Volume 4: Issue 6 | December 2021
The Fifth Commandment:
God is YOUR Father
"Honor your father and your mother,
that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you."
– Exodus 20:12
God gives to some children parents who rarely reflect God’s character and often exhibit the miserable sinners that they are. Nevertheless, the Fifth Commandment remains God’s law for those children, to honor their parents. Because it is a law, a just and holy law, sinful children will break it. The temptation to not honor father and mother is great when father and/or mother fail badly at their calling to raise their children in the fear and instruction of the Lord and not provoke them to anger in all of the ways that a father or mother can.
There is no need to go into detail about how mothers and fathers fail. You already know them, and God is not clueless about damaged family structures. Consider the rest of the Bible. God knows and has pity on the fatherless. Read the Psalms and the Prophets to see that. He is aware that some will not have two believing parents, but only one. Read Paul’s letter to his son in the faith, Timothy, who learned God’s ways from his mother Lois and his grandmother Eunice. God provides older men in a church to instruct younger men, and older women to do so for younger women. God even knows that a parent may be a great obstacle to obeying him, and that is why he tells children to obey their parents “in the Lord.” King Asa of Judah did that. He removed his grandmother as Queen Mother – don’t worry right now about what that position was in the government – because she was making statues for other gods. True love and loyalty for God means honoring mother and father, but never put up with idolatry.
And then there are the children who refuse to follow the paths of good and faithful parents. Read Judges, I Samuel, and also Proverbs. Things never turn out well for such children, and their parents have only grief from them.
Our real problem with the Fifth Commandment is not the commandment, but sin. Sin leads children to refuse to honor their parents, and parents to refuse to love their children and show them God’s character. All such parents and children are under God’s judgment for breaking his law. Where is there hope?
Jesus, and only Jesus, comes and brings the motherless and the fatherless into the perfect care of the Lord. Listen to Jesus’ prayer from John 17. “O righteous Father, even though the world does not know you, I know you, and these know that you have sent me. I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.” The Son knows the Father perfectly and has a perfect relationship with him. Jesus is willing to open the eyes of blinded sinners so that they can see true fatherhood in God, no matter what has become of their earthly parents or what those parents are like. The love of the Father is in every believer in Jesus, not just any kind of love, but the same love that Jesus receives from the Father – that is the love given to broken and lowly and lonely sinners.
By his work Jesus redeems sinners and redeems their shattered experiences from their biological fathers and mothers. The Lord is not unmoved by parents who have led children to false and angry conclusions because of their bad treatment of them. In Diane Langberg’s book, Suffering & The Heart of God: How Trauma Destroys and Christ Restores, she has a comic strip at the end of her book made by one of her counselees. It pictures Mister Jesus telling her about a safe Abba (a safe Daddy) and the little girl, Emma, is conflicted. She only knows “Daddies” who break promises and hurt her, but Emma wants to trust Mister Jesus and learn about the Bible. Jesus saves Emma and opens her eyes to a new understanding of Abba. In the comic Mister Jesus does that by going through the Scriptures verse by verse.
Children, if you are blessed not to have that same confusion and hurt as Emma, practice love and gratitude with your mother and father. Parents, remember that your little ones learn about God through you, your words and your actions. Children, if you are unsure how to honor difficult (or even absent) parents, ask your pastor or some other person in your church whom you know to be wise. But God’s commandment stands: honor father and mother, not because they deserve it, but because you have God as your Father, and you must learn how to resemble him through the power and grace of Jesus, the Son who has shared his Father’s love with us.
– Hunter Jackson
The Enneagram
I just took an online enneagram test. It was easy. Just answer thirty-six questions in the form, “Are you this or that?” The results showed that of the nine personality types, my top scores were 3, “Confident, focused, polished and energetic,” 5 “Cerebral, perceptive, competent and original,” and 8, “Bold, commanding, outspoken and aggressive.” Each type comes with a corresponding warning. Type 8 “can be too domineering,” Type 5 can “get lost in ideas,” and Type 3 “can sometimes be too concerned with looking successful.” Some of my readers who know me may be thinking, “That sounds about right for Bill.”
As I took the test, I alternated between self-awareness and social feedback from others. We know ourselves in part from the opinions of others. (One veteran teacher began his mathematics classes saying, “Write down what you’ve heard about me.” Students wrote. “Now read what you wrote.” Students took turns reading aloud. “Okay, you’ve been warned,” said the teacher.) An Enneagram Test, whether long or short, multiple choice or true/false, naturally evokes the reaction from the test-taker, “That’s about right,” unless the test-taker is lying or has zero self-awareness. Each personality type is stated positively, with a warning about its characteristic weakness. The nine types (ennea is Greek for nine) fit on a circle, with lines connecting them. It all gets wonderfully complex, and there is always more to learn, with exercises to help develop your strengths, increase your self-knowledge, and correct your weaknesses.
Enneagram is big stuff right now. There are books, seminars, coaches, corporate testing, conferences, and podcasts. I checked “Enneagram” on Amazon books. There are over 3000 titles! When I searched “Enneagram Books Intervarsity,” I found over a dozen titles, with four more coming soon, and the promise that “The Enneagram is an insightful tool for personal and spiritual transformation. Reading books on the Enneagram from a Christian perspective can help us grow in self-awareness, develop thriving relationships, and cultivate a closer walk with God. Whether you're new to the Enneagram or you've been studying it for years, books like The Road Back to You offer wisdom from master teachers as well as spiritual practices for each Enneagram type to try.” Notice the phrase “from a Christian perspective” and the book title, “The Road Back to You.”
Where did the Enneagram of Personality come from? Some devotees claim ancient Pythagorean Greek origins for the circle with the nine points, with later connections to the neo-Platonic philosopher Plotinus, the branches of the tree of life in the Jewish Kabbalah, and Islamic Sufi tradition. The Russian philosopher and mystic George Gurdjieff introduced the Enneagram to the modern world in 1915. He claimed he got the circle with its nine points from some small mysterious Christian sects in Asia and the Near East, who had retained teaching that mainstream Christian teaching had corrupted. Over the years, Gurdjieff combined and coordinated the three traditional “ways” of the mind, body, and emotions, or of monks, fakirs, and yogis, into the Enneagram circle. Oscar Ichazo in Latin America developed the system further in the 1950s, and through the Chilean psychiatrist Claudio Naranjo in the 1970s, the Enneagram got to America.
Critics attack the Enneagram of Personality from two perspectives. First, it claims psychological validity, but its categories and procedures are so malleable, that it cannot be rigorously tested or validated. Second, it shares little with Christian theology or spirituality. In response to some Jesuits promoting it, the Vatican in 2003 warned that it has similarities to ancient Gnosticism, and when used as a means of spiritual growth it introduces an element of ambiguity into the doctrine and life of a Christian.
What is wrong with using the Enneagram system? After all, the origin of something does not give its full story; but, be warned, the Enneagram has two fatal flaws. First, it redefines sin by attributing flaws to personality types rather than to breaking God’s law. This redefinition is especially tempting in a society plagued with narcissism and irresponsibility laced with self-doubt. “My type is at fault, not me!” Second, the Enneagram gives rise to a deterministic mindset: “Well, that’s just my personality type.”
Other personality typologies suffer from the same faults. For example, the Myers-Briggs Personality Test, derived from the psychoanalyst Carl Jung’s archetypes and still used by some employers, allows inhospitable and unfriendly people to excuse themselves, “Well, I guess I’m just an introvert. Nothing to be done.” For a while, evangelical churches ate up learning-about-yourself books about one’s “gifts,” encouraging church members to discover what gifts God had given them. Someone closing car windows in a church parking lot when rain began got explained and praised: “He’s using his gift.” Faced with a task needing to be done, people could demur: “That’s not my gift.” Alternatively, someone could demand that the church give him or her the opportunity “to use my gift,” often the gift of preaching or music that allows the gift’s owner the spotlight. The Enneagram system meets the same felt needs and has the same dangerous tendencies as the Myers-Briggs types and searching for one’s “gifts.”
Why has the Enneagram become popular among Evangelicals? For one thing, people long for self-knowledge, but God has made us so deep that we cannot fully understand ourselves. The oft-repeated injunction, “Know thyself,” carved into the entrance to Apollo’s temple at Delphi in Greece, can only be partially achieved. As Paul wrote, “ For I do not understand my own actions (Romans 7:15 ESV).” “ The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it (Jeremiah 17:9 ESV)?” Any system that promises self-knowledge and is sufficiently complex to fascinate the mind will attract followers. The Enneagram is popular in our day for a second reason. It fits our times. People from mega-churches that entertain but do not teach find it attractive. So do people without a strong family identity in a society that exalts looking inward to find one’s true self and one’s own truth. Third, the Enneagram is sufficiently ambiguous and flexible that it invites everyone to enter its maze with the “Aha” cry, “It understands me so it will help me grow.”
What should a believer do when a friend enthusiastically recommends an Enneagram book, seminar, coach, or whatever? If the friend is a preacher, go to a different church. If it is a book, put it aside. Fifty years ago someone enthusiastically gave me a book about the four personality types: choleric, phlegmatic, sanguine, and melancholic, and mixtures thereof. I read thirty pages and suddenly realized the writer was using ancient Greek biology that attributed health to the four humors of blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. I discarded the book.
Paul’s approach to intriguing “secrets” is to ignore them. Every system promising, “Now you will understand yourself and find the path to growth,” derives from myths and speculations. Do not go down their path. Accept the truth that God made you too deep to fully understand yourself. But he knows you and gives salvation, not through looking inward, but through looking to Christ. The Enneagram is a vapor. It looks solid for a time, but it is destined like its predecessors and successors to fade away. “The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).”
– Bill Edgar
God Conceals; Kings Reveal
"These also are proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied.
It is the glory of God to conceal things,
but the glory of kings is to search things out."
– Proverbs 25:1-2
What do we know about how God cares for us, or his rule of the nations, or his government of the universe? As the Bible often teaches, only what he reveals to us by his word and works. “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law (Deuteronomy 29:29).” “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding (Job 38:4).” “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and his ways past finding out! ‘For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has become his counselor?’ ‘Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid (Isaiah 40:13, Job 41:11)?’ For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen (Romans 11:33-36).” “Now when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I was about to write; but I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, ‘Seal up the things which the seven thunders uttered, and do not write them (Revelation 10:4).’” When we remember how very little we know about God and his ways, how vast and complex is his creation, how unpredictable is the course of our lives and the destiny of the nations, we understand our own smallness and the glory of God.
Kings and rulers, however, gain glory by searching into the affairs of their kingdoms. When they shine light on wrongdoing and punish it, and when they reward what is good, they act in the place of God as his agents. It is their glory.
People, of course, want to know the future and understand fully what God is doing, not wanting to let the secret things of God remain secret. That drive to know what God has not revealed drives pagan divination, and the wish to control the Almighty is the motive for magic. These temptations are not unknown to God’s people and sneak into efforts to “know God’s will for my life,” and to pray in such a way that God is somehow obligated to do as we think best.
A king who does not know what is happening in his kingdom, or what his servants are doing in his name has no glory and deserves no honor. Just as elders should know their congregations as a shepherd knew his sheep (I Peter 5:2), so should civil rulers know their subjects: that is their glory. But God, who knows all things, conceals much from us, and that is his glory.
– Bill Edgar
"God hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth."
– Acts 17:26a, KJV
The Reformed Presbyterian Covenanters of the nineteenth century made extensive use of Acts 17:26a as they argued vigorously against slavery, for Chinese immigration, and against treacherous and brutal treatment of the native inhabitants of North America. All humans are one blood! Even those who have shed far too much of it, as the Comanche had. It was firm faith in the reality expressed by Acts 17:26a that encouraged Work Carithers to establish his mission far from any US Army post.
Empire of the Summer Moon (reviewed here by Daniel Edgar) relates Comanche history up until a few years prior to Carithers' arrival. To understand just how daring and bold the RP Missionaries were, it is important to realize that the Comanche had defeated the Apache, the Kiowa, the Spanish, the Mexicans, and fought the Texans to a standoff.
The White Chief of Cache Creek (reviewed here by Betsy Perkins) portrays a small portion of the defeated, depleted Comanche starting around 1890. Work Carithers set out to preach the Way of Jesus to the crushed dregs of a once-proud empire.
Book Review:
Empire of the Summer Moon:
Quanah Parker and the Rise and Fall of the Comanches,
the Most Powerful Indian Tribe in American History
by S. C. Gwynne
Schribner: 2010
Once upon a time American settlers wanted land, so they moved West and took it, usually by breaking a treaty with Native Americans and pushing them out of the way. When the Native Americans defended their land, the settlers and occasionally the military would enforce their claim. And eventually the west was 'won.' At least that's how it's taught at school. Most tellings of America's march across the Western Frontier are remarkably one-sided accounts either in their chest beating and/or self-flagellation; both versions of events focus on the prowess and cruelty of the conquerors. The Native Americans are little discussed as people but rather in broad strokes in terms of what territory each tribe's demise allowed Americans to incorporate during the long march towards Manifest Destiny.
Summer Moon focuses rather on a particular Native American tribe: the Comanche. When chance, aided by the Spaniards, brought the horse into their domain, they went from destitute mountain hunter-gatherers to highly skilled mounted warriors. They were not the first Native American tribe to learn horsemanship, but they were definitely the best at it. The horse became a central part of their culture from which all their other successes flowed. The horse allowed the Comanche to cover huge swaths of land far more efficiently than any other North American people group, and they regularly launched raids at targets hundreds of miles away. These raids became so common, they went from being a political tool to an integral part of their culture. It was the way they enriched themselves, proved their manhood, and policed their boundaries. And the scope of those boundaries – Comancheria – was enormous. At the height of its power, the Comanche controlled huge swaths of territory from New Mexico to Nebraska. And they did so with just 20,000 members. Summer Moon describes a century of conflict in which this burgeoning tribe crushed the Apache, beat back the Spanish, and fought the Texans to standstill. For decades they even defied the Americans’ story about their inevitable march to the Pacific. It wasn’t until a ruthless effort by the post-Civil War US Army that they were defeated and confined to the reservations.
The writing does not mince words. The Comanche made war in a brutal fashion. Torture and rape were the norm for those unfortunate enough to be captured. The book also makes clear that American settlers themselves ultimately made war in a fashion equally shocking to Comanche; their defeat was ultimately brought about by the calculated murder of the Comanche food supply (the buffalo) and many vicious massacres of Comanche camps. The Comanche defy the naive concept of the noble savage. Neither are the settlers heroic cowboys.
In order to provide a central focus to the story, the book details the life of Ann Parker, an unfortunate young girl famously captured by the Comanche. She was adopted into the tribe (a practice that became more common as the numbers of the Comanches dwindled), learned its language, married one of its warriors, and had children. She became “Native” in the true sense of the word. As an adult, however, she had the misfortune to be recaptured by American soldiers during the same raid as when her husband, a Comanche chief, was slain. The story then follows her son and future chieftain Quanah Parker, a charismatic figure who led the Comanche in their closing days of freedom and his efforts to integrate the tribe's remnants into the spreading American civilization.
The writing of the book is at times tedious. S.C. Gwynne felt the need to throw in too many journalistic 'click baity' phrases intended to titillate; this technique distorts the narrative and irritates the reader. Also at odds is the parochial nature of the story versus the grand way in which it is told. While the Comanche were powerful, they were also few in number and controlled territory few besides themselves actually wanted. That they survived so long is as much due to the marginal nature of their resource situation as it is to their prowess. The casualty counts of the battles that decided the fate of the Comanche in the open plains numbered in the hundreds at a time that thousands were slain each day in the meatgrinder of the Civil War.
Regardless of these faults, the book is an eye-opener for those given a conventional education in either American and Native American history. Common narratives to how the West was conquered will be challenged regardless of which education the reader comes to the story with. And it will provide a useful primer for understanding the situation the Reformed Presbyterian mission entered at Cache Creek.
– Daniel Edgar
Book Review
The White Chief of Cache Creek
by Faith Martin & Charles McBurney
Crown & Covenant, 2020
reprinted with permission from RP Witness, Mar/Apr 2021
Why does our modern military have combat helicopters named for the Comanche, Apache, and Kiowa? Who were they, to be thus honored? They were – especially the Comanche – the Mongols of the North American Great Plains, proud cruel warrior nations that fought heroically, viciously, and ultimately hopelessly while their centuries’ long way of life (at least since they mastered the mustangs abandoned by Spanish explorers) was crushed.
Their buffalo were gone; their chief warriors surrendered to the US Army; they were confined to a Territory that would all too soon be invaded by opportunistic white men of dubious morals. Their numbers rapidly dwindled due to illness and lack of their customary food sources.
How then should they live? Which new Road to take? The Peyote Road, recently introduced from Mexico? Or something hard, sober, yet ultimately more eye-opening: the Jesus Road? The humbled Comanche, Apache, and Kiowa hungered for spiritual guidance.
Faith Martin and Charles McBurney’s new book, The White Chief of Cache Creek (Crown & Covenant, 2020) lays out in detail the history of one American Protestant denomination’s response to its nation’s conquest of the Plains Indians: “Carithers’ goal was to get the Indians safely on the Jesus Road before they had to walk the white man’s road. ... [O]nce on the Jesus Road, Indians could enter white culture from a position of strength.” (p. 335)
While Martin and McBurney’s book only hints at the history that preceded the arrival of Reformed Presbyterian missionary Work Carithers in Cache Creek, Indian Territory (later Oklahoma), the reader is well advised to keep in mind the larger picture of the United States’ conquest of the Great Plains Indians. It was notable indeed that Carithers chose to pitch his tent deep in the Territory, close to the crossroads of the Comanche, Apache, and Kiowa – in stark contrast to several other Christian missions that huddled close under the walls of US Army outpost Fort Sill. Carithers believed both in God’s protection and the full humanity of the Indians he was sent to preach to. He was proven right that the Comanche, et al., would respect and even appreciate those who came solely to help them learn how to navigate the white man’s peculiar ways.
Martin’s politically incorrect use of “Indian” helps keep the historic focus, as do rich descriptions drawn from the missionaries’ letters of their milieu: rattlesnakes aplenty, malaria a life-long companion, smallpox, scheming bureaucrats, measles, and murder.
– Betsy Perkins
What is My “Race?”
Every time I go to a new doctor (which has been far too often recently), I fill out forms. At least one usually asks me to check a box: “Caucasian,” “African-American,” “Latino,” “Native American,” “Asian,” “Other.” I always check “Other” and fill in the name “Human.” From its organization in 1798, the Covenanter Church was both anti-slavery and anti-racist. Its leaders and members regularly cited Acts 17:26: God “hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth.” There is neither shame nor glory in “miscegenation,” because the word describes nothing genuine.
Therefore,
WHEREAS We are all descended from an original pair, a male and a female, and
WHEREAS All humans, including Neanderthal and Denisovan humans, produce fertile offspring when we mate, unlike horses and donkeys which produce sterile offspring (mule or hinny), and
WHEREAS The very concept of race immediately raises the question of superiority or inferiority, and
WHEREAS Erroneously thinking of the human race as made up of different “races” has repeatedly led in recent centuries to monstrous evil, and
WHEREAS Trying to fix “racism” by constantly distinguishing between “races” to favor one over another in order to fix past disfavor involving the unimportant in God’s eyes skin color will never solve “racism” or bring peace to our society, and
WHEREAS Using vocabulary to differentiate between essentially like beings like Star-Belly Sneetches and Plain-Belly Sneetches (thank you, Dr. Seuss) will always lead to confusion and strife,
RESOLVED, That I will insist that I am a member of the human race and none other;
RESOLVED, That I will accept the designation “white” with the same understanding that I accept the designation “tall” or “needs corrective lenses,” but will never write or say that I belong to the White Race or the Caucasian Race;
RESOLVED, That I will refuse even to talk about “racial reconciliation,” because the very term leads one to think that there really are different races;
RESOLVED, That the only people I will call “racist” are those who talk as though the single human race is made up of different biological “races;” and
RESOLVED, That I will see and treat every member of the human race as someone made in the now flawed-by-sin image of God, with an eternal destiny of either heaven or hell.
– Bill Edgar
Stories of Evangeline: How Miss Metheny "Got" a Sheik
by Rev. Remo I. Robb
Reprint from the Covenanter Witness, September 29, 1948, p. 200
Once as Miss Metheny rode through the mountains her path led near a village where lived a chief of some reputation.
“You’ve never stopped to see the sheik,” remarked the Bible woman.
“Is there one of importance there?” asked Miss Metheny.
“Oh, yes, the sheik of this village is quite a wise man.”
Most Oriental villages have a chief, or sheik, as the natives say. Sometimes he is the oldest man in the village, sometimes a man of some learning, or a “holy man” who has made the pilgrimage to Mecca, or a merchant who controls the village finances. In any case, the sheik is the man whose word is law in the community. Often he is known over a wide territory and is respected wherever he is mentioned.
So when Miss Metheny heard of this “wise” sheik, she said to her companion, “We have lots of time, let us go even now and pay him a visit.” So saying they turned their horses toward the village, and soon were at the door of the sheik’s house. After a knock they waited to hear the soft tread of shoes and a timid voice, asking, “Who’s there?”
“An American lady to see the sheik,” was the reply.
The footsteps padded off into silence, and after a while a firmer step could be heard returning. The door opened, and the sheik received the two women into his parlor.
Miss Metheny began conversation, but it was soon evident that the sheik did not care to talk. He could not conceive of a woman trying to talk with him as though she were his equal. He thought women were far beneath men, and especially beneath sheiks; he had heard of American women, who were considered on an equality with men, and he did not like the idea at all. By short answers, but gruff replies, he let Miss Metheny know that he was merely being polite to her, and that her call was not at all a welcome one.
As soon as the rules of hospitality would permit, he clapped his hands, and a servant appeared. “Bring food,” he commanded. Then he rose and followed the servant out of the room. He returned soon and sat silent and sullenly tolerating these uninvited women guests.
When the food was brought and set before them, Miss Metheny was uncomfortably suspicious. Why had this man left the room? Had he given any evil orders to his servants? So she merely tasted a little of the food, enough to satisfy the demands of courtesy. The Bible woman, however, ate heartily for she was hungry and the food did taste good. As soon as they had eaten, Miss Metheny rose and carefully, without letting the sheik know of her fears, left the house followed by the Bible woman, and mounted her horse to start home.
Out of hearing, she said, “I’m afraid that old fellow put something into our food. We must hurry home. He will be watching us now, so we must go along as though nothing has happened, but as soon as we are out of sight we will go faster.”
“Oh,” said the Bible woman, “and I ate so much.”
“Yes, I noticed that, but maybe we can get home before we get sick.”
But they had not gone far until the Bible woman did get sick. Very sick, so sick they could not hurry. Because she had eaten little, Miss Metheny was only uncomfortable, but at times she wondered if she would get the Bible woman home. After a hard journey they reached their mountain village. All night long, Miss Metheny was sick, and almost despaired of the life of her Bible woman, but toward morning both began to feel better. She knew then that their lives were spared and after a few days of quietness both were well again.
Some time later in talking the matter over with the Bible woman, Miss Metheny said, “I’m going to get that old sheik.” And this is the way she did it.
A Bible publishing house in Constantinople used to advertise that it published Bibles in any language of the world. That is a rather large sort of claim, for with over a thousand languages to publish from, it is almost impossible that they could all be published correctly from one establishment. Yet this place sold Bibles over all the East and published in nearly all the languages of the East. However, since the printers were not able to read all the languages they printed there were many errors in nearly all of their works, for they could not be proof read. They were accurate enough that if one read them he learned the truth, but the mistakes in printing made folks wonder if there were also mistakes in the message. Some time before, Miss Metheny had bought some Gospels of Luke in Turkish, and some leaflets containing the fifteenth chapter of Luke with its parables of the Lost Sheep, the Lost Coin, and the Prodigal Son. Though she was skilled in many languages, she was not expert in Turkish. As she read the portions she had bought, she was aware of many mistakes in printing, but she was not sure just what the mistakes were nor how to correct them.
Some time after her visit to the old sheik, she packed some Gospels and portions into her saddlebags, saying to her Bible woman, “Come, today we are going to visit the old sheik again.”
“Not I,” said the Bible woman. “He tried to poison us before, and he almost succeeded with me.”
“But he won’t this time, I am sure."
“Oh, but he will. If he finds that he did not succeed the first time, he will try twice as hard when he has another chance.”
“I think not. Did not I say I was going to get him? Come along, you will want to be with me.”
The Bible woman argued further, but she knew from the beginning that when all discussion was finished she would be on her horse riding with Miss Metheny toward the village of the old sheik. And that was exactly where they went.
As before, they knocked at the door, listened for the soft footsteps and the timid voice, asking, “Who’s there?”
As before, the reply was, “An American lady to see the sheik.”
Again they heard the footsteps padding away into silence and after a wait heard firmer footsteps of the old sheik returning. He opened the door, and fairly staggered in amazement when he saw the same two women whom he had tried to poison. He had put enough poison into their food to have killed them easily, yet here they were, and the American woman had begun to talk almost as soon as he had opened the door.
“Oh great scholar,” she had begun. “I have heard of your fame through all these mountains and have come to you for help. I am told that you are skilled in the languages, and are specially skilled as a teacher of the Turkish language. I have come to you, because I – I am just a poor woman, ignorant of Turkish, and greatly in need of assistance.”
“Come in, come in,” he said, hardly knowing what else to do, and feeling proud of the dignity which this American was according him, humbly.
But she did not stop. “It is a privilege to come to such a person, O great scholar, and to be assured that the help I am to get is that of one who knows languages well, so that his teachings are known throughout the whole mountain region. My matter is of great concern to me, but before I state it I must know if you, O great scholar, will be willing to give help to me, a poor woman so ignorant of the language in which you are so highly skilled.”
“Why, yes, I’ll help you. What do you want?”
“I have here in my saddlebags some portions of my sacred writings in Turkish. These are the Christian’s Scriptures, but the writing is badly done, and I want it to be corrected. As you know, O great scholar, bad writing reflects on that which is written, and I would like to have these matters corrected. But of course, you would not want to examine the Christian gospels.”
As she spoke she handed him a portion containing the parable of the Prodigal Son. He took it and began to read. He called for writing material and sat making notations on the margins. As he read, he grew interested.
“What is this?” he asked.
“Oh, that is a mere portion of one of the Christian writings. I am sorry to trouble you with it.”
“Is this all there is?”
“Oh, no, there is much more, but I do not want to take your valuable time, O Scholar. Please make the corrections in that and I will not trouble you further.”
“Where is the rest of it?”
“Oh, I have some here in my saddlebags, but it will not be necessary for you to look at that. You are busy and I am sorry to intrude upon your time, but I wanted the best help I could find, and all people said that you are the best.”
The old man insisted on having a Gospel, so she gave him one, and he opened it to read. She sat in silence waiting for him to speak. Much later after he had read without speaking, he clapped his hands, and as before ordered a servant to bring food.
“Eat heartily, if you wish,” she whispered to her Bible woman. “There is no poison this time.” Nor was there, for in her own way Miss Metheny had crossed the barrier of coldness and hatred, and the sheik treated her as a friend.
In her journeyings through the hills, she never again passed that village without stopping to call on the old sheik. He always received her warmly, and gave her of his food as a true Oriental friend does. This strange friendship continued until at length she left the mountains and returned to Alexandretta.
A few weeks before she was to retire from the mission field at Alexandretta and return to America, a young man came to her door.
“You do not know me,” he said, “but I will tell you right away who I am. I am the grandson of the old sheik in the mountain village.”
“Oh, you glad I am to see you. How is your find grandfather?”
“I am sorry to say that he died not many weeks ago, and on that account I am here. You see, he took the Gospel of Luke, which you gave him and read it. It seemed good to him, so he used to gather the men of the village and read it to them. It wore out, the corners of the pages got torn off, but my Grandfather knew the words that were printed in the corners, so he went ahead and read it without the corners. Over and over again he read the book and the men loved it. Now he is gone, and they have asked me to read it for them. But I do not know it like my grandfather did, and I cannot read where the pages are torn. Will you please give me another Gospel so that I can go home and read it to the men of the village, like my Grandfather did?”
And that’s how Miss Metheny GOT the sheik.
How gloriously well she GOT him!
Origin of Theological Foundations for Youth (TFY)
TFY began with the Lilly Foundation. From church-connected colleges and seminaries across the nation, it solicited proposals for a program to teach high school aged people theology. The proposal fell on the desk of our Seminary’s President, then Jerry O’Neill. He almost tossed it in the wastepaper basket, but before doing so, he called the Chairman of the Seminary Board, Bill Edgar. What did he think? Bill said, “Send it to me.”
Bill roughed out a program and talked to Jerry, saying he thought the Seminary should apply for the Lilly grant. Jerry agreed, took Bill’s rough draft of a proposal, cleaned it up, applied, and got the grant. Lilly liked the proposal and funded TFY’s first few years. Jerry oversaw its beginning organization, working with Andy McCracken, Synod’s youth leader at the time. Off the ground it proved popular. For several decades TFY has been part of the Seminary’s program, a way for the Church to gather and teach young people.
– Bill Edgar
TFY in Three Acts
“What's theology?” one of my fellow lifeguards asked me when I told him that my recent vacation had been for a theology camp. It took me a bit by surprise but I stammered out a quick “The study of God.” That elicited “Oh, so like a church camp.” I reluctantly answered, “Yes.” The conversation was a bit strange in a few ways. First, it would not have made sense to anyone outside of a culture full to the brim with specialized youth camps for everything from soccer to robotics to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. But more centrally, I felt that “church camp” utterly failed to describe the Theological Foundations for Youth program. On the surface, lifting a theology professor onto your shoulders outside a pizzeria and achieving four-part harmony by forcing the male counselor to sight-sing the alto do not appear to be typical church camp fare. Still, there are deeper differences, and more meaningful events, which I will cover here.
Theological Foundations for Youth (TFY) is a three week program for rising seniors at the RP Seminary which takes place over the summer. Because of the unceasing curses of Covid19-Δ, this year it was made into two, two-week programs, with the rising seniors of this year first and the rising seniors of last year afterwards. The middle week, which usually involves church visits and service in smaller groups, was cut out in order to keep the groups sequestered. There is far too much of TFY to merely report on in an article, and even dozens of pages of notes on theology and social interactions will not do it justice. Instead I will describe three of the aspects of the program which the three attendees from the Atlantic Presbytery found helpful.
The first student pointed to a high point of the academic program, a lecture by Dr. David Whitla about the history of our ancestors (for most of us spiritually rather than physically). It was and is a hard story of protest, betrayal, and persecution, concluding with the Cameronians, an uncompromising group of desperate men, rebels, and even assassins who fathered the RP Church. The lecture was enlightening in many ways. One trait which stood out was Dr. Whitla's mature approach to history. To paraphrase one Atlantic Presbytery TFY alumnus, “He just started with the fact that our ancestors killed people. He did not support this but he wasn't quick to apologize or judge them.” Whitla's approach, for me was a stark contrast to how history is often taught in public schools where the past is treated alternately as some strange pantheon of heroes and a graveyard of villains, with history as the judge. Dr. Whitla always treated the Covenanters as people -- sinful people, attempting to serve God. He also treated whatever villains there were as sinners who were lustful for power, and untrustworthy by nature of their sexual sin. He also did not treat our history as something to apologize for, another common narrative today. He always took the Covenanter sin and mistakes seriously, recognizing their failures but showing what the men and women were thinking and feeling. A revelation from this lecture which fascinated many was the fact that some Covenanters were made slaves in the American colonies. Finally, Dr. Whitla did not merely treat history as an ornamental discipline. He instead emphasized how the persecution of the Covenanters is not a thing dead and gone. We may in fact need this Covenanter spirit today and tomorrow as persecution rises again in the Western World.
The second student highlighted the fellowship there, and more specifically the wide range of people both learning and teaching. TFY was one of the few places where I have seen a range of people from all across the RPCNA, especially since last year’s RP International Conference was cancelled. The result was a lot of fascinating and fruitful conversation. I spoke to a few people who, like myself, were in a church which had spent a long period without a pastor. Several people had had the same pastor all their lives. Several people, like myself, are in small and struggling churches. Several people were from what I term “megachurches,” with youth groups larger than my church’s entire roll. Several people were children of RP ministers all their lives, and were raised with nightly family worship. Several people were never raised in the church. At TFY and since, I have learned about both failed and successful church plants, a wide range of different pastors, and a wide range of needs among different churches. I have also learned about many things outside the church, from the lack of true Christians in Indiana Christian schools to the many missions trips people had participated in. There was also a wide range of different teachers, including: a former missionary, a father of a disabled child, a scholar of Augustine, a linguist, and pastors from all manner of different churches. Some would make ironclad logical arguments and some would make emotional appeals. Some would wax eloquent on the nature of reality and others would simply give cold details of devastating situations, calling us to prayer and action. In all of this, I have learned better how to minister to different people
Finally, the third student described TFY as a retreat from the ordinary world. Attending a public school has given me many opportunities to learn and serve, but at times it can be spiritually exhausting. On the other hand, homeschooling often involves more isolation, often a hard thing for the social among us. The Christian life was clearly meant to be lived in and among a community of believers, providing a base camp for fellowship with Christ and for war with Satan. TFY set a new standard for this as we were able to receive wonderful teaching and fellowship with other believers. Examples of fellowship that could only happen in such a setting include impromptu Psalm sings, discussions of ethics, and group prayers. Moreover, with a rest from the influences of the world, I was able to unload and repent of sins which unspoken encouragement from worldly friends had previously hindered me from doing. One key example which came up multiple times was the disrespect for and objectification of women which is so prevelant in today’s world. Such disrespect was mostly absent from the group of young men at TFY. This freedom also allowed many to find comfort from sorrows and unload traumas they had experienced.
The spiritual development of youth has often been a point of discussion in broader evangelicalism, and has been used as a justification for everything from rap worship music to learning Latin, but so often those attempting to teach the young miss the point. TFY never did. Now I say young man, Go west to TFY!
– Isaiah Weir
Extempore Preaching
Extempore preaching means preaching without reading a manuscript or reciting a memorized sermon, or even using extensive notes. When the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America set aside its Testimony of 1806 and adopted a new one in 1980, it did not include the following from 1806: “The ministers of religion have no warrant for reading their sermons to the congregation (paragraph 7 of chapter 24, “Of Christian Worship”). The language is “regulative principle of worship” language, meaning that, what has no warrant in God’s Word in his worship, God forbids. In other words, reading sermons to a congregation is forbidden. (To my memory the Synods before 1980 that debated and adopted the new Testimony section by section did not positively reject this teaching either; they just ignored it.)
The man who drafted the 1806 Testimony was Alexander McLeod. In a book soon coming out from Crown & Covenant, our church’s publishing arm, Gordon Keddie has collected eighteen of McLeod’s published essays. In one, “The Constitution, Character, and Duties of the Gospel Ministry,” McLeod includes a discussion of Extempore Preaching. Here it is.
Extempore preaching
“To this question I have paid some attention. And, from the observations which I have been enabled to make, I conclude that it is more agreeable to the mind of God, in the institution of the gospel ministry, that the pastor should speak to his hearers, from the fullness of his understanding and his heart, upon a subject which he has thoroughly studied and digested, than that he should confine himself entirely to the recitation of words which he has committed to memory, or to the reading of a manuscript which he holds before him. The voice of nature, the voice of Scripture, and the voice of experience are certainly in favor of extempore preaching.
– This is the order of nature. Speech is the natural mode of communicating our thoughts to others. Writing is an artificial substitute for speech; and by its means we converse with those to whom the voice cannot reach. But when we address those who are present, it is more natural that we speak what we know, than that we either repeat what we have committed to memory or read what we have written.
– All scriptural example is upon the side of extempore preaching. Thus the ministers of the synagogues taught and exhorted. Thus all the apostles and evangelists. Thus did also our blessed Savior. Having read his text, he “closed the book” and gave the meaning. “And he began to say unto them…” (Luke 4:20-21). And,
– Experience also recommends this example to our imitation. The most successful ministers, in the best days of the church, thus preached the gospel. The early Reformation, in this as in other particulars, imitated the example of the primitive pastors; and the most successful ministers in every age did likewise. If at any time signal awakenings have commenced under the ministry of one who habitually read sermons, it was found necessary to employ preaching extemporaneously, in cultivating the field and in gathering the harvest.
"There are many strong objections against the opposite method. It restrains the inventive faculty of the preacher; it diminishes his dependence upon God’s Spirit while actually engaged in his ministry; and it prevents those intellectual exertions which, excited by the occasion, give birth to the most natural and forcible remarks. It is also calculated to impede the discharge of other duties. The pastor of a congregation, who, during an ordinary life serves one church, must neglect parochial duties if he is under the necessity of writing two sermons every week. This labor must likewise prevent study. In short, the habit of reading or recitation has gone far toward banishing discipline, and toward filling the church with a superficial ministry. It has had another injurious effect. For as action and reaction are equal and contrary in the moral, as well as in the physical world, it has driven the great body of the people away from the churches of the regularly educated ministry, to follow declaimers who have nothing to recommend them but their natural and extemporaneous eloquence. Nor is this all. Those who cannot preach except by reading have sometimes been placed in a very disagreeable predicament. If they are called upon, in providence to preach, and have not a sermon in their pocket suitable to the occasion, they become justly liable to the terrible charge of Isaiah 56:10: “Dumb dogs; they cannot bark.” Indeed, if the practice of reading were universally adopted in the public worship of the Lord’s Day, it would go far toward the total overthrow of the ordinance of the Christian ministry. As anyone may write, so anyone may read, and then there is no necessity for an ordained ministry to preach the gospel.
"The apologies offered for this innovation have always appeared to me unsatisfactory. 'There are some ministers who cannot correctly explain religion, unless they confine themselves to discourses previously written.' I trust, my brethren, this apology will never be made for your pastor. I believe the principle of it is incorrect; and I venture to say that every man who can write well and can read well would have spoken well, had he cultivated attentively the talent of speech. What! Shall there be found men of talents for every other department that requires eloquence except for the ministry of Christ’s gospel? In the Senate, and at the bar, men of information and of taste have listened with interest to extempore eloquence. But it has been said, “There are some congregations which feel so little interest in the great doctrines of religion as to have no relish for discussions which are not recommended by correctness of composition” – a compliment which I hope shall never be paid by its pastor to this congregation. I shall now dismiss this subject, after I shall have observed that men of superior talents and acquisitions will certainly command respect, whatever be the mode in which they address their hearers; but these valuable endowments might be employed much more successfully in the service of the church, by cultivating an extempore elocution than by reading sermons. Let the ambassador for Christ be thoroughly acquainted with his Bible; let him enrich his mind with various knowledge; let him correct his thoughts by frequent composition; let him accurately digest the subject about which he is to speak, and let him enter the pulpit and address his congregation in total dependence upon his God; let him pour out his heart, not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and of power, and his gain in spiritual effect will far counterbalance his loss in elegance in expression.”
(From the pamphlet The Constitution, Character, and Duties of the Gospel Ministry, New York: J. Seymour, 1808, 72 pp., soon to be reprinted in Keddie’s collection of McLeod’s shorter writings.)
– Bill Edgar
Report on the Home Missions Board Fall Meeting, 2021
The RPCNA's Board of Home Missions met on the RPTS campus in Pittsburgh on October 19-20. The board consists of one representative from each North American presbytery, and one women's representative. Denominational treasurer Jim McFarland is always present as an ex-officio member, and his long history with the boards and their funding is very helpful.
On this occasion, two representatives were present by Zoom. This was an especially good move for Patrick McNeely of Squamish, British Colombia, as his wife gave birth between the evening and morning sessions. The overnight commute from Pittsburgh to Squamish would have challenged even a former special operative. We congratulate Mrs. McNeely on the latest arrival.
Romesh Prakashpalan was reelected board president. Each presbytery reported on its current church plants, its church planting opportunities, its vacant pulpits, and its students under care. There are presently fourteen vacant pulpits across the denomination, including a cluster of vacancies in the older congregations of the Pacific Coast Presbytery: San Diego, Los Angeles, Fresno, and Seattle. There are also now four Chinese-speaking works, including two in Vancouver. Overall the treasurer reported a total of 105 churches and mission churches across the US, Canada, and Japan. Please pray for the Lord to raise up workers to fill the empty pulpits and continue to plant new churches.
The board met some of the RPTS students and their families over dinner and introduced the vacancies and opportunities to them. We were glad to see a good number of students there.
Two policy questions occupied the board's attention. One was prompted by the observation that the RPCNA funds new church plants with reducing aid that stretches over six years, longer than some similar denominations. Presbyteries are asked to contribute, but there are no specific requirements. The Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, by way of comparison, calls for board, presbytery, and local group (or planter's associates) to contribute equal thirds for three years. The board decided to conduct an evaluation of how our church plants have fared over the past thirty-five years so as to better evaluate the effectiveness of our current approach.
The other policy question has to do with continuing to contribute towards the support of Metanoia Prison Ministries chaplain Tim McCracken, previously the long-time pastor of Fresno RPC. The board's constitution clearly directs it to support church planting. Prisoners clearly need the gospel. But can a church be planted behind bars? Synod has a committee studying that question. If the answer is in the negative, what should the HMB's role be in Mr. McCracken's support? And how should the board view future requests from others for similar efforts? A proposed amendment to the board's constitution was discussed and delayed until the spring.
Some recent students from the Theological Foundations for Youth requested that the board provide a list of RPCNA church plants that could be bolstered by students deliberately choosing their college so as to attend and help said plant. The board suggests the following: Oneonta NY, Harrisonburg VA, Atlanta GA, Laramie WY, and Bryan TX. Students should of course get to know the plant when they visit the college.
Church planting can be discouraging work, so the board holds retreats for church planters and their wives every four years. The next such retreat is scheduled for October 21-24, 2022.
– John Edgar
A Farmer’s Hope
John 12:24; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28
Preached for the Funeral Service for Hartley Russell,
May 4, 1944 - October 23, 2021
Today we celebrate the life and mourn the death of Hartley Russell. Hartley was born on May 4, 1944. He and his siblings were the fourth generation of Psalm-singing, Westminster Confession bearing, Covenanter farmers in Walton. And Walton was blessed by their presence. As a young man, Hartley had the blessing of a sister who loved him and cared for him. She went off to Geneva College, and she brought home a girl from rural Michigan. Hartley fell in love with Marilyn Harrington. That is not a surprise. Everyone who met Marilyn fell in love with her. But God had given Marilyn to Hartley as a wife. Eve to Hartley's Adam, they had children, loved them, raised them, and rejoiced in their grandchildren as their children had families of their own.
Hartley was a young man when he married Marilyn in 1966, but youth is not necessarily foolishness. Paul admonishes Timothy, do not let people despise your youth. In 1968, God and the Walton Reformed Presbyterian Church called the young man to serve as a ruling elder, helping the shepherd the flock of God's people. At Hartley's death, he had actively and faithfully served the Walton Reformed Presbyterian Church for 53 years. Three weeks before Jesus took him home, he told me that he thought it was time for him to resign as an elder. He felt bad that he could not actively help shepherd. His request was denied. A ruling elder serves a life sentence, and Hartley's prayers and wisdom were required until the King of the Church proclaims "Well done, good and faithful servant." Hartley was well suited to be a good ruling elder. Ministry in the church of Christ is pastoral. And pastoral work is farm work. The Kingdom of God has always been a farming operation. And Hartley Russell was a farmer. He was the son of a farmer and the grandson of a farmer. And the great-grandson of a farmer. The soil of the Russell Farm was in his blood. Hartley's blood, and the blood of his fathers, was in the soil. But not only were four generations of Russell's farming in Walton, so their (and our) first father, Adam, was a farmer.
Made in the image of God, with dominion over the creatures, our father Adam was given a farm by his heavenly father. He was told to tend and keep it. To make it abundant. To draw forth its glorious fruit. To love things that grow and shepherd that growth with care and focus.
But a farm needs animals also. And animals created to be a friend to farmers were brought to Adam by his Father. Adam exercised his dominion, his loving pastoral concern over the creatures by naming them. There was no fear between Adam and his stock, only loving respect and care. Adam was a good farmer. But, it turns out, not a great farmer.
Running a farm is hard. Running a Kingdom even harder. Adam stumbled and fell from grace. He lost his farm in the first great eviction when he rebelled against his Father's goodness and ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Having lost his good, fertile farm, Adam was sent forth into a world marred by his sin. Farming became even more challenging work. It would now require the sweat of the brow to scratch out enough wheat for a loaf of bread. Thorns and thistles would draw the blood that would be necessary to harvest the fruit.
Hartley Russell loved his land. I suspect he never loved the thorns and thistles. Or the rocks. The long nights with sick cows. The small checks from dropping milk prices. Adam made farming a hard life. But Hartley loved it anyway. He loved it anyway because the self-sacrifice necessary to be a farmer was an expression of love that made him a far better farmer than his father, Adam.
And do you know why? Because Hartley learned his farming, husbandry, and shepherding from the school of Jesus Christ and not the school of father Adam.
And Jesus Christ is the greatest of farmers. Jesus is the good shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep. Paul tells us about the church's growth, saying, "I planted the seed, Apollos watered, but God granted the increase." Jesus gives life. He sustains life, strengthens what is weak, delights in things that grow. He told his disciples, "I am the vine, and you are the branches." In him is life, and he shares that life with his people.
Hartley knew these things. Having been born to faithful parents and baptized into the covenant as a baby, Hartley grew up in God's garden. Through the faithful care of his parents, his teachers, his pastors, and his elders, Hartley came to understand his sinful nature, to appreciate God's holiness, and by the grace of the Good Shepherd, he trusted in the good news. And having trusted, so he lived.
A quiet man but full of wisdom and humor, Hartley's voice was respected among his friends, his peers, and his church and its courts. And his wisdom was that of a farmer… counseling loving care for things that grow, consistently unwilling to throw away that which was broken. A farmer fixes things. Jesus taught him that.
And so he raised many things, but most important to him, his daughter Debbie and his son David. So as he rests with his fathers, Debbie and David and their children will continue to be blessed by the legacy they have received from their parents, living examples of faith, hope, and love.
But of course, a quiet, gentle spirit is not the same as a sinless life. Hartley was not perfect. A good Calvinist, he would not want us to brag that he was a "good man." Hartley was a sinner. But praise be to God, Jesus came to save sinners. Hartley knew his need for a savior. He needed a Shepherd to lay down his life for him. He needed his sin nailed to a cross. A branch without a vine withers quickly. But Hartley had the sure hope of being united to Jesus Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection.
A farmer understands the reality of death. You cannot raise beef and not look death in the eye. My heart broke for Hartley when Marilyn died. But Hartley could see beyond the claims of death and the grave. United to Jesus Christ, he knew that his beloved bride was made alive by Christ when she trusted in him. Being baptized into the Triune name, she died, was buried, and will be raised again in him. Jesus once said, "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear my voice and those who hear will live.” (John 5:25) Marilyn already enjoyed eternal life, and physical death was not a punishment but a means by which her savior embraced her until he should raise her body on the last day. Hartley mourned her death, he felt the loneliness of her absence, but he never feared losing her. Christ was keeping her until they met her again.
And so Hartley faced his death like a farmer who hoped in the Great Farmer. Hartley knew what Jesus meant when he said, "Unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone, but if it dies, it bears much fruit." (John 12:24) Seeds that are planted produce a fruitful harvest. Paul reminds us, "But in fact, Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For in Adam all die, so in Christ, all shall be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then, at his coming those who belong to Christ.” (1 Corinthians 15:20-23)
Hartley understood a farmer's hope in Jesus Christ. We do not go to bury him in a cemetery, but to plant his body as a seed in a garden with the sure hope that as Jesus came forth from the grave, he did so as the firstfruits of a harvest of resurrection that will be raised up in glory on the last day. What a harvest that will be!
Let us honor the man as he honored Christ. And let us follow his example, that we might also one day hear the words that Christ has surely spoken to Hartley, "Well done, good and faithful servant."
– Bill Chellis
Gratitude and a Request for Assistance
Thus endeth our fourth year of running completely on donations. We extend a hearty "Thank you!" to all our donors for their generous contributions. Yes, thank you for sharing the costs of paying the printer, the postage (which unexpectedly rose at the end of August!), the web hosting and editing fees, and the transcription software fees.
We invite you to link to our website and specific articles wherever you have your own online presence. We are particularly pleased with What Is My "Race?" and would be tickled pink if it could take off and go beyond our little corner of God's round earth.
If you appreciate our efforts, you can help us stay in print and online by clicking here, or mail your gift to
A Little Strength
901 Cypress Avenue
Elkins Park PA 19027
Make your check out to “Elkins Park RP Church” with “A Little Strength” in the memo line.
Authors in this issue
Bill Chellis is the pastor of Walton RPC.
Bill Edgar is a retired pastor of Broomall RPC (Philadelphia) and the author of 7 Big Questions Your Life Depends On. He is currently working on a book about Bible heroes with chutzpah.
Dan Edgar is a member of Broomall RPC (Philadelphia).
John Edgar is the pastor of Elkins Park RPC (Philadelphia).
Hunter Jackson is a student under care of Atlantic Presbytery and is studying at Westminster Theological Seminary. He is currently serving as pastoral intern at Elkins Park RP Church.
Betsy Perkins is a member of Elkins Park RPC (Philadelphia).
Remo Robb (1899-1957) was born in Canton, China to RP missionaries, became an American RP pastor, and served as Synod's Home Missions Secretary.
Isaiah Weir is a member of Ridgefield Park RPC (New York).