The most powerful thing we pass along to our children, may not reside in the jeans, but in the soul. Nothing is more confusing to an international business person than the spectacle of an American presidential campaign: the hot-dog gulping, backslapping, and baby kissing, the coy refusal to cast hat in ring, the primaries, the conventions, followed by the manic frenzy of fund raising, whistle-stopping, speechmaking, television commercials—all in the name of democracy. By contrast, Americans find it hard to make sense of the way the French choose their leaders. Still less do they understand the tame British elections, the Dutch free-for-all with two dozen parties, the Australian preferential voting system, or the Japanese wheeling and dealing among factions. All these political systems seem frightfully different from one another. Even more incomprehensible are the one-party elections or pseudo-elections that take place in Russia and Eastern Europe. When it comes to politics, no two industrial nations look the same. Yet once we tear away our provincial blinders, we suddenly discover that a set of powerful parallels lies beneath the surface differences. In fact, it is almost as if the political systems of all Second Wave nations were built from the same hidden blueprint. When Second Wave revolutionaries managed to topple First Wave elites in Franc, in the United States, in Russian, Japan and other nations, they were faces with the need to write constitutions, set up new governments, and deign almost from scratch new political institutions. In the excitement of creation, they debated new ideas, new structures. Everywhere they fought over the nature of representation. Who should represent whom? Should representatives be instructed how to vote by the people—or use their own judgement? Should terms of office be long or short? What role should parties play? #RandolphHarris 1 of 24

In each country a new political architecture emerged from these conflicts and debates. A close look at these structures reveals that they are built on a combination of Old First Wave assumptions and newer ideas swept in by the industrial age. After millennia of agriculture, it was hard for the founders of Second Wave political systems to imagine an economy based on labour, capital, energy, and raw materials, rather tan land. Land had always been at the very center of life itself. No surprisingly, therefore, geography was deeply embedded in our various voting systems. Senator and congress members in America—and their counterparts in Britain and many other industrial nations—are still elected not as representatives of some social class or occupational, ethnic, desirability, or lifestyle grouping, but as representatives of the inhabitants of a particular piece of land: a geographical district. First Wave people were typically immobile, and it was therefore natural for the architects of industrial-era political systems to assume that people would remain in one locality all their lives. Hence the prevalence, even today of residency requirement in voting regulations. The pace of First Wave life was slow. Communications were so primitive that it might take a week for a message from the Continental Congress in Philadelphia to reach New York. A speech by George Washington took weeks or months to filter through to the hinterland. As late as 1865 it still took twelve days for London to Learn that President Lincoln had been assassinated. #RandolphHarris 2 of 24

On the unspoken assumption that things moved slowly, representative bodies like Congress or the British Parliament were regarded as “deliberative”—having the time and taking the time to think through their problems. Most First Wave people were illiterate and unenlightened. Thus, if drawn from the educated classes, it was widely assumed that the representatives would inevitably make more intelligent decisions than the mass of voters. However, even as they built these First Wave assumptions into our political institutions, the revolutionaries of the Second Wave also cast their eyes on the future. Thus the architecture they constructed reflected some of the latest technological notions of their time. Other fluctuations in American society were reflected in suburban living. By the 1930 housing styles were changing and bungalows were out of fashion as the preferred modest home choice. The term “bungalow” had become a pejorative usage among some housing writers in the same way the term “Levittown” did in the 1960s and 1970s. When he dismissed the plebeian Warren Harding as possessing only “a bungalow mind,” President Woodrow Wilson, who was a cultural patrician, was one of the first to use the term in this way. During the 1930s bungalow styles were replaced by modest “Williamsburg Colonials,” which owed their popularity to the publicity John Davison Rockefeller Sr.’s restoration of Colonial Williamsburg, Virginia. Following World War II, the charming colonials were largely replaced as the most popular unassuming homes design by Cape Codes. These, in turn, gave way to low-profile ranch homes and, in the 1960s, their successor, the split-levels. #RandolphHarris 3 of 24

Postwar one-story ranch houses were built more for economy and utility than style. Since economy of construction was a major factor and space was at a premium, rooms often had multiple functions, such as a living room with a dining room or a combined kitchen and dining area. If the house had a study, it almost certainly doubled as a guest bedroom. Ranch-style homes, with their open floor plans and “family friendly rooms,” were even more informal than the bungalows. The simple one-story design with low-pitched eaves and the picture window suggested a casual and comfortable lifestyle. To make the house seem larger, a sliding glass door commonly opened onto a patio so that the outside seemed an extension of the house. Millions of such ranch-styles homes and their variations were built in the postwar years, as even a cursory viewing of suburban housing demonstrates. Currently, ranch styles are less popular on the east coast, where colonial styles are back in favour. However, modified ranch California styles remain popular on the west coast. Regardless of the preferred housing style, across the country a relaxed family-oriented lifestyle with an emphasis on outdoor activities has become the norm. Today in contemporary homes the emphasis on multiple-use space has resulted in the family room and living room often being replaced by a “great room,” while the dining room has gone the way of the parlour. In recent years master bedrooms and bathrooms have grown far larger, while sun rooms, Florida rooms, California rooms, and decks have become more common. However, in terms of sheer size, in many homes, the largest room is invariably the garage. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24

Thus, by the onset of World War II, the patterns for mass suburbanization had been set. Suburbs had already lost their exclusivity as being communities containing homes of only the well-to-do. Suburbs also housed those who were comfortably middle-class. However, in the prewar era, when most Americans were still renters rather than homeowners, and when a typical mortgage was for only half the value of the house and could only be obtained for a period of five years, living in the suburbs was still beyond the hope of the “average” American. No until the coming of the liberal mortgage terms of postwar Veterans’ Administration loads would mass suburbanization of average Americans become a practical reality. Among the passions that agitate the heart of humans, there is an ardent, impetuous one that renders intimate relationships necessary to the other; a terrible passion which braves all dangers, overcomes all obstacles, and which, in its fury, seems fitted to destroy the human race it is destined to preserve. What would become of humans, victimized by this unrestrained and brutal rage, without modesty and self-control, fighting everyday over the object of their passion at the price of their blood? There must first be agreement that the more violent the passions are, the more necessary the laws are to contain them. However, over an above the fact that the disorders and the crimes these passions cause daily in our midst show quite well the insufficiency of the laws in this regard, it would still be good to examine whether these disorders did not come into being with the laws themselves; for then, even if they were capable of repressing them, the least one should expect of them would be that they call a halt to an evil that would not exist without them. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24

Let us begin by distinguishing between the moral and the physical aspects of the sentiment of love. The physical aspect is that general desire which clines one gender to unite with another. The moral aspect is what determines this desire and fixes it exclusively on one single object, or which at least gives it a greater degree of energy for this preferred object. Now it is easy to se that the moral aspect of love is an artificial sentiment born of social custom, and extolled by women with so much skill and care in order to establish their hegemony and make dominant the general that ought to obey. Since this feeling is founded on certain notions of merit or beauty that a savage is not in a position to have, and on comparisons one is incapable of making, it must be almost non-existent for one. For since one’s mind could not form abstract ideas of regularity and proportion, one’s heart is not susceptible to sentiments of admiration and love, which, even without its being observed come into being from the application of these ideas. One pays exclusive attention to the temperament one has received from nature, and not the taste [aversion] one has been unable to acquire; any women suits one’s purpose. Limited merely to the physical aspect of love, and fortunate enough to be unaware of those preferences which stir up the feeling and increase the difficulties in satisfying it, humans must feel the ardours of the temperament less frequently and less vividly, and consequently have fewer and less cruel conflicts among themselves. Imagination, which wreaks so much havoc among us, does not speak to savage hearts; each human peacefully awaits the impetus of nature, gives oneself over to it without choice, and with more pleasures than frenzy; and once the need is satisfied, all desire is snuffed out. #RandolphHarris 6 of 24

Hence it is incontestable that love itself, like all other passions, had acquired only in society that impetuous ardour which so often makes it lethal to humans. And it is all the more ridiculous to represent savages as continually slaughtering each other in order to satisfy their brutality, since this opinion is directly contrary to experience; and since the Caribs, of all existing peoples, are the people that until now has wandered least from the state of nature, they are the people least subject to jealousy, even though they live in a hot climate which always seems to occasion greater activity in these passions. As to any inferences that could be drawn, in the case of several species of animals, from he clashes between males that bloody our poultry yards throughout the year, ad which makes our forests resound in the spring with their cries as they quarrel over a female, it is necessary to begin by excluding all species in which nature has manifestly establish, in the relative power of the genders, relations other than those that exist among us. Hence cockfights do not form the basis for an inference regarding he human species. In species where the proportion is more closely observed, these fights can have for their cause only the scarcity of females in relation to the number of males, or the exclusive intervals during which the female continually rejects the advances of the male, which adds up to the cause just cited. For if each female receives the male for only two months a year, in this respect it is as if the number of females were reduced by five-sixths. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24

Now neither of these two cases is applicable to the human species where the number of females generally surpasses the number of males, and where human females, unlike those of other species, have never been observed to have period of heat and exclusion, even among savages. Moreover, among several of these animal species, where the entire species goes into heat simultaneously, there comes a terrible moment that of common ardour, tumult, disorder and combat: a moment that does not happen in the human species where love is never periodic. Therefore one cannot conclude from these combats of certain animals for the possession of female that the same thing would happen to a man in the state of nature. And even if one could draw that conclusion, given that these conflicts do not destroy the other species, one should conclude that they would not be any more lethal for ours. And it is quite apparent that they would wreak less havoc in the state of nature than in society, especially in countries where mores still count for something and where the jealousy of lovers and the vengeance of husbands every day give rise to duels, murders and still worse things; where they duty of eternal fidelity serves merely to create adulterers; and where even the laws of continence and honour necessarily spread debauchery and multiply the number of abortions. Let us conclude that, wandering in the forests, without industry, without speech, without dwelling, with war, without relationships, with no need for one’s fellow humans, and correspondingly with no desire to do them hard, perhaps ever even recognizes any of them individually, savage humans, subject to few passions and self-sufficient, had only the sentiments and enlightenment appropriate to the state; one felt only one’s true needs, took notice of only what one believed one had an interest in seeing; and that one’s intelligence made no more progress than one’s vanity. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24

If by chance one made some discovery, one was all the less able to communicate it to others because one did not even know one’s own children. Art perished with its inventor. There was neither education nor progress; generations were multiplied to no purpose. Since each one always began from the same point, centuries went by with all the crudeness of the first ages; the species was already old, and humans remained ever a child. If I have gone on at such length about the supposition of hat primitive condition, it is because, having ancient errors and inveterate prejudices to the true state of nature, how far even natural inequality is from having as much reality and influence in that state as our writer claim. In fact, it is easy to see that, among the differences that distinguish humans, several of the pass for natural ones which are exclusively the work of habit and of the various sorts of life that humans adopt in society. Thus a robust or delicate temperament, and the strength of weakness that depend on it, frequently derive more from the harsh or effeminate way in which one has been raised than from the primitive constitution of bodies. The same holds for mental powers; and not only does education make a difference between cultivated minds and those that are not, it also augments the differences among he former in proportion to their culture; for were a giant and a dwarf walking on the same road, each step they both would give a fresh advantage to the gain. Now if one compares the prodigious diversity of educations and lifestyles in the different orders of the civil state with the simplicity and uniformity of animal and savage life, where all nourish themselves from the same foods live in the same manner, and do exactly the same things, it will be understood how much less the difference between one human and another must be in the state of nature than in that of society, and how much natural inequality must increase in the human species through inequality occasioned by social institutions. #RandolphHarris 9 of 24

However, even if nature were to affect, in the affect, in the distribution of her gifts, as many preferences as is  claimed, what advantage would the most favoured humans derive from them, to the detriment of others, in a state of things that allowed practically no sort of relationships among them? Where there is no love, what use is beauty? What use is wit for people who do not speak, and ruse to those who have no dealing with others? I always hear it repeated that the stronger will oppress the weaker. However, let me have an explanation of the meaning “oppression.” Some will dominate with violence; others will groan, enslaved to all their caprices. That is precisely what I observe among us; but I do not see how this could be said of savage humans, to whom it would be difficult even to explain what servitude and domination are. A human could well lay hold of the fruit of another has of savage humans, to whom it would be difficult even to explain what servitude and domination are. A human could well lay hold of the fruit another has gathered, the game one has killed, the cave that served as one’s shelter. However, how will he ever succeed in making oneself be obeyed? And what can be the chains of dependence among humans who possess nothing? If someone chases me from one tree, I am free to go to another; if someone torments me in once place, who will prevent me from going elsewhere? Is there a human with strength sufficiently superior to mine and who is, moreover, sufficiently depraved, sufficiently lazy and sufficiently ferocious to force me to provide for one’s subsistence while one remains idle? One must resolve not to take one’s eyes off me for a single instant, to keep me carefully tied down while one sleeps, for fear that I may escape or that I would kill one. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24

In other words, one is obliged to expose oneself voluntarily to a much greater hardship than the one he or she wants to avoid and gives me. After all that, were one’s vigilance to relax for an instant, were an unforeseen noise to make one turn one’s head, I take twenty steps into the forest; my chains are broken, and one never see me again for the rest of one’s life’ Without needlessly prolonging these details, anyone should see that, since the bonds of servitude are formed merely from the mutual dependence of human and the reciprocal needs that unite them, it is impossible to enslave a human without having first put one in the position of being incapable of doing without another. This being a situation that did not exist in the state of nature, it leaves each person free of he yoke, and renders pointless the law of the strongest. After having proved that inequality is hardly observable in the state of nature, and that is influence there is almost nonexistent, it remains for me to show is origin and progress in the successive developments of the human mind. After having shown that perfectibility, social virtues, and the other faculties that natural humans had received in a state of potentiality could never develop by themselves, that to achieve this development they required the chance coming together of several unconnected causes that might never have come into being and without which one would have remained eternally in one’s primitive constitution, it remains for me to consider and to bring together the various chance happenings that were able to perfect human reason while deteriorating the species, make a being evil while rendering it habituated to the ways of society, and, from so distant a beginning, finally bring humans and the World to the point where we see them now. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24

I admit that, since the events I have to describe could have taken place in several ways, I cannot make a determination among them except on the basis of conjecture. However, over and above the fact that these conjectures become reasons when they are the most probable ones that a person can draw from the nature of things and the sole means that a person can have discovering the truth, the consequences I wish to deduce from mine will not thereby be conjectural, since, on the basis of the principles I have just established, no other system is conceivable that would not furnish me with the same results, and from which I could not draw the same conclusions. This will excuse me from expanding my reflections on the way in which the lapse of time compensates for the slight probability of events; concerning the surprising power that quite negligible causes may have when they ac without interruption; concerning the impossibility, on the one hand, of a person’s destroying certain hypotheses, even though, on the other hand, of a person’s destroying certain hypotheses, even though, on the other hand, one is not in a position to accord them the level of factual certitude; concerning a situation in which two facts given as real are to be connected by a series of intermediate facts that are unknown or regarded as such, it belongs to history, when it exists, to provide the facts that connect them; it belongs to philosophy, when history is unavailable, to determine similar facts that can connect them; finally, concerning how, with respect to events, similarity reduces the facts to a much smaller number of a different class than one might imagine. It is enough for me to offer these objects to the consideration of my judges; it is enough for me to have seen to it that ordinary readers would have no need to consider them. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24

We have been concerned with thought and imagination, but not with language. I had to picture Euston Station, but I did no need to mention it; the child thought that poison was Horrid Red Things, but she could talk about poison without saying so. However, very often when we are talking about something which is not perceptible by the five senses we use words which, in one of their meanings, refer to things or actions that are. When a human says that one grasps an argument one is using a verb (grasp) which literally means to take something in the hands, but one is certainly not thinking that one’s mind has hands or that an argument can be seized like a Winchester rifle. To avoid the word grasp one may change the form of expression and say, “I see your point,” but one does not mean that a pointe object has appeared in one’s visual field. One may have a third shot and say, “I follow you,” but one does not mean that one is walking behind you along a road. Everyone is familiar with this linguistic phenomenon and the grammarians call it a metaphour. However, it is a serious mistake to think that metaphour is an optional thing which poets and orators may put into their work as a decoration and plain speakers can do without. The truth is that if we are going to talk at all about things which are not perceived by the senses, we are forced to use language metaphorically. Books on psychology or economics or politics are as continuously metaphorical as books of poetry or devotion. There is no other way of talking, as every philologist is aware. Those who wish can satisfy themselves on the point by reading the books I have already mentioned in the past and the other books to which those will lead them on. It is a study for a lifetime and I must here content myself with the mere statement; all speech about supersensible is, and must be, metaphorical in the highest degree. #RandolphHarris 13 of 24

We have now three guiding principles before us. First, that thought is distinct from the imagination which it accompanies it. Second, that thought may be in the main sound even when the false images that accompany it are mistaken by the thinker for true ones. Third, that anyone who talks about things that cannot be seen, or touched, or heard, or the like, must inevitably talk as if they could be seen or touched or heard (exempli gratia must talk of “complexes” and “repressions” as if desires could really be tied up in bundles or shoved back; of “growth” and “development” as if institutions could really grow like trees or unfold like flowers; of energy being “released” as if it were an animal let out of a cage). Let us now apply this to the “savage” or “primitive” articles of the Christian creed. And let use admit at once that many Christians (though by no means all) when they make these assertions do have in mind just those crude mental pictures which so horrify the sceptic. When they say that Christ “came down from Heaven” they do have a vague image of something shooing or floating downwards out of the sky. When they say that Christ is the “Son” of “the Father” they may have a picture of two human forms, the one looking rather more mature than the other. However, we now know that the mere presence of these mental pictures does not, of itself, tell us anything about the reasonableness or absurdity of the thoughts they accompany. If absurd images meant absurd thought, then we should all be thinking nonsense all the time. And the Christians themselves make it clear that the images are not to be identified with the thing believed. They may picture the Father as a human form, but they also maintain that He has no body. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24

They may picture Him older than the Son, but they also maintain the one did not exist before the other, both having existed from all eternity. I am speaking, of course, about Christian adults. Christianity is not to be judged from the fancies of children any more than medicine from the ideas of the little girl who believed in horrid red things. Although disentangling the effects of genes and experience is no easy matter, it more and more seems that the genetic influence is considerable. The range of genetically influences traits is impressive—from physical traits (such as handedness and obesity-proneness), to intelligence, to aggressiveness, to our vulnerability to depression and schizophrenia. In one study of 850 twin pairs, John Loehlin and Robert Nichols found that, compared with fraternal twins whose parents treated them very similarly were not more alike than those who were treated less similarly. Even twins who are reared apart exhibit amazing similarities of tastes, personalities, and abilities. “In some domains it looks as though our identical twins reared apart are…just as similar as identical twins reared together,” reports the investigator Thomas Bouchard. We must be careful not to oversimply genetic effects. Our genes issue orders for our bodies, but our humanity also embodies nurturance provided or withheld, education given effectively or poorly, love sustained or withdrawn. Moreover, as every student of psychology knows, our personality reflects the interactions of our genes, past experience, and present situation. If a slow-witted, frail, uncoordinated boy experiences failure in the classroom, on the athletic field, and in his relations with intimacy, shall we say his low self-image is due to his genes or his environment? It is due to both, because his environment reacts to his genetically influenced traits. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24

Studies of adoptive families further restrain our belief in the unilateral power of parenting. The astonishing result of these studies is that the personalities of people who grew up together do not much resemble one another, whether they are biologically related or not. To be sure adoption has some wonderful consequences: it transmits values and attitudes, and it provides a nurturing environment for children who might otherwise be hindered by neglect or abuse. Nevertheless, some dimensions of personality, such as temperamental reactivity, seem not to be greatly affected by normal variations in parenting. The developmental psychologist Sandra Scarr puts it more shockingly: “Our studies suggest that there is virtually no family environment effect on personality. These data say that in any reasonable environment, people will become what they will become.” Although the evidence of parental power tempers Dr. Scarr’s sweeping generalization, there are additional influences over which parents have little voluntary control. In The Nurture Assumption, the psychologist Judith Rich Harris argues that for many aspects of development, direct parental influence is minimal. And it is not just genes, she argues; peer influences are also quite strong. Consider: Preschoolers who, despite parents’ urgings, disdain a certain food will often eat the food if they are put at a table with a group of children who like it. Children exposed to one language accent at home and another in the neighbourhood will invariably end up speaking like their peers, not their parents. To predict whether a teen smokes, ask first not whether a parent smokes but whether the teen has friends who model smoking, who suggest its pleasure, and who offer cigarettes or other tobacco products. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24

If genes and peer influences shape children more than direct parent influence, what does this imply? First, it tells us to agonize less about our in-home parenting style and more about the cultural vapours seeping into our children’s lives. To nurture our children well, we must care about the social environment that nurtures all children, and care about all who influence that social environment. As teachers, youth workers, and media producers and artist we must appreciate the significance of our influence upon youth culture. As the psychologist Mary Pipher has said, “Children are much more socialized by the culture than even the most conscious parents realizes.” Second, it cautions us to be less judgmental. Parents typically feel pride in their children’s successes, and guilt or shame over their failures. They beam when folks offer congratulations for the child who wins an award. They wonder where they went wrong with the child who repeatedly is called into the principal’s office Psychiatry and Freudian psychology have at times been the source of such ideas, by blaming problems from asthma to schizophrenia on “bad mothering.” Society reinforces such parent blaming: believing that parents shape their children’s virtues and blame them for their children’s vices. In many communities, parents can now be fined for their child’s misbehaviour (as if parents of troubled children were not already suffering enough). Should we really castigate the parents of Kip Kinkel (and of an accomplished order sister) following his 1998 murder of them and two fellow students in the cafeteria of his Springfield, Oregon, high school? “Good parents usually have god kids. Bad parents usually have bad kids,” explained one Detroit Free Press letter writer. “Do you really think those killer kids came from healthy homes? When parents fail, shame should follow them.” #RandolphHarris 17 of 24

The well-being of American’s youth rapidly declined after 1960. By the early 1990s, when youth problems had peaked (before beginning to subside), rates of teen suicide, teen violence, and unmarried teen pregnancy all multiple several times over. Human genetics do not explain this swift social recession. What had changed was the social ecology. Family breakdown, parental abandonment, abuse, and neglect were big-bang factors. These macroparenting factors, along with changes in peer and media influences, mattered. The social-science verdicts bears repeating, because it is so important and so little known: normal variations in well-meaning parenting matters less than most people suppose. The social ecology matters more than many suppose. It may be discomforting to realize that having and raising children is a risky business; in procreation a man and a woman shuffle their gene decks and deal a life-forming hand to their children-to-be, who thereafter are subjected to countless influences beyond their parents’ control. However, perhaps we may also take comfort in knowing that we are therefore responsible not for our children’s behaviour, but for having given them our best. “Training up a child in the way one should go,” and then love the person that results. When thinking about particular families, we also do well to remember that the proverbial admonition is complemented by Jesus’ admonition “Judge not.” Remembering that lives are formed by influences under parents’ control and by influences beyond parents’ control, let us be slow to credit parents for their children’s achievements and slower still to blame them for their children’s problems. #RandolphHarris 18 of 24

Likewise, let us restrain our vanity when our children succeed and our feelings of guilt when they fail. As parents, let us train up our children in the way they should go, and let us be slow to judge one another. The need to take care of the nature of our thoughts was illustrated by the life-story of Eugene O’Neill. The gloomy themes of his plays, the guant tragedy and overhanging doom with which he deliberately permeated them, brough him down in his later years with an incurable disease. His palsied hand could not write, and dictated material always dissatisfied him. Those who deny the line of relevant connection between his grim thinking and his sickness ignore that fact that he was an ultrasensitive man—so sensitive that a large part of his life was occupied with the search for a solitary place where no people could interrupt him and where he could live entirely with himself. Why is it that in the stage of heavy sleeping trance a hypnotic subject’s nervous system fails to make the usual reactions to a burning match applied to the hand or a pointed pin stuck into the flesh? Why does the usual sensitivity to pain vanish so largely, often completely? If consciousness really lay in the nerves themselves it could never really be divorces from them.  It is because consciousness does not arise out of the material body, but out of deeper principle of the immaterial, that it can function or fail to function as the bodily though-series. Hence when the consciousness is turned away from the body, when it is induced to cease holding the nerve system in its embrace, it will naturally cease holding the pleasurable or painful changes within that system too. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24

Fear delays digestion; anger hurt the spleen; excessive lust leads to inflammations, infections, or impotence; jealousy creates excessive bile; a shock caused by bad news may turn hair white. The person who holds such negative feelings as chronic gloom and constant fault-finding, who worries self and nags others, is walking the direct path to either a disordered liver or high blood pressure. Vicious mental and speech habits injure the person’s own body and demoralize other people’s feeling. How much is a person’s bitter, rancorous mind, as expressed in one’s bitter, epitheical speeches, responsible for the malady of dyspepsia which afflicts one for so many years? Anger brings liver’s function to a standstill; this throws its bile back into the system, and bilious indigestion follows. The tears which well up in the eyes are physical, yet the self-pity which causes them in plainly mental. The connection between breathing and thinking has been noted by the yoga of physical control. The connection between breathing and feeling also exists. Apoplexy—a fit of chocking, the inability to breathe caches and almost ceases when bad news is suddenly heard. There is a direct line between emotional shocks, fears, or worries, and stomach ulcers. Saliva may become poisonous in anger. Gastric juice may stop flowing in shock of bad news. A Berlin opera singer went to the United States of America on a visit. While there she received the unexpected news of her husband’s death. The shock severely affected her feelings. That same week she became afflicted with an aliment and suffered greatly from it for several years until she died. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24

A last medical science is coming to recognize the power of feeling to make disease in the flesh, the contribution of mind and mood to the body’s sickness. You have some other implements, rarely used. Patience and Endurance Paul would include in that number, as he did in Colossians (1.11). It may take a little while, but with these and the help of God, you will triumph amid the tulips. Callousness and Petulance, broken tools both. What is the common wisdom? Impatience cannot be hurried by impatience! In times of temptation, and if you are the tempted, accept all the advice you can get. If someone else is the tempted, do not deal harshly with one. Give one all the consolation one can handle. Like a ship unmoored, the soul is set a drift by temptation. Like a ship without a tiller, the soul is tossed about the waves. Like a mariner without a chart, the soul is tempted every which way. Like a seaman who has a chart but cannot make head or tail out of it, the soul is at the mercy of the sea. Fire proves iron—that is the kind of point Jesus son of Sirach liked to make (31.26)—and temptation fires the just human. Often we do not know what we can do until temptation opens us up to what we are. Stand sentinel in the intellect we must before temptation strikes. Engage the Enemy at the earliest possible moment. In the chapel. In the dining hall. At the gate. On the road. In the field. To his very point a certain ancient Roman writer, Ovid, the amatory poet, had this wheeze: “If you want stop, stop at the start. Have the antidote ready before you drink the poison. Otherwise you will be dead before the saving draft can reach the lips” (Remedies for Love 2.91-92). #RandolphHarris 21 of 24

That is how temptation works. A simple thought enters the mind. A vivid imagination goes to work. After that it is a nudge, a wink, and a nod. Right from the start you should resist strongly. When you do not, the Enemy bearing evils tiptoes in unawares and wins the day. And so it is everyday. The slower your response, the quicker the Devil’s step. The temptations you have to undergo are graver at the beginning of your spiritual life than at then end. However you look at it, they are all mud. For one person it is a wallow all one’s life. For another, it is just an occasional splatter. Whatever the grand total, we notice one thing. Our temptations have been customized. No two are alike. That explains why each one fits perfectly. The Divine Designer, in association with Weights & Measures Supernatural, has seen to that. That explain also why we can shed each temptation that is laid upon us. The Designer fully expects us to. Another garment awaits the Elect. Therefore we should not despair when we are tempted. We should pray more fervently to God. After all, He thinks us worthy of help in every tribulation. According to Paul in First Corinthians, who should know, “God will give us resources enough” (10.13) so that we can overcome. Therefore, let us humble our souls, huddle ourselves, under the hand of God in every trial and tribulation, as the story of Judith encourages us to do (8.17). Why? “He will help the humble in spirit,” the Evangelist Luke has promised (1.51). And at every temptation that is overcome, He will sound the trumpet. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24

In trial and tribulations the perfection of Humankind is hammered out. I give you one example—Virtue. The better it is hidden, the more light it gives off, or so the common spiritual wisdom goes. However, if the virtuous cannot recognize a temptation when it kisses them on the cheek, what good is all the devotion and fervour? For these poor souls, though, there is still hope. If they patiently sustain themselves in time of adversity, then they will continue to inch along the spiritual path. Some seem to be protected from the great temptations of life and yet are overwhelmed by the nit-picking of daily routine. However, there is another way of looking at it. They are humbled, hobbled, by their poor, shabby response to the small temptations. Hence, they are no so overconfident about their ability to handle the large ones. How wonderful, O Lord, are the works of your hands! The Heavens declare Your glory, the arch of sky displays Your handiwork. In Your love You have given us the power to behold the beauty of Your World robed in all its splendour. The sun and the stars, and the valleys and hills, the rivers and lakes all disclose Your presence. The roaring breakers of the sea tell of Your awesome might; the beats of the field and the birds of the air bespeak Your wondrous will. In Your goodness You have made us able to hear the music of the World. The voices of loved ones reveal to us that You are in our midst. A divine voice sings through all creation. Our God and God of our fathers, merciful King, have compassion upon us; O Thou good and beneficent One, please inspire us with the desire to seek Thee. #RandolphHarris 23 of 24

In Thine abundant compassion return unto us for the sake of our forefathers who did Thy will; please rebuild Thy Temple as of old, and establish Thy Sanctuary upon its ancient site. Please grant that we may see it rebuilt and make us rejoice in its re-establishment. Please restore America to its service of pronouncing the Priestly Blessing, Americans to their song and psalmody, and America to her habitations. There we will make our pilgrimages to Church, and at  the Festivals, as it is writing in Thy Scriptures:  Every day of the year shall all human appear in prayer before the Lord, your God, in the place where He shall choose; everyone shall appear before the Lord with some offering, each according to one’s means, according to the bounty with which the Lord hath blessed one. O Lord our God, please bestow upon us the blessing of Thy Festivals for life and peace, for joy and gladness, even as Thou hast graciously promised to bless. [Our God and God of our fathers, accept our rest.] Please sanctify us through Thy commandments, and please grant our portion in Thy Scripture; please give us abundantly of Thy goodness and please make us rejoice in Thy salvation. Please purify our hearts to serve Thee in truth. In Thy loving favour, O Lord God, please let us inherit with joy and gladness Thy holy [Sabbath and] festivals and may America, who sanctifies Thy name, rejoice in Thee. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who hallowest [the Sabbath and] America and the Festivals. God’s reality is the overwhelming fact of existence. This vision is a gift, a grace, so it may come suddenly, unexpectedly, but more often it comes to someone who has prepared oneself for it by purification and contemplation. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24

Cresleigh Homes

Have you ever tried a wall mural in your home? We love how owning your own home allows you to express your unique style and creativity – whether it’s a mountain mural ⛰ or a unique chandelier. Both are looking fab in our Brighton Station Res 3 model! https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-3/

Learn more about this stunning new residence from Cresleigh Homes!

#CresleighRanch
#CresleighHomes