There is a young and impressionable mind out there that is very hungry for information…It has latched on to an electronic tube as its main source of nourishment. As a whole, the Democratic Republic of the Congo contains 615,942 square miles of forest. and it is known for its high levels of biodiversity, including more than 600 tree species and 10,000 animal species. Some of its most famous residents include forest elephant, gorillas, chimpanzees, okapi, leopards, hippos, and lions. Researchers has found that Central African forests generally have taller trees but lower density of small tress than forest in the Amazon or Borneo. That is because Elephants, gorillas, and large herbivores keep the density of small trees very low through predation, reducing competition for large trees. However, in areas where these animals have been depleted by hunting, forests tend to be shorter and denser with small trees. However, between 2000 and 2010, the country lost 14,331 square miles of forest. It risks being left in a fragmented and severely degraded state due to the growing threat of deforestation carried out to clear the illegal logging. If the current trend continues, the entire forest will be gone by the end of this century, 2100 A.D. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20

Understanding tropical deforestation is important because forests store vast amounts of carbon. Deforestation releases carbon to the atmosphere and prevents the forest from taking up more carbon, and this increases global temperatures and poor air quality. Deforestation also leads to the death of animals and makes it hard for the native to find much needed food. Also, the natives are not allowed to cut down trees because every tree that cut down costs them a fine that is ten times the minimum wages, and a jail sentence. However, since this country is poor, big corporations cannot be stopped from logging trees, and cut them down to plunder. The first inhabitants of these lands, the indigenous, are left forgotten in a corner, while the looters grow and become stronger. The natives have their history and try to defend themselves and their homes so they will not die. The threat to the rainforest seems like a joke because it is a single county, the country of money, put itself above all flags. When they utter, “Globalization,” many think it is absurd because it is an order in which money is the only country served and the borders are erased, not our of fraternity but because of the bleeding that fattens the powerful without nationality. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20

The lie of globalization became a universal coin, and for a few in the Congo, it wove a dream of prosperity above everyone else’s nightmare. Corruption and falsehoods are used to deceive the masses. Being poor, the people are dressed in the wealth of their scarcities, and because the lie is so deep and so broad, they end up mistaking it for truth. The people prepared for the great international forums and, by the will of the government, poverty was declared an illusion that faded before the development proclaimed by economic statistics. The people of the land became even more forgotten, and their history was not enough to keep the from dying, forgotten and humiliated. However, death did not hurt them as much as being forgotten did. They discovered that they no longer existed, and those who govern had forgotten about them in their euphoria of statistics and growth. A similar phenomenon is happening in the City of Sacramento with the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on sports complexes and theater expansions, which cannot even be used, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but nothing being done to make sure people have affordable housing. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20

A country that forgets itself is a sad country. A country that forgets its past cannot have a future. I have said that the original position is the appropriate initial status quo which ensures that the fundamental agreements reached in it are fair. This fact yields that name “justice as fairness.” It is clear, then, that I want to say that one conception of justice is more reasonable than another, or justifiable with respect to it, if rational persons in the initial situation would choose its principles over those of the other for the role of justice. Conceptions of justice are to be ranked by their acceptability to persons so circumstanced. Understood in this way the question of justification is settled by working out a problem of deliberation: we have to ascertain which principles it would be rational to adopt given the contractual situation. This connects the theory of justice with the theory of rational choice. If this view of the problem of justification is to succeed, we must, of course, describe in some detail the nature of this choice problem. A problem of rational decision has a definite answer only if we know the beliefs and interests of the parties, their relations with respect to one another, the alternatives between which they are to choose, the procedure whereby they make up their minds, and so on. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20

As the circumstances are presented in different ways, correspondingly different principles are accepted. The concept of the original position, as I shall refer to it, is that of the most philosophically favoured interpretation of this initial choice situation for the purposes of a theory of justice. However, how are we to decide what is the most favoured interpretation? I assume, for one thing, that there is a broad measure of agreement that principles of justice should be chosen under certain conditions. To justify a particular description of the initial situation one shows that is incorporates these commonly shared presumptions. One argues from widely accepted but weak premises to more specific conclusions. Each of the presumptions should by itself be natural and plausible; some of them may seem innocuous or even trivial. The aim of the contract approach is to establish that taken together they impose significant bounds on acceptable principles of justice. The ideal outcome would be that these conditions determine a unique set of principles; but I shall be satisfied if they suffice to rank the main traditional conceptions of social justice. One should not be misled, then, by the somewhat unusual conditions which characterize the original position. The idea here is simply to make vivid to ourselves the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for principles of justice, and therefore on these principles themselves. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20

Thus it seems reasonable and generally acceptable that no one should be advantaged or disadvantaged by natural fortune or social circumstances in the choice of principles. It also seems widely agreed that it should be impossible to tailor principles to the circumstances of one’s own case. We should ensure further that particular inclinations and aspirations, and persons’ conceptions of their good do not affect the principles adopted. The aim is to rule out those principles that it would be rational to propose for acceptance, however little the chance of success, only if one knew certain things that are irrelevant from the standpoint of justice. For example, if a one knew that one was wealthy, one might find it rational to advance the principle that various taxes for welfare measures be counted unjust; if one knew that one was poor, one would most likely propose the contrary principle. To represent the desired restrictions one imagines a situation in which everyone is deprived of this sort of information. One excludes the knowledge of those contingencies which sets humans at odds and allows the to be guided by their prejudices. In this manner the veil of ignorance is arrived at in a natural way. If we keep in mind the constraints on arguments that it is meant to express, this concept should cause no difficulty. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20

At any time we can enter the original position, so to speak, simply by following a certain procedure, namely, by arguing for principles of justice in accordance with these restrictions. It seems reasonable to suppose that the parties in the original positions are equal. That is, all have the same rights in the procedure for choosing principles; each can make proposals, submit reasons for their acceptance, and so on. Obviously the purpose of these conditions is to represent equality between human beings as moral persons, as creatures having a conception of their good and capable of a sense of justice. The basis of equality is taken to be similarity in these two respects. Systems of ends are not ranked in value; and each human is presumed to have the requisite ability to understand and to act upon whatever principles are adopted. Together with the veil of ignorance, these conditions define the principles of justice as those which rational persons concerned to advance their interests would consent to as equals when none are known to be advantaged or disadvantage by social and natural contingencies. There is, however, another side to justifying a particular description of the original position. This is to see if the principles which would be chosen match our considered convictions of justice or extend them in an acceptable way. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20

We can note whether applying these principles would lead us to make the same judgments about the basic structure of society which we now make intuitively and in which we have the greatest confidence; or whether, in cases where our present judgements are in doubt and given with hesitation, these principles offer a resolution which we can affirm on reflection. There are questions which we feel sure must be answered in a certain way. For example, we are confident that religious intolerance and racial discrimination are unjust. We think that we have examined these things with care and have reached what we believe is an impartial judgment not likely to be distorted by an excessive attention to our own interests. These convictions are provisional fixed points which we presume any conception of justice must fit. However, we have much less assurance as to what is the correct distribution of wealth and authority. Here we may be looking for a way to remove our doubts. We can check an interpretation of the initial situation, then, by the capacity of its principles to accommodate our firmest convictions and to provide guidance where guided is needed. In searching for the most favoured description of this situation we work from both ends. We begin by describing it so that it represents generally shared and preferably weak conditions. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20

We then see if these conditions are strong enough to yield a significant set of principles. If not, we look for further premises equally reasonable. However, if so, and these principles match our considered convictions of justice, then so far well and good. However, presumably there will be discrepancies. In this case we have a choice. We can either modify the account of the initial situation or we can revise our existing judgments, for even the judgments we take provisionally as fixed points are liable to revision. By going back and forth, sometimes altering the conditions of the contractual circumstances, at others withdrawing our judgments and conforming them to principle, I assume that eventually we shall find a description of the initial situation that both expresses reasonable conditions and yields principles which match our considered judgments duly pruned and adjusted. This state of affairs I refer to as reflective equilibrium. It is an equilibrium because at last our principles and judgments coincide; and it is reflective since we known to what principles our judgments conform and the premises of their derivation. At the moment everything is in order. However, this equilibrium is not necessarily stable. It is liable to be upset by further examination of the conditions which should be imposed on the contractual situation and by particular cases which may lead us to revise our judgments. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20

Yet for the time being we have done what we can to render coherent and to justify our convictions of social justice. We have reached a conception of the original position. I shall not, of course, actually work through this process. Still, we may think of the interpretation of the original position that I shall present as the result of such a hypothetical course of reflection. It represents the attempt to accommodate within one scheme both reasonable philosophical conditions on principles as well as our considered judgments of justice. In arriving at the favoured interpretation of the initial situation there is no point at which an appeal is made to self-evidence in the traditional sense either or general conceptions or particular convictions. I do not claim for the principles of justice proposed that they are necessary truths or derivable from such truths. A conception of justice cannot be deduced from self-evident premises or conditions on principles; instead, its justification is a matter of the mutual support of many considerations, of everything fitting together into one coherent view. We shall want to say that certain principles of justice are justified because they would be agreed to in an initial situation of equality. I have emphasized that this original position is purely hypothetical. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20

It is natural to ask why, if this agreement is never actually entered into, we should take any interest in these principles, moral or otherwise. The conditions embodied in the description of the original position are ones that we do in fact accept. Or if we do not, then perhaps we can be persuaded to do so by philosophical reflection. Each aspect of the contractual situation can be given supporting grounds. Thus what we shall do is to collect together into one conception a number of conditions on principles that we are ready upon due consideration to recognize as reasonable. These constraints express what we are prepared to regard as limits on fair terms of social cooperation. One way to look at the idea of the original position, therefore, is to see it as an expository device which sums up the meaning of these conditions and helps us to extract their consequences. On the other hand, this conception is also an intuitive notion that suggests its own elaboration, so that led on by it we are drawn to define more clearly the standpoint from which we can best interpret moral relationship We need a conception that enables us to envision our objective from afar: the intuitive notion of the original position is to do this for us. When I am your president, I hope you will come see me. Please do not leave me up there in the White House all by myself. I grew up watching PBS, and still watch it. For enlightened news coverage, tune in to PBS. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20

Love must be aggressively translated into simple justice. “Each one should use whatever gift one has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms,” reports 1 Peter 4.10. Peter and Paul are saying the same thing. The spiritual gifts we have, and the ministries we perform are gifts of God’s grace. None of us deserves the gifts one has been given. They are given to us by God’s undeserved favour to us through Christ. This means the most “worthy” and the most “unworthy” of all Christians both receive their gifts and their ministries on the same basis. The “unworthy” person surely does not deserve one’s gift, but neither does the most “worthy.” They both receive them as unmerited favours from God. There are quotations marks around worthy and unworthy in above because in reality there is no such distinction in God’s sight. In His sight, we are all totally and permanently bankrupt spiritually. Paul’s statement, “There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3.22-23), is just as true for believers as for unbelievers. We never earn our privileges of ministry because of our heard work or faithfulness in previous service to God. I taught adult Saturday school for many years in a small church before God launched me into a much wider sphere of ministry. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20

However, I did not earn an enlarged ministry through my “faithful” teaching; rather, it was a gift of God’s grace. We are so accustomed to thinking of spiritual gifts in terms of abilities to minister that we lose sight of the ordinary meaning of the word. A gift is something given to us; something we do not earn. However, even our ordinary meaning fails to adequately convey the biblical sense. We tend to give gifts to people who, even though they have not earned them, in some sense deserve them because of their relationship to us or because they have done us a favour of some kind. However, God gives spiritual gifts to people who do not deserve them. None of us deserves to be in God’s service on some far away mission field. It is an awesome thing to attempt to speak on behalf of God. Yet that is exactly what we do when we teach, or preach, or write. It matters not whether our audience is one person or fifty thousand, whether they are kindergarten pupils or graduate theological students. Any time we say or write something that we hold out to be biblical truth, we are putting ourselves in the position of being God’s spokes-person. Peter said, “If anyone speaks, one should do it as one peaking the very words of God,” reports 1 Peter 4.11. I suspect that most people who these essays do teach the Scriptures occasionally if not regularly. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20

Do we appreciate the awesomeness of our responsibility, to be speaking on behalf of God? Do we consider the accountability that comes with being entrusted with the divine message? Paul himself was keenly conscious of his immense responsibility when he said, “Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like humans sent from God,” reports 2 Corinthians 2.17. He said he spoke like a human sent from God, but he also said he spoke before God, or in the sight of God. That is, God not only sent him, but observed him. One Saturday as I stood up to teach my adult Saturday school class, to my dismay, I realized the president of our denominational seminary was sitting in the class. To make matters more intense, he also happened to be the professor of homiletics (the art of preaching). I was sure he was critiquing everything I said, both in content and delivery. Now if the presence of a seminary president in my class was an awesome experience, how much more awed should I be when I realize I speak, or write, in the very presence of God and on His behalf. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20

What, then, will gives us the courage to undertake or continue to teach the Scriptures or, for that matter, to exercise any other spiritual gift? The heartfelt conviction that we have our ministry by God’s grace. Again, as Paul said, “Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart,” reports 2 Corinthians 4.1. It was a sense of God’s mercy that gave Paul courage or, as he expressed it, caused him not to lose heart. Mercy is God’s grace expressed specifically toward people who are viewed by Him as guilty, condemned, and helpless. It is generally expressed in terms of relieving the misery due to their sin. However, God not only relieved Paul’s misery, He elevated him to the office of apostle and gave him the ministry of proclaiming the richest of Christ. However, Paul never lost sight of his own unworthiness, even when exercising his office of apostleship. He never forgot he held that office by God’s mercy. Here we see the biblical relationship between a sense of one’s utter unworthiness on the one hand, and the courage to undertake a ministry for God on the other. To lose sight of our unworthiness is to risk exercising our gifts and fulfilling our ministries in a spirit of presumptuous pride, as if God were fortunate to have us on His team. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20

However, to focus too much on our unworthiness, to the neglect of God’s grace, will effectively immobilize us for His service. That attitude is also an expression of pride because we are still focusing on ourselves and our worthiness or unworthiness, as if God were dependent on some innate quality within us to equip us for His service. Remember we did not declare temporary spiritual bankruptcy. Our bankruptcy is total and permanent. The only worthiness we have with which to come before God is in Christ. And the only worthiness we have to qualify us for ministry is in Christ. If we are to progress in any aspect of the Christian life, we must look outside ourselves and only to Christ. It is in Him that the grace of God is so abundantly poured out on us. God may be generous enough to accept us as we are, with our weaknesses and mistakes, but the law of Karma is above all human emotions, whether they be generous or ingenerous. It demands full payment and distributes to them the consequences of their actions. There is a strong similarity between this and law, irrevocably decreed in Heaven before the foundations of this World, upon which all blessings are predicated. We believe we are born where we should be, but that a just and loving Father in Heaven has decided where we can best perform in this mortal sphere of activity. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20

We believe we reap the rewards of our actions, but we also believe in the atonement of Jesus. Were it not for this merciful provision, we would be left with nearly the same doctrine as others who believe that karma cannot change. That is, we would be left to eternally pay the price of our sins. Christians are taught to be involved in the actions of others through doing good deeds and teaching the gospel. This is the doctrine of loving your neighbour as yourself. Spiritual insights surpass our mere powers of reason. We realize, however, that these moments of enlightenment are given to us by God through the power of the Holy Ghost and that we must study some things out for ourselves and then seek a spiritual confirmation. The gospel also teaches us to follow a wise, God-revealed health law. Physical care and conditioning have been taught since the early days of the Church. “Behold, now it came to pass that the king of the Lamanites sent a proclamation among all this people, that they should not lay their hands on Ammon, or Aaron, or Mmner, or Himni, nor either of their brethren who should go forth preaching the word of God, in whatsoever place they should be, in any part of their land. Yea, he sent a decree among them, that they should not lay their hands on them to bind them, or to cast them into prison. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20

“Neither should they spit upon them, nor smite them, nor cast them out of their synagogues, nor scourge them; neither should they cast stones at them, but that they should have free access to their houses, and also their temples, and their sanctuaries. And thus they might go forth and preach the word according to their desires, for the king as been converted unto the Lord, and all his household; therefore he sent his proclamation throughout the land unto his people, that the word of God might have no obstruction, but that it might go forth throughout the land unto his people, that the word of God might have no obstruction, but that it might go forth throughout all the land, that his people might be convinced concerning the wicked traditions of their fathers, and that they might be convinced that they might be convinced that they were all brethren and that they ought not to murder, nor to plunder, nor to steal, nor to commit adultery, nor commit any manner of wickedness. And now it came to pass that when the kind had sent forth this proclamation, that Aaron and his brethren went forth from city to city, and from one house of worship to another, establishing churches, and consecrating priests and teachers throughout the land among the Lamanites, to preach and to teach the word of God among them; and thus they began to have great success. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20

“And thousands were brought to the knowledge of the Lord, yea, thousands were brought to believe in the traditions of the Nephites; and they were taught the records and prophecies which were handed down even to the present time. And as sure as the Lord liveth, so sure as many as believed, or as many as were brought to the knowledge of the truth, through the preaching of Ammon and his brethren, according to the spirit of revelation and of prophecy, and the power of God working miracles in them—yea, I say unto you, as the Lord liveth, as many of the Lamanites as believed in their preaching, and were converted unto the Lord, never did fall away. For they became a righteous people; they did lay down the weapons of their rebellion, that they did not fight against God any more, neither against any of their brethren. Now, these are they who were converted unto the Lord: The people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Ishmael; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Middoni; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the city of Nephi; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Shemlon, and in the city of Lemuel, and in the city of Shimnilom. And these are the names of cities of the Lamanites which were converted unto the Lord; and these are they that laid down the weapons of their rebellion, yea, all their weapons of war; and they were all Lamanites. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20

“And the Amalekites were not converted, save only one; neither were any of the Amulonites; but they did harden their heart, and also the hearts of the Lamanites in that part of the land wheresoever they dwelt, yea and all their villages and all their cities. Therefore, we have named all the cities of the Lamanites in which they did repent and come to the knowledge of truth, and were converted. And now it came to pass that the king and those who were converted were desirous that they might be distinguished from their brethren; therefore the king consulted with Aaron and many of their priests, concerning the name that they should take upon them, that they might be distinguished. And it came to pass that they called their names Anti-Nephi-Lehies; and they were called by this name and were no more called Lamanites. And they began to be a very industrious people; yea, and they were friendly with the Nephite; therefore, they did open a correspondence with them, and the curse of God did no more follow them,” Alma 23.1-18. Our Lord Jesus Christ be near thee to defend thee, within thee to refresh thee, around thee to preserve thee, before three to guide thee, behind thee to justify thee, above thee to bless thee; Who liveth and reigneth, thank you for bestowing us with your grace. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20

Today’s blog features some inspiring houseplant ideas from plant and interior stylist @hiltoncarter! We are loving the unique decor hacks he has been featuring on his profile lately. Check it out at the link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/blog/

Bless us, O Lord, we welcome you in our house, and may you bless all that dwell in it, as we are graciously pleased to bless the house of Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; we dwell in the walls of an angel of light. As people enter our atmosphere, they feel the abundance of Jesus Christ residing. God gives us the dew of heaven, and the richness of Earth. Be glad for the peacemakers, and through the indulgence of grace bless the Earth with your presence.

God of the hearth, beat strong and pure in the heart of my home. Lord of the threshold, keep vigilant guard over the entrance of my home. Spirits of the land, keep watch throughout the yard of my home. God of the borders, stand ready to repulse all disorder from my home. #CresleighHomes