Where Risk and Faith Meet

Where Risk and Faith Meet

I want to talk today about where risks and faith meet. And how we walk the line between “foolish for Christ” and just foolish. I’m not saying I have all the answers on where that line is…but I am saying we all need to ask the questions, and I think I’ve seen a good indicator of what those questions should be.

Faith, by nature, both starts from logic and then defies it. We can reason our way to many aspects of faith, and we can certainly talk intelligently about it. But there does come a point where logic says “play it safe,” and faith says, “take a risk and trust God.” This is a crucial part of true faith—that letting go of our own understanding and flinging ourselves into the arms of Christ. He will ask each of us to do that at some point, or at many points. Honestly, I believe the more we do it, the more He invites us to do it. The more He’ll stretch out His hand and say, “Okay, good…now follow me here too.”

But I’ve never read where Christ asked the disciples, or the apostles asked the early church, to trust in Him for their own convenience. I’ve never seen where He instructs us to assume God will make everything okay so that we can go out and seek our own will. No. He says we’ll be okay when we’re seeking His will. And “okay” may not mean what we think it does. It may not mean security or health or wealth as the world defines it. It merely means that whatever we have—be it plenty or nothing, be it pain or joy, be it health or illness—He will make us able to face it. That’s what that “I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me” verse is about. Facing, living with, living through any circumstance.

And God’s will for the Church is clear: serve others. Sacrifice for them. Take risks to show them His love.

When the servants of the medieval church went out into plague-ridden Europe, it was not for their own pleasure. They weren’t doing what they wanted to do–they were going out to risk their own lives to serve those who needed it. Their top and perhaps only priority was to visit the sick and do what they could to relieve their suffering. They took great risks to accomplish this. Sometimes God protected them. Sometimes He didn’t. But they went out knowing that if they lived, it was to serve another day, and if they died, it meant being with Him.

We hear amazing stories of missionaries who have seemingly super-human immunities as they serve God in the bush…and just as many stories of missionaries who die or nearly die in that same service. We have stories of people overcoming all odds in service to Him, and stories of people who give up the fight on earth to go on to reign in heaven. This is our reality, friends—faith comes with risks, and sometimes the rewards are earthly, but other times they’re heavenly. The question, though, is this: WHY are we taking the risks? Is it to serve Him? To love others? To relieve their suffering?

Or is it for our own convenience and pleasure?

I’m going to get pointed, and this is where I’m going to offend some of you. I’m sorry if I cause offense—but if you have an emotional reaction to what I’m about to say, please, please do this. Ask yourself why. Why are your emotions tangled up in this? I’ll talk about why mine were, and why I decided to reevaluate them. If you’re reading this later, here’s some context—I’m writing this in the summer of 2021, during a new height of the Covid pandemic. Infection rates are at an all-time high, mask mandates are coming back, vaccines are available but widely eschewed by the faith community. I’m not going to talk about vaccines or their safety, masks or their effectiveness. What I’m going to talk about is how the prevailing stance by the American church is affecting our ability to proclaim Christ.

Let me tell you my personal story. When mask mandates started appearing in 2020, I thought they were stupid. I went out looking up articles that debunked their effectiveness (even though I only found 1 for every 100 saying they were effective). I avoided Maryland, where they were required, and did my shopping in West Virginia, where they weren’t (I live on the border, so this isn’t actually going out of my way, LOL). I laughed about it. I didn’t care. I was convinced I was right simply because I wanted it to be true. I did what I wanted … then I saw a plea from a good friend of mine with immunodeficiency. A plea to think of people like her—people who always have to live with such care, but who cannot even step foot outside her house now as long as other people are being careless. And I was struck.

My stance was all about me. My convenience, my inclinations, what I wanted. My stance had nothing at all to do with my friend or the millions of people in similar situations. Ouch. I wasn’t loving my neighbor. I was only loving myself. I was thinking about whether I got sick…not about whether I was responsible for getting someone else sick.

And that isn’t okay.

Then came the hard question: why? Why was I so determined that my want be right and their statistics be wrong? I had no good answer. So I just asked God to give me eyes to see them and a heart to love them above my own comfort. I tried to think about how I would feel if I was the one who passed Covid to someone who died from it, when I could have prevented it with a few simple steps. And I realized that this is a very simple way of loving my neighbor. Protecting them from me, even when they aren’t protecting themselves.

Then my son was diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes. This doesn’t put him at a higher risk to catch any illness, but what it does mean is that ANY illness—even the ones that healthy people just get over in 3 days—could land him in the hospital. That was when Mama Bear Mode really kicked in and I started noticing people’s actions. And what I noticed really saddened me. That the “world,” those with no faith to speak of, were doing all in their power to keep my child safe…but the Church, who should be thinking first and foremost of others, were the last to do so and only did it under duress. So many were where I’d been at the start but hadn’t yet had that moment of conscience. Not ALL, of course. But when I opened social media or listened to quite a lot of friends, that’s all I was hearing. What they wanted. What risks they deemed acceptable to themselves.

Why did my fellow Christians not love my son? Not love my friend? Not love the millions of people at higher risk than them? Why were my fellow Christians chanting “my rights” above “our love through Christ”? Why were we more concerned with our convenience than in how it destroyed Christ in the eyes of that scared and hurting world? Because it does, my friends. They are afraid. They see a monster wanting to devour them, and they don’t see us fighting it. When mask mandates changed to “don’t wear them if you’re vaccinated, keep wearing them if you aren’t,” I heard countless Christians say, “How will they know? It’s my risk, I’ll take it.”

The world saw that. The world was horrified. Because the world said, “It’s not about the risk to YOU. It’s about the risk you pose to everyone else.” And they’re not wrong. We are the ones supposed to be more concerned for them than ourselves. We’re supposed to be the ones taking risks to help—not to hurt.

The world should not look at us and see people willing to risk THEIR lives for OUR comfort. They should look at us and see people willing to risk OUR lives for THEIR souls.

This is not what I see when I look around at a lot of the church today. More importantly, it’s not what the world is seeing either. I was not showing them I was a risk-taker-for-Christ last year when I laughed and went looking for facts to back up what I wanted to be true; I was only showing them that I was selfish and didn’t care whether I got them sick. That’s something I regret. Something of which I’ve repented. Something I work hard to avoid now.

I am not a fan of “safetyism”—when we try so hard to protect people, especially our children, that we hinder their emotional and mental growth and make them risk-averse (this word is used in an amazing book I talked about in this post). But there is a line. There are risks to take and risks it’s better to avoid, and the real trick is figuring out where that line is. This is why we shouldn’t put our kids in a bubble, but we DO teach them to wash their hands. (Did you know that the first doctor to ask people to wash their hands when they came into his ward was FIRED for his audacity? The hospital board thought he was infringing on the rights of the employees. How dare he!) This is why we don’t say “never get in a car, people die in car accidents!” but we DO wear seat belts. Doing those small actions doesn’t mean we’re faithless—it means we’re smart and focused on true risk-taking. That’s just safety, not “safetyism.”

So where is the line in this situation? That’s what each of us have to decide, and certainly there are good, valid reasons to have avoided what’s a risk to you and yours. I’d never say there isn’t. The question I hope we all ask ourselves, though, is whether where we draw the line affects our ability to work for Christ.

We know that the world will always call us foolish, yes—foolish because our faith values eternal good above earthly good. But we do NOT want to be seen the kind of foolish that results in harm for ourselves or others. Let people call us fools for rushing to the rescue of dying souls even when it means risking our lives. Not for risking those souls for our own benefit. And here’s the tricky part—it isn’t just about our own opinion, not when it comes to serving others. How are THEY seeing your decisions? And how does that impact their view of Christianity?

I want to be able to serve others. Therefore I will do whatever I can to put THEM above ME. This is a lesson I learned from seeing my friend trapped at home and suffering for more than a year. This is a lesson I learned sitting in the PICU of a children’s hospital with my son and being told they would see us again, because he’d get sick, and that’s what happens. This is a lesson I learned when I looked out at the world and saw a Church ruled by fear—fear of government, fear of losing their rights, fear of losing power. And I saw a world ruled by bitterness toward us for putting them at risk. I am not afraid of sickness, I am not afraid of death—for me. But I should not be the cause of it in others just because I’m stubborn and focused on what I want instead of what they need.

This is the lesson I have learned through all of this. This is the journey I’ve taken from “what I want to be true” to “how my opinions on what’s true affect my ability to serve others for Christ.” Maybe your journey has been different, maybe you arrived at different conclusions, even. But in my house, our rule has become, “We will not take risks with this disease just for our own entertainment—shopping, visiting, birthday parties and so on. But we WILL take risks where necessary to serve God and do what he’s called us to do.” We take what safety measures we can, we do what is possible to protect not only our son but everyone else. And then we trust.

We don’t have to agree on our every stance on this stuff. But we DO all have to ask ourselves the same questions. Are we concerned with US…or with THEM? Because if the risks we take are only for our own convenience and comfort, then there is no glory in that in the eyes of God. Faith and risk are only aligned when they involve reaching others for Him.

Where do risk and faith meet? In service to Him. And ONLY in service to Him.

Word of the Week – Smithereens

Word of the Week – Smithereens

My mom sent me this one, so of course I had to look into it! I found the explanation pretty quick, but nevertheless enlightening, so let’s take a look!

Smithereens dates from 1810 and has always meant “small fragments.” No surprise there. But where does it come from? This is the interesting part. =) The smither part we know–it’s directly from the Irish Gaelic smidirin, which is itself a diminutive of smiodar, which means “fragment.”

So what about that -een? Is that where the “small” comes from? Etymologists can only take a good guess at that part, but their theory is that the -een was indeed applied as another diminutive, quoting names such as “Colleen” as evidence that it was done frequently in the Gaelic language. In my imagination I can see someone looking at minuscule fragments and deciding it was so small, it wasn’t just a smither, but a smithereen. 😉

Announcing…Shadowed Loyalty!

Announcing…Shadowed Loyalty!

I’m apparently in a season of sharing book news instead of my usual Thursday musings. 😉 And today I wanted to take a few minutes to tell you about a book that will be coming out next May, called Shadowed Loyalty.

So, let’s rewind about, oh, 13 years. It was the summer when my son was 6 months old–and I had an idea for a mafia story. More specifically, I had an idea for the story of a mafioso’s daughter, the man everyone had assumed she would marry, who had pursued the law instead of the mob, and the Prohibition Bureau agent who tried to steal her heart…for a way to infiltrate her family. Back in the day, I’d called it Mafia Princess, and my critique partner, Stephanie, declared it the novel that would get me published. (Ahem. We’ve been known to be wrong in our predictions, LOL.) My agent was happy with it. We sent it out. It went to committee at a few places. And then…nothing.

Fast forward to last year. Bethany House took a look at several of my old manuscripts, purchased Dreams of Savannah, and told me I was free to do whatever I liked with the ones they passed on. Round about this time, WhiteFire was launching a new imprint–Chrism Press. And I joked to David, “Well, if all else fails, we’ll just see if Chrism wants my mafia story!” After all, Chrism is targeted to Catholic and Orthodox readers…and my mafia family, being Sicilian, are certainly Catholic. I didn’t do a very good job writing that element of it originally, but I can fix that.

Fast forward again to a couple months ago, when the committee at Chrism emailed to say, “We’d love it!” So here we are. Shadowed Loyalty (which my agent approved as a MUCH better title than my original, LOL) has found a home at Chrism and will be making its appearance next May, between the final two books in my Secrets of the Isles trilogy! I’m so excited to be not just an advisor to Chrism, but one of the authors, and to bring new life to this story I’ve had sitting around for such a long time. It needs a ton of work–that’s what I’ll be doing in September, LOL–but I know it’ll turn out to be just the story it was meant to be.

I’ll paste the working back cover copy below, but first I’ll just tell you a bit of the behind the scenes.

Anyone watch NCIS back in the day? Remember the story line that one season with Tony and the romantic interest with the lovely doctor who turned out to be the daughter of the international criminal they were tracking? That’s actually what inspired this book, in a way. Or rather, as I watched it play out, I thought, “So in this framework, the law endorcement officer is clearly the one we’re rooting for. But what if it wasn’t? What if he was the villain? Because come on, from her point of view, he is. He’s out to destroy her family and even if he did feel some affection for her, it doesn’t change facts.” So I starting thinking about other scenarios…and a love triangle involving this agent on the one hand and a hero on the other who was part of her world…and yet not. A stand-up guy.

I don’t recall exactly how I settled on 1920s Chicago and the Mafia, but I spent quite a long time reading several books, choosing the year of my setting, buying and studying a Sicilian dictionary, all that fun stuff. And while my son sat in his bouncy chair at my feet, I hammered out the story for Sabina and Lorenzo and Roman. I learned 20s slang (and decided how much to use or not). I looked up when pizza first arrived in Chicago. I wrote gun fights and speakeasies and corrupt Bureau agents. I included poetry and faith and looking at old friends through new eyes. And most of all, I wrote a heroine who really saw, for the first time, the cost of being part of a family who dwelt partially in the underworld. I examined what it meant to love them and be loyal to them when you came to hate what they were doing.

I have no idea what this book will look like when it’s finished, but I’m excited to dive in and really hone those themes!

Also exciting–I get to design the cover! I haven’t started yet, so the world is still wide open with possibilities for that. Do you have ideas for what you love to see in 1920s fiction? Or a trend you think I should explore? Please share them below! (I know, this is new for me, right? I’ve gotten your take on a couple options before, and I certainly always show you my covers as soon as I can, but I’ve never actually invited anyone into the brainstorming stage before!)

You can track the progress of the book at its page on Chrism Press’s site; as links and covers and all the other fun stuff become available, they’ll be added there. And of course, I’ll keep you updated here as always. =)

About Shadowed Loyalty

Sabina Mancari never questioned her life as the daughter of Chicago’s leading mob boss until bullets tear apart her world and the man she thought she loved turned out to be an undercover Prohibition agent. Now she sees how ugly the underworld can be. Ambushes, bribes, murder, prostitution—maybe Lorenzo, her straitlaced fiancé, had it right when he said it is better to stay far removed. And maybe, if she can understand him and his baffling faith, he will give her another chance.

But Lorenzo isn’t sure he’s ready for that. All his life he has loved Sabina, only to realize she had never felt the same about him. While he’s relieved to see her pursuing God, the Prohibition agent is pursuing her father just as intently, and it falls to Enzo—and his legal skills—to keep trouble at bay. He wants to believe that Sabina can change…assuming they can stay alive until their wedding day.

Shadowed Loyalty, set amid the glitz and scandal of the Roaring Twenties, examines what love really means and how we draw lines between family and our own convictions, especially when following the one could mean losing the other. 

Word of the Week – Dunce

Word of the Week – Dunce

I looked up the word dunce during my marathon writing session for the final book in the Secrets of the Isles trilogy, just to make sure I hadn’t been using it for years when I shouldn’t have been (because those sneak in!), and I was fascinated at what I learned! It had certainly been around long enough for my 1906-set story, but I had no idea its history was so interesting. So naturally, I have to share.

Dunce is actually taken from the name of John Duns Scotus, and before it was dunce, it was actually Duns’ man. So who, you ask, is John Duns Scotus? He was a Scottish scholar of philosophy and theology who lived from 1265-1308 and whose followers ran the universities just before the Reformation. By the 1520s, people were lashing out against the medieval theology and “knowledge,” and John Duns Scotus had become their archetype for the academic who was so obstinately focused on minutia that they failed to see larger truths. By the 1570s, dunce meant “ignoramus, dullard, dolt,” especially dull-witted students. The dunce cap that we all recognize from historical classroom scenes dates from around 1792.

Whenever I come across a word like this taken from someone’s name, I always shudder. Something to avoid in life: that sort of legacy!

Cover Redesigns ~ The Culper Ring!

Cover Redesigns ~ The Culper Ring!

Earlier in the summer, I tried to order some more copies of Ring of Secrets, only to learn that they’d gone out of print. As in, forever. No more paperbacks would be produced. Noooooo! So naturally, I immediately emailed my agent, and we struck up a conversation with Harvest House. Long story short, two days later I found myself in possession of the rights of the three Culper Ring novels, as well as the two novellas that were actually always mine to begin with. 😉 This wasn’t something I’d planned on, but it’s certainly nice to know I can now keep them available for everyone!

One of the stipulations of the reversion of rights was that I would have to provide new covers for them, as the original files were not available. Shucks, right? A cover designer hates being told she has to make new covers for some of her first books. 😉 So today, I’m super excited to reveal ALL the new covers at once! (Okay, so the novellas only got small tweaks, since I’d been the one to design those to begin with.)

Of course, I still have some of the old covers in stock, but once they’re gone, they’re gone forever. So below each new cover, there are a couple links. One to the book’s new page with the new cover, where you can purchase paperback to ship as soon as I have them in hand, and one to the OLD cover’s page too–those are now on sale so I can clear out my stock. 😉 (Well, except for Ring of Secrets, because I only have 2 of those left anyway.) Please note that the new paperbacks are still in process and not in hand. I’m working on these as quickly as I can and hope to have them here and shippable within 2 weeks. You can order now, and they’ll ship as soon as I get them!

If you’re looking for ebooks, they’ll be back up at retailers soon–or you can grab them now from WhiteFire! Links for those are at the bottom of the page!

So let’s jump right into the cover reveals with…

Ring of Secrets

This first book in the Culper Ring Series is set during the Revolutionary War, in 1780. Winter is a character living a deception in order to stay alive as a Patriot in Loyalist-held New York…and help other Patriots in any way she can. I wanted an image that would capture both the playful, “brainless” image she projects, but also hint at the secrets she was keeping. And of course, a beautiful era gown was called for! I admit that orange had never been my favorite on the original, though the overall design was lovely, and I did like the model they selected. For my design, I also chose a different script for the font, made it larger to cover the whole cover for easier reading in thumbnail, and added a fun wax seal on a corner of old paper for series branding. So all that takes us from this…

to this:

I don’t know about you, but I really love the gown here! The color is just lovely, and I love the little pops of brighter colors in the flowers–especially that it ties in just a bit with the original orange, but redder.

Then of course, we have the only-mildly-updated…

Fairchild’s Lady

which went from this:

to the very similar this:

As you can see, the biggest changes there were to put the new title banner and series corner on it. Otherwise, I just kept my original design.

Moving on. =) When I received the cover for Whipsers from the Shadows, my daughter declared it “Cinderella!” LOL. I always found it funny that the gown they chose (which I love!) was in use on several other Christian novels too–apparently there are a few major design firms in the same city that all rented costuming from the same theater! How funny is that? For my redesign, I played with quite a few different ideas. Maybe I wanted Gwyn to be painting? But painting requires light, and I wanted to get those SHADOWS in there, so I opted for an exterior scene with a lovely, moody gate instead. And of course, an era dress. (Oh, fun note–all the gowns on the new novel covers are ACTUAL historical pieces! The Met has many public domain images from their collection, and that’s where I found all these! I just found models to “wear” them digitally.)

So here we go!

Whispers from the Shadows

The lovely Cinderella original:

and my new version:

The second novella, A Hero’s Promise, actually got a facelift last year, when I put a model on the original cover, which had just been the Capitol building before. So for the new version, all I did was flip her around to better flow with the rest of the series and change the color of the banner for the same reason. Here are both the new-old version, ha ha, and the updated one.

A Hero’s Promise

And that brings us to the final cover!

I always loved the original cover of Circle of Spies, especially because (a) the model was the designer’s niece, and (b) the seamstress who designed and created the costume had emailed me when I did my original cover reveal to introduce herself and say what fun she had working on Marietta’s gown! So it was sad to let this one go, but obviously necessary.

Because Mari is in half-mourning for most of the book, the dress had to stay gray. But I decided to put her in her sitting room instead of having the theater background, and I do quite like the model I found and the expression on her face. She gets to be in profile, to keep the theme of the models turning different directions throughout the series. So here we have our two versions of

Circle of Spies

More small notes from Roseanna-the-designer; I love that the title banners and series seals not only change color but actually do a reverse-rainbow. Fun, huh? And I also made a point of integrating a bit of color from the other books into each one. Maybe no one else in the world will ever notice that, LOL, but I love the way it binds them all together when you view them side by side! And so, I’ll leave you with that image. And you can let me know what you think of the new face of

The Culper Ring Series

(Just a quick note about availability–these WILL be on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, etc., but I haven’t had a chance to list them there yet. So for now, you can grab them here. They should be available everywhere in the next week or two!)