All wealth consists of desirable things; that is, things which satisfy human want directly or indirectly: but not all desirable things are reckoned as wealth. If we are honest we have to admit that we will never fully know what happened to our ancestors in their journey towards modern humanity. To be governed by appetite alone is slavery, while obedience to a law one prescribes to oneself is freedom. Instrumental aggression is a biologically adaptive type of aggression, which has the aim of obtaining that which is necessary or desirable. The aim is not destructive as such; this serves only as an instrument for attaining the real aim. In this respect it is similar to defensive aggression, but in other important aspects it is different. It does not seem to have a phylogenetically programmed neuronal basis such as that which programs defensive aggression; among mammals, only animals of prey, whose aggression is instrumental to obtaining food, are endowed with an innate neuronal pattern that impels them to attack their prey. The hunting behaviour of hominids and Homo is based on learning and experience, and does not seem to be phylogenetically programmed. The difficulty with instrumental aggression lies in ambiguity of the terms “necessary” and “desirable.” It is easy to define necessary in terms of an unquestionable physiological need, as, for instance, warding off starvation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 27

Capital is part of wealth which is devoted to obtaining further wealth. In December of 2020, 30 million Americans needed food assistance and/or could not feed themselves and their families. Simultaneously, Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk made headlines for overtaking each other as the richest person in the World with more than $160 billion each. If a human steals or robs because he or she and his or her family do not have even the minimal amount of food they need, the aggression is clearly an act motivated by physiological necessity. The same would hold true for a primitive tribe on the verge of starvation which attacks another tribe that is better off. However, these clear-cut examples of necessity were once relatively rare, but are becoming increasingly common. Other more complicated cases are also becoming much more frequent. The leads of a nation realize that their economic situation will be seriously endangered in the long run unless they can conquer territory having the raw materials they need, or unless they defeat a competing nation. Although frequently such reasons are merely an ideological cover for the desire for increasing power or the personal ambition of the leaders, there are wars which do respond to a historical necessity, at least in a broad, relative sense. However, what is desirable? #RandolphHarris 2 of 27

In a narrow sense of the word desirable, one could answer: The desirable is what is necessary. In this instance “desirable” is based on the objective situation. More frequently, however, desirable is defined as that which is desired. If we use the term in this sense, the problem of instrumental aggression assumes another aspect, and in fact the most important one in the motivation of aggression. The truth is that people desire not only what is necessary in order to survive, not only that which provides the material basis for a good life; most people in our culture—and in similar periods of history—are greedy: greedy for more food, drink, pleasures of the flesh, possessions, power, and fame. Their greed may refer more to one than to another of these objects; what all people have in common is that they are insatiable and hence never satisfied. Greed is one of the strongest noninstictive passions in humans, and it is clearly a symptom of psychical dysfunctioning, of inner emptiness and a lack of a center within oneself. It is a pathological manifestation of the failure to develop fully, as well as one of the fundamental sins in Buddhist, Jewish, and Christian ethics. #RandolphHarris 3 of 27

A few examples will illustrate the pathological character of greed: it is well-known that overeating, which is one form of greed, is frequently caused by states of depression; or that compulsive buying is one attempt to escape from a depressed mood. The act of eating or buying is a symbolic act of filling the inner void and, thus, overcoming the depressed feeling for the moment. Green is a passion—that is to say, it is charged with energy and relentlessly drives a person toward the attainment of one’s goals. In our culture greed is greatly reinforced by all those measures that tend to transform everybody into a consumer. Of course the greedy person does not need to be aggressive, provided one has enough money to buy what one desires. However, if one wants to satisfy one’s desires, the greedy person who does not have the necessary means must attack. The most drastic example of this is the drug addict who is possessed by one’s greed for the drug (although in one’s case increasingly reinforced by physiological sources). The many who do not have the money to buy drugs, rob, assault, or even kill in order to get the necessary means. Destructive as their behaviour is, their aggression is instrumental and not their goals. #RandolphHarris 4 of 27

On a historical scale greed is one of the most frequent causes of aggression and is probably as strong a motive for instrumental aggression as the desire for what is objectively necessary. The understanding of greed is obscured by its identification with self-interest. The latter is a normal expression of a biologically given drive, that for self-preservation, the aim of which is to obtain what is necessary for the preservation of life or of a customary, traditional standard of living. As Max Webber, R. H. Tawney, Heinrich von Brentano, Werner Sombart, and others have shown, humans in the Middle Ages were motivated by the desire to preserve one’s traditional standard of living, whether as a peasant or an artisan. The demands of the revolutionary peasants in the sixteenth century were not to have what the artisans in the cities had, nor did the artisans strive for the wealth of a feudal baron or a rich merchant. Even as late as the eighteenth century we find laws that forbid a merchant to try to take customers away from a competitor by making one’s own store look more attractive or by praising one’s wares to the disadvantaged of those of another merchant. #RandolphHarris 5 of 27

Only with the full development of capitalism—as earlier, in comparable societies like that of the Roman Empire—did greed become a key motive for an ever-increasing number of citizens. However, greed, perhaps because of a still-lingering religious tradition, is a motive to which hardly anyone dares to confess. The logic went: self-interest is a biologically given striving anchored in human nature; self-interest equals greed; ergo: greed is rooted in human nature—and not a character-conditioned human passion. In our phantasy World we are engaged with ideas which have the nature of dynamic structures, acting as “authority figures,” “goodies” and “baddies,” “persecutors,” “victims,” “rescuers,” and so on. Mostly we define these stagey figures in such a way that our way of dealing with them or relating with them is implied in the word itself. We love “goodies” and we try to be like them and feel bad when we are not. We strongly dislike “baddies” and persecute or feel persecuted by them. We identify and sympathize with “victims” (if we did not, it would be because they are “baddies”—their suffering serves them right!) and we welcome and cheer on the “rescuers” (if we did not, it is because we see them as “persecutors”). #RandolphHarris 6 of 27

We have learnt to relate to the World in an excited but frustrated way, or in an angry need-rejecting way, or, thirdly, in a spuriously calm matter-or-fact way. What is left after the libidinal and the anti-libidinal organizations of the self have been disowned? There still remains a self shorn of both enjoyable and painful components, but still capable of engaging in the survival functions, mainly perceiving, remembering, comparing, planning, and so on—the ego-functions. This is left-over is the Central Ego; it is almost entirely a monitor of events. It is an organized region of the self which registers that there has been arousal of need, and gratification or frustration of needs, wishes, impulses to approach or retreat, but it does not register the accompanying feelings. Though of necessity in touch, however, minimally, with whatever dynamic structures enable the organism to survive, there is not much contact with the arousing, gratifying, or frustrating sensations themselves (which have formed “libidinal” and “anti-libidinal” organizations). The Central Ego relates to the Ideal Object. The phantasy is that is an individual does not make a nuisance of itself, is not unjustifiably demanding, and avoids whatever makes its attachment figures reject one, if one does all this and maybe more…then the individual will be behaving in an ideal way and the attachment figures, who of course are ideal, will be able to respond in an ideal way. #RandolphHarris 7 of 27

This is called the Moral Defense (against the intolerable anxiety of living in the hostile World). Alas that is should sound so plausible a term. The World central might suggest that the Central Ego is somehow at the core of a person. However, the Central Ego is the monitor at the boundary between the self and other people and things. In this is closely resembles what Dr. Freud meant by “ego”—he also did not mean the self but only that monitoring process. It is also like Dr. Winnicott’s False Self, the Caretaker Self which protect more vulnerable feelings which are conceived of as deeper, further away, or further back. There are therefore circumstances when the Central Ego is divorced from much that is part of a person; there is only the sort of consciousness which is expressed in “I must get along somehow,” not feeling much or needing much or dreading much since all that is almost entirely split off. Being out of touch with most of the springs of action, the mode of speech is passive. This is how a withdrawn person does feel. The more personal pronouns are also removed: “That is life,” “It is what it is,” “That is how the cookie crumbles,” “No use complaining.” The Central Ego holds summarized abstracts of the environment: concepts not percepts. #RandolphHarris 8 of 27

In these circumstances, the environment, too, is shorn of anything that might make for strong feelings. An Ideal object, it is stripped of its exciting or rejecting aspects, bland. Sometimes this is called the Accepted Object, since everything is experienced as acceptable: “My family is just ordinary,” “We get on well,” “We do not have problems,” What is anything to do with anything?” A person who represents the extreme condition in this mood, might say, “I have no wishes; I do not care about anything or anyone.” Such people have a simple system of guidance—pleasure—seeking/pain-avoiding, or survival, or a cause, or a set of values—by the light of which they manage their lives, rather as managers of industrial organizations may impersonally manage the organization on lines laid down by others. They manage; they do not enjoy. They may think of this matter-of0fact region as their real and most central self. It is a region of thoughts and calculations—an entrepreneurial self-region, or a managerial one, individualistic. #RandolphHarris 9 of 27

The extent to which it is cut off and isolated from other self-regions varies of course—people differ. If it varied from social classes to social class in systematic ways which would be shown up by research, I would not be surprised. I certainly think that it varies between the genders, by and large, the men’s Central Ego being on average more pronounced and more isolated, and also more highly valued than women’s. Personality-structures here, as so often, reflect the institutional structures of our society. So, perhaps to an even greater degree, do the theories we construct, since they are constructed by those of us who have done well by our institutional arrangements. There are people whose Central Ego is the most conscious and valued aspect of their self-imagery. They seem to be conscious of themselves mainly as thinkers, believing themselves to be most uniquely themselves when thinking. It is interesting to note how often philosophers are like this. Dr. Descartes wrote, “I think therefore I am—Cogito ergo sum”; Dr. Pascal called himself a mere fragile reed but, he added quickly, “un roseau pensant”: a thinking reed. Perhaps professional thinkers, academics, and theory-writers are particularly prone to this kind of personality structure, which they thus believe to be characteristic of the whole human race. #RandolphHarris 10 of 27

Being thinkers, they are good at words, and get themselves into print. However, they may not be accurately describing how it is for all of us.  Welfare economics is often defined as a conception of political economy, that is, as standards by which to assess economic arrangements and politics, and their background institutions. (“Welfare” suggest that the implicit moral conception is utilitarian: the phrase “social choice” is far better although I believe its connotations are still too narrow.) A doctrine of political economy must include an interpretation of the public good which is based on a conception of justice. It is to guide the reflections of the citizen when one considers questions of economic and social policy. One is to take up the perspective of the constitutional convention or the legislative stage and ascertain how the principles of justice apply. A political opinion concerns what advances the good of the body politic as a whole and invokes some criterion for the just division of social advantages. Justice as fairness applies to the basic structure of society. It is a conception for ranking social forms viewed as closed systems. Some decision concerning these background arrangements is fundamental and cannot be avoided. #RandolphHarris 11 of 27

In fact, the cumulative effect of social and economic legislation is to specify the basic structure. Moreover, the social system shapes the wants and aspirations that its citizens come to have. It determines in part the sort of persons they want to be as well as the sort of persons that are. Thus an economic system is not only an institutional device for satisfying existing wants and needs but a way of creating and fashioning wants in the future. How humans work together now to satisfy their present desires affects the desires they will have later on, the kind of persons they will be. These matters are, of course, perfectly obvious and have always been recognize. They were stressed by economist as different as Alfred Marshall and Karl Marx. Since economic arrangements have these effects, and indeed must do so, the choice of these institutions involves some view of human good and of the design of institution to realize it. This choice must, therefore, be made on moral and political as well as on economic grounds. Considerations of efficiency are but one basis of decision and often relatively minor at that. Of course, this decision may not be openly faced; it may be made by default. #RandolphHarris 12 of 27

We often acquiesce without thinking in the moral and political conception implicit in that status quo, or leave things to be settled by how contending social and economic forces happen to work themselves out. However, if the conclusion is reached that it is best left to the course of events to decide, political economy must investigate this problem. One might think that this conception of justice relies upon the aims of existing individuals and regulates the social order by principles that persons guided by these aims would choose. We must not overlook the very special nature of that situation and the scope of the principles adopted there. Only the most general assumptions are made about the aims of the parties, namely, that they take an interest in primary social goods, in things that humans are presumed to want whatever else they want. A just system must generate its own support. This means that it must be arranged so as to bring about in its member the corresponding sense of justice, an effective desire to act in accordance with its rules for reasons of justice. Thus the requirement of stability and the criterion of discouraging desires that conflict with the principles of justice put further constraints on institutions. They must be not only framed so as to encourage the virtue of justice in those who take part in them. #RandolphHarris 13 of 27

In this sense, the principles of justice define a partial ideal of the person which social and economic arrangements must respect. Finally, as the argument for embedding ideals into our working principles has brought out, certain institutions are required by two principles. They define an ideal basic structure, or the outlines of one, toward which the course of reform should evolve. The upshot of these considerations is that justice as fairness is not at the mercy, so to speak, of existing wants and interests. It sets up an Archimedean point for assessing the social system without invoking a priori considerations The long range aim of society is settled in its main lines irrespective of the particular desires and needs of its present members. And an ideal conception of justice is defined since institutions are to foster the virtue of justice and to discourage desires and aspirations incompatible with it. Of course, the pace of change and the particular reforms called for at any given time depend upon the current conditions. However, the conception of justice, the general form of a just society and the ideal of the person consistent with it are not similarly dependent. There is no place for the question whether human’s desires to play the role of superior or inferior might not be so great that autocratic institutions should be accepted. #RandolphHarris 14 of 27

Also, there is no question whether human’s perception of the religious practice of others might not be so upsetting that liberty of conscience should not be allowed. We have no occasion to ask whether under reasonably favourable conditions the economic gains of technocratic but authoritarian institutions might be so great as to justify the sacrifice of basic freedoms. Of course, these remarks assume that the general assumptions of which the principles of justice were chosen were chosen are correct. However, if they are, this sort of question is already decided by these principles. Certain institutional forms are embedded within the concept of justice. This view shares with perfectionism the feature of setting up an ideal of the person that constrains the pursuit of existing desires. In this respect justice as fairness and perfectionism are both opposed to utilitarianism. The utilitarian can always say tat given social conditions and human’s interests as they are, and taking into account how they will develop under this or that alternative institutional arrangement, encouraging one pattern of wants rather than another is likely to lead to a greater net balance (or to a higher average) of satisfaction. On this basis the utilitarian selects between ideals of the person. #RandolphHarris 15 of 27

Some attitudes and desires, being less compatible with fruitful social cooperation, tend to reduce the total (or the average) happiness. Roughly speaking, the moral virtues are those dispositions and effective desires that can generally be relied upon to promote the greatest sum of well-being. Thus, it would be a mistake to claim that the principle of utility provides no grounds for choosing among ideals of the person, however difficult it may be to apply the principle in practice. Nevertheless, the choice does depend upon existing desires and present social circumstances and their natural continuations into the future. These initial conditions may heavily influence the conception of human good that should be encouraged, The contrast is that both justice as fairness and perfectionism establish independently an ideal conception of the person and of the basic structure so that not only are some desires and inclinations necessarily discouraged but the effect of the initial circumstances will eventually disappear. With utilitarianism we cannot be sure what will happen. Since there is no ideal embedded in its principle, the place we start from may always influence the path we are to follow. #RandolphHarris 16 of 27

In order to find an Archimedean point it is not necessary to appeal to a priori or perfectionist principles. By assuming certain general desires, such as the desire for primary social goods, and by taking as a basis the agreements that would be made in suitably defined initial situation, we can achieve the requisite independence from existing circumstances. The original position is so characterizes that unanimity is possible; the deliberations of any one person are typical of all. Moreover, the same will hold for the considered judgments of the citizens of a well-ordered society effectively regulated by the principles of justice. Everyone has a similar sense of justice and in this respect a well-ordered society is homogeneous. Political arguments appeal to this moral consensus. There is another resemblance to idealism: justice as fairness has a central place for the value of community. The essential idea is that we want to account for the social values, for the intrinsic good of institutional, community, and associative activities, by a conception of justice that in its theoretical basis is individualistic. For reasons of clarity among others, we do not want to rely on an undefined concept of community, or to suppose that society is an organic whole with a life of its own distinct from and superior to that of all its members in their relations with one another. #RandolphHarris 17 of 27

Thus the contractual conception of the original position is worked out first. It is reasonably simple and the problem of rational choice that it poses is relatively precise. From this conception, however individualistic it might seem, we must eventually explain the value of community. Otherwise the theory of justice cannot succeed. To accomplish this we shall need an account of the primary good of self-respect which relates it to the parts of theory already developed. Since we see so many forms in Nature which are gloriously beautiful, and yet at the same time so many which are repulsively ugly, we may rightly conclude that both beauty and ugliness, the opposites, are present in the World-Idea and hence in the World-Mind. The same may be said of loving-kindness and merciless cruelty. For these attributes are merely human conceptions. The Infinite Mind is infinitely larger and more impersonal in outlook that is the human mind. It will be fund by experience that preoccupation with such questions as “Why does God allow evil in the World?” will fall away under the influence of the Witness Self. The question is relative to and relevant only in the sphere of the personal self in interaction with other personal selves, and in that sphere it has no answer. #RandolphHarris 18 of 27

In the sphere of God the question does not exist. “Come unto Me, all ye who are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest” is still as true as when spoken by the Christ over two thousand and twenty years ago. It is the outward appearance of their environment and the inward reality of their egoism which make so many thinkers doubt whether God is perfectly great. God has not the kind of limited five-sense conscious to which most human beings are limited. One trouble is that it is ordinarily believed that a God who is not a Person is no God at all because He will not be a thinking, intelligent being. It is so customary to associate consciousness with individual consciousness that it seems almost impossible to grasp the concept of omnipresent, everywhere-diffused, all-inclusive Mind which is not a mind. What we deny is the limited kind of being which is the only kind of God most human faculties can imagine. The Real, as the ultimate source of all knowing and feeling beings, cannot itself be unknowing and unfeeling. We could not deny consciousness to God without denying consciousness to humans. However, being absolute and infinite God does not know and feel in the same limited way which confines the knowledge and feelings of finite humans. #RandolphHarris 19 of 27

It is more correct to speak of Mind as the All-Conscious than as the unconscious. What we may rightly say is that, viewed from the side which alone is know to us, a certain phase of it appears to be unconscious. The higher teachings state that all the phases of Mind are consciousness ones. There is a curious and mysterious statement that God can gain nothing more by making Himself known to Himself, since He is already all-knowledge. Friendship cannot exist except towards rational creatures, who are capable of returning love, and communicating one with another in the various works of life, and who may fare well or ill, according to the changes of fortune and happiness; even as to them is benevolence properly speaking exercised. However, irrational creatures cannot attain to loving God, nor to any share in the intellectual and beatific life that He lives. Strictly speaking, therefore, God does not love irrational creatures with the love of friendship; but as it were with the love of desire, in so far as He orders them to rational creatures, and even to Himself. Yet this is not because He stand in need of them; but only on account of His goodness, and of the services they render to us. For we can desire a thing for others as well as for ourselves. Nothing prevents one and the same thing being loved under one aspect, while it is hated under another. #RandolphHarris 20 of 27

God loves sinners in so far as they are existing natures; for they have existence and have it from Him. In so far as they are sinners, they have not existence at all, but fall short of it; and this in them is not from God. Hence under this aspect, they are hated by Him. There is in fact an inner affinity between the law and the soul. That is why rebellion against the law makes the soul sick and distances it from God. That is why love of the law restores the soul. Law is god for the sou, is an indispensable instrument of instruction and a standard of judgment of god and evil. Walking in the law with God restores the soul because the law expresses the other of God’s kingdom and of God’s own character. That is why it converts and restores the soul. Grace is also essential, but not grace as formless spurts of permissiveness that thrust the law aside. The correct order that the soul requires for its vitality and proper functioning is found in the “royal law” of love (James 2.8), abundantly spelled out law, which he fulfilled and enables us to fulfill through constant discipleship to Him. One whose aim is anything less than obedience to the law of God in the Spirit and power of Jesus will never have a soul at rest in God and will never advance significantly in spiritual transformation into Christlikeness. #RandolphHarris 21 of 27

Finally, then, transformation of our soul requires that we acknowledge its reality and importance, understand scriptural teachings about it, and take it into the yoke of Jesus, learning from one humility and the abandonment of “outcomes” to God. This brings rest to the soul. Then our soul is reempowered in goodness by receiving the law and the Word into it as the structure of our covenant fellowship with God in grace. The law is the structure of a life of grace in the kingdom of God. Other things maybe required for soul recovery in some people: perhaps special acts of deliverance or ministries of inner healing or psychological counseling. Always, the good news of Jesus is presupposed. However, the most powerful force for transformation of the soul born “from above” is to walk in righteousness upheld by grace. “The soul is deep.” What do you understand that to mean? How does it relate to intellectual and cultural tendencies of the twenty-first and twenty-second centuries? To biblical teachings. How does “failure of good intentions” relate to the disorders of the soul? Why does fanaticism have such an attraction for the broken soul? What are some way you can acknowledge your own soul? How is law and obedience to law an expression of grace? #RandolphHarris 22 of 27

Does the idea of an affinity between law and the soul make sense to you? Everything, be it person, news, government, celebrity, chatter or gossip, that you set up in the place of God is an idol. In every act of such worship you commit idolatry. If divinity cannot be represented by any idol, any graven image, nether can it be described by any word. All verbal descriptions are non-descriptions. What Jesus Christ called “the only true God” is the ultimate formless reality, not the thoughts about it or the pictures of it created in human imaginations. It is an object of insight, not of sense of thought. Try as much as you can, but in the end you will find God is not something imaginable. Nobody can tell us what God looks like, for God has no form at all. God must be found as He is in reality, not as He has been in human imagination. We feel the presence of a divine power, but we are baffled by its motives. Neither thinking nor any kind of human activity can grasp the full truth about the World-Mind. Not even at the height reached by the self-actualized or adept is this possible. If God were not a mystery, He would not be God. Humans who claim to know Him need semantic correction; this said, their experience may yet be exceptional, elevating, and immaterialist. However, let God remain God, incomprehensible and untouchable. #RandolphHarris 23 of 27

God is a mystery which no human can truly understand, no language can really express, and no idea can fully embody. The one infinite life-power which reveals itself in the cosmos and manifests itself through time and space, cannot be named. It is something that is. For a name would falsely separate it from other things when the truth is that it is those things, all things. Nor would we know what to call it, since we know nothing abouts its real nature. The consciousness and nature of the World-Mind is utterly beyond the capacity and power of any human being to understand, much less to explain. “A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: ‘If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, one, too, will drink from the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. One will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of holy angels and of the lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name.’ This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God’s commandments and remain faithful to Jesus. #RandolphHarris 24 of 27

“Then I heard a voice from Heaven say, ‘Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on. Yes,’ says the Spirit, ‘they will rest from their labour, for their deeds will follow them,’” reports Revelation 14.9-13. Father, I choose faith! I choose Your unlimited grace and favour. I choose to believe that You have good things in store for me. You use me for Your glory in Jesus’s name. Amen. You must continue to bear in mind that the temporal and spiritual are blended. They are not separate. One cannot be carried on without the other, so long as we are here in mortality. We do not feel that it is possible for people to be really good and faithful Chrisitian people unless they can also be good and faith, honest and industrious people. Self-reliance implies the individual development of skills and abilities and then their application to provide for one’s own needs and wants. If further implies that one will achieve those skills through self-discipline and then, through self-restraint and charity, use those skills to bless oneself and others. The Lord expects all his children of sound mind and body to thus perform in this second estate is made clear in many scriptural passages whose central thought focuses on work—personal, earnest, life-sustaining work. #RandolphHarris 25 of 27

The Lord sets free the captives. The Lord opens the eyes of the blind; the Lord raises up them that are humble; the Lord loves the righteous. The Lord protects the strangers, God upholds the fatherless and the widow; but the way of the wicked God does confuse. The Lord shall reign forever, eternally and always. Thy God, O America, shall be Sovereign unto all generations. Hallelujah. Just as each individual is accountable for one’s choices and actions in spiritual matters, one is also accountable in temporal matters. Father, my finances belong to you. I thank You in advance for my financial prosperity. Lord, I know that everything that comes from You is good, so I know that by placing my finances in Your hands, You will come through for me and I will become financially stable and secure. I know that in this new year, You will bless me with my dream house and guide me to stable grounds. Dear Lord, keep me in mind of my blessings no matter how much or little I may have. Please give me the patience to save and the will power to make wise choices. Please help me see the value in building a savings for retirement and a college fund for my children. Please, God, grant me the patience and tolerance necessary to calm my spirit and bring peace and love into my home and silence. I know that you are in control of everything. #RandolphHarris 27 of 27

Cresleigh Homes

Let’s spruce up our backyards before spring in a big way: planters! Often overlooked, but one of the staples in your garden, planters help aesthetics come together and add dimension to your space. Link in bio to read today’s blog! https://cresleigh.com/blog/

Featuring the unique opportunity to personalize, Cresleigh Homes has many desirable communities that really allow you to express your personality and create a home you will treasure forever. https://cresleigh.com/mills-station/residence-4/virtual-tour/

#CresleighHomes