Name: Potato and Apple Skillet Cake
Ingredients: 4 tb Butter; 3/4 c Flour; 1/2 ts Salt; 1/2 ts Baking powder; 2 Large cooking apples; A little sugar to taste; 4 Cloves; 1 ts Cinnamon; 2 tb Butter

CATEGORY	CUISINE	TAG	YIELD
	Irish	Irish, Desserts, Potatoes	4	Servings

INGREDIENTS

4	tb	Butter
3/4	c	Flour
1/2	ts	Salt
1/2	ts	Baking powder
2		Large cooking apples
		A little sugar to taste
4		Cloves
1	ts	Cinnamon
2	tb	Butter

INSTRUCTIONS

FOR THE POTATO CAKE MIXTURE
FOR THE APPLE MIXTURE
First, make a portion of potato-cake mixture:
Rub the butter into the flour.  Add the salt and baking powder and mix
well.  Add the potatoes and knead briefly until the mixture is well
combined.
Divide the dough into two parts and roll out into two circles on a
well-floured board, using a floured rolling pin. Use a plate slightly
smaller than your skillet to trim the circles if necessary.
Peel the apples and slice them thinly.  Layer them evenly on one circle of
dough.  Cover with the other circle of dough and pinch the edges together.
Cook gently in a preheated greased (ideally, buttered) skillet at medium
heat, turning once to cook the other side (you may want to use a plate to
help make turning easier). Each side should take about 15 minutes to become
a moderate toasty brown.
When the apples are cooked through, carefully lift back the top of the cake
and sprinkle with sugar, cloves and cinnamon.  Add a large pat of butter.
Replace the top of the cake and leave on the heat for another 5 minutes to
allow the sugar, butter and cinnamon to melt together.  If desired, spread
the top of the cake thinly with marmalade or apple jelly and put the pan
briefly under the broiler to melt and glaze the cake. Serve cut in wedges,
and eat very hot with cream or a rich pouring custard.
(adapted from a recipe in MODERN AND TRADITIONAL IRISH COOKING, Ethel
Minogue, New Burlington Books, 1988:  ISBN 1-85348-103-3.  Shared by Diane
Duane [http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~owls/european_cuisines.html])
Posted to CHILE-HEADS DIGEST V4 #217 by Peter Morwood & Diane Duane
<owlsprng@iol.ie> on Nov 27, 1997

A Message from our Provider:

“It is easier to preach ten sermons than it is to live one.”

Some Reasons Baptists Do Not Baptize Infants: 1. In every New Testament command and instance of baptism the requirement of faith precedes baptism. So infants incapable of faith are not to be baptized. 2. There are no explicit instances of infant baptism in all the Bible. In the three “household baptisms” mentioned (household of Lydia, Acts 16:15; household of the Philippian jailer, Acts 16:30–33; household of Stephanus, 1 Corinthians 1:16) no mention is made of infants, and in the case of the Philippian jailer, Luke says explicitly, “They spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house” (Acts 16:32), implying that the household who were baptized could understand the Word. 3. Paul (in Colossians 2:12) explicitly defined baptism as an act done through faith: “…having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God.” In baptism you were raised up with Christ through faith – your own faith, not your parents’ faith. If it is not “through faith” – if it is not an outward expression of inward faith – it is not baptism. 4. The apostle Peter, in his first letter, defined baptism this way, “…not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience – through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21). Baptism is “an appeal to God for a good conscience.” It is an outward act and expression of inner confession and prayer to God for cleansing, that the one being baptized does, not his parents. 5. When the New Testament church debated in Acts 15 whether circumcision should still be required of believers as part of becoming a Christian, it is astonishing that not once in that entire debate did anyone say anything about baptism standing in the place of circumcision. If baptism is the simple replacement of circumcision as a sign of the new covenant, and thus valid for children as well as for adults, as circumcision was, surely this would have been the time to develop the argument and so show that circumcision was no longer necessary. But it is not even mentioned.

John Piper