Puritan pastor, theologian, philosopher and mystic Jonathan Edwards extols the glory of God:

. . . I have often had sweet complacency in God, in views of his glorious perfections, and of the excellency of Jesus Christ. God has appeared to me a glorious and lovely Being, chiefly on account of his holiness. The holiness of God has always appeared to me the most lovely of all his attributes. The doctrines of God’s absolute sovereignty, and free grace, in showing mercy to whom he would show mercy; and man’s absolute dependence on the operations of God’s Holy Spirit, have very often appeared to me as sweet and glorious doctrines. These doctrines have been much my delight. God’s sovereignty has ever appeared to me a great part of his glory. It has often been my delight to approach God, and adore him as a sovereign God, and ask sovereign mercy of him.

I have loved the doctrines of the gospel; they have been to my soul like green pastures. The gospel has seemed to me the richest treasure; the treasure that I have most desired, and longed that it might dwell richly in me. The way of salvation by Christ has appeared, in a general way, glorious and excellent, most pleasant and most beautiful. It has often seemed to me, that it would, in a great measure, spoil heaven, to receive it in any other way. That text has often been affecting and delightful to me, Isa. xxxii. 2. ‘A man shall be an hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest,’ &c.

It has often appeared to me delightful, to be united to Christ; to have him for my Head, and to be a member of his body; also to have Christ for my Teacher and Prophet. I very often think with sweetness, and longings, and pantings of soul, of being a little child, taking hold of Christ, to be led by him through the wilderness of this world. That text, Matt. xviii. 3. has often been sweet to me, ‘Except ye be converted, and become as little children,’ &c. I love to think of coming to Christ, to receive salvation of him, poor in spirit, and quite empty of self, humbly exalting him alone; cut off entirely from my own root, in order to grow into and out of Christ: to have God in Christ to be all in all; and to live, by faith on the Son of God, a life of humble, unfeigned confidence him. That scripture has often been sweet to me, Ps cvx. 1. ‘Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy mercy, and for thy truth’s sake.’ And those words of Christ, Luke x. 21. ‘In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit and said, I thank thee O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou has hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight.’ That sovereignty of God, which Christ rejoiced in, seemed to me worthy of such joy; and that rejoicing seemed to show the excellency of Christ, and of what spirit he was.

Sometimes, only mentioning a single word caused my heart to burn within me; or only seeing the name of Christ, or the name of some attribute of God. And God has appeared glorious to me, on account of the Trinity. It has made me have exalting thoughts of God, that he subsists in three persons; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The sweetest joys and delights I have experienced, have not been those that have arisen from a hope of my own good estate; but in a direct view of the glorious things of the gospel. When I enjoy this sweetness, it seems to carry me above the thoughts of my own estate; it seems, at such times, a loss that I cannot bear, to take off my eye from the glorious, pleasant object I behold without me, to turn my eye in upon myself, and my own good estate.

My heart has been much on the advancement of Christ’s kingdom in the world. The histories of the past advancement of Christ’s kingdom have been sweet to me. When I have read histories of past ages, the pleasantest thing, in all my reading, has been, to read of the kingdom of Christ being promoted. And when I have expected, in my reading, to come to any such thing, I have rejoiced in the propect, all the way as I read. And my mind has been much entertained and delighted with the scripture promises and prophecies, which relate to the future glorious advancement of Christ’s kingdom upon earth.

I have sometimes had a sense of the excellent fulness of Christ, and his meetness and suitableness as a Savior; whereby he has appeared to me, far above all, the chief of ten thousands. His blood and atonement have appeared sweet, and his righteousness sweet; which was always accompanied with ardency of spirit; and inward strugglings and breathings, and groanings that cannot be uttered, to be emptied of myself, and swallowed up in Christ. . . .

I have, many times, had a sense of the glory of the Third Person in the Trinity, and his office as Sanctifier; in his holy operations, communicating divine light and life to the soul. God in the communications of his Holy Spirit, has appeared as an infinite fountain of divine glory and sweetness; being full, and sufficient to fill and satisfy the soul; pouring forth itself in sweet communications; like the sun in its glory, sweetly and pleasantly diffusing light and life. And I have sometimes an affecting sense of the excellency of the word of God as a word of life; as the light of life; a sweet, excellent, life-giving word; accompanied with a thirsting after that word, that it might dwell richly in my heart.

–Jonathan Edwards [LINK]

Tonight Virginia awaits the death of an infamous murderer. But Christians who acknowledge the justice of this sentence cannot take pleasure in it, since it is written that God finds none.

In saving us Christians, God did not take our evil deeds into account. They were nailed with Christ to the cross.

So let us pray that in his final hours Mr. Mohammed would, like the repenting thief on the cross, find peace through the crucified Son of God.

“Stockholm Syndrome” is a psychological pathology in which a person held in an environment of intense isolation and abuse becomes so confused and disoriented as to locate his own identity with his abuser. This disorder of the soul hit the network news in the eighties, when kidnapped newspaper heiress Patty Hearst participated with her SLA captors in some notorious crimes, brandishing a weapon. She had been so brainwashed that she didn’t remember who her real enemies were.

People are adaptable creatures. Looking back on some historical atrocity, I assume a attitude of judgment. ‘How could they do that? How could so many people be so depraved, deluded or terrified as to participate in that horror?’ Why didn’t anyone refuse to cooperate?’ or, ‘Why didn’t enough people refuse to cooperate?’

“Normal” people don’t do things like that, I think. There must have been something wrong with them.

But “normal” is merely what prevails within a particular frame of reference. And people have short lives and shorter memories. Normal is what everyone expects. It is normal for teenagers to have sex. It is normal for pregnant teenagers to kill their babies. It is normal for wives to leave their husbands and for fathers to neglect their families. It is normal for parents to abandon their children to professional babysitters—and grown children return the kindness.

Money and Power are the gods of the age, and their devotees sacrifice in marble temples on Wall Street and Capitol Hill. Vast markets thrive on lust, exploitation, fraud, selfishness, and envy. Every day in teeming cities people dream up schemes for getting and spending other people’s wealth. And because these things are normal, they must be all right.

I’m encouraged to pursue a job where I create no real value, improve nobody’s life in a tangible way, and do no ultimate good. (Can you even call it work?) If I’m any good at it, I get a competitive salary, a company car, and a fat bonus at the end of the year. This child of the Covenant is climbing the ladder at Pyramid, Inc. (The Biggest Thing Since Babel). Lord, deliver us from Pharaoh, but not yet—the free fish and cucumbers are to die for.

There must be something good about this setup or it wouldn’t exist. Sure, some people are winning and some are losing, but deep down the world must be as it should.

I am a Christian, but I don’t understand how what I believe about God has anything to do with the world I live in. Actually, the world I live in has nothing to do with God.

My heart has been taken captive by the world. Without another point of reference, I begin to see things as the world does. I know I belong to another place, but I’ve never been there. I think it must be a lot like here—without the things I don’t like, of course.

I’m a pretty good person (considering my circumstances!) and God can’t hold my moral failures against me—I’m only human. In this way also I think like the world.

The world takes advantage of my innocence. But we’ve been together so long, I’ve come to think it’s my only friend. It pours me a poison cocktail and I drink it like wine. I sear my own conscience devising clever apologetics for the world’s Darwinian economics and wage slavery.

To the brainwashed, all things are pure. This is why naiveté is so dangerous—all things are not pure. Sin has done a pretty effective job establishing impurity as the status quo. And what God has cursed, let no man call blessed.

Sounds hopeless. How can anyone get free? There is a cure for Christian Stockholm Syndrome, and it’s called God’s Word. It sets its readers free from the ethical imprisonment the world holds them in. There is one sovereign Lord over all. By the light of Scripture we revel in His glory and see the world as He does.

The world is the enemy of righteousness; it suborns justice; it hates the Chosen People.

It can go to hell.

* Christian singer Derek Webb’s latest release is called “Stockholm Syndrome.” It inspired this essay.

An Essay

Ethics are External Expressions of an Internal Life

Ethos is not an internal condition of the soul. A person cannot be ethically virtuous, nor can virtue be created in him through ethical conditioning. Rather, ethics are the internal life of the individual as externalized; as expressed in relation to others. Ethics could be defined as internal moral virtue applied to a person’s relationships and dealings with other persons. Thus, ethics, as opposed to virtues, become instantiated precisely at the moment that a person reaches out to another person.

Ethical Systems Define Communities

An ethical system practically defines the boundaries of human interaction in a given community. Ethically speaking, a community comprises many persons living together in the same ethical space. This is one characteristic of a community: there may be geographical and historical parameters to consider as well.

But of course the question immediately presents itself: Who or what sets the ethical rules within a community?

Different communities approach this task in different ways. The exact forms of ethical behavior vary from community to community, as well as the way they are set. This has a lot to do with how, and for what purpose, the community is constituted. Although an ethical system defines the ethical space of a community, the ethical system itself is given its dimensions by the self-existing character of the community, in the same way that personal ethics are interpersonal instantiations of personal virtues. As communities change, their ethical norms change as well.

Jesus Christ Creates Christian Ethics

Now for the community known as the Church, one would expect that the Person by whom it has been created, and for whom it exists, would have something to do with creating its ethical space. And this is precisely what we discover in the ethical teachings of Jesus Christ–the Sermon on the Mount being possibly the keystone of his ethical teachings. The Gospels are brimming with Christ’s ethical instructions and His endorsements and interpretations of the Law of Moses.

But being a member of Christ’s Body does not depend on adherence to ethical rules.

Christianity is Not Defined by an Ethical System

Christ’s ethical teachings can only apply to those who are actually members of the true Christian community, those who are truly within the fellowship of His Kingdom. And one cannot insinuate himself into the Kingdom by means of works and moral behavior. Christ said of these:

On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matt. 7.21-23)

This is a terrible warning to those who are content to behave as Christians outwardly without true devotion to God.

In a similar passage, the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats from Matt. 25, Jesus reproves those who observe religious piety without showing His love to those around them. These hypocrites reverence the idea of Christ, and even derive earthly comfort and assurance from it, but have none of His Spirit dwelling inside them. Christ demands obedience, but given as from His children, not His vassals.

Knowledge of Christ Comes Through Faith Only

It is not through membership in a church or participation in religious activities, nor through initiation into religious mysteries and theology, that Christ is truly known. He can be known only by those to whom He has made Himself known. This knowledge of God comes through faith, which is the sole means of achieving a true knowledge of the Holy—and this gift of faith is acquired and exercised in secret and in silence.

Christian Ethics Come From Knowledge of Christ

This is not to say that the person with true faith is unknown to others. On the contrary, it is impossible for such a true faith to remain silent or without good works. Public religious expression and good works flow from faith as naturally as breathing. But faith comes first. And well it should, because if ethical behavior is the external expression of an internal life, Christian ethics proceed from a heart that has become one with Christ—become actually a member of His mystical body, which, of course, is the true Church.

No Individual Lives Outside of a Community

But the discerning reader has already noticed a problem with the definitions given at the beginning. If ethics are the outward expression of something internal and inherent to an individual, yet ethics are particular expressions of specific communities, then there must be a characteristic of the human person that cannot be separated from a particular community of place and time.

Absolute ‘ethical independence’ is shown to be an illusion, as personal ethics, whatever they are, are defined by something inherent to a person that connects him to something outside of himself. It may be a family or a local community or a religion. For a Christian, it is Christ and His Body. Ethics are a phenomenon of something else that comes before them. They do not exist independently.

Christians are Dead to Communities of Place and Time

Christ often warns that those who join His body will become alienated from other communities. “Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead” (Matt. 8.22). “I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother . . . And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household” (Matt. 10.35-36), are two of many instances in the Gospel of Matthew alone. The one who follows Christ is, in fact, “dead.” He has ceased to be a member of the communities that previously required his ethical allegiance. Those who live to God are dead to the world. And this poses a difficult ethical problem, if the Christian is (to the world) a dead person who for some reason is still living among us, so to speak. Martin Luther was right to shift the focus of Christian ethical behavior away from Law and rest it solely on Love; for, if he is actually dead, the Christian is certainly not bound by the human laws of his time and place. Christians act toward others and obey man’s laws because they are guided by the law of Love. This love and obedience does not legitimate ethics and law-abiding as things that are good in themselves, but only in so far as these actions are in accord with the ethical teachings of Christ.

Persecution is Ethical

If we view Christianity in this way, as a religion that actually rejects and replaces the ethics of the communities in which it appears, we begin to understand why pagan societies feel so threatened by the Christian faith, and why they resort to vicious persecutions in a vain attempt to bring reform to their threatened ethical systems and save the fabric of their civilizations. Ethical systems demand that what opposes them be suppressed. But neither ethics nor society, nor persecution and sword, nor pleasure, nor pain, nor life, nor death, can ever separate us from the love of Christ.

Abraham’s actions in making ready to sacrifice Isaac were not in harmony with modern ethics—or even, it is likely, with his own ethical inclinations—but they were carried out by a love and faith that overcame even parental affection and the patriarch’s hopes of a great cultural legacy.

Ethical Systems Contain Nothing of Christianity

No community exists because of its ethics. A community exists first, and its ethics emerge as a phenomenon of its particular existence. So too with Christianity. The ethical structures that are called “Christian Moral Values” or “A Christian Nation” or “Christian Conservatism” or “Christian Socialism” are different things entirely from Christianity; they do not even share a boundary line with it. All they have in common is the reflection of some outward characteristic—an ethic—that Christianity produces, yet they are entirely based on this ethic itself as a first principle and so they depart entirely from what it actually means to be “Christian.”

It is vain for a person who is not “In Christ” to attempt to live within the Christian community by mimicking Christian ethics, and it is murderous to a church to allow it to be constituted around ethics, instead of around the Person and saving work of Christ Himself. It is murderous because it does not “discern the Body,” destroying and replacing it with an inferior construct.

The timeless insight of G. K. Chesterton (from The New Jerusalem, hat tip to Peter Reed, boldface is mine):

And in truth if there was now no material fog, there was any amount of mental and moral fog. The whole industrial world symbolised by London had reached a curious complication and confusion, not easy to parallel in human history.  It is not a question of controversies, but rather of cross-purposes. As I went by Charing Cross my eye caught a poster about Labour politics, with something about the threat of Direct Action and a demand for Nationalisation.  And quite apart from the merits of the case, it struck me that after all the direct action is very indirect, and the thing demanded is many steps away from the thing desired. It is all part of a sort of tangle, in which terms and things cut across each other.  The employers talk about “private enterprise,” as if there were anything private about modern enterprise. Its combines are as big as many commonwealths; and things advertised in large letters on the sky cannot plead the shy privileges of privacy. Meanwhile the Labour men talk about the need to “nationalise” the mines or the land, as if it were not the great difficulty in a plutocracy to nationalise the Government, or even to nationalise the nation. The Capitalists praise competition while they create monopoly; the Socialists urge a strike to turn workmen into soldiers and state officials; which is logically a strike against strikes. I merely mention it as an example of the bewildering inconsistency, and for no controversial purpose.  My own sympathies are with the Socialists; in so far that there is something to be said for Socialism, and nothing to be said for Capitalism. But the point is that when there is something to be said for one thing, it is now commonly said in support of the opposite thing. Never since the mob called out, “Less bread!  More taxes!” in the nonsense story, has there been so truly nonsensical a situation as that in which the strikers demand Government control and the Government denounces its own control as anarchy. The mob howls before the palace gates, “Hateful tyrant, we demand that you assume more despotic powers”; and the tyrant thunders from the balcony, “Vile rebels, do you dare to suggest that my powers should be extended?” There seems to be a little misunderstanding somewhere.

Some people seem to think that what is known as Calvinism, that is, the structures and doctrines of Protestant theology, which were in large part shaped by the French Reformer Jean Cauvin, is an artificial construction on Christianity, dreamed up in authoritarian Geneva.

Today is the 500th anniversary of Calvin’s birth.

It was John Calvin who in large part helped to sum up the teachings of the Reformed faith, which Luther and others, in departing from Rome, had begun to preach, but had not quite brought together in harmony. Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion became the new standard for doctrine that is founded directly on Scripture, not speculation or philosophy. Calvin’s primary concern was the glory of God; Father, Son and Holy Spirit; in the work of redemption, which is to say, the Gospel.

C.H. Spurgeon, the English Baptist preacher, had this to say about his Calvinist doctrine:

It is no novelty, then, that I am preaching; no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines that are called by nickname Calvinism, but which are truly and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus. By this truth I make my pilgrimage into the past, and as I go, I see father after father, confessor after confessor, martyr after martyr, standing up to shake hands with me . . . Taking these things to be the standard of my faith, I see the land of the ancients peopled with my brethren; I behold multitudes who confess the same as I do, and acknowledge that this is the religion of God’s own church.

Elsewhere Spurgeon summarized what doctrines this true religion consists of:

I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross.

Protestants of all stripes, and probably Catholics as well, owe much to the labors of Calvin and the other Reformers in making the Word once more preeminent in Christian theology.

THE VOW

“Forsaking all others”—
Not a hope, or a dream
This promise won’t sever
In payment for love.

Determining statement!
It closes behind it
Loves loved and remembered,
In darkness complete.

But think of the freedom
In bonds freely chosen:
No slavery of passion,
No canting regret:

For memories forgiven
Have lost all their power
To hurt, or to hinder
This promise we meant.

PCS 06/08/2009

The California Supreme Court ruled today on an omnibus challenge to the validity of the California constitutional amendment that was introduced by referendum and ratified in November, restricting the legal definition of marriage in that state. The Court affirmed the constitutionality of the measure. The decision is lengthy and can be found here. The conclusion is as follows (page 135):

In summary, we conclude that Proposition 8 constitutes a permissible constitutional amendment (rather than an impermissible constitutional revision), does not violate the separation of powers doctrine, and is not invalid under the “inalienable rights” theory proffered by the Attorney General. We further conclude that Proposition 8 does not apply retroactively and therefore that the marriages of same-sex couples performed prior to the effective date of Proposition 8 remain valid.

Having determined that none of the constitutional challenges to the adoption of Proposition 8 have merit, we observe that if there is to be a change to the state constitutional rule embodied in that measure, it must “find its expression at the ballot box.”

A pleasant vindication for democracy.

Pros:

• Impartiality; promotes adherence to traffic laws.
• Possibility for institutionalized lenience.
• May have effect of reducing penalties for traffic violations.
• Ought to necessitate anonymity.
• Could boost local revenue.
• Can relieve inappropriate role of police as revenue agents.

Cons:

• Justice depends on how they are implemented.
• If not regulated, potential for intolerable strictness.
• Police enforcement allows for common-sense lenience.
• Information-sharing practices raise significant privacy issues.

Analysis:

Impartiality. With talk of endemic racism, ticket quotas, and other troubling questions of police enforcement, if traffic cameras reduce police involvement in traffic enforcement, the result may be more just enforcement of traffic laws, while reducing the cost of the police force or allowing it to devote more of its energy to fighting drugs and crime.

Lenience. Not all traffic violations are significant. Speeding may not be dangerous at all, and traffic cameras do not have any sense of which violations are significant and which are not, which police officers–if not motivated by perverse incentives such as ticket quotas–are able to gauge. As mentioned before, cameras may help to reduce the “racist cop” problem. However, a major complaint about cameras is that they tend to be overly strict. Red-light cameras are known to catch cars that cross an intersection on a yellow light, putting an impossible burden of proof on the driver.

Local revenue. If camera fines go to the local municipality, they may be a good way to supplement town revenue without raising taxes.

Anonymity/Privacy. Since traffic cameras should not be able to detect who is driving a vehicle, the effect will be to  penalize the owner of the vehicle for violations committed with his vehicle. Putting the burden on owners is not a bad thing; it will force them to be careful who they allow to drive their vehicles. The other theoretically good thing about this is that equity demands that while fines may be issued for camera-caught violations, the owner, while liable for the fine, cannot be held personally responsible for the violation. In other words, it should not count against his driving record as a police stop would. Of course there is no guarantee that cameras will be implemented in a just manner, and any sort of public surveillance raises obvious concerns about privacy in an age where data is freely shared and monitored among local, state, and federal agencies. That kind of extensive power over information is not appropriate for a free society.

1 Corinthians 10:1-22

10:1 For I want you to know, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, 2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 and all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. 5 Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

6 Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. 7 Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.” 8 We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. 9 We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents, 10 nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer. 11 Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. 12 Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. 13 No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.

14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18 Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? 19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

1 Corinthians 11:17-34

11:17 But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. 20 When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. 21 For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.

23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

33 So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another— 34 if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.