING PHOTOGRAPHING, PHOTOCOPYING, RECORDING, OR ALL OTHERWISE.
THE DREAMER & THE MOON® IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF IRENE ZEVGOLIS CHRISTIAN. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.


“You’re Another!” is one of the favorite games people play with history. Accuse citizens of doing something outrageous, and they point to precedents. When Watergate blighted Richard Nixon, author Victor Lasky came back with the potboiling It Didn’t Start With Watergate . Lasky could easily show that “It,” meaning high-level corruption, marked previous presidential administrations. The biased media, he charged, simply had overlooked “It” back then.
“You’re Another!” is a brief and easy game to play. Today the New Christian Right, which in the media code name is the Moral Majority, says “You’re Another!” to defend its intrusion of religion into politics. “No one criticized the leftist clergy for supporting civil rights or dissenting against the Vietnamese War. ” So goes the defense. Not true. Polls and press clippings show that in the 1960’s as now most Americans rejected clerical “meddling in politics.” Few citizens have challenged the right of fundamentalists to be up front in current politicking. They have, however, been bemused to note that what these fundamentalists condemned as sinful meddling a dozen years ago they now openly admit they are practicing today. The liberal clergy, pointing this out now, gets its half of the inning of “You’re Another!” Game’s over.
“Follow the Leader” is a more worthwhile game. Who led the line that the New Christian Right is now following? Not “What were the mere precedents?” but “What were true precursors?” is the question to ask. To qualify, a movement has to have qualities that all sides observe in the New Christian Right today. It has to have been Protestant, moralist, political, militant, and power-seeking.
At first glance, abolition looks like a candidate for precursorship. Though not many realize it today, that movement was inspired in part by antislavery British evangelicalism. American revivalism then impelled it. Pioneer abolitionist Theodore Dwight Weld, for example, taught revivalist techniques to new recruits. But abolition is not a real precursor of the Moral Majority. Like the civil rights cause of the 1960’s, it was not a move for Protestant supremacy. Many abolitionist leaders quickly moved away in disgust from the foot-dragging churches.
The New Christian Right, on the other hand, does want Protestants to run the show. Its leaders, it is true, can link up with Roman Catholics on the abortion issue. Thanks to a fillip in their millennial teaching, one that insists on the part Israel plays in Jesus’ Second Coming, they can be friendly to Jews in the matter of Zionism. But their new program began as an effort to restore “Christian America.” Believers were called to vote only for “Born Again” candidates. Are there precursors for that drive?
On the Fourth of July in 1827, back when America really was a Protestant empire, Philadelphia Presbyterian Ezra Stiles Ely made news by overreaching. He blurted that “every ruler should be an avowed and sincere friend of Christianity.” As he assessed the prospects for a Moral Majority, he carefully excluded even Catholics from the list of Christians who could “bring electors into the field” against “any species of avowed hostility to the truth of Christianity.” His America would have no room for Secular Humanists—he called them Deists and Socinians—or for “profane swearers, notorious Sabbath-breakers, seducers, slanderers, prodigals” and the like. Maybe, Ely blurted, there should be “a new sort of union … a Christian party in politics .” The public, in response, was creatively apathetic. Clergy who secretly agreed with Ely were embarrassed by his extremism.
Family-based causes have recently been the big crowd-pleasers, the attractive issues for the Moral Majority, and the profit-makers for bumper-sticker manufacturers. Distressed over drastic social change—unmarried couples living together, divorce rates rising, homosexuals demanding rights, pornographers flourishing, abortion legalized, extravagant claims being made for the Equal Rights Amendment—the New Christian Right has tried to return America to the world of the Good Old Days.
A cluster of causes late in the nineteenth century was a precursor for these efforts. It included Prohibition and woman suffrage, both of whose victories waited for the twentieth century. Whatever its later reputation, Prohibition did originate as a progressive social cause. At first it was designed not so much to punish the drinkers as to protect their families. Most of the movement’s fronts were Protestant. The Anti-Saloon League, for instance, was virtually an arm of the Methodist Church and its allies. One of its critics, Peter Odegard, in 1928 smoked out what is more obvious today: the movement masked efforts of those who sought “Protestant political supremacy,” just as the Moral Majority does today.
While some Catholics supported temperance, they did so on their own. The Women’s Christian Temperance Union was an aggressive domain of WASPs, with accent on the “P” for Protestants. Its leadership soon moved into or linked up with leadership of the woman suffrage movement. Feminists today are often puzzled to learn that conservative territories and states like Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Colorado first extended the vote to women. Why did they do so? Some Protestant churchmen elsewhere opposed the suffrage laws. But Puritan-minded members in those states saw that they could instantly double the number of the WASP voters, the defenders of “traditional values,” by extending the franchise to women. They thus held off the power of foreign-born, Catholic, and drifting newcomers.
When people play “You’re Another!” the New Christian Right also takes its raps for “single-issue politics.” In truth, it does care about multiple issues, from opposing the Panama Canal treaty and the Department of Education to X-rated films and secular public schools. But it also has learned the technique of bypassing political parties, overlooking many positive qualities and records of candidates, and helping elect only those officials who toe the line on the single issue that momentarily engrosses the Protestant militants.
If the New Christian Right is playing Follow the Leader today, the precursors in their line include the Methodist clergy. Today that clergy is chiefly on the liberal side, critical of “single issue” politics. But in the 1920’s, as Temperance-minded historian Robert Moats Miller remembers, “all the great and terrible power of the organized church was brought to bear” against repeal of Prohibition. “Every Methodist was called to be a soldier. Every unit, every agency … of the church was pressed into service.” Methodists were not to vote for any pro-wet candidate. Prohibition was a last hurrah for those who dreamed of a Protestant-run empire.
What leaders do Moral Majoritarians follow today when they support Israeli claims for hegemony over the West Bank? Their obsession on this point puzzles outsiders who had earlier typed all fundamentalists as anti-Semitic. Precursors for the Zionist stand go back to nineteenth-century revivalism. Some pioneer evangelists believed, as most of the New Christian Right does today, that Jesus would return to rule for a thousand years after the destruction of the earth in its present form. Before that time, biblical promises that Israel would be restored as a nation have to be literally fulfilled.
A century ago the Protestant “Zionists before Zionism” began opposing religious liberalism, theological modernism, and secularism. These all were foreboding “signs of the times” before the Lord’s reappearing, and all of them rejected biblical literalism. Chicago evangelist William E. Blackstone in 1891 presented President Benjamin Harrison with a memorial asking for the return of Palestine to the Jews. He garnered signatures of 413 prominent Americans to support him. Seventy-five years later the state of Israel dedicated a forest to Blackstone’s memory. Today leaders of Israel give awards to fundamentalists like evangelist Jerry Falwell, who is merely following the leaders of long ago.
Fundamentalists see the world in extreme dualisms: God versus Satan, Christ versus Antichrist, Christian versus Secular Humanist. The choice of humanists as a bogy has precursors all the way back to the Federalist clergy who opposed Tom Paine and Thomas Jefferson as “infidels.” Organized anti-religion has always been a minuscule force in America. But supporters of the orthodox Protestant empire have always needed crusades against infidels in order to stir up the masses and raise funds. In their days, socialist Robert Owen, platform star Robert Ingersoll, journalist H. L. Mencken, and Scopes trial lawyer Clarence Darrow have all worn the stigmata that signers of the Humanist Manifestoes of 1933 and 1973 wear today in conservative Protestants’ eyes.
Through all these movements toward Protestant supremacy, these efforts to impose the morality of some of the people on all of the people, there runs a vision of an elect and chosen people, God’s new Israel. If the world is so soon to be destroyed, many ask, why should the Protestant Right care so much about earthly morals and values in America? Evangelist Falwell and his colleagues all make clear why. God, they say, chose America as his special nation; it is the last free training ground of evangelists who will at the final moment rescue the chosen in other nations of the world. That twist about converting people before the millennium may be only a century old, but the elect-nation idea itself has precursors in the notions of the first Protestants who set foot in New England in 1620 and 1630. Ever since, Protestant patriarchs and patrons have blessed the cannon that keep the American citadel strong.
What happened to all these Protestant putsches? Most of them occurred when Protestant churches dominated, before America’s wild pluralism was as obvious as it is today. So history will not simply “repeat itself.” But the careers of precursors are informing. Absolutists who enter politics must compromise to get and hold power. The New Christian Right has already begun to do so. It has linked up with Catholics and some Jews on issues like abortion. Its more anti-Semitic flank has found it important to announce that God does, indeed, hear the prayers of Jews. The Moral Majority had to excuse the hard liquor that was back at the White House for the inauguration of a Born Again President. It has had to live with administration appointees who do not meet their rigid tests.
If history has any “lesson” for the American majority, it is this: contending that belligerent Protestants do not have the right to carry religion into politics is unfair and fruitless. Instead, in American politics, those who do not like a movement do best to organize against it. If they choose to do so now, against the New Christian Right, they will find plenty of precursors for such activity. The game, then, is not “You’re Another!” but “Follow the Leaders” who know or can learn the games of politics in American church and state.


Looking for an Easter Craft perfect for church but are finding nothing but Easter bunnies and Easter Eggs? Have no fear, we have come up with our list of 10 Christian Easter crafts perfect for all ages and budgets.
10. Cross Card
Children’s Pastors all over America take part in the annual debate: Easter Egg Hunt Yea or Nay? While Easter Egg hunts are a popular outreach event for several churches, others decide to leave the eggs at home in order to keep Easter focused on Jesus. No matter where your church is located, you most likely will find that your parents will have strong stances for either side. So, should you bring an Easter Egg Hunt to your kid’s ministry this year?
First let’s have a quick history lesson. The Easter Bunny comes from German culture, dating back to the 1500’s. Both rabbits and eggs symbolize fertility, an important theme for spring, which represents new life itself. The legend goes that the Easter Bunny would deliver colorful eggs, candy, and toys to children who behaved well just like Santa. Parents would then hide eggs throughout their yards and tell their children that the Easter Bunny had brought them. The church would latter connect Easter eggs to the new life received through Jesus.
Now that you have some context to the Easter Bunny, we have put together a pros and cons list for having an Easter Egg Hunt at your church.
Pro: Continue reading


You may also like
The eyes have it...
The eyes have it!
Fifteen views of Jersey's coast
Walking the paths of the northern coast of Jersey.
A collection of imaginary settings
St Bartholomew The Great
Vising Smithfield Market at the weekend, I came across this wonderful church: the Priory Church of St. Bartholomew, founded in AD 1123. as part of a monastery of Augustinian Canons. Bartholomew was one of the Twelve Apostles, brought to Jesus by Saint Philip. He is reputed to have brought Christianity to Armenia where tradition states that he was later flayed alive and crucified head down.
The frozen fingertips of Autumn
A vase I found in a junk shop inspired me to these autumn colours...
Revisiting four lakes
Revisiting the light of these images, high altitude lakes
Time Machine: the return
The last of a triptych project: Time Machine
As the fog clears...
Early morning as the fog clears, Greenwich Park


Easter Sunday Brunch
April 01, 2018
10:00am - 2:00pm
Now accepting reservations for Easter Sunday Brunch! We will offer our regular brunch menu in addition to some of your favorite specials.
Tables usually book up weeks in advance, so make your reservation today by calling 901-522-8555.
Online reservations are not accepted.
Patio seating will be available on a first-come, first-served basis if weather permits.
Last seating is at 2:00pm. We will not be open for dinner service so that our employees can spend time with their families.


Lloyd H. Ellis, Jr., M.D., Ph.D.
Sister Annette was on a tear. Leaning back in her chair beside her spacious desk in her spacious pastor's office in her spacious rectory, she let fly at the purpose of her greater community. Sister was a figure one could imagine as a princess of the church in any other denomination: articulate; vigorous; experienced; magnetic. Instead of a diocese, however, she had, in desperation, been thrown a crumb. St. Procop, once the largest Czech church in the United States, had been poorly designed. Well before Sister was given responsibility for this decidedly moldy crumb, the parish, financially unable to maintain its building, had been forced to take down its threateningly unstable dome and then, as a further humiliation, forced to take down both of its towers. In a cruelly impoverished and unsafe neighborhood, St. Procop school was a distant memory, its convent long abandoned, the parish unable to pay its yearly diocesan assessment. Sister had rallied her moribund responsibility: a state-supported program for troubled children took over and paid to clean up most of the school as well-meaning suburban Lutherans and Presbyterians took over the rest of the building for their inner-city missions; the convent became a decidedly low-rent but decent home for men struggling to maintain and improve themselves; the parish paid off its debt and embarked on an energetic feeding program for its neighbors.
But now the Bishop would decide in three days which fifty-two inner-city parishes he would have to close. For more than a year he had been assisted in this painful process by discussions within “clusters” of congregations. St. Procop was clustered with four other parishes and the Bishop asked the cluster to recommend closing two parishes. Two of the five parishes seemed untouchable: Sagrada Familia had been built by the Diocese as a new Hispanic parish; Our Lady of Mount Carmel had a vigorous school, the only Roman Catholic educational presence in its area. That left St. Colman, St. Stephen, and St. Procop. Irish St. Colman was a marble extravaganza. German St. Stephen, with its complete ensemble of Mayer Munich windows and acclaimed carved wood furniture and statuary, was generally acknowledged to be the most beautifully decorated church in Cleveland, the Roman Catholic equivalent, as a landmark, of Eric Mendelsohn’s Park Synagogue on the East side of town. From a fine arts and preservationist point of view, Sister Annette clearly held the short straw. In Sister’s favor, however, was her stewardship and her parish’s missions to the otherwise marginalized. Now, Sister’s wrath and frustration were directed at other members of her cluster committee. “They dismiss me,” she said, “when I talk about hunger and poverty and despair. All they want to talk about is stained glass.”
This is a book about stained glass and the buildings that hold it up. It is a paean of praise for those who imagined and worked and argued and schemed so that religious buildings went up over greater Cleveland. Here there is only fleeting notice of the mission of congregations for any purpose other than for the erection of buildings. But because I only want to talk about the stained glass does not mean that there is not another story.


I recently read The Chinese Puzzle, by Mike Falkenstine. This is a must-read for anyone who is interested in China missions. Few writers, if any, give a balanced picture of what the present-day Chinese church is really like. In The Chinese Puzzle, Mike Falkenstine has done so.
The book begins with a well-researched but concise look at the history of Christianity in China that is designed to help the reader understand how China’s critical attitude toward Christianity came about. This is followed by an exposition of current trends in China, including recent developments in the government’s stance on religious issues, the explosive growth of both open churches and house churches, and the rapid emergence of previously unheard-of opportunities for Western Christians to serve the church in China openly.
The third chapter is short but, in my opinion, the most important. In it, Falkenstine reveals an unflattering picture of Western missionaries as they appear to Chinese pastors — often as arrogant, controlling, and generally not very helpful. The chapter then examines just what Western missionaries have been doing wrong and concludes with invaluable advice on what they ought to do in order to be of greater service to the church in China (or other countries).
The fourth chapter, called “The Persecution Myth and Why it Survives” gives several examples of persecution stories published by major Christian organizations and news agencies in the West that were later debunked. In one case, Falkenstine was able to trace the story to its source—where the pastor of a church that had been bulldozed by the government excitedly took him to see the newer, bigger church the government had built to replace it. Falkenstine shows how the “persecution myth”—the false belief that persecution is the norm and that Christians in China can only practice their faith under cover and at great personal risk—is perpetuated largely by Western Christian organizations that depend on persecution stories for fundraising. He also makes it clear that the propagation of this myth actually hurts the church in China.
The final three chapters describe in more detail the sorts of groundbreaking ministries that are being carried out openly by Western Christian organizations in China; the ways Chinese view themselves and the future of their country; and the ministry that Falkenstine himself is involved in.
The content of the book is revealing and important enough (to those interested in China missions) that I think it deserves five stars. On a more personal note, I lived in China for five years and worked with the church there, and in my opinion American Christians need to be exposed to the balanced view presented in this book.
[Note: I wrote this review back in 2008. I just ran across it again and noticed that a second edition of The Chinese Puzzle has been released, so I thought it appropriate to post the review again here. I made a few minor modifications to the original version (which can be found on Amazon.com).]


A Priest Story
I remember, years ago, when I was in my home parish, a priest who was assigned there for several years. I don’t recall many details about him, except that he kept getting my place of work confused with someone else, and I was always correcting him. I never brought it up, but each time we would meet, he would inevitably ask me a question about working in this specific place, for some unknown reason. Perhaps it resonated with him (or he wanted me to work there!); perhaps he was just a bit muddled.
He was a very, very nice person. I want to clarify that because people, being who and what they were, were unkind when describing him. They poked fun at his sunny disposition, his cheerful demeanor, and mild manner. I have no clue as to why this causes unkindness from others, and I should, since I was one of them, at the time.
Maybe it was just easy.
Perhaps he illuminated something we lacked?
In retrospect, he was the much better person. As a priest, that should have been a given, but we all know that it is not necessarily so.
His sin? He always saw the glass half full. Heck, completely full, when it wasn’t. He saw the goodness and brightness, and I guess, the Light of God, in everything. Even disastrous situations. Which, could another reason he was ridiculed.
“Oh, what a beautiful day it IS!”. He often began his homilies this way.
Which led the fusspot congregants (mostly women, if the truth be told), to proclaim rather smugly: “Why, Fr. Smith could be standing up to his kneecaps in a basement full of flooded water, and he’d STILL say…Oh, what a beautiful day it IS!”
How dare he? Sure, he was in a position to be eternally cheerful: He didn’t have bills to pay, kids to raise and lawns to mow. (Just irritating parishioners, I see now.)
Okay, but still not good enough reason for anyone (particularly, CHRISTIANS) to denigrate his perpetually sunny outlook. It was pretty mean-spirited, and everyone, including me, lost the translation.
Lately, I’ve been thinking about Fr. Smith. I wish I knew him better. Because he had something we all chase after, in many different ways. Some not good for us at all.
He had faith. He had hope. He had…yeah, God. And he was sure of his God. So why NOT look at the inherent good, even if the basement was full of water? Why NOT proclaim How Great Thou Art, then and there?
I know, it’s easy to say, but believe me, I’ve seen people with tremendous burdens who manage to stay hopeful, positive…and kind. Maybe he was one! And we just didn’t know…or didn’t chose to know.
How unChristian of us, huh?
So, now looking back, with more wisdom and gratitude for each day, and each new experience, I recognize that Fr. Smith really did have the better attitude. And the stronger faith.
What’s wrong with wanting to “Keep on the sunny side, always on the sunny side…”?
Nothing. In fact, emotionally, it’s way better than seeing that glass half empty…or not there, at all.


I treasure the "end" of Julie's Holy Week reflections. Here's one, key quote:
Some will argue that Christianity and Easter are much more than this picture of Jesus as I've painted him and his relationships. I'd say most Easter celebrations I've attended are about less.
She reaches her conclusion:
This year, I stayed home and dyed eggs with my husband and kids. As MLK Jr would call it, I was a conscientious objector to church-ified Easter. This Easter is the day my faith died. It is now utterly in ruins, in a tomb waiting for some kind of resuscitation...
As I grow older and think more about the resurrection and what it means, and what it doesn't mean, I'm less sure that I understand any of it.
Like Julie, I've been disillusioned more than once by the institutional church. But one thing I am sure of: the life in Christ we are part has a non-reducible, unchangeable pattern. First there is death, and then there is resurrection. Another way to say it: After failure, loss, hurt, abandonment, and regret, there is redemption. It sounds like Julie is in the middle of death.
I will pray for her, and it will be a prayer filled with confidence. Somehow, Jesus always brings resurrection.


We are locked into time and space. Because of this, it is impossible for us to fully grasp what it would be like to be unhampered by temporal restraints. But we serve a God for whom all events are equally present. Henry David Thoreau once observed: “As if we could kill time without injuring eternity.” Time is our most precious resource, and Scripture assures us that our stewardship of the time we have been allotted is not something we should ignore.
In Psalm 90:17, Moses prayed that God would “establish the work of our hands. This old man had seen his entire generation wandering aimlessly in the desert. For forty years the Israelites had roamed, with no specific destination in sight. In view of that seemingly futile drifting, Moses had cried out to God for some assurance of significance. Moses essentially said, “Unless we are gripped by life’s brevity and place proper value on the time we have, no matter how long or short it is, we will never gain a wise heart.”
We can employ the skills and principles of time management, buy a new calendar (even a high priced electronic one), employ a better scheduling system–all are of little benefit until we understand the value of time. Granted, we may do a better job of scheduling our time, but that doesn’t mean we’re doing a better job of spending that time. Knowing the difference defines wisdom!
According to Moses, the years of our lives “quickly pass”. As we grow older, we look back and wonder where the time went. Each of us is allotted a finite number of days. Are we spending those days wandering aimlessly, with no goal, no purpose in sight? Or are we numbering those days and thereby gaining a heart of wisdom? “Lord teach us…”


Tuesday, January 16, 2018
For Val Plumwood
God had already loaded the dice in Eden, first by giving Adam dominion over the beasts, and then by demonstrating his own dominion through the interdiction against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge. It was not only that God established Adam as regent over the animals, or that he placed Eve in the subordinate role, but that Adam had the power to name the animals, while she was the one who could speak to them. The fall from primal paradise was already assured by the design of paradise itself.