The secret of business is to know something that nobody else knows. From the standpoint of the theory of justice, the most important natural duty is that to support and to further just institutions. This duty has two parts: first, we are to comply with and to do our share in just institutions when they exist and apply to us; and second, we are to assist in the establishment of just arrangements when they do not exist, at least when this can be done with little cost to ourselves. It follows that if the basic structure of society is just, or as just as it is reasonable to expect in circumstances, everyone has a natural duty to do what is required of one. Each is bound irrespective of one’s voluntary acts, performative or otherwise. Now our question is why this principle rather than someone other would be adopted. As in the case of institutions, there is no way, let us assume, for the parties to examine all the possible principles that might be proposed. The many possibilities are not clearly defined and among them there may be no best choice. To avoid these difficulties I suppose, as before, that the choice is to be made from a short list of traditional and familiar principles. To avoid conflict, it is necessary at least when the individual holds an institutional position, to choose a principle that matches in some suitable way the two principles of justice. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
The two principles of justice state that each person has the same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of liberties for all; and social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions. They are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society. The simplest thing to do, then, is to use the two principles of justice as a part of the conception of right for individuals. We can define the natural duty of justice as that to support and to further the arrangements that satisfy these principles; in this way we arrive at a principle that coheres with the criteria for institutions. The original position is designed to be a fair and impartial point of view that is to be adopted in our reasoning about the fundamental principles of justice. The main distinguishing feature of the original position is the veil of ignorance: to insure impartiality of judgment, the parties are deprived of all knowledge of their personal characteristics and social and historical circumstances. They do know of certain fundamental interest they all have, plus general facts about psychology, economics, biology, and other social and natural sciences. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23
There is still the question whether the parties in the original position would do better if they made the requirement to comply with just institutions conditional upon certain voluntary acts on their part, for example, upon their having accepted the benefits of these arrangements, or upon their having promised or otherwise undertake to abide by them. Offhand a principle with this kind of condition seems more in accordance with the contract idea with its emphasis upon free consent and the protection of liberty. However, in fact, nothing would be gained by this proviso. In view of the lexical ordering of the two principles, the full complement of the equal liberties is already guaranteed. No further assurances on this score are necessary. Moreover, there is every reason for the parities to secure the stability of just institutions, and the easiest and most direct way to do this is to accept the requirement to support and to comply with them irrespective of one’s voluntary acts. In a well-ordered society the public knowledge that citizens generally have an effective sense of justice is a very great social asset. It tends to stabilize just social arrangements. Even when the isolation problem is overcome and fair large-scale schemes already exist for producing public goods, there are two sorts of tendencies leading to instability. From a self-interested point of view each person is tempted to shirk doing one’s share. One benefits from the public good in any case; and even though the marginal social value of one’s tax dollar is much greater than that of the marginal dollar spent on oneself, only a small fraction thereof redounds to one’s advantage. These tendencies arising from self-interest lead to instability of the first kind. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23
However, since even with a sense of justice human’s compliance with a cooperative venture is predicted on the belief that others will do their part, citizens may be tempted to avoid making a contribution when they believe, or with reason suspect, that other are not making theirs. These tendencies arising from apprehensions about the faithfulness of others lead to instability of the second kind. This instability is particularly likely to be strong when it is dangerous to stick to the rules when others are not. It is this difficulty that plagues disarmament agreements; given circumstances of mutual fear, even just humans may be condemned to a condition of permanent hostility. The assurance problem, as we have seen, is to maintain stability by removing temptations of the first kind, and since this is done by public institutions, those of the second kind also disappear, at least in a well-ordered society. Parities in the original position do best when they acknowledge the natural duty of justice. Natural duties are moral requirements. As the institutions and social positions to which institutions and social positions to which institutional and social duties attach may be morally defensible or indefensible, they do not necessarily possess any more force. Given the value of a public and effective sense of justice, it is important that the principle defining the duties of individuals be simple and clear, and that it insure the stability of just arrangements. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23
The natural duty of justice would be agreed to rather than a principle of utility, and from the standpoint of the theory of justice, it is the fundamental requirement for individual. Obligation is often so strong that the person to whom a person is obliged is able to make specific requests that the person who is obliged must fulfill. In many ways, obligation is a deeper principle than friendship, reciprocity or exchange, as it is the force that underpins each of these other drives. Therefore, the principles of obligation, while compatible with the natural duty of justice, is not an alternative but rather has a complementary role. People have a duty of mutual respect. This is the duty to show a person the respect which is due to one as a moral being, that is, as a being with a sense of justice and a conception of the good. Mutual resect is shown in several ways: in our willingness to see the situation of others from their point of view, from the perspective of their conception of their good; and in our being prepared to give reason for our actions whenever the interests of others are materially affected. These two ways correspond to the two aspects of moral personality. When called for, reasons are to be addressed to those concerned; they are to be offered in good faith, in the belief that they are sound reasons as defined by a mutually acceptable conception of justice which takes the good of everyone into account. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23
Thus to respect another as a moral person is to try to understand one’s aims and interests from one’s standpoint and to present one with considerations that enable one to accept the constraints on one’s conduct. Since another wishes, let us support, to regulate one’s actions on the basis of principles to which all could agree, one should be acquainted with the relevant facts which explain the restrictions in this way. Also respect is shown in a willingness to do small favours and courtesies, not because they are of any material value, but because they are an appropriate expression of our awareness of another person’s feelings and aspirations. Now the reason why this duty would be acknowledged is that although the parties in the original position take no interest in each other’s interest, they know that in society they need to be assured by the esteem of their associated. Their self-respect and their confidence in the value of their own system of ends cannot withstand the indifference much less the contempt of others. Everyone benefits then from living in a society where the duty of mutual respect is honoured. The cost to self-interest is minor in comparisons with the support for the sense of one’s own worth. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23
Similar reasoning supports the other natural duties. Consider, for example, the duty of mutual assistance. The ground for proposing this duty is that situations may arise in which we will need the help of others, and not to acknowledge this principle is to deprive ourselves of their assistance. The duty of beneficence (mutual assistance) is to be public, that is, a universal law. While on particular occasions we are required to do things not in our own interests, we are likely to gain on balance at least over the longer run under normal circumstances. In each single instance the gain to the person who needs help far outweighs the loss of those required to assist one, and assuming that the chances of being the beneficiary are not much smaller than those of being the one who must give assistance, the principle is clearly in our interest. However, this is not the only argument for the duty of mutual assistance, or even the most important one. A sufficient ground for adopting this duty is its pervasive effect on the quality of everyday life. The public knowledge that we are living in a society in which we can depend upon others to come to our assistance in difficult circumstances is itself of great value. It makes little difference that we never, as things turn out, need this assistance and that occasionally we are called on to give it. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
The balance of gain, narrowly interpreted, may not matter. The primary value of the principle is not measured by the help we actually receive but rather by the sense of confidence and trust in other human’s good intentions and the knowledge that they are there if we need them. Indeed, it is only necessary to imagine what a society would be like if it were publicly know that this duty was rejected. And maybe with the way things are going in 2021, a society that rejects mutual assistance is not so hard to imagine. Once we try to picture the life of a society in which no one has the slightest desire to act on these duties, we see that it will express an indifference if not disdain for human beings that will make a sense of our own worth impossible. Once again we should note the great importance of publicity effects. To obey (God) is the proper office of a rational soul. God is good; He made all these things good and for the sake of their goodness; one of the good things He made, namely, the free will of rational creatures, by its very nature includes the possibility o f evil; and creatures, availing themselves of this possibility, have become evil. Now this function—which is the only one I allow to the doctrine of the Fall—must be distinguished from two other functions which it is sometimes, perhaps, represented as performing, but which I reject. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
Since I believe God to be good, I am sure that it was better for Him to create than not to create. I do not think the doctrine of the Fall can be used to show that it is “just,” in terms of retributive justice, to punish individuals for the faults of their remote ancestors. Some forms of doctrine seem to involve this; but I question whether any of them, as understood by its exponents, really meant it. The Fathers may sometimes say that we are punished for Adam’s sin: but they much more often say that we sinned “in Adam.” It may be impossible to find out what they meant by this, or we may decide that what they means was erroneous. However, I do not think we can dismiss their way of talking as a mere idiom. Wisely, or foolishly, they believed that we were really—and not simply by legal fiction—involved in Adam’s action. The attempt to formulate this belief by saying that we were “in” Adam is a physical sense—Adam being the first vehicle of the “immortal germ plasm”—may be unacceptable: but it is, of course, a further question whether the belief itself is merely a confusion or a real insight into spiritual realities beyond our normal grasp. It would, no doubt, have been possible for God to remove by miracle the results of the first sin ever committed by a human being; but this would not have been much good unless He was prepared to remove the results of the second sin, and of the third, and so on forever. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
If the miracles ceased, then sooner or later we might have reached our present lamentable situation: if they did not, then a World thus continually underpropped and corrected by Divine interference, would have been a World in which nothing important ever depended on human choice, and in which choice itself would soon cease from the certainty that one of the apparent alternatives before you would lead to no results and was therefore not really an alternative. As you may know, the chess player’s freedom to play chess depends on the rigidity of the squares and the moves. The conception of right is finite: it consists of finite numbers of principles and priority rules. Although there is a sense in which the number of moral principles (virtues of institutions and individuals) is infinite, or indefinitely large, the full conception is approximately complete: that is, the moral considerations that it fails to cover are for the most part of minor importance. Normally they can be neglected without serious risk of error. The significance of the moral reasons that are not accounted for becomes negligible as the conception of right is more fully worked out. We manage to make judgements, useful rules exist. The full system directs us to act in the light of all the available relevant reasons (as defined by the principles of the system) as far as we can or should ascertain them. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
A principle taken alone does not express a universal statement which always suffices to establish how we should act when the conditions of the antecedent are fulfilled. Rather, first principles single out relevant features of moral situations such that the exemplification of these features lends support to, provides a reason for making, a certain ethical judgment. The correct judgment depends upon all the relevant features as these are identified and tallied up by the complete conception of right. We claim to have surveyed each of these aspects of the case when we say that something in our duty all things considered; or else we imply that something is our duty all things considered; or else we imply that we know (or have reason for believing) how this broader inquiry would turn out. By contrast, in speaking of some requirement as a duty other things equal (a so-called prima facie duty), we are indicating that we have so far only taken certain principles into account, that we are making a judgment based on only a subpart of the larger scheme of reasons. I shall not usually signal the distinction between something’s being a person’s duty (or obligation) other things equal, and its being one’s duty all things considered. That important thing that is that such riders as “other things equal” and “all things considered” (and of course “prima facie”) are not operators on single sentences, much less on predicates of action. Rather they express a relation between sentences, a relation between a judgment and its grounds; they express a relation between a judgment and a part or the whole of the system of principles that defines its grounds. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23
A traditional doctrine is to divide the principles that may apply to individuals into two groups, those of perfect and imperfect obligation, and then to rank those of the first kind as lexically prior to those of the second kind. Yet not only is it in general false that imperfect obligations (for example, that of beneficence) should always give ways to perfect ones (for example, that of fidelity), but we have no answer if perfect obligations conflict. The story of Genesis is a story (full of the deepest suggestion) about a magic apple of knowledge; but in the developed doctrine the inherent magic of the apple has quite dropped out of sight, and the story is simply one of disobedience. In the developed doctrine, then, it is claimed that Man, as God made him, was completely good and completely happy, but that he disobeyed God and became what we now see. Many people think that this proposition has been proved false by modern science. “We now know,” it is said, “that so far from having fallen out of a primeval state of virtue and happiness, humans have slowly risen from brutality and savagery.” There seems to me to be a complete confusion here. Brute and savage both belong to that unfortunate class of words which are sometime used rhetorically, as terms of reproach, and sometimes scientifically, as terms of description; and the pseudo-scientific arguments against the Fall depends on a confusion between the usages. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23
If by saying that man rose from brutality you mean simply that man is physically descended from animals, many would not agree with that. We forget that our prehistoric ancestors made all the useful discoveries. To them we own language, the family, clothing, the use of fire, the domestication of animals, the wheel, the ship, poetry and agriculture. Science has nothing to say for or against the doctrine of the Fall. To some, the idea of sin presupposes a law to sin against: and since it would take centuries for the “herd-instinct” to crystallise into custom and for custom to harden into law, the first man—if there ever was a being who could be so described—could not commit the first sin. This argument assumes that virtue and the herd-instinct commonly coincide, and the “first sin” was essentially a social sin. However, the traditional doctrine points to a sin against God, an act of disobedience, not a sin against the neighbour. And certainly, if we are to hold the doctrine of the Fall in any real sense, we must look for the great sin on a deeper and more timeless level than of social morality. This sin has been described by Saint Augustine as the result of Pride, of the movement whereby a creature (that is, an essentially dependent being whose principle of existence lies not it itself but in another) tries to set up on its own, to exist for itself. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23
Such a sin requires no complex social conditions, no extended experience, no great intellectual development. From the moment a creature becomes aware of God as God and of itself as self, the terrible alternative of choosing God or self for the center is opened to it. This sin is committed daily by young children and less affluent beings who are unenlightened as by affluent sophisticated persons, by solitaries no less than by those who live in society: it is the fall in every individual life, and in each day of each individual life, the basic sin behind all particular sins: at this very moment you and I are either committing it, or about to commit it, or repenting it. We try, when we wake, to lay the new day at God’s feet; before we have finished shaving, it becomes our day and God’s share in its is felt as a tribute which we must pay out of “our own” pocket, a deduction from the time which ought, we feel, to be “our own.” However, life is not logical or sensible or orderly. Life is a mess most of the time. And theology must be lived in the midst of that mess. Authors can write books about God and man, but for all their illustrations and interpretations, it is no more than opinion from the bleachers unless it is lived. And life is not lived in the bleacher, but on the muddy fields by human beings who get bloody and bruised and who contend for the score to their last grasp. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
Faith is believing and acting—acting in obedience to the commands of Christ—even though you cannot see what is going to happen. Love the Lord with all your heart, mind, and soul, and your neighbour as yourself. You promised God something—to commit your life to Him and love and obey Him. So you do that no matter how you feel. And the longer and more you do that—obey Him—then you will begin to feel your love for Him and His love in return. If you really want to, you can make time for God. You will never know what God wants unless you seriously study His Word. However, when you begin to do what He tells you there, you will feel His love. Many depend on their wealth for security; the righteous are free to be generous, because their security is in God. As long as I hang onto my bank account as an insurance policy, I can never trust God wholly and will never full experience God’s blessings. That does not mean throw away all my money, it means I need to store my faith in God and be loving and support that who genuinely need it. The presence of God, which is always with us, is an essential redeeming factor. God’s intent is to be present among His people and to heal them, teach them, and provide for them. “I will place my dwelling in your midst, and I shall not abhour you. And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and you shall be my people,” reports Leviticus 26.11-12. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23
No counsel could be safer and better than that which proceeds from God to a human. The Word of God carries its own assurance with it. Those skilled, proficient, and accustomed to it, who are able to recognize the authentic signs, can safely accept and trust themselves to it. However, the beginner and the inexperienced need to check and test it, lest they are led astray by some imposter posing or by some impulse sincerely presuming itself to be the Word of God. To accept the ever-rightness of the Word of God is done by reading the scriptures and getting to know God’s love. The nearness of God is our good. Deuteronomy 7.21 says, with regard to surrounding enemies, “You shall not dread them, for the LORD your God is in your midst, a great and awesome God.” We should expect from a local congregation of disciples of Jesus principles and absolutes—and the highest ideal of historic Christianity, we should expect to be a place where divine life and power is manifestly present to glorify God and meet the needs of repentant human beings. This implies an atmosphere of honesty, openness, indiscriminate acceptance of all, supernatural caring, with utter admiration for and confidence in Jesus. Performance is where we try to make an impression rather than just be what we are. The truth is the only point of view that matter is God’s. No human is likely to know what is going on in your mind, heart, body, and soul and they cannot judge by reading overt responses. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
Christ is authority over all things. He is with us every moment, and is our only hope. “Determine to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified,” reports 1 Corinthians 2.2. We expect to find Christ in others and that is all we are looking for. We do not worship “worship” or fine service or impeccable teaching or fine looking people. Why consider the wee being, when your eyes could be on the King or Queen, whom, supposedly, you went to see anyway? Why look at some aspect of performance—some “vessel” matter, no doubt—when you could come to see Jesus in the midst? Once the spirit of will has been quickened with new life from above, then the priority of the mind (thought and feeling) in inner transformation must be respected. This is true whether we are thinking of what we can do for ourselves to grow in grace and in knowledge of Christ, or of how we can help others among whom we serve. The ideas and images and the information and ways of thinking that occupy our mind must be changed to Godly ones, as is also true of the feeling tones that make up our emotional life. Our beliefs and feelings cannot be changed by choice. We cannot just choose to have different beliefs and feelings. However, we do have some liberty to take in different ideas and information and to think about things in different ways. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23
We can choose to take in the Word of God, and when we do that, beliefs and feelings will be steadily pulled in a Godly direction. Once of the worst mistakes is to believe that people can choose to believe and feel differently. Following that, we will try to generate faith by going through the will—possibly trying to move the will by playing on emotion. Rather, the will must be moved by insight into truth and reality. Such insight will evoke emotion appropriate to a new set of the will. That is the order of inward change. Belief is when your whole being is set to act as if something is so. And that is how the commands of Jesus finally come to us as we grow. We see them to be reality. We do not make the change; we discover it after it happens. So we do not, in general, control our beliefs or those of others. We never choose to believe, and we must not try to get ourselves or others to choose to believe. That is God’s work. We can try to understand and try to help others to understand. And beyond that—God must work. Once we understand this and stop tying to get people to choose to believe or to do things they really do not believe, He will certainly work as we do our part. People will progressively learn to do the things Jesus commanded us. We will begin to see the real changes in belief and emotion, and the actions will follow. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23
We seek to know truth and we teach others: There is a God. This is his World, and we wit it. This God is totally goo and totally competent. God is alive and always with us. He comes to us in Jesus Christ, whom we can totally trust. He gives us a book and history, through which His Spirit will lead us to all we need to know about Him and about us. Respecting the priority of the mind in spiritual formation means that we seek to understand these things and to help others understand them. We work in depth. We can choose to turn our minds towards these truths. Belief will come as God’s gift within the hidden depth of our life and will grow under the nurturing of the Word and the Spirit. That is what is going on in a local congregation that is following God’s plan for spiritual formation. We must be Spirit led, Bible informed, intelligent, experimental, and persistent. The Christian past holds a huge store of information on spiritual formation. It is a treasure—a God deposit—in Christ’s people. We must take the trouble to know it and to own it in ways suitable to today. We should never forget that this sort of intensive training away from “ordinary life” is exactly what Jesus did in the spiritual formation of the selected few who were to be his shock troops his “green berets” in World revolution. He gave them almost three years of special training away from their ordinary life. Only after that were they led through His death and resurrection to the Upper Room and the endowment with power from on high. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
We well might ask ourselves, What have we actually gone through in the process of spiritual formation? We must flatly say that one of the greatest contemporary barriers to meaningful spiritual formation in Christlikeness is overconfidence in the spiritual efficacy of “regular church services,” of whatever kind they may be. Though they are vital, they are not enough. It is that simple. Individuals and local congregations of disciples must discover and effectively implement whatever is required to bring about the inner transformation of those who have really become apprentices of Jesus and who real do gather in immersion in the Trinitarian presence. In doing so they will have put in place the principles and absolutes of the New Testament churches, and they will certainly see the corresponding fruits and effects. Jesus did not give us a plan for spiritual formation that we fail, and He has the resources to it that it does not. Be genuinely kind to hostile people and return blessing from cursing. Often we have plenty of opportunity to practice and refine these in our own families. Develop understanding of such situations, role-play them, take testimonies of success and failures, and give further teaching and practical suggestions. Keep going. Disciples might be invited to keep a journal of which things they have learned to do. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23
We can really manifest God’s plan for the spiritual transformation of human existence on Earth. Christianity has brought forth children of light to be, with Jesus Christ, the light of the World only in those times and places where it has steadily drawn people into His “kingdom not of this World” and taught them to live increasingly in the character and power of God. No special talents, personal skills, education programs, silver or gold, money, or possessions are required to bring this to pass. We do not have to purify and enforce some legalistic system. Just ordinary people who are His apprentices gathered in the name of Jesus and immersed in his presence, and taking steps of inwards transformations as they put on the character of Christ: that is all that is required. Let that be our only aim, and the triumph of God in our individual lives and our times is insured. The renovation of the heart, putting on the character of Christ, is the unfailing key. It will provide for human life all the blessings that money, talent, education, and good fortune in this World cannot begin to supply, and will strongly anticipate, with this present life, a glorious entry in the full presence of God. The renovation of the Heart in Christlikeness—that is, in humanity as God always intended it—is not something that concerns the heart (spirit, will) alone. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23
If other aspects are in the grip of evil, the heart cannot be renovated. Willpower—even inspired willpower—is not the key to personal transformation. Rather, the will and character only progress in effectual well-being and well-doing as all other essential aspects of the person come into line with the intent of a will brought to newness of life from above by the Word and the Spirit. The path of renovation of the heart is therefore one in which the revitalized will takes grace-provided measures to change the content of the thought life, the dominant feeling tones, what the body is ready to do, the prevailing social atmosphere, and the deep currents of the soul. These all are to be progressively transformed toward the character of Christ. And as it transpires, the individual or group more and more effectively acts for the good things they intend; and the will itself evermore broadens and deepens its devotion to good and the God of the good. Of course this is, in reality, the great race of moral life, run before the great cloud of witness. We are come as spiritually alive beings to the city of the living God, the Heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of Angels in festal assembly, and to the church of the first-born who are enrolled in Heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of righteous humans made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23
To run this race well is to become the kind of person who God will welcome to participate with Him in His future governance of all creation. “You were faithful over few things, I will put you in charge of many things, enter into the joy of your Lord,” reports Matthew 25.21. The joy of our Lord is the use of power for good. He loves to create and sustain everything that is good. That is to be our joy as well. To run the race well, to be faithful over few things, is our part. And as we look at the road ahead, we must deal with detail. We must take the particular things that slow us down and the sins that entangle us, and put them aside in a sensible, methodical ways. We remove their roots from our minds, feelings, and so forth. We are neither hysterical nor hopeless about them. We find out what needs to be done and how to do it, and then we act. We know God will help us with every problem as we take appropriate steps. King, God, ruler of all that is, please inspire those who govern us to do the right things, the necessary things, and not just the convenient things. Please grant them the vision to bring peace and justice, drawing wisdom from the ways of the past without being bound by them, looking toward the future with clear eyes and sound mind. And the celestial beings of the Heavenly chariot, with great stirring, rise toward the seraphim and all together they respond with praise: Blessed be the glory of the Lord from His Heavenly abode. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23
Once we get our hands on the Spring, there will be little beautiful sunny days and barbeques in this #Meadows Residence 4 backyard! Just you wait and see!.
Residence Four at Cresleigh Meadows is one of the largest homes available in the market! At just under 3,500 square feet we are sure you’ll have enough room for the entire family here! The open concept design includes four bedrooms, three and one half bathrooms and a three car garage.
When entering this expansive home, take note of the two story ceiling height at the entry. There is a bedroom on the first floor, located off the entry, with its own bathroom making it ideal for a guest suite or multigenerational living. The formal dining room provides ample space for entertaining and has convenient access to the kitchen via Butler’s Pantry.
The kitchen comes fully equipped with a large eat-in island, stainless steel appliances, and quartz counters and opens onto the spacious great room. Upstairs you’ll find the Owner’s retreat, two bedrooms, and the loft perfect for a game room or TV lounge. The Owner’s retreat is spacious and inviting with a large bedroom and spa like bathroom featuring a large soaking tub, walk-in shower, dual vanities, and two walk-in closets. https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-meadows-at-plumas-ranch/residence-4/
Now that we’re heading into spring, it’s time to start thinking about the do’s and don’ts of landscaping. Check out today’s blog to learn the top mistakes you should avoid when planning your garden! Link in bio. https://cresleigh.com/blog/
Randolph Harris II International 