Tomorrow I’m speaking on the subject of laziness @ CCA. Actually, I’m speaking about the sluggard in Proverbs. Don’t you just love that word – sluggard? It sounds like slug, something we know a lot about here in the Northwest. Slugs move slowly; they don’t seem to have much value; they are extremely annoying (especially when they eat your lettuce!). In short, slugs are a lot like sluggards.
In preparation for the sermon, I once again turned to one of my favorite authors, Ben Patterson. He wrote a book called Serving God: the Grand Essentials of Work and Worship. It’s one I’ve turned to often when I’ve given consideration to the theme of work. Patterson reminds us that the Reformers, especially Luther and Calvin, gave a great deal of thought to the subject of vocation. Our English word vocation comes from the Latin root, vocare, meaning “to call.” The Reformers believed that every follower of Christ has a similar vocation, or calling – that is, to glorify Christ as his servants and priests to the world. Luther’s concept of the priesthood of all believers is rooted in this understanding. Every one of us is called to be a minister of Christ– not just a chosen few.
In short, we have differing occupations, but one common vocation. Our skills vary, but the end result of using those skills for God will be very similar – namely, Jesus will end up looking good.
In his book, Patterson cites a poem by the seventeenth century priest George Herbert. Every time I read this poem, it touches something in me. It’s called The Elixir, after the stone that the alchemists in Herbert’s day sought which could supposedly transform common metals into precious ones. In this poem, Herbert applies the idea to our work. What is the elixir that can transform our common, every day jobs into something precious?
Teach me, my God and King,
In all things Thee to see,
And what I do in any thing,
To do it as for Thee.
A man that looks on glasse,
On it may stay his eye;
Or if he pleaseth, through it passe,
And then the heav’n espie.
A servant with this clause
Makes drudgerie divine:
Who sweeps a room, as for thy laws,
Make that and th’ action fine.
This is the famous stone
That turneth all to gold:
For that which God doth touch and own
Cannot for lesse be told.
May God grant to each of us the discipline and the grace to have this state of mind in every task we undertake. “And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.” Colossians 3:17
Steve Pecota - a Pastor in Seattle 
Please give evidence for your claim that voter fraud was tried in even two courts. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was tried in one court, but I haven’t heard of it. Every court where cases of voter fraud were filed, dismissed it on procedural grounds and the evidence was not heard. However it was Heard in the legislative sessions in many states. In those states they sent alternate electors because of the voter fraud evidence they saw. There is tons of evidence – you can even watch the hearings online for those legislative sessions and the Overwhelming evidence presented. Can you provide one or two examples of a court of law that heard the voter fraud charges? Where the evidence was actually presented and lawyers were allowed to argue their cases and where a judge ruled on the evidence and not procedure?
The rest of your post is premised on your claim that there was no voter fraud. That’s absolutely absurd. The only way you can deny voter fraud is if you choose not to look.
Thanks for your comments, Beverly. I know that it’s widely reported that the courts have not considered the evidence but simply ruled on procedural grounds. That contention is simply false. It stems from a misunderstanding of how the courts function. It is true that some cases were dismissed for lack of standing. But a dismissal for various reasons does not mean that the affidavits remain unread or untested. In each case, affidavits are submitted giving testimony to the claims of the suit. Evidence is submitted from both sides, including testimony of witnesses in the affidavits and amicus briefs. The court weighs the evidence to determine whether the case has merit. This in not performed willy nilly or through a roll of the dice. To claim as much would amount to questioning the integrity of the entire court system. The fact is that after weighing the evidence for the suits brought by the Trump campaign, the courts have determined in case after case that the suit lacks merit. There is simply not enough evidence to warrant a trial. In many cases that is because the evidence presented is determined to be hearsay. Hearsay evidence might sound compelling when presented in the popular press, but it doesn’t meet the legal standards to stand up in a court of law. The examples are abundant. You can read the complete documentation from every suit that has been brought. It is available at
https://www.democracydocket.com/case_type/active-cases/
Here’s an example from the state of Michigan in which several charges are addressed. It contains some fascinating examples of why the courts determined that the evidence presented was hearsay and simply not credible. I encourage you to read it.
Click to access Scanned-from-a-Xerox-Multifunction-Printer.pdf