Robin Hardy's Abbey Lands
Random Mutterings
The Problem with P.D. James
Jan. 13, 2025: When a reader asked about my favorite books, I'm afraid I gave her more than she bargained for. It's apparent that I like mysteries, but I left one prominent mystery writer off that list: P. D. James.
Her intelligent writing, deft characterizations, and meticulous plots had me carrying her books—Cover Her Face, Death of an Expert Witness, The Black Tower, Unnatural Causes—out to the chicken coop to read. But I began to weary of her aggressive atheism, which seemed to grow more pronounced in the later books (i.e., Devices and Desires.)
Now, I don’t require my mystery authors to be Christian; I don’t even require that they acknowledge God. But if they’re going to assert that all religious faith is illusory and all Christians are dupes, they have to find examples honestly. Misquoting Scripture is cheating.
In James’ A Taste for Death, the cowardly, ineffective priest who has found two men murdered in his church sits contemplating how he will contend with the aftermath of the tragedy, especially the publicity. He decides he must be proactive, visiting the prominent victim’s family: “Now that he knew what had to be done, it was remarkable how different he felt. A biblical phrase dropped into his mind, ‘Doing evil that good may come.’ But he quickly put it away from him. It was too close to blasphemy to be comfortable.” (That’s on p. 95 of the Warner Books paperback.)
​
The implication for someone who doesn’t know Scripture is that “doing evil that good may come” is something that God approves of, or does Himself. In certain circumstances it’s okay. That the priest vaguely feels it’s blasphemous only means he’s too timid to do what God’s Holy Book says or that what it says is really kind of evil.
Well, there really is such a verse, Romans 3:8. But what the Apostle Paul actually says is, “And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.”
See Romans 3:1-12 for some context, though it's not Paul’s complete argument. Most of the rest of that chapter is his forcefully explaining why God is righteous and therefore His people must be righteous. But how many of James’ readers are going to look that up?
After two thousand years, Christians are still being slandered with the same old lies.
Fun With Ditches
Jan. 14, 2025: About 12 years ago, I lived in a new development in a rural area. The lots were large, a quarter acre, most of that in the back yards. And every back lot on our street was transected by a drainage ditch. This was necessary because the land sloped slightly across all the lots, and any rainfall required a conduit to run through the land without flooding the properties.
​
Mowing the ditch was difficult, especially as water tended to pool at the bottom. So I decided to exploit that feature and landscape the ditch. Here's how that turned out:

grapevines growing
on trellises
willow tree
canna lilies
mint
aquarium grasses
What was most fun was watching the new residents take up lodging in the ditch: the crayfish and the frogs, in particular.



Here is the ditch in the winter, looking in the opposite direction.
It was a lot of work, but I miss that place.
Confessions of a Facebook Fact-Checker
Jan. 16, 2025: About seven years ago, I began freelancing for a large international corporation as a fact-checker for Facebook. The name of our division was Uolo. There were hundreds, if not thousands of us working in the United States market alone. This is how we did our job:
We were given lists of flagged Facebook posts to evaluate. The standards we were required to use were a select number of newspapers or journals: The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time, The Wall Street Journal, The Chicago Tribune, The Week, AP, Reuters, The Atlantic, and a few more I can’t remember. These were the only allowable sources to determine if content was valid or not.
I quickly discovered that these sources tended to congregate around a single position on any issue—that is, there were no divergent viewpoints. Worse, in a few instances, the only approved source I could find that spoke on a particular issue was the one I was evaluating. We were permitted to use a source to fact-check itself.
By selectively interpreting quotations, I was able to allow a number of questionable posts to stand without getting in trouble—until COVID hit in 2019. Then I watched in disbelief as a number of eminent scientists and researchers who questioned the prevailing wisdom about vaccines, social distancing, masking, and closing schools and businesses got deplatformed. The more of their posts I read, the more I realized they had valid points. But I was only a cog in the fact-checking machine.
By 2021, I’d had enough of this, and dropped the work. By this time, I had become engrossed in a new story about a Westfordian soldier who had fallen ill with the fever, and crawled out the infirmary window to find shelter from the rain in a henhouse, then was found by a young girl who came out to feed her chickens the following morning….
The Afterlife
Jan. 19, 2025: “For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does.” (1 Pet. 4:6, ESV)
Scriptures like this (and 1 Cor. 15:29) are why I decided to change the ending
of the third book of the Streiker Saga, Streiker's Morning Sun, and follow that
up with If Only for This Life. Some readers have been irritated or confused by my extension of Adair and Fletcher’s relationship into the supernatural, and some, ah, hate it.
​I understand that. My own Southern Baptists have very strict rules about God’s not messing with people after death other than to send them to heaven or hell. But then how do you explain the verse in 1 Peter?
​
Some translations or paraphrases try hard to explain away the obvious reading. Several add the word now to make the verse read, “those who are now dead”—implying that these people were alive when they heard the gospel. The Contemporary English Version, while avoiding the insertion of now, explains in a footnote: “the dead: Either people who died after becoming followers of Christ or the people of Noah’s day (see 3.19).”
Their appeal to 1 Peter 3:19 doesn’t help much, for while Peter does mention the unbelievers in Noah’s day, he specifically says Christ preached to their spirits in
prison (echoing Paul’s argument that Christ descended into the “lower parts” of the earth). The New Living Translation, knuckling under the pressure to add now,
does concede in a footnote that the original Greek reads, “preached even to the dead.”
The only honest explanation I see is that the afterlife is God’s purview to do whatever He wants, and He wants to redeem us.
You Call That a Party?
Jan. 21, 2025: So, I found this on one of those bad album cover sites—

Which is not really fair, because it's not a bad cover; it just needs a little something extra to indicate that there is actually a party going on. So I improved it:

Now THIS is a party. You're welcome!
Corpse in the Basement
Jan. 28, 2025: Visualize this: you have a dead body in the basement. Yeah, it’s been there for quite a while, so it’s rotting and maggot-filled, only, it won’t stay dead. It keeps trying to come up the stairs into the rest of the house. But since it’s in advanced decomposition, only a foot or an arm, or sometimes the head, will make it up the stairs. They slither through all the rooms, leaving a slime trail of putrescine and bits of tissue on the floor and furniture. Cleaning up after them is a nightmare: even after scrubbing with bleach, the odor lingers for days.
You keep corralling the pieces and throwing them back down into the basement. You’ve tried everything to keep them down there—burying them; locking the basement door; nailing it shut and stuffing rags in the cracks, but time and again you turn around, and there’s a lower leg with foot partially attached dragging itself across your kitchen to the refrigerator. This corpse is making your house pretty uncomfortable. And it won't leave.
​
While you ponder what to do with that, you hear about a billionaire philanthropist who’s underwriting house renovation projects. After talking to people who have seen some success contracting with him, you invite him to your house.
The day he comes, you’re pretty nervous, because he wants to walk through the whole house. You go with him down into the basement, where he sees the liquefying corpse. But you are encouraged to see it lying there dead as dead can be. It doesn’t even twitch.
So the billionaire finishes his walk-through and leaves, promising to come back the next day. The moment he’s out the door, all heck breaks loose. Six or seven body parts come rampaging up the stairs, and it takes you most of the night to get them back down in the basement and get the house cleaned up. You are now a nervous wreck.
In the morning the doorbell rings, and the billionaire is on your front porch with his suitcase. He tells you, “The only way to get this job done is for me to move in. And it’s going to take a lot of work on your part. Are you good with that?” What do you tell him?
All of the above is my paraphrase of Samuel Rutherford’s letter to James Lindsay of Sept. 7, 1637, part of which is below:
4. It is mercy's wonder, and grace's wonder, that Christ will lend a piece of the lodging, and a back-chamber beside Himself, to our lusts; and that He and such swine should keep house together in our soul. For, suppose they couch and contract themselves into little room when Christ cometh in, and seem to lie as dead under His feet, yet they often break out again; and a foot of the Old Man, or a leg or arm nailed to Christ's cross, looseth the nail, or breaketh out again! And yet Christ, beside this unruly and misnurtured neighbour, can still be making heaven in the saints, one way or other. May I not say, "Lord Jesus, what doest Thou here?" Yet here He must be. But I will not lose my feet to go on into this depth and wonder; for free mercy and infinite merits took a lodging to Christ and us beside such a loathsome guest as sin.
​
5. Sanctification and mortification of our lusts are the hardest part of Christianity. It is in a manner, as natural to us to leap when we see the New Jerusalem, as to laugh when we are tickled: joy is not under command, or at our nod, when Christ kisseth. But oh, how many of us would have Christ divided into two halves, that we might take the half of Him only! We take His office, Jesus, and Salvation: but "Lord" is a cumbersome word, and to obey and work out our own salvation, and to perfect holiness, is the cumbersome and stormy north-side of Christ, and that which we eschew and shift.
I Once Had a Cockatiel
Jan. 30, 2025: His name was Elvis, because he wanted a lot of attention and he liked to sing. He had a nice big cage, but he didn’t like it much; only used it for sleeping. Mostly, he liked to sit on his feed dish on my desk while I was working.

So he flew around the room to land on whatever wall art he liked, then checked to see if I noticed.


He got bored with that, though, because he was a pretty harsh critic and I seldom made the changes he suggested.


He was a great cuddle-muffin, though, which is how he talked me into taking him outside to enjoy the sunshine. The minute I took my hand off him, he flew away. I never saw him again, and never loved another bird.
Until we got the chickens.


The End
Your Life Is a Story
Feb. 1 2025: In Book 20, Lord Efran and De’Ath, Efran has an epiphany:
On the trek up the switchback, they heard Cudmore, on courtyard gate duty, whistling “Whoopsie Daisy”—a song that only old-timers from Westford would know. Hearing it for the first time in years, Efran was both comforted and saddened, for it called to mind men who had been friends and tutors to him, now long gone. They played such a large part in shaping me, he mused. And Therese whispered, In Your book were written the days that were formed for me, every one of them, when as yet there was none of them. [Ps. 139:16]
Raising his face to the white fortress above, he realized, I am a character in a story. How good a character I am depends on my faithfulness to the rôle the Author wrote for me.
​In the family room of my childhood home, one whole wall was lined with books, the lower shelves being dedicated to children’s books. So I’d fry a bologna sandwich, take it to the family room, and sit on the floor next to the shelves to pull out one of the books of children’s classics.
Sitting cross-legged on the floor, eating my sandwich, I got acquainted with poetry and prose. Without knowing it, I absorbed rhyme and rhythm, sound effects, and significant details. I became attached to characters solely to find out what happened to them. Again without realizing it, I learned that story is everything.
That is, the power of a story is in the plot, in what happens. The most wonderful story ever is the Biblical story, that of God’s dealings with people. How they respond to Him determines what happens in their own story.
Free will is the greatest gift imaginable. I often tell aspiring writers that, to be believable, their characters must be free to defy the author. If the characters are not free to do what they want, they’re only cardboard cutouts, making the plot a sham and the story worthless. So the great Author gives His characters the freedom to do what they will with the gifts He gives them. And many, many stories come to life.
As a young adult with children of my own, I rediscovered the importance of story. Bible stories were my lifeline during that time. When I understood the meaning of “Obedience is better than sacrifice,” I saw how a character can cooperate with the Author to live a story of purpose and power.
The creator of The Hardy Boys books, Franklin W. Dixon, gave this advice on making a good story: “Get your hero in a pit and throw rocks at him.” Conflict is essential to story in that it lays open the characters for inspection: what are they made of? What is in their hearts? This exploratory surgery is painful to the characters, of course, especially the ones who choose to look at the results. But these results are what shows the characters how to survive in a story that includes powerful antagonists.
The Author Himself will not make characters do what He wants, but His gift of freedom enables some characters to bend others to their will. These tyrants usually find their stories going quite well... until the last chapter. In the middle of Chapter 10, the protagonist cannot know what will have happened by Chapter 23; he only knows what clues he has picked up from the Author in the preceding nine chapters.
So when the Author points out the path of perseverance, self-denial, and respect for truth as the way of escape, and the protagonist chooses that difficult road, he eventually emerges into an ending previously unimagined in its satisfaction. The Author has been able to create that ending only because the protagonist allowed it.
Right now, today, we are creating our own stories. Our stories will eventually be read to the entire universe
or another,
and it is completely in our power to determine how our story ends.
One Thing I Regret
Feb. 5, 2025: —about moving to an apartment is that I can't dig in the dirt.​ At a previous house I had ample opportunity to dig in the dirt:

The first thing I did was fill in the front beds which bordered a long front porch. So I could sit on the porch and read, hidden from street view by the plants. That was nice.
​
Then I went on to the side beds:



—where I put in hyacinth bean, acidanthera, and lilies. I had my share of failures, though. On the left below is a gerbera daisy in a pot. Potted plants always die on me. And it took me all summer to figure out that you can't let okra get as big as it wants to.


Inedible Edible
We only stayed a few years in that house. But at least I got my signature portrait there.

The Author's Apology
Feb. 6, 2025: We authors are a thin-skinned lot. But honestly, in the United States, in the 21st century, we have a great deal more freedom of expression than our predecessors in earlier times.
​
For instance, consider John Bunyan. He spent over 12 years in prison for the crime of preaching the Bible. While there, he wrote The Pilgrim's Progress, and had it published in two parts when he was sprung (1678 and 1684). He was severely criticized for using (1) fiction (2) dialogue (3) fantasy and (4) allegory to explore the Christian life in this unprecedented work. He replied to these objections in "The Author's Apology for His Book" (a theme which every writer is familiar with). Here are just a few excerpts:
I knew not what; nor did I undertake
Thereby to please my neighbour; no, not I;
I did it mine own self to gratify….
Well, when I had thus put my ends together,
I show'd them others, that I might see whether
They would condemn them, or them justify;
And some said, Let them live; some, Let them die;
Some said, John print it; others said, Not so:
Some said, it might do good; others said, No.
​
Now was I in a strait, and did not see
Which was the best thing to be done by me:
At last I thought, Since you are thus divided,
I print it will, and so the case decided….
​
I further thought, if now I did deny
Those that would have it thus to gratify,
I did not know but hinder them I might
Of that which would to them be great delight;
For those which were not for its coming forth,
I said to them, Offend you I am loath;
Yet since your brethren pleased with it be,
Forbear to judge till you do further see.
If that thou wilt not read, let it alone;
Some love the meat, some love to pick the bone….
​
May I not write in such a style as this?
In such a method too and yet not miss
My end—thy good? ….
​
"Well, yet I am not fully satisfy'd
That this your book will stand when soundly tried."
Why, what's the matter? "It is dark!" What though?
"But it is feigned." What of that? I trow
Some men by feigned words, as dark as mine,
Make truth to spangle, and its rays to shine!
"But they want solidness." Speak, man, thy mind!
"They drown the weak; metaphors make us blind."
My dark and cloudy words, they do but hold
The truth, as cabinets enclose the gold.
Thank you, John, for pleading my case better than I could.
Corgis Like the Water
Feb. 7, 2025: Here's another throwback, this time to when we had a house with a pool. We also had two dogs, one a Corgi named Frodo. And guess what? Frodo LOVED the pool, especially when he had teenagers to play with.

What's this? Somebody lounging in the water? (Note the feet.) Frodo to the rescue!

Frodo gets his man!

Finally, the victim allows himself to be rescued.

A Corgi's work is never done.

The victim tries to hide, but Frodo is not fooled.

The victim escapes, but Frodo's after him!

Then Frodo has to help Ginger out after she was thrown into the pool.

BONUS: Ginger as she normally appears.
Command These Passions

Feb. 9, 2025: "We are in the world like men playing at tables; the chance is not in our power, but to play it is; and when it is fallen we must manage it as we can; and let nothing trouble us but when we do a base action, or speak like a fool, or think wickedly: these things God hath put into our powers; but concerning those things which are wholly in the choice of another, they cannot fall under our deliberation, and therefore neither are they fit for our passions.

"My fear may make me miserable, but it cannot prevent what another hath in his power and purpose: and prosperities can only be enjoyed by them who fear not at all to lose them; since the amazement and passion concerning the future takes off all the pleasure of the present possession.

"Therefore if thou hast lost thy land, do not also lose thy constancy; and if thou must die a little sooner, yet do not die impatiently. For no chance is evil to him that is content, and to a man nothing is miserable, unless it be unreasonable. No man can make another man to be his slave unless he hath first enslaved himself to life and death, to pleasure or pain, to hope or fear: command these passions, and you are freer than the Parthian kings."
Jeremy Taylor, Holy Living
Portrait of Joseph

Feb. 10, 2025: I ran across this beautiful portrait of Jesus' stepfather Joseph
by Lilly Riccardi, who explains in a lengthy post why she defied tradition to portray him as a young, handsome man (quoting Bishop Fulton Sheen)—
​
“Was he [St. Joseph] old or young? Most of the statues and pictures we see of Joseph today represent him as an old man with a gray beard, one who took Mary and her vow under his protection with somewhat the same detachment as a doctor would pick up a baby girl in a nursery. We have, of course, no historical evidence whatsoever concerning the age of Joseph....
​
“To make Joseph out as old portrays for us a man who had little vital energy left, rather than one who, having it, kept it in chains for God’s sake and for his holy purposes. To make Joseph appear pure only because his flesh had aged is like glorifying a mountain stream that has dried. The Church will not ordain a man to his priesthood who has not his vital powers. She wants men who have something to tame, rather than those who are tame because they have no energy to be wild. It should be no different with God.
​
“Furthermore, it is reasonable to believe that Our Lord would prefer, for a foster father, someone who had made a sacrifice rather than someone who was forced to it. There is the added historical fact that the Jews frowned on a disproportionate marriage between what Shakespeare called 'crabbed age and youth'; the Talmud admits a disproportionate marriage only for widows or widowers. Finally, it seems hardly possible that God would have attached a young mother, probably about sixteen or seventeen years of age, to an old man. If he did not disdain to give his mother to a young man, John, at the foot of the Cross, then why should he have given her an old man at the crib? A woman’s love always determines the way a man loves: She is the silent educator of his virile powers.
​
“Joseph was probably a young man, strong, virile, athletic, handsome, chaste and disciplined. Instead of being a man incapable of loving, he must have been on fire with love...."