Name: Spitzbuben
Ingredients: 1/2 lb Shortening; pork lard if available; 7 oz Sugar; 3 Egg yolks; 2 tb Rum; 2 tb Sour cream; 1 lb Flour; Sugar; Vanilla; Jam

Why do we give our efforts in the church a pass when it comes to excellence? Are we hypercalvinists? Hey, just get the biblical part right and nothing else will matter. Are we all about just applauding good effort even when the product produced is an outright embarrassing representation of Christ? Maybe that individual is not the most gifted for the job. Are we erecting a double standard? We take the “real world” seriously and anything goes in the “spiritual world.” Are we settling for second best because after all, “it’s better than nothing?” Are we grieving the Spirit in assuming that He will always “bless our mess?” Are we not getting paid so we think we can kick it back a bit? Are we using grace, God’s acceptance of us, as an excuse to give Him halfhearted efforts?

Randy Smith

CATEGORY	CUISINE	TAG	YIELD
Meats, Eggs, Dairy		Dessert	8	Servings

INGREDIENTS

1/2	lb	Shortening; pork lard if available
7	oz	Sugar
3		Egg yolks
2	tb	Rum
2	tb	Sour cream
1	lb	Flour
		Sugar
		Vanilla
		Jam

INSTRUCTIONS

Mix lard, sugar, eggs & rum & blend for 15 minutes. Add sour cream & flour
& mix well. Roll out the dough, and using a wine glass, cut out round
cookies. Bake in 300 oven for 15 minutes or until lightly browned. While
still hot, spread cookies with jam, stick two together & turn them into a
mixture of sugar & vanilla. This cookie will keep nicely.
FRAU WALFER (RITA) BOCK
From the <The Bliss of Cooking Returns>, Fort Bliss Officers Wives Club,
Ft. Bliss, TX.  Downloaded from Glen's MM Recipe Archive,
http://www.erols.com/hosey.

A Message from our Provider:

“The thankful heart sees the best part of every situation. It sees problems and weaknesses as opportunities, struggles as refining tools, and sinners as saints in progress. #Francis Frangipane”

Those who believe that marriage is an evolving concept and that “same-sex marriage” is based on man’s new understanding of the nature of homosexual orientation fundamentally assert that “marriage” itself is a meaningless notion. If the concept of marriage has no fixed reference point beyond the evolving (constantly changing) mind of man, then no idea of marriage can have any permanence or claim to be the right view of marriage since, according to evolutionary dogma, man may yet progress to new understandings of marriage in the future. The logic of evolutionary thought also leads to the possibility that the idea of “same-sex marriage” will be rejected in the future as an ignoble phase of human development for which man should be ashamed. If it might be renounced in the future, on what ethical grounds can it be wrong to oppose it today?

William Einwechter