Let us consider that it is far better to suffer than to be disgraced; that it is better to strive against evil than to succumb to it effetely; that loyalty and unity of heart are virtues for which no transient prosperity could make up to us if haply they were lost; that when the soul of a people moves as it does, thank God today with one strong impulse toward that which is just and right, that our soul is growing every hour to true nobility and to the worthiness of its mission.

The following excerpts were selected from a sermon preached by Morgan Dix just a few days after the beginning of the Civil War in April 1861. Considering the turmoil presently found in our stormy social and political climate, both here and abroad, it seems fitting that these words might likewise find some resonance in our day. — Editor.
The Way of God in the Storm
“The Lord hath His way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of His feet,” saith the prophet (Nahum 1:3). And the way of the Lord, whether it be in the whirlwind or in the summer’s breeze, in the storm or in the fair weather, is a way of justice, of mercy, and of truth. If a storm arises and blows, be it lighter or heavier, we need not fear if we know that the way of the Lord is there. Even in the whirlwind and in the storm “let the people praise Thee, O God, yea, let all the people praise Thee” (Psalm 67:5).
Storms are not the worst and greatest evils. Ask the sailor which he will choose, a mere storm or the dead calm of windless waters; and do not doubt his reply. Ask the wretched inhabitant of some pestilential climate, on which the stillness of the curse lies heavy day after day, what he would give for a storm from the cool, healthy north to blow upon the fever swamps and drive the destroyer from before it.
Yes, brethren, the words of the prophet are true, and the way of the Lord is in the storm. The storm is His minister of mercy and benefit, though in a rough, fierce way of its own. The storm does us good service in keeping the equilibrium among the elements, and it ministers beneficial discipline in its time — just as God appoints. This is the mission of the stormy wind and tempest in the firmament above: angry of face, but full of benefit and good; stern and sharp, but profitable also.
And that which is true in the firmament is just as true beneath it. Here, upon the way of this life, rises storm after storm. Here, also, the winds blow and beat upon the earthly house of this tabernacle. Here are blast and tempest along the way of each man, and of each community, and of all the nations upon earth. But the way of God is in them here below as well as up there over our heads.
Here, likewise, the clouds of strife and struggle are the “dust of His feet.” Here, also, have storm and tempest found their needful place and their healthful mission. It is so with them all. All are but God’s means of castigation which we need, and of advancement of which we have when we have been deemed worthy. This is true of the storms of life, whether they eddy in a narrow radius around one man, or around each one of us in his turn; or whether they gather into notable volume around some whole community; or whether, lastly, they expand to the compass of the round cyclone, and getting leverage below, through the strong arms of the earthquake, where it might shake the mighty nation and the ancient and honorable people to its center.
Finding the Virtue in the Storm
It is not the part of men to fly from the storm every time it falls upon them, but to look it full in the face; to search amid its folds and its rising fury for the mysterious way of the Lord which is surely therein. And, by doing so, to draw from it the virtue and the strength which are lodged there; thus rising, with added security from the temporary shock, to be taught by the event and gain a reverence and fear of the Lord.
Brethren, there is a deep and divine philosophy, crystallized into visible shape in nature, illustrated in all the inner history of man, and assented to by the convictions of the heart wherever that heart beats. It is a teaching, one and the same for every place, every age and every time. This philosophy runs thus: that all things are purified by trial. “Every one,” saith our Lord, “shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt” (Mark 9:49, KJV).
The whirlwind and the storm must come; and men must meet them. There is no exemption from this law; and the philosophy of which we speak is probably the simplest and the most universal that ever was taught. Advancement and honor come by the pathway of trial.
Read More
Related Posts:

Heterosexuality is not the cure!  Christ’s love and love for Christ is the cure.  This is not merely Christians’ wishful thinking.  Is it not possible for a believer to be a new creation in Christ?  Is it not possible for us to say to fornicators, adulterers, idolaters, homosexuals, and sodomites: “of such were some of you” But you were washed, sanctified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of God? (1 Cor 6:9-11).

Within the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), debate and controversy has troubled the church resulting in votes on Book of Church Order (BCO) amendments primarily, although not exclusively, on the question of church officers identifying as a “Side B gay Christians.”
The origins of this identification are unclear but by some accounts comes from the Gay Christian Network which attempts to walk a fine line between professing gay Christians who do not see their sexuality as sinful as “Side A,” and those who by contrast see their desire as sinful and therefore seek to control their desires in celibacy as “Side B.”  At best, this identity is confusing even for those professing it.  The advantage is that “Side B gay Christians” identify with both the gay community and the Christian community. The motivation for some, as expressed by Greg Johnson, is this allows for care over those who are gay.
This raises many questions that are generally not the focus of the discussion and debate.  By not addressing the core questions, the presbytery votes on the BCO amendments presented larger questions that continue to loom on the horizon that threaten the peace of the church.
Why is this precise definition of “Side B gay Christians” so important?  As explained by its proponents, it is an attempt to provide a compromise between the objective of attempts at “conversion therapy” of gays to become “ex-gay,” and those who struggle with same-sex attraction and consider their being gay as unchangeable, yet believe they are forgiven in Christ.  “Side B gay Christians” identify with both communities as a result.
As Christian leaders, teaching and ruling elders are charged with protecting the “peace and purity” of the church, is it Christ-honoring to officially have church officers living with such a compromised identity straddling two communities as distinct from one another as the church of Christ and the gay community?
At what point are we as Christ’s church ignoring the admonitions to: “avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless” (Titus 3:9); and “But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife (2 Timothy 1:23)?”
This whole question has resulted in strivings about interpreting God’s law that has resulted in strife and division threatening the unity of Christ’s church.  At best, the use of the term “Side B gay Christians” is defined by psychology and cannot be explained definitively from God’s Word.  The term “gay” only became popular since the 1960s where the term sodomite was not comfortable to be used to identify oneself.  Yet biblically, the practices of gays are defined as sodomy.
Why is there the need to defend the “Side B gay Christian’s” identity? Such a designation calls into question the possibility of what Thomas Chalmers called the “expulsive power of a new affection.”  The most effective way to kill our sin is by finding greater joy in Christ.  Do “Side B gay Christian” advocates not have any hope in that reality?  Christians need to repent of the practice of “conversion therapy” as the cure for same-sex desires; Christ is the only hope.  To withhold the hope of the joy and delight that Christ changes one’s desires, is a great sin in and of itself.
Heterosexuality is not the cure!  Christ’s love and love for Christ is the cure.  This is not merely Christians’ wishful thinking.  Is it not possible for a believer to be a new creation in Christ?  Is it not possible for us to say to fornicators, adulterers, idolaters, homosexuals, and sodomites: “of such were some of you” But you were washed, sanctified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of God? (1 Cor 6:9-11).
Why does TE Greg Johnson thrust these discussions on us?  He should back away from writing books such as Still Time to Care, in which he alleges that those who disagree with him do not care about homosexuals.  Why does the church need to affirm his questionable definitions?  Is he so self-righteous in his care for gays that he judges others and finds them not as caring?  Can he not receive correction and trust Christ as his defense?  The warning of Titus 3:10-11 is sobering.
It is also sobering to read Proverbs 6:16-19.  Is Greg Johnson sowing discord among his brethren?  I do not presume to know.  Yet I sense that we as a church of Jesus Christ are being asked to affirm his identity and beliefs.
May God restore the peace and purity of His church with in the PCA.  We need to pray more diligently for this to be so.
Dr. Douglas Kittredge is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is pastor emeritus of New Life in Christ PCA in Fredericksburg, Va.

Written by Samuel D. James |
Saturday, January 15, 2022
My parents seem far more willing than I to engage a person and tell them to make a situation materially better, whereas I am far more willing than my parents to use the digital marketplace as a weapon, to “get back” at the people who fail me in some way by telling others that these people are untrustworthy. The older generation acts as if the proper recipient of their frustration is the institution itself and that asking them to make it better is reasonable and right. The younger generation believes that their anger should be directed toward the audience, and that the goal of complaining in these spaces is not to get anything fixed by the institution but to see the institution punished by others.

At the risk of leaning too far into generational stereotypes, which are indeed lazy and perpetuate slipshod thinking, I’m going to observe yet another difference between people of my age and of my parents’ age.
On multiple occasions I have seen my parents, my in-laws, and other Boomer and Silent Generation-era adults ask to speak to a manager. The order at the restaurant was wrong, or took way too long. A shipment was damaged, someone was over-billed, or the hotel room was not clean. Sometimes the necessity of such a tense confrontation is obvious, but often I’ve cringed when the older people I’m with decide to complain, especially since complaints almost always land hardest on employees who make the smallest wages and have the littlest control of the situation (as a veteran of the fast food industry, I can verify this).
My wife and I are far, far more likely than either of our parents to accept an unsatisfactory experience without complaining to the people in charge of it. We’ve eaten the wrong order, accepted an inaccurately described package, and put up with being put out. I’m sure my parents and in-laws have done this too, but the point is that the idea of complaining to a person and trying to get something wrong fixed seems to be more plausible to the older people in my life.
You know why that’s interesting to me? Because I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve known an older family member to take to the Internet to complain. I don’t think my parents have written a Yelp review in their lives. I think there’s been a few negative Amazon reviews, but the ratios of Amazon purchases/negative reviews and restaurant experiences/in-person complaints don’t even begin to compare. Again, these are generational stereotypes that by definition are not true of everyone. But if you look through Yelp reviews and if you use Twitter or Facebook to read what people are saying about community businesses, it does tend to be true that the complaints, the criticisms, and—more to the point of this post—the expressions of outrage and personal injury skew closer to my age than my parents’ age.
What I’ve noticed is that my parents seem far more willing than I to engage a person and tell them to make a situation materially better, whereas I am far more willing than my parents to use the digital marketplace as a weapon, to “get back” at the people who fail me in some way by telling others that these people are untrustworthy. The older generation acts as if the proper recipient of their frustration is the institution itself and that asking them to make it better is reasonable and right. The younger generation believes that their anger should be directed toward the audience, and that the goal of complaining in these spaces is not to get anything fixed by the institution but to see the institution punished by others.

Freddie observes that canceling someone online virtually never dispenses any material good to anyone. In this sense, canceling somebody is not “justice,” because there is literally no justice to be done on behalf of any victim, real or imagined.
Read More