By Elizabeth Prata
Creation Grace: Fields
John MacArthur: “I realize I’m on the last lap…”
By Elizabeth Prata
The annual Shepherds Conference held at Grace Community Church, currently pastored by John MacArthur, is a highlight of all the conferences on the Christian circuit. Drawing top-notch speakers from around the world, the sermons are encouraging, deep, and convicting.
The mission of Shepherds Conference is to provide the opportunity for men in church leadership to be challenged in their commitment to biblical ministry. It also aims to refresh men in ministry for the three days through the sermons, songs, and fellowship, and to BE served.
It began over 40 years ago. Thousands of men pour into the campus and overflow rooms are also filled. It has grown from 100 men to this year around 6000 men from all over the world attending.
For all of the ShepCons, as it’s nicknamed, John MacArthur has been the host. He has pastored Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, CA for 56 years and has said ShepCon is the highlight of the year for him. He has always said he has had two goals as a pastor: preach the word and raise up men. In this, he has been faithful.
Of all the 6000 men attending, there is one man who is not attending this year, and that is MacArthur himself. Previously he has opened and closed the conference with a sermon based on the conference’s theme, which this year is “Proclaiming Christ to the ends of the earth”. It is the first time in 40 years he has not been able to attend.
On March 7, 2025 published a video explaining why. In January 2023 he was preaching the first morning service and he became short of breath. “I went on to preach for 50 minutes” he said. But after the service as elders to attended him, “they sidelined me” and he was not allowed to preach the second service, MacArthur said. Doctors later confirmed he’d had a heart episode. Thus began an 18 month journey through numerous heart operations, lung surgeries, and dialysis. He has most recently been in the hospital for 7 weeks straight and was only recently released.
Disappointed he could not deliver his sermon to close out the conference this year, he gave a video message.
Below is a clip from the short published by Grace to You on Youtube, it’s not the entire message, which at present I cannot find online except from Phil Johnson of Grace To You, on Twitter. Watch the entire 2:30 message here if you are on Twitter/X. https://x.com/i/status/1898192033367609452
Or here on Facebook, the John MacArthur Appreciation Page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/MacArthur.111/posts/24010591651863596/
MacArthur said he had his message he’d intended to deliver printed and distributed to the conference attendees. It will also be sent to the people on GTY’s mailing list. Here is the cover:
It hits hard. Here is a transcription of the message from John MacArthur from the video.
I want to say ‘grace to you’, all of you who are at the Shepherds Conference. For me it’s a highlight of the year so you have to know my disappointment in coming to you through video. It really came down to being the only option because I haven’t had such a speedy recovery as I’d hoped to have. I feel great, I just lost a lot of strength by being 7 weeks in the hospital. It’s the hospital that can kill you. You can survive the illness…if you can survive the hospital then you’ve won on every level. It took a toll on me physically, so I’m seeing therapists and trainers trying to get back as soon as possible.
I had this message on my heart and I didn’t want to lose the opportunity to give it to you so we printed it up in a booklet. The good news is, you don’t have to listen to me, you don’t have to take notes because you’re going to get the sermon in a booklet form.
Just know how much I miss being at Shepherds Conference. I love the fellowship, I love the preaching, I especially love the singing…every aspect of it. And the camaraderie and fellowship of meeting people is always a highlight. Thank you for your prayers, thank you for your faithfulness, and being a part of Shepherds Conference. I’ll be praying for you, asking the Lord to bless in an unusual way, and sharpen all of us for whatever the Lord has for us in the future.
I realize I’m on the last lap. That takes on a new meaning when you know you’re on the short end of the candle, but I am all thanks and praise to God for everything He’s allowed me to be a part of and everything He’s accomplished by His word in these years of ministry.
Grace and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
John MacArthur is 85 years old. His acknowledgement of being near the end of his life is not only a statement of the obvious. His great age, shrunken body, tremulous voice, and numerous heavy medical issues all testify to that. But knowing MacArthur’s care for his elders and his people, his statement of being at the short end of the candle was a care in itself- preparing his people and the wider world for his translation in body on this earth to heaven’s glories. This is how a lion of the faith finishes well, indeed.
The Role of Almonds in Biblical Texts
By Elizabeth Prata
Why almonds? They appear a lot in the Bible. There must be some kind of symbolism to almonds, almond blossoms, and almond trees.
Then he made the lampstand of pure gold. He made the lampstand of hammered work, its base and its shaft; its cups, its bulbs, and its flowers were of one piece with it. There were six branches going out of its sides; three branches of the lampstand from the one side of it and three branches of the lampstand from the other side of it; three cups shaped like almond blossoms, a bulb and a flower on one branch, and three cups shaped like almond blossoms, a bulb and a flower on the other branch—so for the six branches going out of the lampstand. And on the lampstand there were four cups shaped like almond blossoms, its bulbs and its flowers; and a bulb was under the first pair of branches coming out of it, and a bulb under the second pair of branches coming out of it, and a bulb under the third pair of branches coming out of it, for the six branches coming out of the lampstand. Their bulbs and their branches were of one piece with it; the whole of it was a single hammered work of pure gold. And he made its seven lamps with its tongs and its trays of pure gold. He made it and all its utensils from a talent of pure gold. (Exodus 37:17-24).
Aaron’s Rod sprouted ripe almonds:
Now on the next day Moses went into the tent of the testimony; and behold, Aaron’s staff for the house of Levi had sprouted and produced buds and bloomed with blossoms, and it yielded ripe almonds. (Numbers 17:8).
The LORD used almond trees in speaking to Jeremiah:
And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, “What do you see, Jeremiah?” And I said, “I see a branch of an almond tree.” 12 Then the Lord said to me, “You have seen well, for I am watching over My word to perform it.” (Jeremiah 1:11-12).
What do almonds mean in biblical symbolism?
The early-appearing white bloom of the almond apparently serves as a picture of the early graying of a person’s hair, pointing the writer of Ecclesiastes to the certainty of death (Eccles. 12:5). The early blossom meant for Jeremiah that the almond watched for spring and gave the prophet a wordplay on the almond (Hb. shaqed) and his task to watch (Hb. shoqed) (Jer. 1:11). Source: Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary
The reference to the image white hair of age is conspicuous, since the almond blossoms in early February, sometimes January, and the white blossoms would stand out as the only color on the hillside, as nothing else was blooming or growing yet.
The almond is Amygdalus communis (N.O. Rosaceae), a tree very similar to the peach. The common variety grows to the height of 25 feet and produces an abundant blossom which appears before the leaves; …This early blossoming is supposed to be the origin of the name shāḳēdh which contains the idea of “early.” The masses of almond trees in full bloom in some parts of Palestine make a very beautiful and striking sight. The bloom of some varieties is almost pure white, from a little distance, in other parts the delicate pink, always present at the inner part of the petals, is diffused enough to give a pink blush to the whole blossom. (The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Vols. 1–5, p. 100), 1915.).
Barnes’ Notes says, “The name almond in Hebrew denotes the “waking-tree,” the “waking-fruit;” and is applied to this tree, because it blossoms early in the season. It serves here, as in Jeremiah 1:11-12, to set forth the speed and certainty with which, at God’s will, His purposes are accomplished. So again the blossoming and bearing of Aaron’s rod, naturally impotent when severed from the parent tree, may signify the profitableness, because of God’s appointment and blessing, of the various means of grace (e. g. the priesthood, the sacraments), which of themselves and apart from Him could have no such efficacy”
Beautiful!
A question about Lifeway Resources and my response
By Elizabeth Prata
I was asked about the Lifeway Bible Study “When You Pray.” The study involves a collection of authors, who wrote a chapter each. They are- Kelly Minter, Jackie Hill Perry, Jen Wilkin, Jennifer Rothschild, Jada Edwards, and Kristi McLelland. It is a 7-session lesson designed for small groups, self alone, or a retreat accompanied by the separately purchased ‘Group Experience Kit’. Each session was written by the different author listed above. It includes a video component for each session. The study uses 6 different Bible translations, including the NLT.
GotQuestions: FMI and Review of the NLT here.
It is not best practice to use multiple translations in one study.
Using many translations in one study: AI says, “A Bible teacher should generally not use six different translations in one study as it can be overwhelming and confusing for students, potentially detracting from the focus on understanding the text rather than comparing translation nuances; it’s usually better to stick with one primary translation and only reference a few others when necessary to clarify meaning or highlight translation variations in specific passages.”
I thanked the questioner for the query and for the encouragement and for reading my material here on the blog. Discernment is always good.
I am sorry to say that uniformly, almost anything from Lifeway is going to be bad. They unashamedly platform false teachers. A while back Lifeway published a spate of “heaven tourism” books where people who said they’d died were given a tour of heaven, some of them claiming to have met Jesus. Lifeway continued to publish these books for years until a big outcry finally pushed them off Lifeway’s shelves. Their years-long persistence in publishing these books, some of which contradicted each other and all contradicting the Bible, despite appeals, petitions, and rebukes, displayed a wanton lack of concern for the spiritual state of their customers, a lack of discernment, and a prioritizing of greed over truth.
As for this specific study titled “When You Pray”, I’ve written several times about the authors Jackie Hill Perry, and Jen Wilkin. Both are egregious Bible twisters. Perry came out with an announcement that she receives direct revelation from Jesus and was instructed to tell people the different pieces of news ‘He’ tells her. Like this: “Ok ok. I’ll say this. God primarily deals with me in dreams. I’ve been enlightened, warned, and led to intercede for others through them.” She has since removed this Twitter announcement. You can read a transcript of it at the link above.
G3 on Why Modern Prophecy is False
Jen Wilkin is obsessed with two things, preaching and women. This equals women preaching, she twists almost every sermon, Q&A, panel, or interview into a women need to be leaders WITH men (in roles the Bible denies us, of course). In one famous sermon she likened period blood (excerpt) from women to the blood on the cross, saying women have a better understanding of the gospel because of this. I am not kidding.
As for Minter & Rothschild, Michelle Lesley has written about them, discerning that these women preach to men and they support and promote false teachers. She does not recommend either of these women.
Alternatives to Lifeway’s When you Pray ‘study’ might be:
At Ligonier, there is a 6-week lesson series with video etc, called Prayer, where RC Sproul “uses the acronym ACTS and the Lord’s Prayer to teach us how to pray” 24 min each. It costs $9.00/month.
https://connect.ligonier.org/library/prayer-27945/about/
G3 Ministries has small group studies, https://g3min.org/resource-category/small-group-study/?
The Hidden Life of Prayer by David MacIntyre is a classic gem, video on youtube (https://youtu.be/ODz1aOo6EOk?si=-P_LP270APU8PqwN and 39 page book can download for free at Chapel Library, https://www.chapellibrary.org/book/hlop/hidden-life-of-prayer-the-macintyredavid?
Praying the Bible by Donald S. Whitney is a small book and 5-min youtube videos by the author go thru how to pray daily without falling into the rut of saying the same old thing. https://youtu.be/A-HziKu5Ot0?si=yU70QoTBvrklUrbw
Grace Community Church led by MacArthur has a huge small group ministry section for men and women, many of the lessons are taped or video’d and have accompanying pdf or notes.
I’d say any of those alternatives are better than Lifeway. 🙂
Lifeway is not a trustworthy source for any Christian material, sadly.
Pulpit Fashion
By Elizabeth Prata
Pulpits. If you attend church, you’ve got one. It may be a music stand, a desk, a simple or an ornate traditional pulpit. But the preacher needs to stand somewhere to face his audience, and preach the truth visibly and audibly. A pulpit, in Western church architecture is “an elevated and enclosed platform from which the sermon is delivered during a service.”
Here is Spurgeon opining on how horrible many pulpits are, lol. At the time apparently, the Pulpit was enclosed in some way, either by rails or a box, and between being confined and having gas lamps near the head, Spurgeon said, “is very apt to make a preacher feel half intoxicated, or to sicken him. We ought to be spared this infliction.” More here, Pulpits–
Remarkable are the forms which pulpits have assumed according to the freaks of human fancy and folly. Twenty years ago they had probably reached their very worst. What could have been their design and intent it would be hard to conjecture. A deep wooden pulpit of the old sort might well remind a minister of his mortality, for it is nothing but a coffin set on end: but on what rational ground do we bury our pastors alive? Many of these erections resemble barrels, others are of the fashion of egg cups and wine glasses; a third class were evidently modeled after corn bins upon four legs; and yet a fourth variety can only be likened to swallows’ nests stuck upon the walls. Some of them are so high as to turn the heads of the occupants when they dare to peer into the awful depths below them, and they give those who look up to the elevated preacher for any length of time a crick in the neck. I have felt like a man at the mast-head while perched aloft in these “towers of the flock.” These abominations are in themselves evils, and create evils.
Even 200 years ago they were looking for that sweet spot of design for a pulpit. Seems like at some point, Spurgeon found it.
Here is HB Charles on the making of the only 3rd replica of Spurgeon’s pulpit desk from which HB will now preach. He was overcome with joy at how this structure supports and aids the preacher in his preaching: The Charles Spurgeon Pulpit at Shiloh
Pastor David Tarkington was asked by a woodworking congregant what kind of pulpit he would like if he could design one, and he promptly said, ‘Like Spurgeon’s- go see HB Charles’ to see what it looks like.‘ Then he wrote,
What is the significance of having a replica pulpit of Spurgeon’s? I know that throughout our community and around the world, God’s men are preaching God’s Word faithfully while standing behind home-made stands, music stands, milk cartons stacked up, ornate pulpits, tall tables, and some with no stand at all. Yet, in our church, with the facility God has blessed us to have, this stage set-up and pulpit says more than most know. The desk where the copy of God’s Word is opened each Lord’s Day for the preaching of the word is more than just a piece of furniture. It is a heavy responsibility for the pastor to preach the Word, rightly divide it, and feed the flock well, trusting the Holy Spirit to empower the spoken words from the written Word so that God may be glorified.
Rebecca Van Doodewaard wrote an 8-part series on Ecclesiastical Architecture. I enjoyed that series very much. Here is an excerpt from that series, the entry focusing on pulpits:
So, “because the Word is indispensable, the pulpit, as the architectural manifestation of the Word, must make its indispensability architecturally clear” (Bruggink and Droppers, 80). The sacraments are necessary. Congregational singing is important. Prayer is needed.
Proclaimed gospel, however, has historically held and should hold primary importance in Protestant worship. Everything else in worship and the sanctuary should revolved around it and point to it. Presbyterians, low Anglicans, Baptists, and Methodists (among other Protestant groups), despite their differences, all originally put the preached Word front and center, theologically and architecturally.
This most basic element of biblical Christianity found consistent architectural expression across the board. You will see in old churches that have not renovated their sanctuaries, that even in times of strong denominational affiliation, large, beautiful, central pulpits were ubiquitous.
The pulpit was large, not only so that it was visible from all parts of the sanctuary, but also so there was space to hold the preacher’s notes, a hymn book and a copy of the Scriptures which the congregation could see. The other reason that pulpits were large was to make the minister look smaller, hiding most of the man behind this architectural manifestation of the Word. Source Rebecca Van Doodewaard, Ecclesiastical Architecture.
The Pulpit at Grace Community Church, By Phil Johnson:
Pastors often express interest in the pulpit at Grace Community Church. It is famous as one of the first pulpits ever mounted on a hydraulic lift, so that it can be adjusted for height, (side note: Spurgeon complained that as a short person “They are generally so deep that a short person like myself can scarcely see over the top of them, and when I ask for something to stand upon they bring me a hassock…” which is unstable.)
and it can even descend all the way beneath the platform, all at the touch of a button.
(This was made necessary by the placement of the baptistery, which is at the congregation’s eye level, in the platform behind the pulpit. The pulpit was built to descend so that it could be permanently located at the very front of the platform, yet be easily moved—almost imperceptibly—so that the baptistery can be seen.)
I’ve often said this is my favorite pulpit to preach from, for several reasons. Of course, it’s a historic pulpit with an unrivaled reputation as a place where biblical preaching always meets an eager congregation.
But I like the pulpit for pragmatic reasons, too. It offers more real estate for notes than any pulpit I have ever preached from anywhere. Its top is almost flat, not slanted like a music stand. (Slanted pulpits always allow my notes to slide beneath the reach of my bifocals. I’d prefer a totally flat pulpit-top.) Our pulpit is high enough that the line of sight between my notes and eye-contact with the congregation is very short.
As a piece of furniture, our pulpit is not particularly remarkable. There’s nothing ornate or extraordinary about its craftsmanship. But what it lacks in aesthetics it more than makes up for in serviceability.
CR Wiley says, “I was recently asked, “What makes a good pulpit?” Here’s one I designed and had built for me at my last church. Here are a few convictions and practical considerations that went into the design of this one.
1.A pulpit has a liturgical function—it isn’t a lectern, it is the throne of the Word in Reformed churches. Consequently, it should make the pulpit Bible visible from every part of the sanctuary. It’s not supposed to enhance the status of a preacher, instead it should say something about the authority of God’s judgements. To reinforce this I had what appear to have armrests on either side of the pulpit Bible—and it just so happened that these provided places for a preacher to place his hands.
2.It should be substantial, even heavy, made of the highest quality materials a congregation can afford. This pulpit is made of quarter sawn red oak from the Berkshires in Massachusetts and it weighs roughly 400 pounds.
3.On the practical side of things, it should have places to put notes and books that might be used during preaching. As you might be able to tell, this pulpit provides plenty of space on either side of the pulpit Bible for those things. Source
What is your opinion on pulpits?
Elisabeth Elliot: Faith, Controversy, and Legacy
By Elizabeth Prata
A reader asked me about Elisabeth Elliot. This is the answer I gave.
Elliot was one of the five wives whose husbands were killed by the unreached Ecuadorean Auca Indians back in 1956. She decided to remain in the mission field and minister to the same natives who had speared her husband. Later, returning to the US, she remarried and began speaking on a circuit. Her second husband, Addison Leitch, died agonizingly of cancer 4 years later. Elliot wrote books and hosted a radio program for 13 years called Gateway to Joy. She married for a third time in 1977 to Lars Gren and remained so until her death caused by dementia in 2015. She had one daughter, Valerie. Elisabeth was seen as a graceful, valiant, strong woman, but she was also disillusioned at times, complex, and had bouts of depression.
The question I was asked about Elliot was, was her theology off? It seems a bit off to the reader. I answered, yes her theology IS off. Elisabeth seems to be something of a sacred cow in evangelical circles, and has escaped scrutiny or critique. She gets a pass.
Some years ago I read an interview a Catholic lady was involved in with Elisabeth Elliot. A remarkable exchange occurred which the interviewer put in her resulting article. Elisabeth’s evangelical brother Thomas converted to Catholicism. He became an apologist for Roman Catholicism and wrote many books on the religion.
She said of her brother, the Catholic, that she wished she was brave or she’d be a Catholic too. From Catholic Exchange, an interview:
“Do you know my brother, Thomas Howard? He entered the Catholic Church some years ago. I only wish I had his courage. … “Cowardice, I suppose. My listeners and readers simply would not understand.” Source: Courage to be Catholic
No, we would not.
Though these things happen, it wasn’t solely wanting her child to go to American schools that made Elisabeth leave the mission field, it was constant interpersonal conflict with fellow widow Rachel Saint that was the final straw. They could not stand each other. Though Elisabeth apparently tried to heal the fracture, it never did heal. It’s really not here or there, but the press gives Elliott a winsome graciousness or a settled placidity which was not always true.
She also preached to men. Christianity Today wrote, “Elliot, like many prominent conservative women, also manifested certain contradictions amid her complementarian advocacy. Though she insisted that only qualified men could serve as pastors, she taught church audiences that typically included adult men. Along with her second husband, she joined the Episcopal Church, one of the denominations most adamant about ordaining female pastors.“
In her early life and especially when courting Jim, she had weird ideas about personal will and divining the will of God, using almost mystical means such as circumstances and experience. Her Keswick Holiness upbringing instilled this in her. This led her to excessive self-introspection and sometimes paralysis in decision making.
Elliot biographer wrote in her essay Why Elisabeth Elliot Changed Her Beliefs about Finding God’s Will, “She saw God’s care as dependent on her perfect obedience, and obedience as including not only her actions and her will but every aspect of her life right down to her natural inclinations. Human free will involved only the choice to obey or disobey God’s direction, and God’s will was so minutely specific that even an earnest seeker could miss the narrow path of obedience.”
The fear of missing God’s direction caused Elliot much grief. While it is admirable to want to lay down the whole body, mind, strength, and heart down for the Lord, it is a kind of personal sovereignty that thinks our own decisions can and do thwart God’s will.
Did not Mordecai say to Esther, “Then Mordecai told them to reply to Esther, “Do not imagine that you in the king’s palace can escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silent at this time, liberation and rescue will arise for the Jews from another place, and you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:13-14), making it clear that Esther could decide what she wanted to decide, but that God’s plan would proceed regardless of Esther’s decision.
Elisabeth developed a rubric for divining what God wanted her to do,
(1) the circumstances,
(2) the witness of the Word,
(3) peace of mind
It’s an unstable thing to depend on emotions to confirm a personal decision. Whether it’s fear or peace, emotions should not figure in. No doubt Paul did not ‘feel peace about it’ when he got up from the road from being beaten almost dead to confront the mobs again, or when he floated on a shipwreck plank for days. In Acts 9:16, Jesus tells Paul, “For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” Knowing the certainty of suffering was ahead, I am sure Paul didn’t feel a spiritual placidity all the time. Our emotions should not be a guide for obedience.
On the plus side, Elisabeth was staunchly against feminism, and spoke frequently about headship submission, roles in marriage, and resisting cultural norms. On the downside, she often said these things at predator Bill Gothard’s events. And she began this professional relationship with Gothard in the mid 1990s, AFTER accusations began to come out against Gothard, which were later confirmed by his Board.
She certainly endured horrific tragedies, martyrdom of her first husband, agonizing long death of 2nd from cancer, and a semi-abusive relationship with the 3rd, and a 10-year battle with dementia, which caused her death at age 88. Her work on the mission field is beyond admirable, and her writing no doubt has helped many, as well as her popular radio program.
However, her legacy is definitely complicated, wrapped in grace under suffering, obedience to the Lord even under the most difficult trials, and an advocate for gender roles- which are all good things. However her search for HOW to obey God, her yearning for Catholicism, and her evident hypocrisy in preaching to men, are sad complicating factors in her life’s story.
The Puritan Fashion Police: A Look at Sumptuary Laws
By Elizabeth Prata
You can’t legislate behavior. The 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibited the sale, transportation, and manufacture of alcohol. It went into effect on January 17, 1920.
It didn’t work. The 21st Amendment repealed it in 1933. It had little effect on alcohol consumption.
I was watching a Youtube history video on the Renaissance in Europe. This is the period around the 1400s to the 1600s. In the video the history expert mentioned Italian “Sumptuary laws.” I learned that these were laws designed to regulate personal spending, often based on religious or moral grounds. The idea was to limit extravagant spending on food, drink, clothing, and/or household items.
Sumptuary Laws extend as far back as ancient Rome and ancient Greece. The secular point of sumptuary laws was to distinguish one’s class by the manner of dress. The religious point was to prevent lavish and wasteful expenditures on finery of those in ‘mean condition.’
The American Puritans tried Sumptuary Laws on the new colony as well. It worked about as well for them as these laws did for everyone else: not too good. But they tried it anyway, and so, the American Puritans became fashion police for a while.
Hannah Lyman was a Connecticut Puritan who, in 1676, was hauled to court for her manner of dress, along with about three dozen other women. Charged with overdressing, their crime was wearing a silk hood. In a moment of rebellion, Hannah wore her silk hood to court. The judge was not amused, and she along with the other women, were fined.
In another example of a specific sumptuary law, no one except those in high government were permitted to wear gold in their clothes. “Declaring its “utter detestation and dislike” of men and women of “mean condition, education and calling” who would wear the “garb of gentlemen,” the Massachusetts General Court in 1639 particularly prohibited Puritans of low estate from wearing “immoderate great breeches, knots of riban, silk roses, double ruffles and capes.” Women of low rank were forbidden silk hoods and scarves, as well as short sleeves “whereby the nakedness of the arms may be discovered”— the daring new fashion popular among the upper classes.” We Were What We Wore.
As the Puritan colony settled, trade resumed between our side of the Atlantic and Europe. People were just as fond of their frills and frippery as they always had been. More exotic garb was coming in, including short sleeves, gasp! This infuriated the Reverend Nathaniel Ward so much that, under a pseudonym, in 1647 he issued an angry and somewhat cryptic treatise called ‘A Simple Cobbler of Aggawam‘, and called out the ladies:
“I truly confesse, it is beyond the ken of my understanding to conceive, how those women should have any true grace, or valuable virtue, that have so little wit, as to disfigure themselves with such exotic garb, as not only dismantles their native lovely lustre, but transclouts them into gant bar-geese, ill-shapen-shell-fish, Egyptian Hyeroglyphicks, or at the best into French flirts“… geese, shellfish, hieroglyphics, and French flirts!? Egad! The reverend was truly worked up! (Source).
To be fair, the reverand also called out other religious sects, such as Familists, Antinomians, Anabaptists, and other enthusiasts…
Governing personal behavior and individual choices is always a dicey proposition. Hannah and the other women were fined. It was said specifically that Hannah was “wearing silk in a fflonting (flaunting) manner, in an offensive way…” I really don’t know how you’d wear a silk cap in a flaunting way. Perhaps she flirtatiously tipped it over one eye?
According to Claudia Kidwell, the former head curator of the Smithsonian Institution’s Costume Division, “Clothing’s most pervading function has been to declare status.” The early Puritans loved finery, but only the ones who could afford to have it tailor made enjoyed the finer points of it, and these were usually the leaders of the community, wealthy merchants, or high-born immigrants from England. It wasn’t until the late Industrial Revolution when ready made clothes appeared on the shop shelves.
But in the early days, we read,
Though simplicity of dress was one of the cornerstones of the Puritan Church, the individual members did not yield their personal vanity without many struggles. As soon as the colonies rallied from the first years of poverty and, above all, of comparative isolation, and a tide of prosperity and wealth came rolling in, the settlers began to pick up in dress, to bedeck themselves, to send eagerly to the mother country for new petticoats and doublets that, when proudly donned, did not seem simple and grave enough for the critical eyes of the omnipotent New England magistrates and ministers. Hence restraining and simplifying sumptuary laws were passed. In 1634, in view of some new fashions which were deemed by these autocrats to be immodest and extravagant, an order was sent forth by the General Court.
Though we most often see a Puritan portrait where the subject is wearing black, this was not usually the case in real life. Puritans wore black for paintings becuase black was their Sunday best. Black was a hard color to achieve and it faded quickly. But their daily mode of dress sported all sorts of colors.
Margaret Winthrop, the Massachusetts governor’s wife, ordered her clothing from John Smith, her family’s tailor in London. Margaret wanted “the civilest fashion now in use.”
Even then the clothes made the man. Or woman. In 1652, Jonas Fairbanks was called to the court in Salem for “wearing great boots.” Someone had spotted him wearing them, and snitched. The court record reads: “Jonas Fairbankes presented for wearing great boots. Discharged, it appearing that he did not wear them after the law was published.” Not today, snitcher. Not today.
A few other court decisions from that time in Salem (1646-1651) read:
Henrye Bullocke fined for excess in his apparel in boots, ribbons, gold and silver lace, etc.
Marke Hoscall of Salem fined for excess in his apparel, wearing broad lace.
John Bourne and his wife presented for concealing some pieces of cloth, stuff and thread committed to them and converting them to their own use. To make treble restitution and public acknowledgment at a public meeting in Salem within one month or pay fine.
In England in the late 1500s, a sumptuary law was passed requiring wool caps to be worn. In New England, such wool caps, called Monmouth caps, proved to be practical, and the people who had come from England were used to wearing them, so they were worn without resistance. These ‘Monmouth caps’ became widely used, but as a personal, practical choice.
“Every person above the age of six (excepting “Maids, ladies, gentlewomen, noble personages, and every Lord, knight and gentleman of twenty marks land”) residing in any of the cities, towns, villages or hamlets of England, must wear, on Sundays and holidays (except when travelling), “a cap of wool, thicked and dressed in England, made within this realm, and only dressed and finished by some of the trade of cappers, upon pain to forfeit for every day of not wearing 3s. 4d.” Sumptuary Law of 1651 Massachusetts Bay Colony and the Fairbanks Family
Partly, the old issue of Job’s friend tinged the American Puritans’ thinking. They believed that wealth ordained by God, the wealthy were in favor with Him. Thus, to dress below one’s class would be highly incorrect. However, this use of sumptuary laws to identify class distinctions and maintain hierarchies in class waned as there was more socio-economic movement between classes occurring than it did in England. It became impossible to enforce, too. “Clothing is created out of motivation,” says Claudia Kidwell. “The wealthy wanted to maintain distinctions. Everyone else wanted to close the gap.”
In Puritan Massachusetts, the Sumptuary Law was instituted less to maintain a hierarchy, though that was part of it, but based on biblical standards of wise shepherding and to institute frugality. In this, New Englanders do owe a debt, because if you have heard of the “Thrifty Yankee”, that regional characteristic is real and pervasive to this day. Enacted in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the fall of 1634, the General Court ordered,
“That no person either man or woman shall hereafter make or buy any apparel, either woolen or silk or linen with any lace on it, silver, gold, or thread, under the penalty of forfeiture of said clothes. Also that no person either man or woman shall make or buy any slashed clothes other than one slash in each sleeve and another in the back; also all cut-works, embroideries, or needlework cap, bands, and rails are forbidden hereafter to be made and worn under the aforesaid penalty; also all gold or silver girdles, hatbands, belts, ruffs, beaver hats are prohibited to be bought and worn hereafter.” (Old English updated to modern language, Source).
Problem is, Christian liberty is still Christian liberty. It should not be legislated. But it kept happening anyway, people insisting on personal choice with their money, including where or when to buy finery. The court opined there was-
“intolerable excess and bravery hath crept in upon vs, and especially amongst people of mean condition, to the dishonor of God, the scandal of our profession, the consumption of estates, and altogether unsuiteable to our povertie…”
Obedience to God’s ways is a personal choice and a matter of Christian liberty when it’s in the areas not prescribed. Attempts to regulate one’s choices, whether tobacco, alcohol, clothing, or spending have always proved impossible to enforce and have failed in almost all cases. Hannah Lyman was 16 years old when she faced the court. Her bold stand for personal fashion choice resounds to this day.
However, there IS something to “the clothes make the woman.” The Bible advises us to be modest, and it also advises to shepherd our means well. Paul wrote of women in 1 Timothy 2:9, “Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive apparel,”
and in, 1 Peter 3:3-4, “Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair or gold jewelry or fine clothes, / but from the inner disposition of your heart, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God’s sight“.
In the Old Testament, showy attire is likened to haughtiness. Being haughty is behavior that attempts to bring excessive attention to self,
Isaiah 3:16-24, “The LORD also says: “Because the daughters of Zion are haughty—walking with heads held high and wanton eyes, prancing and skipping as they go, jingling the bracelets on their ankles— / the Lord will bring sores on the heads of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will make their foreheads bare.” / In that day the Lord will take away their finery: their anklets and headbands and crescents…“
But legislation is not the way. Simple obedience to Jesus is the way. It DOES say something about a woman who wears short-shorts and halter tops. It says, ‘look at my body on display.’ It also says something if a woman goes in the other direction with a constant neck-high and floor length mode of dress, which in my opinion says, ‘look at my modesty on display.’
The indignant Reverend does make a sensible plea, “to avoid morose singularity, follow fashions slowly, showing by their moderation, that they rather draw in the other direction with their hearts, then put on by their examples.“
All things in moderation. Including laws!
Further Resources
Our Puritan Ancestors: Mass Bay Residents Waged a Fashion War in the Colony
Records and files of the Quarterly courts of Essex county, Massachusetts
Sumptuary Law of 1651 Massachusetts Bay Colony and the Fairbanks Family
The Puritan Experiment with Sumptuary Legislation
Creation Grace: A Glassy Sea
By Elizabeth Prata
This picture was taken in Lubec Harbor, easternmost point in the US and next to New Brunswick Canada. The waters are part of the Bay of Fundy, known for having the highest tidal range in the world. A large volume of water has to rush in and out within a few hours. The more water that needs to come in, the more it roils. When the tide comes in, the roiling starts abruptly and for a while it almost looks like it’s boiling. The weather in northern Maine and Canada is rough, too, with constant wind and storm.
This picture was taken because it is unusual to see such calm waters in this area of the world. Calm mid-tide, no storm, no fog, no wind.
The world isn’t calm now, not for more than mere moments in a few places, sometimes. There will come a day when the sea will be glassy always, and hearts will be calm. We will fully know peace.
Victim Mentality: A Biblical Critique
By Elizabeth Prata
Over the last five or eight years, I’ve seen a dramatic rise in what people term a “victimhood culture.” This is a culture which declares all power is evil, privilege is ill-gotten and leads to oppression, and victimhood is virtuous. Victims are allowed to opine on anything without facing critique, because, after all, it was their experience, or in the current parlance, “their truth.”
It’s the idea that that suffering and persecution (and any slight, wound, or grief is ‘persecution’ to victims) are a source of status. The deeper the ‘persecution’ the higher the status.
The notion that suffering or persecution can become a source of status is testimony to two things: 1) how satan twists anything, even the good things of the Bible, and 2) how me-centered Christianity can become if allowed to fester unfettered.
How does satan subtly twist the Bible away from Jesus toward ourselves? In this identity politics sphere anyway, the Bible says that the foolish shame the wise, the the weak are made strong, the king becomes a slave so that the slaves may become kings, the first shall be last and the last shall be first. Satan took this and ran with it to create victimhood mentality.
Victim identity is not new. Prior to Swiss philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s ideas infiltrating his 1700s culture, participants in civil society counted their status based on what they had contributed positively to it. After Rousseau, who invented the category of ‘the disadvantaged’, it became based on a lack or a negative. Source.
But its infiltration wholesale into the faith is fairly new. Slowly, incrementally (because satan is subtle) me-centeredness crept into the faith in the form of sermons, books (self-help), and famously platformed ‘wounded women’ prancing about their stages opining about how they were ‘hurt’. Thus, one’s faith is based on how the person overcame the hurt in their own power, instead of focusing on and glorifying Christ by their teaching. Their experience becomes the focus.
I give one example among many, perhaps the best known example to this day- Beth Moore. On her instagram recently, she wrote,
Here is how Beth Moore was ‘hurt by her denomination’: She was given a Sunday School class to teach by her denomination (Southern Baptist Convention pastor John Bisagno, Moore’s pastor). When it outgrew the room, she was given an auditorium. Then she was given opportunity to ‘speak’ (AKA preach) to her congregation on Sunday evenings. Moore’s pastor John Bisagno is widely seen as having launched her ministry career and ’empowering women’ in ministry in modern times. When Moore’s first manuscript was rejected by Lifeway, an arm of her denomination, her friend Lee Sizemore advocated for her and got the manuscript published. Moore went on to have a lucrative relationship with Lifeway for decades, with a Lifeway worker noting “no one’s products brings in more money for Lifeway than Beth Moore’s”.
Her denomination via Lifeway paid for half of Moore’s private jet travel for decades as she rose in prominence and became known as the most famous conservative evangelical woman in the world at the time. Supported by her denomination she was puffed by Christianity Today and even the secular magazine The Atlantic in long articles. Moore made millions, and at one time enjoyed owning 4 homes scattered across Texas from Galveston to Tomball to Menard.
But … the ‘denomination hurt her’. She called all this support ‘misogynistic’ even though she was specifically launched as an ’empowered woman in ministry’ BY her denomination, and supported for decades BY her denomination, petted and jetted BY her denomination. Now wrung dry, Moore’s noisy and divisive exit was the thanks they got.
That’s the victimhood culture- as long as it serves the person and their goals, they will play the victim. Playing the victim keeps the focus on the individual and away from Jesus.
Oh, I know they will say the word ‘Jesus’ a lot. They may even attribute their overcoming their hurt to Jesus. But the focus is squarely on themselves, their hurtful experience, and their power to overcome.
While reality constrains us to acknowledge genuine suffering and oppression exist and obligates compassion, it also requires us to acknowledge that the doctrine of perpetual victimhood—an ideology that frames individuals as powerless, blameless, and entirely at the mercy of external forces—stands in opposition to reality and starkly contradicts the teachings of Scripture. Source The Doctrine of Victimization and the Destruction of Personal Agency
At root of the victim mentality is pride. It says ‘I was hurt. I deserve better treatment than that.’ The word deserve is key here. In fact, what we deserve is hell. What did John the Baptist deserve? He was beheaded. Did he deserve that for speaking the truth? No. Is he deemed a victim in the Bible? Jesus said he was the greatest man. Did Paul deserve to be imprisoned? No. Did Paul claim to be a victim? He went through a lot. He counted it all as joy in service to the King.
If you have a victim mentality, you will see your entire life through a perspective that things constantly happen ‘to’ you. Victimisation is thus a combination of seeing most things in life as negative, beyond your control, and as something you should be given sympathy for experiencing as you ‘deserve’ better. Source: The Victim Mentality: What it is and Why You Use It
A true Christian will see whatever happens to them as being FOR them. Why? Because Jesus is sovereign and is the cause of all things.
Today a person’s moral authority is directly proportional to how many different ways he or she can claim to have been victimized.
Social Justice and the Gospel, part 1
I could easily trade on being a victim. I grew up in a neglectful and abusive home. I am a child of divorce. I was a latchkey kid. I was stalked by an actual rapist in college and helped the police catch him. I was betrayed and abandoned by an adulterous husband. I was a congregant in a spiritually abusive church. I was a congregant in a church whose worthless pastor blatantly plagiarized every sermon he gave, even ripping off the original pastor’s life anecdotes as if he had lived them. Do you know what all of that adds up to? LIFE. It’s life. That’s all.
Pagans and Christians alike have things happen to them. Just because Christians have wounds and hurts doesn’t make us special. Playing a Christian victim is a devolving sphere of self-pity and a heaping up other victims to affirm your self-pity.
Herbert Schlossberg has said of victim mentality that it, “exalts categories of weakness, sickness, helplessness, and anguish into virtues while it debases the strong and prosperous. In the country of ontological victimhood, strength is an affront.” (see source below).
This is exactly why strong Christian men are seen as oppressors and Christian women crying over ‘misogyny’ in the faith are seen as the strong and ‘brave’ ones.
It is OK to feel sorrowful once in a while. Do I ever feel sorrowful for a lost childhood? Sure. But I focus on the positives. I have been saved by the blood of the Lamb, though I do not deserve it. I have His strength, provision, and support every day. I can boldly approach the highest throne with my petitions. I have an eternity to see the face of God and dwell in glory. What a joy that the Lord shepherded me even before my moment of justification to turn me into the person I am today, including the life trials before and after salvation! What minuscule things my wounds and hurts are when compared to the weight of glory!
I am sorry if you were hurt by family, stranger, church, denomination, anyone. I am sorry if you are feeling sorrowful. But we are not victims. We are to love, forgive, bring our cares to Jesus and lay them at His feet. Some of the people who ‘hurt’ me are not saved. They were just living their unsaved lives in sin, and their sin affected me. Some have passed into their eternity unsaved as far as I know. Others are near death’s door as an unsaved person. How can I feel sorry for myself when their eternity hangs in the balance? May it not be that I sit in the safe seat of justification and point to myself when others around me are destined for eternal wrath and torment!
Both Paul and Moses were so torn by the fact of their countrymen being unsaved they pleaded for them, even to suffer in their stead. (Romans 9:3, exodus 32:32). This kind of self-abegnation is unheard of today.
It would be logical for pagans to wonder, ‘what kind of Jesus do Christians serve who constantly moan about being a victim? What a sad, ineffectual religion!’
The cross of Jesus defeats all self-pity, victimhood, pride, anger, bitterness. Yes, we may need to work hard at claiming this defeat depending on the depth of the crime. But we certainly do not need to inflate our wounds in order to garner attention and pity. Jesus is too precious for that.
Further Resources
G3 Ministries: video, The Intersection of Victimology and Evangelicalism | Ep. 90
The Cult of Victimhood, The Master’s Seminary blog article
Source for Schlossberg quote- Herbert Schlossberg, Idols for Destruction: Christian Faith and its Confrontation with American Society p. 69–70.
The Hidden Strength of Mundane Faith Practices
By Elizabeth Prata
So many people, especially women, are hopscotching the globe founding important ministries, establishing orphanages, ’empowering’ native women, or teaching to packed arenas, that it makes the rest of us humdrum ladies feel, ahem, left behind. Should we be doing the big things? Can we do the bigger things? Are we doing enough?
All I do every single day, is go to work. I come home and I study my Bible &pray, I write, and if I have enough energy after that, I read a bit. Then I go to sleep and do it all over again. On the weekends all I do is grocery shopping, laundry, cooking the week’s lunches ahead, and study a lot more and write a lot more. I go to church on Sunday late afternoon. Bed time. Repeat.
I’m not skipping off to host conferences or giving interviews on panels or unashamedly on tour or in Rwanda on a storytelling trip. I wash dishes in obscurity in GA and my job is to help kindergarteners tie their shoes and learn their ABC’s. It’s not glamorous. It doesn’t seem like it’s very much at all of a contribution to the kingdom. I mean, Beth Moore is a 60+ year old grandma busy with her panels, and cohorts, and Bible studies, and traveling tours. She keeps a packed schedule. Younger women also seem to be doing the big things, the glamorous things, like Jennie Allen and Raechel Myers and Kari Jobe. As for me, I’m just plodding.
Well, let’s hear it for the plodders.
First, if you are a mother, you are in a highly esteemed Biblical position. You are doing such wonderful work for the kingdom in being a foundation block in society, in raising pure young women and strong young men for the next generation. I thank Mrs George G. Paton and Mrs Eliza Spurgeon and Mrs Irene MacArthur and all the other Missus’ who raised men and women who in turn, impact the kingdom.
Secondly if you think of the life of Paul most often we think of the highlights. His speeches before thousands, his dramatic miracles, his appearances before kings and leaders.
However, Paul also walked. Thousands upon thousands of miles, he plodded. He trudged. He hiked. From one town to another, in all weathers. In addition, Paul sewed tents. (Acts 18:3). He did the mundane. He wrote letter upon letter to friends. He fundraised. The in-between miracle times in his three missionary journeys were rife with the mundane and the insignificant, except nothing about a Christian’s life is insignificant. Not Paul’s and not mine and not yours. The Lord cares for all our concerns. He clothes us and feeds us and He even knows the number of hairs on our heads. To Him, it’s all significant.
As for the women of the New Testament, Dorcas was beloved not because she was on storytelling tours of Rwanda empowering women for ‘style and justice’, but because she sewed. She made clothes for the poor and she “was always doing good”. (Acts 9:36). She lovingly helped, humbly and quietly, within her own sphere.
Mary, mother of God? Do we hear of her going on her book tour, telling about the angel that came to her one day, and the miracle of the three wise men or hyping up audiences with her harrowing tale of narrowly escaping the massacre of the innocents? No. Whether she was in Egypt or in Israel, Mary simply raised her Son. She brought Him up in the faith and managed her household and she raised Jesus’ siblings too. A few times a year she made the pilgimage to the Temple and the rest of the time, she did what women then and onward have done, she lived in her home and she was faithful to the Lord through His word.
Here are two articles about the plodding kind of faith that endures. That kind of faith is cement. It’s bedrock.
The first is by Kevin DeYoung, titled, Stop the Revolution. Join the Plodders.
It’s sexy among young people—my generation—to talk about ditching institutional religion and starting a revolution of real Christ-followers living in real community without the confines of church. Besides being unbiblical, such notions of churchless Christianity are unrealistic. It’s immaturity actually, like the newly engaged couple who think romance preserves the marriage, when the couple celebrating their golden anniversary know it’s the institution of marriage that preserves the romance. Without the God-given habit of corporate worship and the God-given mandate of corporate accountability, we will not prove faithful over the long haul.
This one is one of my favorites. It’s by John MacArthur, titled An Unremarkable Faith
Meet Larry, a thirty-six year old Science teacher. Larry married Cathy 12 years ago. They love each other and enjoy raising their two sons. Larry’s life wouldn’t hold out much interest to the average citizen. His Facebook account doesn’t draw many friends and nobody ever leaves a comment on his blog. In fact, most people would summarize Larry’s life with one word—boring. But not Larry. Teaching osmosis to junior high students, playing Uno with his kids, and working in the yard with Cathy is paradise to him. But the real love of his life is Jesus. Larry’s a Christian. He’s been walking with the Lord for more than 20 years.
Not that founding orphanages isn’t worthwhile or something women or men can’t or shouldn’t do. Not that going on a missionary trip to Africa isn’t something Jesus wants us to do. But the big doers are fewer than we think, despite the hype. Most of the church is populated with plodders. As Kevin DeYoung concluded his article,
Put away the Che Guevara t-shirts, stop the revolution, and join the rest of the plodders. Fifty years from now you’ll be glad you did.
the-end-time.org 